Posted on 02/08/2008 4:02:17 AM PST by monkapotamus
Your comments about Romney are weird. Do you have any personal experience to back them up? I personnally spent over two hours with Romney when he visited our National Guard unit in Iraq. We flew him all over the place to meet all the Massachusetts troops deployed. If he was pulling an “act” of being gracious and polite and interested in what we were doing, he did a brilliant job. Our battalion commander and senior staff officers had lunch with him in our conference room He answred our questions for over an hour.
All in all, I was very impressed. He didn’t strike me as an above the fray rich guy at all. As a small business owner in civilian life I was especially interested in his thoughts on taxes and immigration. On both issues he hit home runs if you ask me. He eaned my vote that day. Despite the fact he never served in the military he at least had the sack to fly around the country with us under some dangerous conditions. I for one am sorry he’s out of the race. Maybe he’ll get a VP nod, we’ll see.
Your observations are nuts if you have nothing but what Hucklebee says about him as your “evidence”.
Tthrowing open the doors to 30 million invaders and giving terrorists access to civilian courts is not national security.
Cordially,
We are, indeed, electing a National Talk Show Host. Thus, Obama has the inside track.
Ryan Seacrest vs. Tyra Banks might have been a better campaign - I know the voter turnout would have been much higher. ;)
If he had waited until after his CPAC speech to suspend his campaign, he would have been carried all the way to the white house on conservative shoulders. What an error in judgment.
Every time I read or hear this or something to the same effect I think of McCain's support, or indeed encouragement, of the invasion across our southern border and I just can't believe that he really gives a good goddamn about our "national interest".
Every time I read or hear this or something to the same effect I think of McCain's support, or indeed encouragement, of the invasion across our southern border and I just can't believe that he really gives a good goddamn about our "national interest".
I think it could be easily argued that running a successful plantation was the 18th century equivalent of today's "meeting a payroll".
Exactly.
So...slavery is the same as employees?
Is that right?
Key words: “the 18th century equivalent”.
Nope. There were plenty of folks at that time with businesses that had real employees.
But, just because I don’t like being picky, I’ll acknowledget that running a plantation was a lot of work. However, I was reacting to the notion that a president isn’t qualified who hasn’t had run a business.
Eisenhower was a general. So was Washington. They were not renowned as businessmen. Certainly, those were not the reasons they’d been called to the presidency.
Most of the military spend their entire lives in that career, and never have to meet a payroll.
And, no place in the Constitution does it mention a “Businessman in Chief” but it does mention a “Commander in Chief.”
Nope. There were plenty of folks at that time with businesses that had real employees.
But, just because I don’t like being picky, I’ll acknowledget that running a plantation was a lot of work. However, I was reacting to the notion that a president isn’t qualified who hasn’t had run a business.
Eisenhower was a general. So was Washington. They were not renowned as businessmen. Certainly, those were not the reasons they’d been called to the presidency.
Most of the military spend their entire lives in that career, and never have to meet a payroll.
And, no place in the Constitution does it mention a “Businessman in Chief” but it does mention a “Commander in Chief.”
I agree with your post, I just thought he had a little more business experience than you were giving him credit for.
The nature of the Liberal, hence Liberalism, is collectivization. Form a group. Follow leadership. Work for a common advantage.
The nature of the Conservative, hence Conservatism, is individualism. Independence and self reliance. Be a leader. Work for individual advantage.
It is only when the threat to individualism as perceived by large numbers of Conservatives is sufficient to motivate millions of individual efforts, that Conservtism is advanced.
There is no lesson that can be learned. It's like the parable of the scorpion riding across the river on the back of the frog and stinging him so they both drown. It's just in our nature.
Mitt can organize campaigns very well. However the best organization can not make up for the biggest weakness. Mitt Romney himself. Voters don’t know where he’s coming from because he’s a phony. That’s the problem. We don’t trust him to do what he says he will do.
Mitt Romney: The Plastic Banana.
Are you sure about that? I think he ran a very large agribusiness operation in the days that agribusiness was the major industry of Virginia.
Granted, quite a few of George Washington's workers didn't have the right to leave, but he still had to feed them, and there were lots of others who were freemen working for him.
Thank you for resurrecting this old thread.
One good thing about this year is we’re still having a real debate about who our nominee will be in late February. Read the dates. Last election cycle, the primary was basically over before it got to late February.
“George Washington never met a payroll.” xzins....
“I think he ran a very large agribusiness operation in the days that agribusiness was the major industry of Virginia.” darrellmaurina......
Not to mention his earlier work as a surveyor. Last I checked surveying took a crew, and that means a payroll......
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.