Sheez...I do NOT like Mitt Romney; however, I like having the ability to fire people too. Doesn't mean I like DOING it. Who wouldn't prefer it that way? Imagine the opposite.
He is being unfairly treated about THAT particular statement, and it's a little ridiculous. Let's get to issues and statements that actually MATTER.
well in all fairness then a boss who don't fire people
and end up running the company into the ground so all workers have to get new jobs
would be less charitable then one who fire the ones he need to keep aloofComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Charity is about giving to those not able... not those who are unwilling. You can't run a company by handing away jobs to people who can't keep them. That isn't charity, it is mismanagement.
Business exectuvies owe a duty to the workforce to run a company well. Letting the inept stay employed is a diservice to the workforce, and mismanagement.
You're not serious right? I mean if someone is not doing their job or comes in latre or misses work every week are you saying that they should not be fired? How about all of those Wall street Bankers whose companies failed and yet they got million dollar bonuses? Should they have been fired? Just asking....Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
This is getting old. It's sad how many people knowingly only repeat one line of what he actually said.
Also, what the hell does philanthropy have to do with being president? Nothing at all. It's CONGRESS that decides how the people's money is spent. The people deliberately taking Romney out of context is banking on the masses not really understanding this.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
The masses don't understand that Congress actually controls the budget, which is one of the most basic tenets of our government. If "the masses" weren't completely f**king retarded almost by definition then we wouldn't have the level of corruption in our government that we currently do.
Now, let's see if you're smart enough to stop blaming the president for s**t he has no control over. At this pont I'm not holding out high hopes though. Been on digg too long for that.
Obama makes no attempt to control anyting!
In the last four months he took his family on a $4 million dollar vacation to Hawaii mostly paid for by us! Then they spent a few more millions in Marthas Vinyard for another weeks vacation. Then they went to Disney world and closed down half of the park for a private party and this week end they went to the Bahamas.....your right! can't blame Obama for doing anything!Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
There's something wrong with mass consumption
Why do we want what we don't need
Alcohol burn it clean, asphalt meth-amphetamine
Will make it seem alright, It's gonna make it seem alright
Living in the hunger underground
Some people say I got a problem with authority so
What if I do man it beats relinquishing control
Philthy Phil Philantropist
You've taken when you shoulda give away
Philthy Phil you gave to us
We cannot repay
There's something grand about being nothing
There's something lame 'bout being grand
Alcohol squirting gun, no holidays in the sun
That's me not being you, that's me not being you
Either part of the solution or the problem
Can there not be a middle ground for just the anybody
Replace Superman with Joe ordinary
Philthy Phil Philanderer
You've taken when you shoulda give away
Philthy Phil you gave to us
We cannot repay
Philthy Phil Philantropist
You've taken when you shoulda give away
Philthy Phil you gave to us
We cannot repay
We cannot repay
Bleh...
HERE IS THE BOTTOM LINE. OBAMA AS FAR AS WE KNOW PAYS NOTHING TO HIS CHURCH AND HAS GIVEN 1% OF HIS INCOME TO CHARITY! THE OBAMAS SPENT FOUR MILLION DOLLARS ON A HAWAIIAN VACATION A LOT OF WHICH WAS PAID FOR BY AMERICAN TAX PAYERS, THEY THEY WENT TO MARTHAS VINYARD FOR A WEEK, THEN THEY CLOSED DOWN HALF OF DISNEY WORLD FOR A PRIVATE PARTY AND THEY JUST WENT TO THE BAHAMAS FOR THE WEEKEND. ALL OF THIS IN THE LAST FOUR MONTHS. lETS NOT FORGET MICHELLES $6 MILLION DOLLAR TRIP TO SPAIN LAST YEAR.
MITT ROMNEY ON THE OTHER HAND GIVES TEN PERCENT OF HIS INCOME TO HIS CHURCH AND GIVES AN ADDITIONAL FIFTEEN PERCENT TO CHARITY!Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Who controlled the Senate and the House before the Republican win in 2010? Reid and Pelosi. If the GOP has been doing all this spending, why are they called the Party of No?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
"My favorite quote from the President is where he promised to go through the budget page by page and line by line cutting spending where we could and having the programs we do have be more efficient. "
If you already knew that the president doesn't actually control the budget, then your above comments are knowingly misdirection (intentionally blaming someone for something they had no control over).
If you genuinely want to improve this nation why would you start with petty lies that any idiot can see through?
I fail to see how this is a petty lie. He said it when he was the President-Elect. Why would he promise that if he didn't feel that he could have some influence there? Here is his exact quote. And it was "We" not "I, the President":
"That is why I will ask my new team to think anew and act anew to meet our new challenges.... We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line – eliminating those programs we don’t need, and insisting that those we do operate in a sensible cost-effective way." http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/11/obama_vows_line.html
No matter how you dice it up, Obama, Pelosi, and Reid are all in the same party working together. And they had the three major leadership positions for two years (and 2/3rds of them now).Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
'Who controlled the Senate and the House before the Republican win in 2010?'
The republickins had control until 2006 elections, then the dems for 07 08 and 09.
So the republickins have control for twice as many years as the dems, and you're blaming just one party??????
Kinda funny, but pure bulls**t!~
And the Dems had control in 2010 too. The republicans took the house, but really were not sworn in until the start of 2011. So yes, two years of Democrats controlling both the House and the Senate with President Obama in the White House.
There is plenty of blame to go around for the past 10-15 years, but I was referring specifically to spending increases since President Obama has been in office (20% higher since President Bush). I posted my links to references on the data.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
10-15 years? This started back in the 80's, what you are now seeing is the end result of Reagan's Free Trade, and Deregulation campaign. If you voted for him, you should be happy, as you are now getting what you asked for.
Regarding spending increases, these are much more justified than the increases that have take place from 1980 thru 2008. At least most of this money went to public works projects such as parks bridges, schools and highways, instead of Blackwater.
10 years? 15 years? 30 years? It doesn't change my point. There is plenty of blame to be shared over that time period.
We can't travel back in time and change policy, we can only change things moving forward. Right now, we are on a path to huge debt similar to the path that Greece is on. No matter how well intentioned, it is money we don't have and can't afford.
Things won't get much better until you stop the outsourcing, and tariff imports from third world countries, such as India and China.
The party of corporate America has spent the last 30 years looking out for the big guys, and most of the young voters were too damned dumb to see this coming. Now that it's here, they still don't recognize the cause for what it is. Instead, they think that the pres. has some magical power to create the jobs that have been shipped overseas.
markcalvinoFeb 4, 2012
The only charity that Romney has done so far is to make 100% sure he reelects Obama
"Let Detroit go bankrupt""
"Corporations are people too, my friend"
"Banks are nice people"
Is this schmuck working for the Obama campaign? If so, he's doing a fantastic job.
bigbert81Feb 3, 2012
Sheez...I do NOT like Mitt Romney; however, I like having the ability to fire people too. Doesn't mean I like DOING it. Who wouldn't prefer it that way? Imagine the opposite.
He is being unfairly treated about THAT particular statement, and it's a little ridiculous. Let's get to issues and statements that actually MATTER.
sloppyjoes7Feb 3, 2012
Especially has he wasn't even talking about actually "firing" people. He was talking about a consumer's right to choose who to buy from.
So, anybody who uses that quote against him thinks consumers shouldn't have the right to choose companies or products to buy from.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
greatwhitmonkeyFeb 3, 2012
I notice how Obama looks like a small monkey character? Hmmmmm...
theonewhoknowsFeb 3, 2012
Yeah, because being charitable is all about not firing people when you run a company.
dauntless1Feb 3, 2012
Well, it kind of is, isn't it? It's giving someone something you didn't have to give them, at some cost to you. Isn't that somewhat charitable?
rudegarFeb 3, 2012
well in all fairness then a boss who don't fire people
and end up running the company into the ground so all workers have to get new jobs
would be less charitable then one who fire the ones he need to keep aloofComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
dauntless1Feb 3, 2012
Yeah, but that's the misconception. There is no reason t think not firing some janitor will "run the company into the ground".
Charity does not require you to give ALL of your money, forever.
theonewhoknowsFeb 3, 2012
Charity is about giving to those not able... not those who are unwilling. You can't run a company by handing away jobs to people who can't keep them. That isn't charity, it is mismanagement.
Business exectuvies owe a duty to the workforce to run a company well. Letting the inept stay employed is a diservice to the workforce, and mismanagement.
Linking this to charity is foolish.
anthologyjoe1Feb 3, 2012
You're not serious right? I mean if someone is not doing their job or comes in latre or misses work every week are you saying that they should not be fired? How about all of those Wall street Bankers whose companies failed and yet they got million dollar bonuses? Should they have been fired? Just asking....Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
theonewhoknowsFeb 3, 2012
Me not serious? Are you directing your comment to me?
norman619Feb 3, 2012
This is getting old. It's sad how many people knowingly only repeat one line of what he actually said.
Also, what the hell does philanthropy have to do with being president? Nothing at all. It's CONGRESS that decides how the people's money is spent. The people deliberately taking Romney out of context is banking on the masses not really understanding this.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
dauntless1Feb 3, 2012
The masses don't understand that Congress actually controls the budget, which is one of the most basic tenets of our government. If "the masses" weren't completely f**king retarded almost by definition then we wouldn't have the level of corruption in our government that we currently do.
drich255Feb 3, 2012
And that was Pelosi and the Dems until the 2010 elections.
dauntless1Feb 3, 2012
Good job. That's step one.
Now, let's see if you're smart enough to stop blaming the president for s**t he has no control over. At this pont I'm not holding out high hopes though. Been on digg too long for that.
anthologyjoe1Feb 3, 2012
Obama makes no attempt to control anyting!
In the last four months he took his family on a $4 million dollar vacation to Hawaii mostly paid for by us! Then they spent a few more millions in Marthas Vinyard for another weeks vacation. Then they went to Disney world and closed down half of the park for a private party and this week end they went to the Bahamas.....your right! can't blame Obama for doing anything!Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
adaguyFeb 4, 2012
I think he keeps going on vacations cause he knows it will piss you off!
kaegroFeb 3, 2012
There's something wrong with mass consumption
Why do we want what we don't need
Alcohol burn it clean, asphalt meth-amphetamine
Will make it seem alright, It's gonna make it seem alright
Living in the hunger underground
Some people say I got a problem with authority so
What if I do man it beats relinquishing control
Philthy Phil Philantropist
You've taken when you shoulda give away
Philthy Phil you gave to us
We cannot repay
There's something grand about being nothing
There's something lame 'bout being grand
Alcohol squirting gun, no holidays in the sun
That's me not being you, that's me not being you
Either part of the solution or the problem
Can there not be a middle ground for just the anybody
Replace Superman with Joe ordinary
Philthy Phil Philanderer
You've taken when you shoulda give away
Philthy Phil you gave to us
We cannot repay
Philthy Phil Philantropist
You've taken when you shoulda give away
Philthy Phil you gave to us
We cannot repay
We cannot repay
Bleh...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI2zR_gMaTcComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
anthologyjoe1Feb 3, 2012
HERE IS THE BOTTOM LINE. OBAMA AS FAR AS WE KNOW PAYS NOTHING TO HIS CHURCH AND HAS GIVEN 1% OF HIS INCOME TO CHARITY! THE OBAMAS SPENT FOUR MILLION DOLLARS ON A HAWAIIAN VACATION A LOT OF WHICH WAS PAID FOR BY AMERICAN TAX PAYERS, THEY THEY WENT TO MARTHAS VINYARD FOR A WEEK, THEN THEY CLOSED DOWN HALF OF DISNEY WORLD FOR A PRIVATE PARTY AND THEY JUST WENT TO THE BAHAMAS FOR THE WEEKEND. ALL OF THIS IN THE LAST FOUR MONTHS. lETS NOT FORGET MICHELLES $6 MILLION DOLLAR TRIP TO SPAIN LAST YEAR.
MITT ROMNEY ON THE OTHER HAND GIVES TEN PERCENT OF HIS INCOME TO HIS CHURCH AND GIVES AN ADDITIONAL FIFTEEN PERCENT TO CHARITY!Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
particleman420Feb 3, 2012
why are you so concerned with their vacations and what they give to any church?
why do you keep repeating the same thing over and over in the same thread?
adaguyFeb 4, 2012
'why do you keep repeating the same thing over and over in the same thread?'
It's all he can come up with.
drich255Feb 3, 2012
If you think that President Obama will win the election on those sound clips alone (that both have reasonable context) -- I wish you good luck.
My favorite quote from the President is where he promised to go through the budget page by page and line by line cutting spending where we could and having the programs we do have be more efficient. http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/11/obama_vows_line.html
Instead, we got 20% more spending since 2008 -- and that doesn't include the President's Health Care Bill http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204740904577195352148844134.htmlComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
dauntless1Feb 3, 2012
Who controls the budget again?
Oh yeah, CONGRESS.
But keep pretending that you know how government works.
drich255Feb 3, 2012
Who controlled the Senate and the House before the Republican win in 2010? Reid and Pelosi. If the GOP has been doing all this spending, why are they called the Party of No?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
dauntless1Feb 3, 2012
"My favorite quote from the President is where he promised to go through the budget page by page and line by line cutting spending where we could and having the programs we do have be more efficient. "
If you already knew that the president doesn't actually control the budget, then your above comments are knowingly misdirection (intentionally blaming someone for something they had no control over).
If you genuinely want to improve this nation why would you start with petty lies that any idiot can see through?
drich255Feb 3, 2012
I fail to see how this is a petty lie. He said it when he was the President-Elect. Why would he promise that if he didn't feel that he could have some influence there? Here is his exact quote. And it was "We" not "I, the President":
"That is why I will ask my new team to think anew and act anew to meet our new challenges.... We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line – eliminating those programs we don’t need, and insisting that those we do operate in a sensible cost-effective way." http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/11/obama_vows_line.html
No matter how you dice it up, Obama, Pelosi, and Reid are all in the same party working together. And they had the three major leadership positions for two years (and 2/3rds of them now).Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
particleman420Feb 3, 2012
"I fail to see how this is a petty lie."
and thats why you keep repeating the same stupid s**t over and over day after day. you have no clue.
that is also why no one takes your comments seriouosly.
adaguyFeb 4, 2012
'Who controlled the Senate and the House before the Republican win in 2010?'
The republickins had control until 2006 elections, then the dems for 07 08 and 09.
So the republickins have control for twice as many years as the dems, and you're blaming just one party??????
Kinda funny, but pure bulls**t!~
drich255Feb 4, 2012
And the Dems had control in 2010 too. The republicans took the house, but really were not sworn in until the start of 2011. So yes, two years of Democrats controlling both the House and the Senate with President Obama in the White House.
There is plenty of blame to go around for the past 10-15 years, but I was referring specifically to spending increases since President Obama has been in office (20% higher since President Bush). I posted my links to references on the data.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
adaguyFeb 4, 2012
10-15 years? This started back in the 80's, what you are now seeing is the end result of Reagan's Free Trade, and Deregulation campaign. If you voted for him, you should be happy, as you are now getting what you asked for.
Regarding spending increases, these are much more justified than the increases that have take place from 1980 thru 2008. At least most of this money went to public works projects such as parks bridges, schools and highways, instead of Blackwater.
drich255Feb 4, 2012
10 years? 15 years? 30 years? It doesn't change my point. There is plenty of blame to be shared over that time period.
We can't travel back in time and change policy, we can only change things moving forward. Right now, we are on a path to huge debt similar to the path that Greece is on. No matter how well intentioned, it is money we don't have and can't afford.
adaguyFeb 4, 2012
Things won't get much better until you stop the outsourcing, and tariff imports from third world countries, such as India and China.
The party of corporate America has spent the last 30 years looking out for the big guys, and most of the young voters were too damned dumb to see this coming. Now that it's here, they still don't recognize the cause for what it is. Instead, they think that the pres. has some magical power to create the jobs that have been shipped overseas.