cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2012 07:38 pm
@engineer,
Not all Mormons, only the majority. They seem immune to Romney's lies, and his write-off of 47% of Americans who pay no taxes. Romney is ahead by 54 points in Utah; that's a majority.

BTW, I'm not blaming individual people, not only Mormons, about the way people vote for their candidates. However, when there are so much evidence of lies and class warfare from Romney, I don't have much respect for people who will vote for him. They *(Romney and Ryan) lied about Obama taking $717 billion from MediCare. Gross lies. Romney believes he deserves to be president based only on his wealth; he's flip-flopped on all the major issues.

What more is there?
engineer
 
  3  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2012 08:53 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I certainly agree that Romney is in no way qualified to be President based on his fluid stands on issues, his lack of empathy for the majority of Americans and his failure to understand why you can't open airplane windows. It strikes me that Romney thinks he would be a good President because he is a decent manager. All the stories I read about him talk about how he is a hands-on manager who likes to get down in the details. He certainly did an ok job on the SLC Olympics. Unfortunately for him, management is not in the President's job description. The President must look out and up, be visionary, be a leader. He can hire all the managers he needs but the strategic vision must be his. Romney has no vision so all positions are equal.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2012 08:56 pm
@engineer,
Well stated, and I agree.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2012 09:08 pm
@cicerone imposter,
What a piece of work you are CI.

The majority of Muslims are not terrorists, violent savages or haters of democracy (or Obama), but the majority of Mormons couldn't care less about truth or embrace the Evil that is Mitt Romney.

Meanwhile the percentage of Democrat black Americans is roughly that of Republican Mormons, and yet you see nothing of similar peculiarity to that.

You're a bigot CI. You're attempt to walk back your bigoted rant is pathetic.

Before this election is over we will see the Obama supporters raising the "otherness" of Mormons as an attack against Romney.

And you'll follow along in lock step.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2012 09:34 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I posted this on the previous page, but want to repeat it here, because of the position Romney has taken against China's unfair trade.

Quote:
Romney's blind trust invested in the Chinese government oil company.


He's contradicted himself again, by investing in China that creates jobs there.

What's wrong with this picture?
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2012 09:50 pm
@cicerone imposter,
You do know how a blind trust works don't you?
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2012 09:54 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

You do know how a blind trust works don't you?


yes, but only idiots believe any of Romney's assets are really in a 'blind trust.' It's a farce, nothing more.

Cycloptichorn
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2012 10:33 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
And the CIA was behind the fall of the World Trade Center.

Typical Democrat bullshit.

DEM: "Romney invested in China!"

REPUB: "His blind trust did and the purpose of having a blind trust is to avoid the conflicts you've just raised."

DEM: "The blind trust was a fraud. Romney told the investment company to invest in Chinese oil companies because he is traitorus scum!"

REPUB: "You do know that the blind trust divested his holdings of the shares in the Chinese oil companies"

DEM: "There's my proof! Romney told them to so that he might have cover for his traitorous greed!"

REPUB: "You really are an asshole."

DEM: "Maybe so, but electing Obama to a second term is more important than any silly principle about honesty or even common sense!"
Rockhead
 
  3  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2012 10:34 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
you're so good with strawmen, finny.

you should build scarecrows...
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  6  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2012 10:58 pm
So... Romney (the master businessman - the numbers guy - the economy fixer) says he has no earthly idea about what exactly his blind trust did with his money, and we're paranoid if we don't totally buy that.

Romney says his holdings that are in the Cayman Islands have nothing to do with trying to evade paying taxes, and we're supposed to ignore that the main reason for anyone hiding funds there is to avoid paying taxes on them.

Romney says he has a plan to lower EVERYone's taxes, and he will pay for it by cutting big entitlements, and even though there are only a handful of entitlements big enough to supply that (like the home mortgage interest deduction), he just can't tell you which ones he'll cut until after we elect him, and we're supposed to just shrug and wander blindly to the polls.

Romney sells a hundred different kinds of snake oil with a hundred different conflicting and contradictory talking points, and those of us who raise doubts about this empty obscure vapor of ambition maquerading as someone who could be president.... well, Finn says we're all just stupid and biased.


Welcome to desperate, upside down chop-logic world.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2012 11:11 pm
@snood,
snood wrote:

well, Finn says we're all just stupid and biased.


That assumes everyone believes your nonsense, which is quite a bold contention, but yes, I do believe you are stupid and biased.

A blind trust is very specifically defined under the law.

It doesn't matter how smart Romney is or how masterful a businessman he may be, the trust is blind to him.

Yours is nothing more than specious innuendo that counts on the ignorance of others.

But don't let facts get in the way of the narrative you want to write.

snood
 
  2  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2012 11:31 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
That assumes everyone believes your nonsense

I assumed nothing, I said you disparage the people here that raise questions about Romney.

Quote:
But don't let facts get in the way of the narrative you want to write.


Facts? Like the fact that Romney has taken completely opposite positions on government sponsored healthcare, women's choice, the dream act...? Like the fact that Romney says he'll cut entitlements but can't be specific until after November 6th?

That stench of speciousness that's wrinkling your nose? It's coming from you.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  3  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2012 11:43 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
A "blind trust" is a misnomer. The owner has all the rights to make any decision on his blind trust. Only people who are clueless believes what Romney says about his tax returns and blind trust.
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Tue 25 Sep, 2012 01:12 am
.
Looks like Romney's shot himself in the foot again, this time all the way back in 1994:
Quote:
Ken Gross, an ethics lawyer with the law firm Skadden Arps in Washington, D.C., has helped presidential candidates set up blind trusts. He says blind trusts are complicated, expensive and generally a pain.

"Most people who have any kind of wealth are interested in how it's managed," Gross says. "And blind trusts, because they are blind, you don't know what's going on with your money."

But a blind trust does have one crucial advantage for a politician: It becomes an easy answer to any conflict-of-interest question. Mitt Romney used it in the Republican primary debates earlier this year.

"My investments are not made by me," he said at the time. "My investments for the last 10 years have been in a blind trust, managed by a trustee."



Of course, there's an easy response from a less wealthy opponent. In fact, there's a video going around of Mitt Romney from 1994, when he was challenging another very rich candidate with a blind trust: Ted Kennedy.

"The blind trust is an age-old ruse, if you will," Romney said. "Which is to say, you can always tell a blind trust what it can and cannot do."
So which one is it? Blind or not blind? Well, all trusts are not created equal.

Federal election rules require fairly tight ones. State rules, not so much.

I called up a trust lawyer, Colby Wallace, with Bernstein Shur in Portland, Maine. I asked him how you can tell how blind a trust really is.

His advice: First look at the person who runs the trust, the person who's supposed to keep all the investments secret. If the person is a friend or relative, it looks bad.Second, look at what went into the trust at the very beginning. Rich people get rich in specific fields or by starting specific companies, Gross says. "And just because it becomes part of a blind trust doesn't erase it from your memory."

The third way to evaluate a trust is to look at what kind of reporting the trust makes back to the politician. If the candidate gets fairly detailed reports about how much he has made in capital gains, dividends or interest, he may be able to figure out what's going on inside the trust.

But Wallace says that once you get up to the presidential level, with federal laws, this can't happen easily.

So what does it all mean for Mitt Romney?

His blind trust is run by a longtime financial adviser, who might know his likes and dislikes. If Romney were elected president, the campaign has already conceded that he would need to have a stricter blind trust with an outside firm running the money, instead of a close adviser
.

The many rules mean a lot of work for people like Gross, who consults on blind trusts. But he still tells his clients he doesn't like blind trusts much.

He recommends that politicians without a ton of investments simply put their money into plain-vanilla index funds and bonds. Then tell everyone where the money is.

That's the route President Obama has taken, judging from his 2011 financial disclosure form (PDF): His investments are primarily in index funds from Vanguard and U.S. Treasury bills and notes.


With friends like himself, Romney doesn't need enemies.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  4  
Reply Tue 25 Sep, 2012 06:52 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
"The blind trust is an age-old ruse, if you will. Which is to say, you can always tell a blind trust what it can and cannot do."
- Mitt Romney

“A blind trust is very specifically defined under the law.
It doesn't matter how smart Romney is or how masterful a businessman he may be, the trust is blind to him.”
-Finn (the not stupid and biased) D’Abuzz
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  3  
Reply Tue 25 Sep, 2012 06:56 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

And the CIA was behind the fall of the World Trade Center.

Even Romney's campaign says that the blind trust isn't, you know, an actual blind trust that meets federal standards.

Why? Because Romney hired his personal lawyer to be the trustee of this "blind" trust.

Romney himself has said "the blind trust is an age-old ruse." (1994 interview with the Boston Globe)

ABC News: Mitt Romney's Blind Trust Not So Blind
snood
 
  3  
Reply Tue 25 Sep, 2012 06:58 am
Finn(the objective and intelligent) D'Abuzz:

Quote:
Before this election is over we will see the Obama supporters raising the "otherness" of Mormons as an attack against Romney


...or not.
JPB
 
  3  
Reply Tue 25 Sep, 2012 07:03 am
@snood,
There's time yet and I think the Dems are capable of getting sleazy if the poll numbers go against them. That said, there's absolutely no reason for sleaziness because Mitt self-destructs every time he opens one of his many mouths.
tsarstepan
 
  2  
Reply Tue 25 Sep, 2012 07:15 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

And the CIA was behind the fall of the World Trade Center.

Typical Democrat bullshit.

No. Conspiracy theorists tend to be uberconservative Republicans who live shacked up in the backwoods of Montana with a few hundred rifles, a ton of mortar rounds, and whom happen to 'marry' and breed with their daughters because their afraid Jews and colored people might take their daughters away and breed a superminority race that wishes to spread their secular values.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  2  
Reply Tue 25 Sep, 2012 07:24 am
@JPB,
JPB wrote:

There's time yet and I think the Dems are capable of getting sleazy if the poll numbers go against them. That said, there's absolutely no reason for sleaziness because Mitt self-destructs every time he opens one of his many mouths.


Yeah, it could happen. I don't think it's more likely than the possibility of Republicans using Obama's Muslim acquaintances or Kenyan roots or... oh, wait...
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Why Romney Lost - Discussion by IRFRANK
Route to the sea. - Question by raprap
Two bad moments for Romney in second debate - Discussion by maxdancona
Romney vs. Big Bird - Discussion by maxdancona
Mitt Romney, the bane of Sesame Street - Discussion by DrewDad
It looks like it's Paul Ryan!!! - Discussion by maxdancona
Who will be Romney's running mate? - Discussion by Robert Gentel
When will Romney quit the race? - Discussion by edgarblythe
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Romney 2012?
  3. » Page 86
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/25/2024 at 10:16:46