Our political discourse these days is so frustratingly bad that it really is no wonder that our country is in the general shape that it is in. The things that people look for in candidates are so backwards that we wind up electing the best talkers and sales people and we rarely get any depth or experience. I truly have no idea if Romney will be a better president than BO and I voted for BO last time around. I wanted to believe what he told us he represented and I thought the country needed what he was promising. Unfortunately, he not only didnt deliver what he promised but he has turned into exactly what he actually was all along. We all fell for the rhetoric when we should have done what we all knew to do, which is judge someone by thier actions and not their words. With that in mind, I looked harder at Romney and, frankly, I am more impressed with him at every turn. He is not the most charismatic guy around or the most dynamic speaker- but those really arent what make a good president.
Lets talk qualifications for the job based soley on actions and experience.
We can get one thing out of the way first- by all accounts Romney is a decent, moral and ethical man. Nothing in his history suggests otherwise and you know the dems have looked with everything they have.
Certainly Romney had a fairly priviledged upbringing from a financial standpoint. In typical Mormon fashion though he was far away from a trust fund baby and seems to have adhered to his beliefs in his life especially those related to charity from both a financial and time aspect.
He is obviously intelligent from an academic standpoint with his degrees from BYU and a JD and MBA from Harvard.
This is where he starts to really shine. After harvard he went to Bain and started as every other MBA graduate at the firm. To me, this is one of the absolute biggest selling points of Romney. Bain was full of smart, agressive, type A people and every single one of them wanted to succeed. He was competing against the elite in his field and he came out on top. Anyone that has even an inkling of experience with firms like Bain will attest that you do not get to the top of the firm by anything other than talent, success and a certain amount of political skill. He was handed nothing. he got to the top of Bain based on his achievements and merit. It is very impressive. His business acumen should be undebatable. It is funny to me to hear people say things like Romney used debt at Bain so that is all he knows how to do. That is foolish. It is absurd to think that he would not have been successful in whatever business career he decided to go into.
This is where he really starts to seperate himself from BO. That is not to say that BO would not possibly have been successful in the private sector, he just never really tried. Mitt did try and was successful.
The Olympics were another big achievemnet for Mitt. The scenario there is somewhat similar to what we see now. The organization was rampant with corruption, mis-management, in fighting and financial crisis. Sounds like our country and congress. In short order he organized, dealt with egos, made financial decisions, ran out dead weight and delivered a first rate Olympics that actually made money. Another example of Mitt inheriting a fiasco on all levels and turning it into a grand success.
Again, this alone was a greater achievemnet than anything BO did prior to the presidency. BO didnt have the chance to do it so we dont know if he could have done well with it or not, but we know that Mitt did.
At this point, we know Mitt is smart and capable based on his unarguable success in his business career and his running of the Olympics. This is already by far more accomplishment and preparedness for the presidency than BO had, but some still say that politics is different from the business world or the olympics where he couldmake decisions on his own. That is true to a point, but you have to have extraordinary political skills to advance as Mitt did at Bain and successfully run an event like the Olympics. However, we don't even need that as proof when we look at Mitt as Governor.
Again, the situation in Ma was pretty similar to our current situation in the country. Mitt got elected as a republican in one of the most ardent democratic states in the country. He inherited a horrible finacial mess including a huge budget deficit as well as a large debt burden. Without raising taxes on 98% of the state (in fact most taxes were lowered including capital gains taxes and income taxes-although a closing of tax havens actually increased tax revenue) Mitt balanced the budget and turned the debt into a surplus. Amazingly, he never blamed the previous guys or blamed the overwhelming majority of dems in the state govt. He simply did what he has done his whole career, which is make it work and succeed.
Again compared to BO, it is devastating. As a congressman and Senator BO proved that he is good at getting elected but little else. He was the most partisan voter according to his actions in the entire senate. More importantly, he showed zero aptitude for non-partisan governing. Again, that is not all his fault as in fairness a congressman or senator really needs to be partisan to some degree. But BO did not ever demonstarte an ability to work with the other side or manage people or get things accomplished and Romney did.
With BO, the proof is certainly in the pudding. In his 3.5 years as president he has been a terrible "leader" first and foremost. Yes he inherited a bad economy. But he did nothing to really fix it except throw money at it. he has been openly divisive and combative and partisan and full of excuses. All of those traits are fine for a Senator but none of them are fine for a president. As a leader and a consensus builder he has been woefully inadequate by any definition. And again, we arent talking about his speeches and his words- we are judging purely by his actions.
A few small examples. There are many things a politician promises and doesnt deliver on as many of those things are out of his control. I have never faulted BO for his handling of things like the wars or Guantanamo or some foreign policy and, to a certain degree, the economy. But lets look at what he CAN control. He promised to have the most open regime in history with all bills and legislation available to the country for debate and understanding. Yet, the single biggest piece of legislation he signed was so seceretive that even his own party admitted they didnt have time to read or understand the bill. BO had 100% ability to comtrol this and he failed miserably. Another, even the most strident left wingers on here and in America know that we need to make spending cuts. yet, no matter what BO has SAID for 3.5 years he hasny actually put a single one of them on paper for the public to look at. None. He personally commissioned a non-partisan debt panel to advise him on the issues and they gave him a full report and he used it for toilet paper. Never even addtressed it. He said in his State of the Union address that his healthcare plan would have some meaningful tort reform and yet the final 2000 plus document didnt have a single even token bit of reform. He actually tries to use his handling of the auto industry as a positive. Yet he basically broke the laws as they existed at the time and gave the unions a huge payout when an organized bankruptcy would have saved virtually every job and every job at a country that supplies them.
Bottom line, we cant ever know exactly how a person will act as president before they are elected but we know that Mitt is honest, smart, capable and has been successful in business, non-profit and government in his career. And we know how BO is based on his actual record.
I think its Mitt's turn. he has a proven track record of success in all of things we need in a president. Ill take the steak over the sizzle every single day.
One more little tidbit on Romney in Ma as Governor that I think is telling and a little funny. One of the things Romney did was to attempt to get rid of all tolls on a portion of the main highway (I-90) that ran through the state. Romney had the tolls looked at from a financial point of view and it turned out that the tolls didnt even cover the costs of the poeple manning the toll booths. It was costing the state almost double the amount of toll revenue to collect the tolls!!! Even more amazing was that the dems in the state were against the measureas they said it was being done for political gain. If that isnt a perfect example of why career type politicians are bad for the country I don't know what is. Everyone agrees that our finacial health as a country and our economy are the most critical problems we currently face as a country. yet we expect people, like BO, who dont even have an inkling of financial prowess to fix the problem.
Lets talk qualifications for the job based soley on actions and experience.
We can get one thing out of the way first- by all accounts Romney is a decent, moral and ethical man. Nothing in his history suggests otherwise and you know the dems have looked with everything they have.
Certainly Romney had a fairly priviledged upbringing from a financial standpoint. In typical Mormon fashion though he was far away from a trust fund baby and seems to have adhered to his beliefs in his life especially those related to charity from both a financial and time aspect.
He is obviously intelligent from an academic standpoint with his degrees from BYU and a JD and MBA from Harvard.
This is where he starts to really shine. After harvard he went to Bain and started as every other MBA graduate at the firm. To me, this is one of the absolute biggest selling points of Romney. Bain was full of smart, agressive, type A people and every single one of them wanted to succeed. He was competing against the elite in his field and he came out on top. Anyone that has even an inkling of experience with firms like Bain will attest that you do not get to the top of the firm by anything other than talent, success and a certain amount of political skill. He was handed nothing. he got to the top of Bain based on his achievements and merit. It is very impressive. His business acumen should be undebatable. It is funny to me to hear people say things like Romney used debt at Bain so that is all he knows how to do. That is foolish. It is absurd to think that he would not have been successful in whatever business career he decided to go into.
This is where he really starts to seperate himself from BO. That is not to say that BO would not possibly have been successful in the private sector, he just never really tried. Mitt did try and was successful.
The Olympics were another big achievemnet for Mitt. The scenario there is somewhat similar to what we see now. The organization was rampant with corruption, mis-management, in fighting and financial crisis. Sounds like our country and congress. In short order he organized, dealt with egos, made financial decisions, ran out dead weight and delivered a first rate Olympics that actually made money. Another example of Mitt inheriting a fiasco on all levels and turning it into a grand success.
Again, this alone was a greater achievemnet than anything BO did prior to the presidency. BO didnt have the chance to do it so we dont know if he could have done well with it or not, but we know that Mitt did.
At this point, we know Mitt is smart and capable based on his unarguable success in his business career and his running of the Olympics. This is already by far more accomplishment and preparedness for the presidency than BO had, but some still say that politics is different from the business world or the olympics where he couldmake decisions on his own. That is true to a point, but you have to have extraordinary political skills to advance as Mitt did at Bain and successfully run an event like the Olympics. However, we don't even need that as proof when we look at Mitt as Governor.
Again, the situation in Ma was pretty similar to our current situation in the country. Mitt got elected as a republican in one of the most ardent democratic states in the country. He inherited a horrible finacial mess including a huge budget deficit as well as a large debt burden. Without raising taxes on 98% of the state (in fact most taxes were lowered including capital gains taxes and income taxes-although a closing of tax havens actually increased tax revenue) Mitt balanced the budget and turned the debt into a surplus. Amazingly, he never blamed the previous guys or blamed the overwhelming majority of dems in the state govt. He simply did what he has done his whole career, which is make it work and succeed.
Again compared to BO, it is devastating. As a congressman and Senator BO proved that he is good at getting elected but little else. He was the most partisan voter according to his actions in the entire senate. More importantly, he showed zero aptitude for non-partisan governing. Again, that is not all his fault as in fairness a congressman or senator really needs to be partisan to some degree. But BO did not ever demonstarte an ability to work with the other side or manage people or get things accomplished and Romney did.
With BO, the proof is certainly in the pudding. In his 3.5 years as president he has been a terrible "leader" first and foremost. Yes he inherited a bad economy. But he did nothing to really fix it except throw money at it. he has been openly divisive and combative and partisan and full of excuses. All of those traits are fine for a Senator but none of them are fine for a president. As a leader and a consensus builder he has been woefully inadequate by any definition. And again, we arent talking about his speeches and his words- we are judging purely by his actions.
A few small examples. There are many things a politician promises and doesnt deliver on as many of those things are out of his control. I have never faulted BO for his handling of things like the wars or Guantanamo or some foreign policy and, to a certain degree, the economy. But lets look at what he CAN control. He promised to have the most open regime in history with all bills and legislation available to the country for debate and understanding. Yet, the single biggest piece of legislation he signed was so seceretive that even his own party admitted they didnt have time to read or understand the bill. BO had 100% ability to comtrol this and he failed miserably. Another, even the most strident left wingers on here and in America know that we need to make spending cuts. yet, no matter what BO has SAID for 3.5 years he hasny actually put a single one of them on paper for the public to look at. None. He personally commissioned a non-partisan debt panel to advise him on the issues and they gave him a full report and he used it for toilet paper. Never even addtressed it. He said in his State of the Union address that his healthcare plan would have some meaningful tort reform and yet the final 2000 plus document didnt have a single even token bit of reform. He actually tries to use his handling of the auto industry as a positive. Yet he basically broke the laws as they existed at the time and gave the unions a huge payout when an organized bankruptcy would have saved virtually every job and every job at a country that supplies them.
Bottom line, we cant ever know exactly how a person will act as president before they are elected but we know that Mitt is honest, smart, capable and has been successful in business, non-profit and government in his career. And we know how BO is based on his actual record.
I think its Mitt's turn. he has a proven track record of success in all of things we need in a president. Ill take the steak over the sizzle every single day.
One more little tidbit on Romney in Ma as Governor that I think is telling and a little funny. One of the things Romney did was to attempt to get rid of all tolls on a portion of the main highway (I-90) that ran through the state. Romney had the tolls looked at from a financial point of view and it turned out that the tolls didnt even cover the costs of the poeple manning the toll booths. It was costing the state almost double the amount of toll revenue to collect the tolls!!! Even more amazing was that the dems in the state were against the measureas they said it was being done for political gain. If that isnt a perfect example of why career type politicians are bad for the country I don't know what is. Everyone agrees that our finacial health as a country and our economy are the most critical problems we currently face as a country. yet we expect people, like BO, who dont even have an inkling of financial prowess to fix the problem.
