Romney the Idiot, in his own words [Archive] - Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com

Steve R

09-22-2012, 12:34 PM

Stevie, you can't handle the truth.
You've got that wrong. I guess you're unaware of my position, stated several times on this forum, that I consider Obama the worst president in my (long) lifetime, but not because he's a socialist (which, as a socialist, I can assure you he's not) or a Muslim (which he's not) or not legally qualified for the presidency (which he is). He's the worst because he is a mass-murdering war criminal and the greatest threat to civil liberties ever to hold office in the White House. That said, Mitt Romney is still an idiot, and if you don't think his own words confirm it, then you're way too "liberal" in your evaluation of his intellectual capabilities.

joecam

09-22-2012, 01:01 PM

Previous (http://www.livejournal.com/go.bml?journal=randompictures&itemid=12302946&dir=prev)
Memorize (http://www.livejournal.com/tools/memadd.bml?journal=randompictures&itemid=12302946)
Share (javascript:void(0))
Track (http://www.livejournal.com/manage/subscriptions/entry.bml?journal=randompictures&itemid=12302946)
Flag (http://www.livejournal.com/tools/content_flag.bml?user=randompictures&itemid=12302946)
Next (http://www.livejournal.com/go.bml?journal=randompictures&itemid=12302946&dir=next)

Harsh words for Mitt.

http://randompictures.livejournal.com/12302946.html#cutid1 (http://randompictures.livejournal.com/12302946.html#cutid1)

PaceAdvantage

09-22-2012, 01:05 PM

http://randompictures.livejournal.com/12302946.html#cutid1First problem...Mitt Romney never said those exact words...

Thus, I'm not going to believe that anyone else said those replies to Mitt either...

thaskalos

09-22-2012, 01:47 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQwrB1vu74c&feature=related

"The least interesting man in the world..."

Greyfox

09-22-2012, 02:03 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQwrB1vu74c&feature=related

"The least interesting man in the world..."

Almost. There is one who is even less interesting.

ft_Mb-4nXJk

65 lies ??

kg9m1F8B2_c&feature=related

Steve R

09-22-2012, 04:28 PM

First problem...Mitt Romney never said those exact words...

Thus, I'm not going to believe that anyone else said those replies to Mitt either...
Nor are those words shown in quotes. So it's not a direct quotation but the content is absolutely correct.

These are the actual words:

"There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it -- that that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. ... These are people who pay no income tax. ... [M]y job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

So he is claiming that 47% of Americans pay no income tax, which essentially is true although the number is really 46.4%. By claiming he'll never convince "those people" to take personal responsibility he is clearly stating that they don't.

But you do know, don't you, that the responses to the unquoted comment were intended only to represent the demographic range of the people under his umbrella of self-proclaimed "victims" and government leeches? But to me the clincher of his idiocy is the denial that people are entitled to things like health care, food or housing. That's objectivist crap to the max. I'll go one step further. Angry mobs rising up and killing those who would deny them health care, food or housing they are justified because the instinct for survival preempts the infantile and biologically insane faux philosophy of objectivism. Don't get me wrong. I'm not advocating mass violence, but if someone threatens my and my family's very survival by denying me food because I can't pay, I will take theirs by any means possible - and so would you. Biology is one hell of a behavioral driver.

Tom

09-22-2012, 05:08 PM

Steve R

09-22-2012, 06:23 PM

You are why we have the second amendment.
You are ready to kill for food, but not give up your cable TV or your internet, or go out and get a job that might require work or be beneath you.

One you give all the luxuries and have cleaned toilets, if you are still hungry, I'll give you a sandwich.
That's quite an (il)logical leap, but not unexpected from you.

If you had any sense of history you would have seen the connection between what I was writing about and what the French people did in 1789 and the Russian people in 1917. When human beings are desperate to survive they will do what it takes. Don't think it couldn't happen in the U.S. if pricks like Romney, Obama and all the other other bitches of the oligarchy remain in power. Not only could it happen. I think it will. History is littered with examples of the rich being slaughtered by the poor when the wealth and power gap becomes intolerable. And since the U.S. is essentially an "elected" monarchy with the monarch being pre-selected by the oligarchs, you guys are on the road to revolution unless there is a change in values and culture (and I use those words loosely when it comes to the U.S.).

Tom

09-22-2012, 06:39 PM

So what, you don't like tuna fish?

Rookies

09-22-2012, 06:56 PM

Ex-con, Con Conrad Black has a couple of great comments about Mittens, in one of his normal jeremiads, today:

"And now, in an astounding demonstration of national fecklessness, a failed president is running slightly ahead in the polls of a challenger who has a real CV, unlike recent presidents, but who is so politically oafish and plastic, he makes Elmer Fudd seem charismatic." :lol:

"The fact that Willard M. Romney is still running almost even in the polls despite his demiurgic implausibility as a candidate, afflicted by a one-person pandemic of foot-in-mouth disease, illustrates the concern of the American voters.":lol:

One thing, the old, curmudgeon, troglodyte, 1%er can do, is put the pedal to the medal with prose!:D

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/09/22/conrad-black-canadas-front-row-seat-for-the-american-disaster/

PaceAdvantage

09-22-2012, 07:14 PM

So he is claiming that 47% of Americans pay no income tax, which essentially is true although the number is really 46.4%. By claiming he'll never convince "those people" to take personal responsibility he is clearly stating that they don't.Actually, as I stated in another thread, I read Romney's comments to mean a certain SEGMENT of that 47% who pay no income taxes also take NO personal responsibility (which is true, as I'm sure you would agree). You and others choose to interpret his words in a different fashion. That's fine.

I give him the benefit of the doubt, knowing he is a successful, intelligent, highly educated individual. Thus I know he doesn't believe that the ENTIRE 47% DO NOT take personal responsibility for their lives. The words that came out of his mouth that evening might make it APPEAR otherwise, but I'm sure if given the chance he would choose his words more carefully to convey the EXACT meaning if he knew his comments were going out to a wider audience...he didn't think he was being quoted or recorded, so he wasn't careful with his words...

See, that's the crux of this entire silly debate. There are actually people (like you, apparently) who believe that Romney sees that entire 47% as lacking personal responsibility and therefore they look to the gov't to help them at every turn. I refuse to believe Romney truly believes such nonsense. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

fast4522

09-22-2012, 08:08 PM

I take comfort in the idea that Mitt Romney speaks like a regular guy rather than a scripted teleprompter con artist. As a bonus I am delighted in the fact that Canadians dread the thought that Mitt Romney can win this election. And even if he said that he does not care if he hurts the feeling of the 47% who would not vote for him, that is cool beans for me.

Greyfox

09-22-2012, 08:20 PM

Ex-con, Con Conrad Black has a couple of great comments about Mittens, in one of his normal jeremiads, today:

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/09/22/conrad-black-canadas-front-row-seat-for-the-american-disaster/

What you didn't mention in the Conrad Black article were his comments about Obama and his regime that are highlighted below:

"Either Romney lucks through and numerate sanity starts to return to American public life, or the most self-destructively incompetent regime since James Buchanan brought on the Civil War, will come back and stoke up a truly spectacular inferno that will purify America in a mighty economic Jonestown. "

Rookies

09-22-2012, 08:56 PM

What you didn't mention in the Conrad Black article were his comments about Obama and his regime that are highlighted below:

"Either Romney lucks through and numerate sanity starts to return to American public life, or the most self-destructively incompetent regime since James Buchanan brought on the Civil War, will come back and stoke up a truly spectacular inferno that will purify America in a mighty economic Jonestown. "

Hell, he's Canada's SuperSized Con.

Ya didn't think he was going to write an entire paeon to Das Kapital, didja? ;)

thaskalos

09-22-2012, 09:18 PM

See, that's the crux of this entire silly debate. There are actually people (like you, apparently) who believe that Romney sees that entire 47% as lacking personal responsibility and therefore they look to the gov't to help them at every turn. I refuse to believe Romney truly believes such nonsense. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Fair enough...you are obviously a person who is not satisfied in accepting the literal interpretation of someone's words...choosing instead to read between the lines, for what he probably MEANT to say. And you might have a point; we often fail to phrase our words exactly like we have them in our mind.

But would you use these advanced interpretive skills of yours when it comes to analyzing something like Obama's "if you own a business...you didn't build that" comment?

Is that what you think Obama really meant to say, judging by the content of the rest of his speech?

Isn't Obama also an "intelligent, highly educated individual"?

Or does one have to be rich in order to deserve the "benefit of the doubt"?

PaceAdvantage

09-22-2012, 09:20 PM

Fair enough...you are obviously a person who is not satisfied in accepting the literal interpretation of someone's words...choosing instead to read between the lines, for what he probably MEANT to say. And you might have a point; we often fail to phrase our words exactly like we have them in our mind.

But would you use these advanced interpretive skills of yours when it comes to analyzing something like Obama's "if you own a business...you didn't build that" comment?

Is that what you think Obama really meant to say, judging by the content of the rest of his speech?

Isn't Obama also an "intelligent, highly educated individual"?

Or does one have to be rich in order to deserve the benefit of the doubt?I'm fairly certain I haven't criticized Obama for his "You didn't build that" comment.

I could be wrong, as my mind is often a blur these days, but I know it's something I didn't harp on, and I'm pretty sure never wrote about at all...

Greyfox

09-22-2012, 09:22 PM

Hell, he's Canada's SuperSized Con.

Ya didn't think he was going to write an entire paeon to Das Kapital, didja? ;)

You obviously haven't read his book "A Matter of Principle."

Black is a very learned man with respect to history and has written splendid biographies on FDR and Nixon.

He was wrongly convicted of fraud by a Chicago court who knew little or nothing about the financial goings on of Hollinger Inc.
While Black was in prison, the court appointed guardians of the company took Hollinger into bankruptcy.
Shares which were over $21 when Black was in charge, became worthless under their stewardship (the overseers made pisspots full of money) , even as wall paper.
You know not where of you speak.

Rookies

09-22-2012, 10:04 PM

You obviously haven't read his book "A Matter of Principle."

Black is a very learned man with respect to history and has written splendid biographies on FDR and Nixon.

He was wrongly convicted of fraud by a Chicago court who knew little or nothing about the financial goings on of Hollinger Inc.
While Black was in prison, the court appointed guardians of the company took Hollinger into bankruptcy.
Shares which were over $21 when Black was in charge, became worthless under their stewardship (the overseers made pisspots full of money) , even as wall paper.
You know not where of you speak.

Oh, I know a hell of a lot about Lord Con Cross Dresser. His life mirrors Gordon Gecko and in classic Con fashion, he tried to pillage 2 Union Pension Funds for himself. Fortunately, he was nailed by the Ontario Supreme Court (http://www.adjustment.ca/example.shtml?x=96), when trying to effectively bankrupt employees who had worked for his company for decades.

He is a self satisfied, sanctimonious, monumental prick and I was delighted that he was tried, convicted and served time in the U.S. for his shenanigans with Hollinger.

And his greatest claim to infamy was, in a fit of pique and holier than thou, decided to diss his Canadian citizenship so he could be plumped up by the House of Lords.

So now, post conviction, he can't reacquire Canadian Citizenship and only is allowed to stay in Canada on Visitor's Passes ( aka Green Cards) due to that Con P.M. Harper kissing his ample arse.

Most Canadians, in the court of public opinion, have stated their opinion:

BEGONE!

Tom

09-22-2012, 10:42 PM

Send him here.

Tom

09-22-2012, 10:49 PM

Fair enough...you are obviously a person who is not satisfied in accepting the literal interpretation of someone's words...which is exactly what you do for Obama but not Romney. Admit your bias. It's ok to be biased. 47% of the population is!

Is that what you think Obama really meant to say, judging by the content of the rest of his speech? Speech? It is the ESSENCE of all that he is, says, and does.

Isn't Obama also an "intelligent, highly educated individual"? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Smatest guy in all 57 states. OR 58...whatever!

Or does one have to be rich in order to deserve the "benefit of the doubt"?
Aren't you above Class Warfare? With all the money Obama has raised from the richest people in the country, don't you know how pathetic that comment is? It signals your are on empty.

View from the peanut gallery

Greyfox

09-22-2012, 10:52 PM

Most Canadians, in the court of public opinion, have stated their opinion:

BEGONE!

A true believer of the Toronto Star has spoken, for what it's worth.

Rookies

09-22-2012, 11:30 PM

A true believer of the Toronto Star has spoken, for what it's worth.

Au contraire. Black has made MANY enemies. There's not one public opinion poll, left or right leaning in origin, that supports giving this ass back his Citizenship. Let him die in Britain.

Greyfox

09-23-2012, 12:14 AM

Black is a pompous prick, an uppety muck-muck, and has blind spots about himself for sure.
But when it comes to recognizing leadership and potential he is a very bright observer.
He has labelled the last 4 years as "a failed Presidency."
His comments re: Obama and the future -
the most self-destructively incompetent regime since James Buchanan brought on the Civil War, will come back and stoke up a truly spectacular inferno that will purify America in a mighty economic Jonestown. "

are spot on accurate! Unfortunately, his opinion may not carry much weight with Americans. It should.

Actor

09-23-2012, 03:24 AM

So what, you don't like tuna fish?
I love tuna.

http://www.amazon.com/Tuna-Lovers-Cooked-Recipes-ebook/dp/B009APNGB6/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1348384755&sr=1-1&keywords=cookbook+tuna

Actor

09-23-2012, 03:53 AM

Tom

09-23-2012, 09:33 AM

They ban you from Canada for your opinions?

badcompany

09-23-2012, 12:30 PM

But you do know, don't you, that the responses to the unquoted comment were intended only to represent the demographic range of the people under his umbrella of self-proclaimed "victims" and government leeches? But to me the clincher of his idiocy is the denial that people are entitled to things like health care, food or housing. That's objectivist crap to the max. I'll go one step further. Angry mobs rising up and killing those who would deny them health care, food or housing they are justified because the instinct for survival preempts the infantile and biologically insane faux philosophy of objectivism. Don't get me wrong. I'm not advocating mass violence, but if someone threatens my and my family's very survival by denying me food because I can't pay, I will take theirs by any means possible - and so would you. Biology is one hell of a behavioral driver.

Earth to Leftist. When was the last time you were actually in a poor neighborhood in the United States?

If you had any recent first hand experience in this area, you'd know that lack of food is the least of their problems. I was just in a poor neighborhood in the Bronx. I've never seen so many morbidly obese people in my life.

Revolution?:lol: Maybe if you expand the definition to include waddling to the fridge for yet another helping of ice cream.

PaceAdvantage

09-23-2012, 02:41 PM

Revolution?:lol: Maybe if you expand the definition to include waddling to the fridge for yet another helping of ice cream.I laughed...

Steve R

09-26-2012, 09:26 AM

Earth to Leftist. When was the last time you were actually in a poor neighborhood in the United States?

If you had any recent first hand experience in this area, you'd know that lack of food is the least of their problems. I was just in a poor neighborhood in the Bronx. I've never seen so many morbidly obese people in my life.

Revolution?:lol: Maybe if you expand the definition to include waddling to the fridge for yet another helping of ice cream.
Another reactionary living in the bubble.

"While obesity is a problem for society, the poor are disproportionally affected (Tanumihardio et al, 2007). This is due to many factors including the finding that high calorie, processed foods are cheaper and more readily available to low-income consumers. A study of the New Haven area has shown that supermarkets located in less affluent areas stock fewer healthier varieties of foods and have fresh produce of lower quality than supermarkets located in higher-income areas (Andreyeva, et al, 2008). In addition, a 2004 study demonstrated that the energy density of food products (usually due to higher fat and sugar content) is inversely proportional to energy cost (Drewnoskia, 2004). In other words, limited income coupled with easier access to relatively cheap, higher calorie food, results in a higher propensity for obesity among low-income individuals and their families." - http://www.nlcfpc.org/poverty-and-obesity/2011/2/8/the-relationship-between-poverty-and-obesity.html, February 2011

Tom

09-26-2012, 11:54 AM

It is completely insane that in a country where the surgeon general has identified “an epidemic of obesity” that we are simultaneously subsidizing the production of high-fructose corn syrup. It is equally insane that the government is helping to artificially lower the cost of foods that are driving up national healthcare costs (i.e. killing us), while having a national healthcare debate about how we are going to pay for those costs.

http://naturalhealthdossier.com/2011/04/the-economics-of-obesity-why-are-poor-people-fat/

This is what poverty looks like today. Obama did that!

badcompany

09-26-2012, 12:14 PM

Another reactionary living in the bubble.

"While obesity is a problem for society, the poor are disproportionally affected (Tanumihardio et al, 2007). This is due to many factors including the finding that high calorie, processed foods are cheaper and more readily available to low-income consumers. A study of the New Haven area has shown that supermarkets located in less affluent areas stock fewer healthier varieties of foods and have fresh produce of lower quality than supermarkets located in higher-income areas (Andreyeva, et al, 2008). In addition, a 2004 study demonstrated that the energy density of food products (usually due to higher fat and sugar content) is inversely proportional to energy cost (Drewnoskia, 2004). In other words, limited income coupled with easier access to relatively cheap, higher calorie food, results in a higher propensity for obesity among low-income individuals and their families." - http://www.nlcfpc.org/poverty-and-obesity/2011/2/8/the-relationship-between-poverty-and-obesity.html, February 2011

Typical Leftist who has to minimize the successes the of Capitalism by distorting Logic to the point where fat people are really starving.

Applying Loony Leftist Logic, since poor people have less access to cars and have to walk more and ride bikes, therefore burning more calories. Shouldn't they be skinnier?

The truth is that poor people in the U.S live like kings, by WORLD STANDARDS, you know those standards you have to pretend don't exist.

If you want to see real hunger, look to your Socialist paradises. Oh wait, they're not really Socialist. They're some other figment of your bizarre imagination.

badcompany

09-26-2012, 12:37 PM

http://naturalhealthdossier.com/2011/04/the-economics-of-obesity-why-are-poor-people-fat/

This is what poverty looks like today. Obama did that!

Oh, my! The poor dear. If she only had access to better quality produce, she'd look like this:

http://cdn01.cdn.justjared.com/wp-content/uploads/headlines/2010/06/gisele-bundchen-calzedonia-campaign.jpg

Tom

09-26-2012, 12:56 PM

Poverty in this country is the American Dream for many.
Like Obama's brother! :lol:

Steve R

09-26-2012, 02:15 PM

Typical Leftist who has to minimize the successes the of Capitalism by distorting Logic to the point where fat people are really starving.

Applying Loony Leftist Logic, since poor people have less access to cars and have to walk more and ride bikes, therefore burning more calories. Shouldn't they be skinnier?

The truth is that poor people in the U.S live like kings, by WORLD STANDARDS, you know those standards you have to pretend don't exist.

If you want to see real hunger, look to your Socialist paradises. Oh wait, they're not really Socialist. They're some other figment of your bizarre imagination.
Wow, there actually is a reason Australia's deputy PM called Republicans "cranks and crazies". Time you got your ass out of B*#!ck, Alabama or whatever American hole you live in. BTW, which is the last "Socialist paradise" you visited? Maybe you can post some photos of how the poor live there. OTOH, maybe life in drug- and rat-infested inner city projects is not so bad, or living among the inbred poor folk of Appalachia. Ah, America. The model for human dignity.

badcompany

09-26-2012, 03:06 PM

Wow, there actually is a reason Australia's deputy PM called Republicans "cranks and crazies". Time you got your ass out of B*#!ck, Alabama or whatever American hole you live in. BTW, which is the last "Socialist paradise" you visited? Maybe you can post some photos of how the poor live there. OTOH, maybe life in drug- and rat-infested inner city projects is not so bad, or living among the inbred poor folk of Appalachia. Ah, America. The model for human dignity.

I live in NYC, and deal with poor people everyday. I see how they live. Most of their problems are as a result of failed government interventions, the type that you advocate.

You're just a miserable old man who spent his life adhering to a failed ideology. Don't worry. In the next life everything will be fair :lol:

elysiantraveller

09-26-2012, 03:08 PM

lamboguy

09-26-2012, 03:25 PM

this thread is pretty stupid to start out with. ROMNEY is anything but an idiot, he is very smart and articulate. i know conservative republican's hate guys that are indecisive and constantly change their minds like Romney often does.

i think its better to be that way than to be stubborn, and when you run for office, one might often have to change their stances to get votes. he did it in Massachusetts with the abortion issue and got elected by the skin of his teeth, now he is running for president and will try to do whatever it takes to get the votes.

let the price go up a little higher and i will bet on him