Romney a nice guy?

[davekc]

Saw this story and thought it might be made up. Doesn't appear so.
Surprised it the first time I had heard of it.

snopes.com: Romney Business Partner Daughter Search

 

[cheri1122]

Can't think why it would surprise you - most anyone would do whatever they could for a friend or co worker in that situation, IMO. A 14 yr old girl, Ecstasy, whereabouts unknown - it pushes all the right buttons for any parent, and Romney has never been portrayed as an indifferent parent.
That he was able to utilize the resources mentioned is just one of the many benefits of being part of the 1%: the options are nearly unlimited, whatever the goal.
Look at the responses here, when help is needed: there are plenty of volunteers, every time. Does that add to our qualifications in the political arena?
OK, so Romney's a nice guy. I'm still not going to vote for him.

 

[davekc]

The left wing usually portrays him as this callous guy and maybe not. As far as would another politician do the same thing? Not so sure on that. Many seem pretty self serving.
As to whether to vote for him or not? If it is him or O, well the lesser of two evils gets the nod.

 

[chefdennis]

I heard about this the other day, but haven't seen anything in print...I have no doubt it is true..but I really dont care if he is a Nice guy or and azzhole....just as long as he does all that can be done to undue the b/s that the pos statist taking up space and breathing the air in the WH now has done..including barrycare, and cuttting back all the extensions to the unemployement benefits that have been put out there...just to name 2....

 

[cheri1122]

When Romney's portrayed as callous, it's in a business sense, not in his personal life. What worries voters is that he'll run the government as he ran his businesses, and what happens to people who aren't 'profitable' then?
Add to that his total cluelessness about women and people who work for a living [asking his wife's opinion on the concerns of working women was a bit, um, shall we say, stoopid? Nobody has all the knowledge needed, but we need someone who at least knows who to ask!] and his belief that imposing his moral beliefs on others [defunding Planned Parenthood] is acceptable, and he has no business leading the US, IMO.

 

[Tennesseahawk]

When Romney's portrayed as callous, it's in a business sense, not in his personal life. What worries voters is that he'll run the government as he ran his businesses, and what happens to people who aren't 'profitable' then?
Add to that his total cluelessness about women and people who work for a living [asking his wife's opinion on the concerns of working women was a bit, um, shall we say, stoopid? Nobody has all the knowledge needed, but we need someone who at least knows who to ask!] and his belief that imposing his moral beliefs on others [defunding Planned Parenthood] is acceptable, and he has no business leading the US, IMO.

I know... a president who pushes his healthcare beliefs, and his anti-Constitution beliefs on us is more acceptable.

I just threw up in my mouth a little.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not advocating Romney. Just calling you out on your view of kettle, when your pot is also black (and he is too). IMO, it's the difference of scum and scummerer.

 

[davekc]

At the end of the day, it really comes down to who can cut the spending and get the national debt under control. That effects just about everything. Women's healthcare, unemployment and the rest of it won't matter if our financial situation doesn't start improving.
At this point, we know Obama wants to continue spending. He has said so himself. So that leaves us with someone that at least is talking about finances.
We just can't keep borrowing money that isn't there. Just look at Greece. We aren't far away.

 

[cheri1122]

I know... a president who pushes his healthcare beliefs, and his anti-Constitution beliefs on us is more acceptable.

Not what I said.

I just threw up in my mouth a little.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not advocating Romney. Just calling you out on your view of kettle, when your pot is also black (and he is too). IMO, it's the difference of scum and scummerer.

IOW: same choice as usual.

 

[cheri1122]

At the end of the day, it really comes down to who can cut the spending and get the national debt under control.

Agreed. The difference is in which spending to cut, no? So far, the spending cuts have [as always] focused on those who have the least ability to fight back, from local libraries to federal cuts in higher education. Nobody's looking at the money spent for those at the top of the food chain, or complaining about all the welfare that goes to corporations - it seems a tad lopsided, is all.

That effects just about everything. Women's healthcare, unemployment and the rest of it won't matter if our financial situation doesn't start improving.

Our financial situation would improve, maybe, if some of the money that's been thrown at 'business' for the last few decades [which they used to enrich their 'stakeholders, rather than enrich America by expanding jobs with decent wages and benefits for Americans] were instead used to find solutions to the unemployment that is crippling us. Without good jobs, there is no middle class for the poor to aspire to join, no market for the services of the financial, real estate, insurance companies, etc, that dominate the 1%.

At this point, we know Obama wants to continue spending. He has said so himself.

And he has some historical data to show that drastic cuts to services that help people [as opposed to corporations] only exacerbate the problems. More people need unemployment and subsidized health care, rent, food, etc, and we simply can't blame them for being lazy/shiftless/irresponsible and let them die, right?
A LOT of money has been spent to subsidize Big Business over the past few decades, and if it was a good investment, why are there no jobs today?

So that leaves us with someone that at least is talking about finances.

Wait - Obama is talking about finances, too, lol.

We just can't keep borrowing money that isn't there.

We can, if it offers a better chance of repaying it. A lot of people feel that 'business' [eliminating jobs, avoiding taxes, insider trading, creative accounting, etc] played a big part in getting us into the financial hole we're in, and someone like Romney ain't gonna get us out.

Just look at Greece. We aren't far away.

Sure we are - or would be, if American business would invest in America [by paying their taxes, instead of paying accountants to find ways to avoid it] and in Americans by creating and keeping decent jobs here. Americans have always been workers, but then, there used to be jobs that paid enough to live a decent middle class life, until they were traded for more profit to the shareholders.....
No one I know espouses Communism, despite the claims of some - people just want to work and pay their bills and raise their kids and save for the future, mostly, but it can't be done on what jobs pay these days.
Meanwhile, the rich just keep getting richer, the income disparity keeps increasing, and carriers keep making more money, but O/O's are making less.....
Is 'business' going to fix that?

 

[davekc]

Well, there several places we agree, and some we don't. On the agreement side, we do have to make some adjustments on the loopholes in the tax code. That I agree with. As much as you may dislike it, you have to drop the corporate tax as we are currently the highest in the world. Too easy for business to go somewhere else. Just how it is. World economy and stockholders are going to dictate that. Wanting more taxes just drives them away.
The other issue on taxes is that 1 percent are paying 50 percent of the fed taxes now. Where do you raise it when the other half only pay a payroll tax and zero federal tax?
Even if they paid every penny they make, you are still broke. The problem is entitlements. That is your biggest costs and they are climbing. More people are on the take than ever before.
Unfortunately, billions have been provided for the poor, yet nothing has changed.
Most may want to work, but don't have the education for today's economy. Like a bad drug, some get hooked on it, and they never get off.
I do agree on all the wasted money in Washington. All kinds of green projects and other wasteful spending we have wasted billions on. Of course WE borrowed all that money.
If someone wants to do their fair share, that's where I would be looking. Obama is financing his playground on the backs of future generations. Every time he borrows money it devalues the dollar, which in turn means the poor have less dollars to spend. Want to help the poor, sick and disenfranchised? Knock off all the spending and stop borrowing money.

I'm not trying to be combative as I think many share your views. But I will leave you with this. If the borrowing and the goofy spending continue we could possibly lose our ability to borrow money or the dollar will crash. It will be the ones on government entitlements that will really get pounded. It won't be many of the one percenters. Not a happy picture, but a clear reality.

 

[cableguymn]

At the end of the day, it really comes down to who can cut the spending and get the national debt under control. That effects just about everything. Women's healthcare, unemployment and the rest of it won't matter if our financial situation doesn't start improving.
At this point, we know Obama wants to continue spending. He has said so himself. So that leaves us with someone that at least is talking about finances.
We just can't keep borrowing money that isn't there. Just look at Greece. We aren't far away.

Neither Obama or Romney will get spending below current incoming tax dollars.

 

[LDB]

At the end of the day, it really comes down to who can cut the spending and get the national debt under control.

Agreed. The difference is in which spending to cut, no? So far, the spending cuts have [as always] focused on those who have the least ability to fight back, from local libraries to federal cuts in higher education. Nobody's looking at the money spent for those at the top of the food chain, or complaining about all the welfare that goes to corporations - it seems a tad lopsided, is all.

That effects just about everything. Women's healthcare, unemployment and the rest of it won't matter if our financial situation doesn't start improving.

Our financial situation would improve, maybe, if some of the money that's been thrown at 'business' for the last few decades [which they used to enrich their 'stakeholders, rather than enrich America by expanding jobs with decent wages and benefits for Americans] were instead used to find solutions to the unemployment that is crippling us. Without good jobs, there is no middle class for the poor to aspire to join, no market for the services of the financial, real estate, insurance companies, etc, that dominate the 1%.

At this point, we know Obama wants to continue spending. He has said so himself.

And he has some historical data to show that drastic cuts to services that help people [as opposed to corporations] only exacerbate the problems. More people need unemployment and subsidized health care, rent, food, etc, and we simply can't blame them for being lazy/shiftless/irresponsible and let them die, right?
A LOT of money has been spent to subsidize Big Business over the past few decades, and if it was a good investment, why are there no jobs today?

So that leaves us with someone that at least is talking about finances.

Wait - Obama is talking about finances, too, lol.

We just can't keep borrowing money that isn't there.

We can, if it offers a better chance of repaying it. A lot of people feel that 'business' [eliminating jobs, avoiding taxes, insider trading, creative accounting, etc] played a big part in getting us into the financial hole we're in, and someone like Romney ain't gonna get us out.

Just look at Greece. We aren't far away.

Sure we are - or would be, if American business would invest in America [by paying their taxes, instead of paying accountants to find ways to avoid it] and in Americans by creating and keeping decent jobs here. Americans have always been workers, but then, there used to be jobs that paid enough to live a decent middle class life, until they were traded for more profit to the shareholders.....
No one I know espouses Communism, despite the claims of some - people just want to work and pay their bills and raise their kids and save for the future, mostly, but it can't be done on what jobs pay these days.
Meanwhile, the rich just keep getting richer, the income disparity keeps increasing, and carriers keep making more money, but O/O's are making less.....
Is 'business' going to fix that?

I think maybe something was said in here that was worth reading but darn it, blue is less contrasty than black and size 2 is too small compared to the readable default font size. I've just given up trying to read the posts that have to be posted unreadable. It sucks having old eyes.

 

[Tennesseahawk]

I'm not trying to be combative as I think many share your views. But I will leave you with this. If the borrowing and the goofy spending continue we could possibly lose our ability to borrow money or the dollar will crash. It will be the ones on government entitlements that will really get pounded. It won't be many of the one percenters. Not a happy picture, but a clear reality.

And that's what many are calling the zombie apocalypse... the entitlement crowd, all of a sudden, not having food given to them. Here in Detroit, we have probably close to a million of them.

 

[layoutshooter]

"Agreed. The difference is in which spending to cut, no? So far, the spending cuts have [as always] focused on those who have the least ability to fight back, from local libraries to federal cuts in higher education. Nobody's looking at the money spent for those at the top of the food chain, or complaining about all the welfare that goes to corporations - it seems a tad lopsided, is all."


Local libraries and higher education are NOT the business of the federal government. That is where Ron Paul is 100% correct. We MUST start getting rid of the idea that the federal government is there to solve state and local problems, It gives them FAR too much power when they take over these functions.

We also have to get rid of the 99% vs. 1% thinking. First off there is no such break down. Second, those who are the loudest about representing the "99%" do not represent anything but their own interests. Third, politics based on divisions, like class envy, class warfare and "protected classes" is designed not to make it better for the few but to divide the People to make it easier to control them.

Protected classes, envy rhetoric etc are the favorite tools of the Marxist and the other extremist ends of politics. The use of those tools depends on the People acting on emotion rather then reason. It works. Just look around. One just has to look at the success of Nazi Germany. What we see here is exactly the same, just substitute "rich" for "Jew" in the "scapegoat" section of the form. The result is the same.

 

[davekc]

Neither Obama or Romney will get spending below current incoming tax dollars.

I certainly can't argue that. Just a matter of who is likely to spend less. At this point we have the results of one.

 

[davekc]

"Agreed. The difference is in which spending to cut, no? So far, the spending cuts have [as always] focused on those who have the least ability to fight back, from local libraries to federal cuts in higher education. Nobody's looking at the money spent for those at the top of the food chain, or complaining about all the welfare that goes to corporations - it seems a tad lopsided, is all."


Local libraries and higher education are NOT the business of the federal government. That is where Ron Paul is 100% correct. We MUST start getting rid of the idea that the federal government is there to solve state and local problems, It gives them FAR too much power when they take over these functions.

We also have to get rid of the 99% vs. 1% thinking. First off there is no such break down. Second, those who are the loudest about representing the "99%" do not represent anything but their own interests. Third, politics based on divisions, like class envy, class warfare and "protected classes" is designed not to make it better for the few but to divide the People to make it easier to control them.

Protected classes, envy rhetoric etc are the favorite tools of the Marxist and the other extremist ends of politics. The use of those tools depends on the People acting on emotion rather then reason. It works. Just look around. One just has to look at the success of Nazi Germany. What we see here is exactly the same, just substitute "rich" for "Jew" in the "scapegoat" section of the form. The result is the same.

Libraries and schools should be a state function. As a country, we spend more per student than any other country yet lag way behind in academic results. This is exactly why throwing money at this kind of stuff just doesn't work.

 

[layoutshooter]

Libraries and schools should be a state function. As a country, we spend more per student than any other country yet lag way behind in academic results. This is exactly why throwing money at this kind of stuff just doesn't work.

I contend that schools and libraries are a LOCAL function. Then the taxpayers that are footing the bill could have greater control and oversight. As many things as possible must be kept local.

Our schools suck for MANY reasons, too much money being spent on them is only one of them. Public servants DICTATING their wages to those who pay them is a HUGH part of the problem.

 

[muttly]

I think Romney IS a nice guy. From all indications he has lived an exemplary life. Didn't do drugs,break the law, or cheat on his wife.He cared about his dog enough to take it on vacation and gave it a first class seat on top of the van. THE DOG LIKED IT!! Headed a firm that created jobs. I'd rather have a businessman running this country because he knows how to create an environment for business growth. More businesses= more jobs= people with more money. I'll take that over a mob boss running this country like the Corleone family.
He helped that co worker find his daughter. Oh and he helped save another families dog from certain drowning. Good guy that Romney.

Gamechanger: Romney once saved a dog’s life « Hot Air

 

[chefdennis]

I don't give a rats butt what laws the garbage in DC has passed for the "entitlement crowd"..or the "benefit of the people"..if they aren't provided for in the Constitution, get rid of them, ALL of them including agencys and regulation and WELFARE and SS.. and I don't care if the SC has upheld them...They have made their share of mistakes in more then a few of their rulings and decisions....Just because the Fed Gov passes laws and the SC upholds them DOESN'T MAKE THEM ALWAYS LEGAL....

Unemployment is a STATE program and paid for from the states..(NOT TAX DOLLARS). the FED jumped in and gave the states all this bs extension money so that people can collect for almost 2 yrs...bs....if you and your employer have paid in, then collect for what time the state allows..when the state system is broke..bye bye seeya....go to charities....

It is NOT the FED governments job to "take care of the people" through handouts and a Corporation owes no one nothing more then what the market will bare for the services rendered...and a return to shareholders on their investments....thats it....nothing more...

Yes the tax system needs revamped..and the corporate rate needs lowered....

Anything as far as "help" to those that are in need, needs to come from the states as approved by those that live in "THAT" state...each state takes care of their own citizens, that way the people of the state, EACH INDIVIDUAL state controls what happens in their state....wow, that kinda sounds like what the founding dads setup in the 1st place....iF ITS NOT LISTED AS A POWER OF THE FED GOV IN THE CONSTITUTION, IT IS UP TO THE STATES.....

When the LiberalS run out of other peoples money to give away, lookout..and that day is coming, faster then the whiners want to believe...me, i cant wait for it to get here..then maybe when the dust settles, my grandkids might have a chance of not having to pay for the debt that has been dumped on them and beable to enjoy a life that the Fed Gov hasnt stolen from them.....These frickin "lets make sure everyone is taken care of and "everyone needs to pay their fair share " "liberals" make me sick....

 

[AMonger]

* they "lets make sure everyone is taken care of liberals" make me sick....

Even Schwarzenegger said that when he was campaigning for governator of Kal-ee-fown-ia. Everybody must be provided for, or some such bilge.

When the federal money stops flowing, there'll be some confusion for a couple days, but after that, people who rely on welfare and consider it their money are going to get restless. Better have plenty of ammo on that day, my friend.