Romney’s business experience a curse?

posted at 9:50 am on January 31, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Republicans often laud private-sector experience as a key quality for chief executives, but Byron York throws a little cold water on the notion in an excellent column for armchair historians today.  In his estimation, neither the GOP nor the Democratic Party have won with a true businessman-as-leader nominee in decades:

The last president elected as a businessman was Herbert Hoover in 1928. “Hoover’s appeal, before his reputation became tarnished by the Depression, was as a problem solver and a solid businessman,” says Princeton University historian Fred Greenstein. “Someone who was not erratic — to the point of being dull.”

Certainly businessmen have tried to win the presidency. Ross Perot ran on his business experience and won 19 percent of the popular vote in 1992. Wall Streeter Wendell Willkie made a strong run against Roosevelt in 1940. But it’s safe to say that running as a businessman has not been a sure-fire route to the White House.

“Business skill and political skill are qualitatively different,” says Steven Hayward, author of the two-volume biography “The Age of Reagan. “They do not transfer well into the other domain.”

However, that’s not exactly a clear analogy to today, either.  York gives short shrift to both Bushes, who combined private-sector experience with varying degrees of public-sector work (the younger Bush only worked in the public sector for less than 15 years combined between two offices).  He also overrates Hoover as a businessman; Hoover certainly did well as a mining engineer, but made more of a name for himself as a relief organizer and humanitarian, and then spent more than a decade in and out of the public sector.  Hoover ran for President in 1920 in one of the GOP’s last brokered conventions (the last was in 1948), losing out early to Warren Harding, and then served as Secretary of Commerce from 1921 until he successfully ran for the Presidency in 1928.

Greg Sargent points to a new poll from WaPo/ABC that bolsters the albatross argument:

If Mitt Romney wins the GOP nomination, as seems increasingly likely, he will have plenty of time to reintroduce himself to national swing voters on his own terms. But in the short term, the evidence is mounting that the bruising GOP primary, and the bipartisan attacks on Romney’s corporate background, low millionaire tax rate, caginess about his tax returns, and his offshoring, are damaging him among the broader electorate.

The Post has just released the first national polling that directly asks about Romney’s corporate past. The results:

Overall, do you have a favorable or unfavorable impression of Romney’s work buying and restructuring companies before he went into politics?

  • Favorable 35
  • Unfavorable 40
  • No opinion 25

Among independents, 36 percent view Romney’s work favorably, versus 37 percent who view it unfavorably. [bullet format added for clarity — Ed]

Interestingly, that problem isn’t alleviated by substituting Newt Gingrich for Romney.  In the same poll snippet linked by Sargent, the survey asked about “Gingrich’s work, since leaving elective office, as a consultant for companies with an interest in federal policymaking,” and found that among all adults (not registered or likely voters), it got a 24/54 favorability rating — far below Romney’s.  It’s also important to note that this poll doesn’t have any information about its sample composition, and given the lengthy history of seriously skewed partisan splits in this series, this may not be the most reliable representation of an actual problem.  It’s worth noting that those leaning Republican like Romney’s experience a lot more than Gingrich’s, 58/24 to 44/40.

In Florida, at least, the news is a lot more sunny about business experience, even for Romney.  This is a poll taken of likely general-election voters in one of the most important swing states for November:

In the battleground state of Florida, a Mason-Dixon poll conducted for the Tampa Times and Miami Herald, showed favorable results for Romney. Nearly half (46 percent) of Florida voters viewed Romney’s business background positively, while just 30 percent negatively.  This is despite lots of scrutiny in the news media about Romney’s record at Bain over the last several weeks.

The numbers suggest that Romney’s work at Bain and his wealth are vulnerabilities, but hardly a silver bullet that will significantly hurt his general election prospects against President Obama.  It’s useful to think about Romney’s vulnerabilities in comparison to other presidential nominees.  Reports on Bill Clinton’s philandering were arguably much more damaging than Romney’s business track record in 1992; his net fav/unfav dropped to negative double-digits in April of that year.   And Ronald Reagan’s outspoken conservatism – including his past opposition to Medicare – was a glaring vulnerability in polls back in 1980.

Like George W. Bush, Romney combines his business experience with at least a short stint as a chief executive in a populous state, regardless of what one thinks of his track record there.  Will Obama make his private-equity experience an issue if Romney wins the nomination?  He’ll certainly try, but after all of the scrutiny and fact-checking done on claims in the GOP fight, it might be old news with few new angles by the time it gets to September.  Meanwhile, we can agree that business success isn’t a be-all, end-all for presidential success, but it won’t be an albatross, either.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

For the morons and religious bigots.

Cult

1. a particular system of religious worship, especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies.

2.an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, especially as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.

3.the object of such devotion.

4.a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.

Christianity is a cult.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:23 PM

I LIKE TO FIRE PEOPLE on an endless tv commercial loop with background pictures and stats about the people Bain fired.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 12:04 PM

.
No doubt- That was a gaffe he would like to take back- regardless of the context. My point was neutralizing the OWS/ class warfare attack that will be coming as best as possible.
.
Strategy time:
Mittens has to spend sometime preparing for the “I like to fire people”-
He needs to respond by saying – “I “misspoke” and really meant to say- I would like to fire Obama”- with a Staple’s store in the background. This would force the “literal” demtards to scurry back to the video for rebuttal-and recall the entire quote context- Which was about firing HEALTH CARE/INSURANCE companies.
Nobody likes insurance companies- do they?— Mittens , yes WILL have to take the high road about that type of negative campaigning. CREATIVITY will be required to Fight at the machine- not merely rage at it.

FlaMurph on January 31, 2012 at 12:24 PM

We already know that you are a bigot and a moron.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:16 PM
Pal, not believing in a faith is not being a bigot…if you don’t believe in Voodoo, are you a bigot? Or if you don’t believe in Islam, are you a bigot? Good grief…I’m not a Catholic, guess I am a bigot…

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 12:19 PM

Excellent post! Yes, in “Gunlock Bill”‘s world, you cannot question Romney’s Mormonism or you are a certified “bigot and a moron.” (Sorry…it’s the only two words he knows….) :)

jfs756 on January 31, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Mittens has to spend sometime preparing for the “I like to fire people”-

FlaMurph on January 31, 2012 at 12:24 PM

Too bad people can’t get the quote right, not even here at HA.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:31 PM

Excellent post! Yes, in “Gunlock Bill”‘s world, you cannot question Romney’s Mormonism or you are a certified “bigot and a moron.” (Sorry…it’s the only two words he knows….) :)

jfs756 on January 31, 2012 at 12:30 PM

You know what makes you a bigot jfs756? Your comment that you wouldn’t vote for Romney BECAUSE he’s a Mormon and you feel his religious beliefs are nutty.

SauerKraut537 on January 31, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Pal, not believing in a faith is not being a bigot…if you don’t believe in Voodoo, are you a bigot? Or if you don’t believe in Islam, are you a bigot? Good grief…I’m not a Catholic, guess I am a bigot…

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 12:19 PM

Non sequitur.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Timing is everything. In an era when Americans, homeowners and small businesses are struggling as big banks receive billion-dollar bailouts, crony capitalism is rampant, hedge fund traders game the system, and an unholy alliance between Washington and Wall Street creates such diverse wonders as Solyndra and Dodd Frank, a close examination of Romney’s years at Bain Capital (which the Obama campaign will conduct with zeal), will not play well with the “small folks.”

Romney ran a medical device company (link below) for 4 years, during which, time it profited to the tune of millions from Medicare fraud. Romney sold the company for a handsome profit just as the feds closed in (the very month they closed in). Of course, Romney “knew nothing” about the fraud. As others have noted, this occurred pre-Sorbanes Oxley. Today, under that law, a CEO would be considered to have known about such pervasive practices in his own company and would be facing criminal prosecution. So, yes business experience does matter – in context.

http://www.therightscoop.com/blood-money-mitt-romneys-medicare-scandal/

pacificisland on January 31, 2012 at 12:33 PM

And you’re a moron because you can’t figure out that you’re a bigot.

SauerKraut537 on January 31, 2012 at 12:33 PM

We already know that you are a bigot and a moron.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:16 PM

Do Mittbots realize how alike they and Obamabots are?

If you don’t like Obama = racist.

If you don’t like Romney = bigot.

YAWN.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 12:34 PM

I saw Sen. McCain on Fox last night and he was pointing out that in some future states, Idaho, I believe, Gov. Romney is going to be helped out by they large LDS population. Isn’t it odd that the argument of his faith is a negative in S.C. but a plus in other areas?

Cindy Munford on January 31, 2012 at 12:36 PM

The romneycare dogs, who support everything about him are pathetic. Your supporting an Obamasatan clone and you don’t even realize it.

What is the difference between Obamacare & romneycare. Nothing! It’s a freakin disgrace Romneycare will destroy the republican party. Not one conservative I know will ever vote for him in the general. A choice between two sociolist is no choice at all!!!

Danielvito on January 31, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Do Mittbots realize how alike they and Obamabots are?

If you don’t like Obama = racist.

If you don’t like Romney = bigot.

YAWN.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 12:34 PM

If you don’t like Obama, that doesn’t make you a racist. If you don’t like Obama because he’s black and you’re of another ethnicity, THEN you’re a racist.

If you don’t like Romney, that doesn’t make you a bigot. If you don’t like Romney because his religion doesn’t square with yours, THEN you’re a bigot.

SauerKraut537 on January 31, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Do Mittbots realize how alike they and Obamabots are?

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Do ABRtards realize how alike they and Obamabots are?

They lie. The misrepresent. They fabricate.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:37 PM

And they are MORONS!

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Too bad people can’t get the quote right, not even here at HA
Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:31 PM

And when Mittens does say– “What I meant to say was -I like being able to fire Obama” (ThankYou Bill)– you will say- “this guy is awesomely ruthless… and I love him as much as Newton”

FlaMurph on January 31, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Shorter: I know you are but what am I.

You’re boring and predictable.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Ronald Reagan himself was a Democrat until the age of 50 when he switched to the Republican party. Like Romney, when Reagan was involved in the private sector he largely stayed out of politics. The more involved Reagan became in politics, the more conservative his views became. For example, Reagan changed from being prochoice to being prolife.

Gingrich doesn’t have conservative values; he makes a mockery of them. He lies; he’s corrupt; he’s blowhard and an ego-maniac. He doesn’t have the support, the organization, or the money to run a campaign against an incumbent president. His campaign in Florida exposed his weakness against Obama and voters can see it, and they are starting to see the only viable candidate as Romney.

Romney is the conservative candidate who BEATS OBAMA IN POLLS.

Do conservatives want to beat Obama in November?

http://www.whyromney.com/

mountainaires on January 31, 2012 at 12:39 PM

What is the difference between Obamacare & romneycare.

Danielvito on January 31, 2012 at 12:36 PM

1900 pages of government bureaucracy. Death panels.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:39 PM

You’re boring and predictable.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Another example of projection.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:40 PM

Romney is the conservative candidate who BEATS OBAMA IN POLLS.

mountainaires on January 31, 2012 at 12:39 PM

Really?

Rasmussen Reports 1/28 – 1/30 1500 LV 47 42 Obama +5
USA Today/Gallup 1/27 – 1/28 907 RV 48 48 Tie
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl 1/22 – 1/24 RV 49 43 Obama +6
PPP (D) 1/13 – 1/16 700 RV 49 44 Obama +5
CBS News/NY Times 1/12 – 1/16 1021 RV 45 45 Tie
Pew Research 1/11 – 1/16 1207 RV 50 45 Obama +5

Looks like you’re using ‘Special’ Gunlock Bill math where 2 + 2 = 7

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Cross posted in Headlines thread:

I have an intense dislike of Mitt Romney, and for a variety of reasons cannot bring myself to vote for him. But let me say this in his defense: his ability to identify and to attract talent is extremely impressive.

When he was governor, he hired some real duds. But he also hired many outstanding individuals – brilliant, talented, creative, committed. Much of what he was able to accomplish in the area of bureaucratic streamlining and reforms was the result of knowing who to hire, letting them do what they do best, and giving them his support. This is critically important in a leader, much more important than having personal experience with the ins and outs of business or finance.

The problem is that this tendency can be dangerous, and in the case of someone who doesn’t have any core convictions like Romney, it can get you into a lot of trouble (see Gruber, for example). Also, this talent of his seems to be limited to those areas that he’s most naturally comfortable with: restructuring, streamlining operations, etc. IOW, process. Important, yes, but not to the exclusion of policy. And he had much more of a mixed record when it came to hiring people for policy positions. For example, a couple of his health and human services picks were great; others were truly awful.

With respect to his business background, I don’t think it is all that important or relevant. I would suggest that it would be far more important to have someone of his experience serving in the cabinet, for example, than as President. It doesn’t take someone of his background to understand what to do as President; it’s actually not that complicated. It’s not that the President and most Congressmen (both Republicans and Democrats) don’t know what it would take to pull us out of this mess; it’s that the solutions require more political courage than most of them are able to summon. (And in the case of Obama, it would take abandoning his lifelong hatred of this country.)

Turning around this country will take vision, political conviction and courage. And Romney lacks all three.

Just Sayin on January 31, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Just Sayin on January 31, 2012 at 12:42 PM

‘Special’ Gunlock Billie Bob learned a new word today. Good boy Billie, you’re extra special today. Now be a good little Bille and let the adults talk.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 12:42 PM

Christianity is a cult.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:23 PM

No, Christianity is a relationship.

dominigan on January 31, 2012 at 12:43 PM

mountainaires on January 31, 2012 at 12:39 PM

Are you on freakin drugs, your comparing Romneycare to Ronald Reagan.

I see, Ronald reagan enacted the biggest piece of sociolism (romneycare) in the history of any state-pre obamacare and that’s comparable to Ronald reagan.

Do you realize how stupid you sound trying to pimp for your fraud!!!

Danielvito on January 31, 2012 at 12:44 PM

I read this whole thread without commenting because grown up people were talking about the facts. It was interesting. Then the pro-Romney people come in and all I see is more of the same thing they’ve been doing for the last few weeks.

I think the non Romney people have made it pretty clear they will not vote for Romney under any circumstance. I include myself in that group. Accusing me of being a bigot isn’t going to change my mind, nor is accusing me of not being a true conservative, etc. All you Romney people say you will vote for the nominee, whoever it is, so you people should come over to the Newt side. Tell Romney to drop out for the good of the country and then we can all be on the same side. Deal?

Night Owl on January 31, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Apostles’ Creed

That’s a summation, that every Christian Church subscribes to (with minor variances) to…thanks for asking.

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 12:17 PM

So all those people that believed in Jesus before the existence of the “Apostles’ Creed” weren’t Christians?

Your definition FAILS.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:47 PM

I think the non Romney people have made it pretty clear they will not vote for Romney under any circumstance. I include myself in that group.

Night Owl on January 31, 2012 at 12:45 PM

So, you are an Obama supporter then.

Why should we care what you think if you would rather have Obama?

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:49 PM

No unlike you, we have principle and if two sociolist on the ballot their is no choice.

Explain what the difference is in Romneycare and Obamacare. Further, do you even realize romney’s advisors crafted Obamacare.

Do you even understand the impact of that!

Danielvito on January 31, 2012 at 12:52 PM

So, you are an Obama supporter then.

Why should we care what you think if you would rather have Obama?

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Not at all. I don’t care if you care what I think, and I think I am not alone in making that point, but you seem to think if you call me a moron just one more time, I’ll see the light. Do we have a deal or not?

Night Owl on January 31, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Just Sayin on January 31, 2012 at 12:42 PM

I would very interested to know who you feel is the person go thru the primary season, win the nom and be able turn this country around.
.
Do you have a name?

FlaMurph on January 31, 2012 at 12:53 PM

So all those people that believed in Jesus before the existence of the “Apostles’ Creed” weren’t Christians?

Your definition FAILS.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:47 PM

I think that you are the person not getting it. It is not about whether you know about Jesus. In scripture, it says that even the demons know Jesus (and tremble). Demons are not Christians.

The difference is whether you put Jesus first in your life, as Savior. This means, above your wife, children, friends, relatives, everything else… even your life.

Does Jesus Christ come first in your life. If so, then all the other things fall in line as you follow His example. If not, then no professing with your lips will change the fact that he is NOT Lord of your life.

dominigan on January 31, 2012 at 12:54 PM

The hate is strong in this thread. Good thing 50% of the people here are 50+ and won’t be around for much longer.

antisense on January 31, 2012 at 12:56 PM

‘Special’ Gunlock Billie Bob:

They wear MAGIC underwear. Case closed.

Yes some religions wear headgear like Jews or Hindus. But I know not of any religious headgear that is worn because it gives the wearer magical powers.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 12:57 PM

dominigan on January 31, 2012 at 12:54 PM

What does this have to do with Romney’s business experience? Find a bridge somwhere.

antisense on January 31, 2012 at 12:57 PM

SauerKraut537 on January 31, 2012 at 12:37 PM

G’day to you, sir. You’ve been ‘off the radar’ for a time.

What you said in that post is of course, exactly right.

But stigmatizing political opponents with accusations of Racism and Bigotry are the best (however disingenuous) way to render your political opponents into irrelevancy.
As such, I don’t expect anyone to cease using it as a weapon.

listens2glenn on January 31, 2012 at 12:57 PM

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 12:57 PM

The resident financial and religious illiterate speaks.

antisense on January 31, 2012 at 12:58 PM

The hate is strong in this thread. Good thing 50% of the people here are 50+ and won’t be around for much longer.

antisense on January 31, 2012 at 12:56 PM

LOL. It’s not hate, it’s ridicule for a group of people that wear magic underwear. And I’m in my 30s. And I think all religions are silly but Mormons are beyond silly and into laugh out loud ridiculousness.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 12:58 PM

The resident financial and religious illiterate speaks.

antisense on January 31, 2012 at 12:58 PM

I’m sorry did I offend your underwear?

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 12:59 PM

I think that you are the person not getting it. It is not about whether you know about Jesus. In scripture, it says that even the demons know Jesus (and tremble). Demons are not Christians.

So, then you agree that his definition fails to define what a Christian really is.

The difference is whether you put Jesus first in your life, as Savior. This means, above your wife, children, friends, relatives, everything else… even your life.

Does Jesus Christ come first in your life. If so, then all the other things fall in line as you follow His example. If not, then no professing with your lips will change the fact that he is NOT Lord of your life.

dominigan on January 31, 2012 at 12:54 PM

So, it isn’t so much what you believe but what you do. I agree.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 1:00 PM

LOL. It’s not hate, it’s ridicule for a group of people that wear magic underwear. And I’m in my 30s. And I think all religions are silly but Mormons are beyond silly and into laugh out loud ridiculousness.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Grow up. It is no more silly than the belief someone returned from the dead. It has little to do with the merits of any candidate in the race.

antisense on January 31, 2012 at 1:02 PM

Grow up. It is no more silly than the belief someone returned from the dead. It has little to do with the merits of any candidate in the race.

antisense on January 31, 2012 at 1:02 PM

MAGIC UNDERWEAR

Case closed.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Explain what the difference is in Romneycare and Obamacare.

You mean besides the 1900 pages of federal bureaucracy and the death panels?

Further, do you even realize romney’s advisors crafted Obamacare.

Do you even understand the impact of that!

Danielvito on January 31, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Are you serious? Who added the additional 1900 pages?

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 1:03 PM

FlaMurph on January 31, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Good question, FlaMurph. Like a lot of conservatives, I am deeply dissatisfied with this field. I had supported Perry, and now I am at a bit of a loss.

What I am starting to think about, though, is which candidate would be the most likely to get out enough of the conservative vote to help with down-ballot races. My thinking is that if we have a very strong turnout of genuine Independents and moderate Dems and a relatively low turnout of Conservatives, we could end up taking a bath on the Senate and maybe not do so well in the House either. So at this point, for that reason, I am leaning toward Santorum. I also think that he would bring the fight to Obama in a way that Romney just won’t.

I worked very hard on Romney’s 1994 Senate campaign, but became so disillusioned – no, disgusted – by what I saw during the campaign that before election day rolled around I knew that I could never vote for him. His performance as Governor did nothing to change my mind.

Just Sayin on January 31, 2012 at 1:04 PM

MAGIC UNDERWEAR

Case closed.

angryed on January 31, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Your OWS thinking is more magical than any briefs one may wear. Troll harder.

antisense on January 31, 2012 at 1:05 PM

After these scorched-earth tactics Mitt used against Newt, I just have NO idea how he is going to reach out to all the Newt supporters and bring them back in the fold if he wins the nomination.

Even if he does a McCain and picks a Conservative superstar for VP(Ryan? Jindal?), I’m not sure it’ll be enough to heal the fractures. (people would just say, “hey, I’m not falling for that again!”)

tkyang99 on January 31, 2012 at 1:06 PM

The resident financial and religious illiterate speaks.

antisense on January 31, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Yup! That is angryeyed.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 1:06 PM

After these scorched-earth tactics Mitt used against Newt, I just have NO idea how he is going to reach out to all the Newt supporters and bring them back in the fold if he wins the nomination.

tkyang99 on January 31, 2012 at 1:06 PM

The Newtron cultists are lost, but the others may be salvageable.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 1:08 PM

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 12:17 PM

A lot of that sounds pretty weird.

Conceived by a ghost?

Dead for three days and then was alive again. Have you ever seen a body that has been dead for three days?

I don’t care what Mormons believe, that jfs756 dude doesn’t have the standing to judge any other persons beliefs. He beliefs are very strange.

csdeven on January 31, 2012 at 1:11 PM

I would suggest that people who blog here, start brainstorming about how they are going to help Romney win if he is the candidate. First you have to correct the media impression that Newt has made that he Stole Money, Hides his money in Swiss Bank accounts, and Hides his money in the Caymans. Newt owes it to the rest of us to make prosperity and business wholesome again, and to stop talking like an Occupier.

The other thing you can do, is give the candidate republican Senators. In Virginia, it looks like Newt’s supporters couldn’t even pass around some primary sheets or stand out at a supermarket for him. Who do you think is going to do it for you?

Mitt has organization that can translate into efficiency when he gets to Washington. Newt may blather that he will do a bunch of things on the first day, Hoardes of Things!!! but he seems to have trouble tying his own shoelaces.

Fleuries on January 31, 2012 at 1:12 PM

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 1:08 PM

Being that your a Romneycare dog, I know it’s pointless but both Romneycare & obamacare are mandates that indiviuals HAVE to buy insurance or face fine and or prison. In america, you know, land of the free, that is historic compromize of our rights.

Take your complain about the 1,900 pages to Romneycare, it was his advisors that crafted it.

Seriously, do you work for that chump Romney, only a paid flak can be either this oblivious!

Danielvito on January 31, 2012 at 1:15 PM

After these scorched-earth tactics Mitt used against Newt, I just have NO idea how he is going to reach out to all the Newt supporters and bring them back in the fold if he wins the nomination.

tkyang99 on January 31, 2012 at 1:06 PM

There is an article by American Thinker called It’s not about Newt.
It’s a good summary I think. Bringing McCain to stump with Romney was a way to show conservatives our place.

MontanaMmmm on January 31, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Just Sayin on January 31, 2012 at 12:42 PM

.
Agree- I don’t think anyone is satisfied with the selection. But then we have to ask ourselves – are we waiting for a messiah moment- like the liberals with Otingly the Marxist? They really don’t exist until the media creates them. So don’t hold your breath for our side. I gave up looking for Mr./Mrs. Goodnom a long time ago. And the proof is in looking at the last 30 yrs of “nominees” who won the WH. Yikes ! What that says to me is that a Man/or woman is selected to be President and you really won’t know what happens until they get into it- regardless of what they say. I’m sure alot of people thought carter was the bomb back in the day.
.
For me this primary has not been about finding the perfect conservative candidate – or one that “connects” with my feelings. For me it is who has the best chance to get the commie out of the WH.

FlaMurph on January 31, 2012 at 1:21 PM

. Bringing McCain to stump with Romney was a way to show conservatives our place.

MontanaMmmm on January 31, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Hmmmm, that sounds promising.

Cindy Munford on January 31, 2012 at 1:21 PM

Mitt’s private sector experience helped him come up with:

“Buy this or go to Jail”

-Governor Mitt Romney

portlandon on January 31, 2012 at 1:24 PM

Cindy Munford on January 31, 2012 at 1:21 PM

Hey, Cindy I’ve been a lurker for years and am thus a Newbie.
At the risk of sounding like a suck up. I always appreciate your comments.

What is your take on bringing out McCain, it seems like it would not be helpful other than in NH, so why do it and still continue to have him be a major player in the campaign?

MontanaMmmm on January 31, 2012 at 1:26 PM

Take your complain about the 1,900 pages to Romneycare, it was his advisors that crafted it.

Danielvito on January 31, 2012 at 1:15 PM

Are you totally clueless?

Masscare was about 100 pages. Obamacare was over 2000 pages. The difference is 1900 pages.

It doesn’t matter who wrote the 1900 pages that AREN’T in Masscare.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 1:30 PM

Danielvito on January 31, 2012 at 1:15 PM

Also, if you don’t like Masscare, DON’T live in Mass. You can move away from it.

If you don’t live in Mass, then Masscare hasn’t hurt you.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 1:32 PM

FlaMurph on January 31, 2012 at 1:21 PM

Believe me, I’m not waiting for a Messiah, either. We are all deeply flawed individuals, and our candidates are no different.

If you are supporting Romney because you think he has the best chance of defeating Obama, I can respect that. I disagree with that assessment, but I can absolutely respect it… especially since I seem to be in the minority on the question of his electability. :-)

Just Sayin on January 31, 2012 at 1:33 PM

Dr Evil on January 31, 2012 at 11:55 AM

Part of the problem is that any of the candidates could take such an approach… yet we are stuck with 20th century paradigms that no longer work and the Republican Party is only lagging by a bit behind the Democratic Party in showing that this doesn’t work. It isn’t that Republicans are doing better because they have better ideas or ideals, it is that they haven’t had their turn to screw things up in the 20th century way worse than the Democrats. They nearly did that under Bush with Medicare Part D, TSA, DHS, DNI, TARP… all or mostly bi-partisan efforts which got Establishment Republicans on-board.

All of those are failures at one level or another. They are also all of them 20th century program types and building of government.

Obama and the Democrats outdid Bush with a few years of a Republican Congress and some years of a mixed Congress before it went Democratic.

None of the candidates can put together a coherent concept that is different from the past and the past is a failure which we, our children, our grand-children and great grand-children will pay for with not just cash but their very liberty. All of those now left in the field on the Republican side have the problem of being unable to even think of scaling back government. Newt got rid of programs and balanced a budget, yes, but he left the machinery in place to re-expand once he was gone… the programs aren’t the problem, the agencies and mind-set behind them are. Romney is just taking part in the mind-set… the mind-set is the problem. They all have it in what is left of the field, it is just a question of degree, not kind.

ajacksonian on January 31, 2012 at 1:37 PM

That’s why I’ve actually been given Ron Paul, of all people, a second look recently. He seems to be the only one who GETS IT. We ARE BROKE, like he said many times.

I look at it this way, if we don’t fix our debt problems, this country and most of the world is surely headed to catastrophe.

If Ron Paul fixes our debt problems, at the cost of gutting the military, the world might NOT blow up and we could still end up ok, and we can rebuild once he gets out of office.

So if Newt doesn’t turn out to be the one I might just vote for Paul instead.

tkyang99 on January 31, 2012 at 1:45 PM

Non sequitur.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Which means you were wrong…not voting for someone because they are a democrat, that is being a bigot? How about not voting for someone because they believe in Voodoo magic, or that dances in the nude at the full moon? That’s bigotry?
How about if someone believes in Global Warming and it harms Mother Earth, and you think that is “nutty”…bigotry in your mind?
How about if you feel someone who takes people to Africa, and gives them Kool-Aid…or if someone wears Nike shoes and is waiting for the “comet”…bigotry to think they are nutty?
How about some people who think they can become Gods of their own world…or have “Celestial Wives (many of them), think that is “nutty”? Some do…
Or how about someone who thinks a persona can be three people…Nutty? Some do, but it’s not bigotry, it’s not having the same values, the same faith, and it’s okay not to vote for someone who doesn’t agree with you in faith, or in Global Warming, or in Abortion, or that is too short, or has facial hair, neither which has happened in the past years since the advent of TV…get it?

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 1:47 PM

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 1:47 PM

Bigots always find ways to justify their bigotry.

csdeven on January 31, 2012 at 1:50 PM

Excellent post! Yes, in “Gunlock Bill”‘s world, you cannot question Romney’s Mormonism or you are a certified “bigot and a moron.” (Sorry…it’s the only two words he knows….) :)

jfs756 on January 31, 2012 at 12:30 PM
You know what makes you a bigot jfs756? Your comment that you wouldn’t vote for Romney BECAUSE he’s a Mormon and you feel his religious beliefs are nutty.

SauerKraut537 on January 31, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Wrong again, SourPuss. I don’t “feel” his religious beliefs are nutty; they ARE nutty!

You know, you really need to chill out over there, SourPuss. Have you ever considered trying decaff? :)

jfs756 on January 31, 2012 at 1:51 PM

Business skills and “herding cats in DC” are completely different skill sets, and Willard (from the RAT movie of the same name) has NO DC cat herding experience. As a consequence, Pres. Willard (God Forbid!) will be TOLD what to do by the RepubliCRAT establishment types (the snot-nosed, sniveling, pampered and entrenched members of the House and Senate who long should have been term-limited OUT of DC), just like the Jack@$$ Party majorities did to the Jack@$$-In-Chief. RINO Romney, in spite of his invocatios, will NOT repeal ObamneyCare (Hell, he was co-creator!), and he will not repeal Dodd/Frank (“Too big to fail” is written into the damn bill!) because the Wall Streeters are his BFFs putting hoards of money into his coffers. So Florida, don’t go by what Willard says, GO BY WHAT HE’S DONE!!!

Colatteral Damage on January 31, 2012 at 1:58 PM

There is an article by American Thinker called It’s not about Newt.
It’s a good summary I think. Bringing McCain to stump with Romney was a way to show conservatives our place.

MontanaMmmm on January 31, 2012 at 1:17 PM

I don’t think so. I think they are giving them way too much credit. McCain is actually a reminder of what happens when you run a moderate republican- you lose. Even George W Bush was smart enough to invoke Ronald Reagan’s name, even if he wasn’t really a conservative.

This isn’t the first string running this time around. One of these campaign teams are going to face Obama in the general. From what I have seen of their campaigns so far, they are no match for Axelrod. He’s going to set them up like bowling pins, and knock them down.

Dr Evil on January 31, 2012 at 1:59 PM

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 1:47 PM

Just an attempt to rationalize your bigotry.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 2:01 PM

And they are MORONS!

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:38 PM

You know, “Gunlock,” you REALLY need to work on that vocabulary over there. No, really. I mean, c’mon, you’ve graduated from “bigot,” to “moron,” and we’ll give you that one; however, I really think you need to expand your horizons. I mean, just think of it…you could maybe see if Mama could increase your allowance and buy you a little dictionary. That way, you could look up ALL KINDS OF WORDS!! Wouldn’t that just be da bomb, “Gunlock”? Hmmmmm??? Hee hee hee hee!!!!!!!!!!

jfs756 on January 31, 2012 at 2:01 PM

Alert

Schadenfreude on January 31, 2012 at 2:09 PM

jfs756 on January 31, 2012 at 2:01 PM

Just ignore this one. It is a poor excuse for a troll and isn’t worth conversing with.

Instead, let’s share investment tips!

antisense on January 31, 2012 at 2:10 PM

So all those people that believed in Jesus before the existence of the “Apostles’ Creed” weren’t Christians?

Your definition FAILS.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Don’t be a fool…she asked for a definition, I gave her one…that’s like saying if you define a word from a 2010 dictionary, every word before than that was written wasn’t known…
It’s a “definition” a summary of faith…you logic is a little suspect, along with your intellect.
All of this was defined from the very beginning, it was put into a summarized form that every Christian Church has in their liturgy.
If you were a Christian, you would know that…

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 2:11 PM

jfs756 on January 31, 2012 at 2:01 PM

From the one who doesn’t know what a cult is.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 2:11 PM

jfs756 on January 31, 2012 at 1:51 PM

Someone pointed out that you believe a ghost had sex with a woman and she gave birth. They also said you believe that a guy was crucified and died, was buried for 3 days, and then came back to life. I also heard elsewhere that you believe that God is a bodiless God, but is also a ghost, but also has a body. The question is….what does the Ghost God do with the skin from the bodied God when he isn’t using it? Does it hang on a hanger (NO WIRE HANGERS!!!) or does he fold it up and place it in a drawer?

You should examine your goofy beliefs before you point the finger at ANYONE for what they believe.

But it is clear that you are a despicable bigot.

csdeven on January 31, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Alert

Schadenfreude on January 31, 2012 at 2:09 PM

I really wish Romney had a more aggressive tax plan.

csdeven on January 31, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Bigots always find ways to justify their bigotry.

csdeven on January 31, 2012 at 1:50 PM

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 1:47 PM

Just an attempt to rationalize your bigotry.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 2:01 PM

I guess that could be your only response, another insult.
In other words, I am right and you don’t know how to respond…so you would have no problem voting for a man who believed in VooDoo and danced naked to the full moon…okay, I wouldn’t.
But of course I never said Mormonism was a reason to or not to vote for someone…where over 95% of the Mormon’s would vote for Mitt, isn’t that “bigotry”, you are excluding all the other religions for your own?
OOOOOOPs,darn rational thinking sinks your boat again…

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 2:14 PM

You should examine your goofy beliefs before you point the finger at ANYONE for what they believe.

But it is clear that you are a despicable bigot.

csdeven on January 31, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Here is a classic…calling someones religion “goofy” and then calling them a bigot…
Not voting for someone because they are Christian is not being a bigot, it’s just not meeting someone standard of faith.
But your post is a hoot…read it again and see the irony…

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Don’t be a fool…

Like you?

she asked for a definition, I gave her one…

Yeah, one that obviously was exclusionary.

that’s like saying if you define a word from a 2010 dictionary, every word before than that was written wasn’t known…

That is a stupid analogy.

It’s a “definition” a summary of faith…you logic is a little suspect, along with your intellect.

But it OBVIOUSLY only applies to a SUBset of Christianity. Not to all of Christianity.

All of this was defined from the very beginning, it was put into a summarized form that every Christian Church has in their liturgy.
If you were a Christian, you would know that…

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 2:11 PM

Pure bovine feculence. It wasn’t defined that way until several centuries AFTER the beginning of the Christian era.

If you knew more Christian history, you would know that.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Just an attempt to rationalize your bigotry.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 2:01 PM

Now here is the challenge for you…where am I a bigot?
In what post did I ever hint at being a bigot?
I have never, never, stated that Mitt or any Mormon should be discounted because of their religious views…indeed I have been promoting Mitt as the VP or high cabinet member, imagine being a bigot while promoting someone for the 2nd most powerful position in the world…do you know how foolish that makes you look?
So now, show me the post where I show bigotry…unless you think trying to define it is “bigotry”, I hope you aren’t that stupid.

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 2:21 PM

So all those people that believed in Jesus before the existence of the “Apostles’ Creed” weren’t Christians?

Your definition FAILS.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:47 PM
Don’t be a fool…she asked for a definition, I gave her one…that’s like saying if you define a word from a 2010 dictionary, every word before than that was written wasn’t known…
It’s a “definition” a summary of faith…you logic is a little suspect, along with your intellect.
All of this was defined from the very beginning, it was put into a summarized form that every Christian Church has in their liturgy.
If you were a Christian, you would know that…

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 2:11 PM

That’s okay, “right2bright.” You did a great job to attempt to explain it to him. However, there are none so blind as those who will not see.

jfs756 on January 31, 2012 at 2:22 PM

jfs756 on January 31, 2012 at 1:51 PM
Someone pointed out that you believe a ghost had sex with a woman and she gave birth. They also said you believe that a guy was crucified and died, was buried for 3 days, and then came back to life. I also heard elsewhere that you believe that God is a bodiless God, but is also a ghost, but also has a body. The question is….what does the Ghost God do with the skin from the bodied God when he isn’t using it? Does it hang on a hanger (NO WIRE HANGERS!!!) or does he fold it up and place it in a drawer?

You should examine your goofy beliefs before you point the finger at ANYONE for what they believe.

But it is clear that you are a despicable bigot.

csdeven on January 31, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Your problem, “csdeven,” is that you hate Christians and anything to do with Christianity. C’mon man, admit to it. That’s what your issue is, isn’t it? All anyone needs to do is even bring up the word “Christian,” and you go ballistic. You need to do something with your hate. You really do. Do something about it, dude, or it’s going to consume you.

jfs756 on January 31, 2012 at 2:28 PM

If you knew more Christian history, you would know that.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Pal, it isn’t a “subset”, name me the Christian sect that doesn’t have one of the creeds in its liturgy.
Definitions refine the known into a reasonable explanation. It creates a standard, so we have a base to measure by.

What’s the measurement for a foot? Before 1959 or after, or before 1873 or after…the Creed made sure the standard was established. That is the definition used by all Christian Churches…unless you can find one that doesn’t. Along with the standard mon-theism, etc.

Everything in the creed was from the beginning, that’s what a “summary of faith” is, just a summary of what is already known.
You don’t read the whole bible every Sunday, but you have an overriding theme which controls the direction of the Church…that is what the Creed does.

There are other differences…in all Christian Churches and houses of worship, all are invited, without conditions of faith…that was Jesus’s commandant, that all can come before him, and that the faithful are not divided by their “gifts”.

Good luck on your search for Him…

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 2:33 PM

That’s okay, “right2bright.” You did a great job to attempt to explain it to him. However, there are none so blind as those who will not see.

jfs756 on January 31, 2012 at 2:22 PM</blockquote

Pearls before swine…

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 2:34 PM

That’s okay, “right2bright.” You did a great job to attempt to explain it to him. However, there are none so blind as those who will not see.

jfs756 on January 31, 2012 at 2:22 PM</blockquote

Pearls before swine…
right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Agreed. Very appropriate citation.

jfs756 on January 31, 2012 at 2:36 PM

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 2:14 PM

You have a past of spouting your anti-Mormon bigotry. So I do not accept your weak justifications and refuse to address you as if you deserved one iota of serious thought.

csdeven on January 31, 2012 at 2:52 PM

jfs756 on January 31, 2012 at 2:28 PM

Certainly not. I would like to see you justify your weird beliefs and at the same time criticize another faith and do so with one shred of intellectual honesty. So far it is clear that you are nothing but a religious bigot. You feel your beliefs to be superior to others and you have no tolerance of those who hold those different beliefs.

csdeven on January 31, 2012 at 2:56 PM

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 2:16 PM

One religious bigot defends another religious bigot. You must be very happy that you found a brother in your religious bigotry.

csdeven on January 31, 2012 at 2:59 PM

You have a past of spouting your anti-Mormon bigotry. So I do not accept your weak justifications and refuse to address you as if you deserved one iota of serious thought.

csdeven on January 31, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Unfortunately you won’t find any of that…it’s just you throwing out your lies…
I have dissed the founders, for taking child brides (pedophilia), and for other such things, I also dissed Martin Luther for being so anti-Jew, he was horrible…but Mormon’s themselves? Never as a Mormon, I dissed posters who happened to be Mormon, and I am sure some were Baptists, Catholics, Lutherans, etc. I have promoted Mitt as a fine potential leader if he ever became a conservative, hardly a sign of bigotry.
But you my dear? The ultimate bigot, mainly because you throw that word out to deflect your horrible attack on Christians, and your insulting of our Heavenly Father, obvious not the same as yours.
You keep spreading your lies…I can assure you that someone actually takes you serious, somewhere, sometime…but you are a hoot.

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 3:06 PM

One religious bigot defends another religious bigot. You must be very happy that you found a brother in your religious bigotry.

csdeven on January 31, 2012 at 2:59 PM

Now if only you could find one quote, one post where I showed that bigotry…buy you never do, you just throw out that word.
For years you have tried that, and you have never found one post to back up your lie…
So here it is…put up or shut up.

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 3:08 PM

One religious bigot defends another religious bigot. You must be very happy that you found a brother in your religious bigotry.

csdeven on January 31, 2012 at 2:59 PM
Now if only you could find one quote, one post where I showed that bigotry…buy you never do, you just throw out that word.
For years you have tried that, and you have never found one post to back up your lie…
So here it is…put up or shut up.

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 3:08 PM

Again, I give you extreme kudos, “right2bright,” for attempting to reason with this guy. However, the fact of the matter is, HE’S guilty of the very thing (bigotry) that he accuses us of. He simply cannot tolerate any discussion of Christianity. It offends him because he doesn’t know Jesus as his Lord and Savior. That’s at the heart of his issues. So, rather than coming to grips with his own issues, he conveniently lashes out to people like us who make him so uncomfortable talking about Christianity. He’s a sad case. He really is.

jfs756 on January 31, 2012 at 3:18 PM

Pal, it isn’t a “subset”, name me the Christian sect that doesn’t have one of the creeds in its liturgy.

The ancient Christian sect started by Jesus. They didn’t have any of the creeds in their liturgy.

Definitions refine the known into a reasonable explanation. It creates a standard, so we have a base to measure by.

Dictionaries define words based upon usage. Why is the dictionary definition of Christian not good enough for you? Is it because it isn’t exclusionary enough for you?

the Creed made sure the standard was established.

Unfortunate for you that the Creeds were written by members of the Roman Catholic Church. When it says “catholic”, the authors meant “Roman Catholic”.

See how fun creeds are.

That is the definition used by all Christian Churches…

No, it isn’t. It wasn’t used by the ancient Christian Church, the one organized by Jesus.

unless you can find one that doesn’t.

The ancient Christian Church, the one organized by Jesus.

Everything in the creed was from the beginning, that’s what a “summary of faith” is, just a summary of what is already known.

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 2:33 PM

As explained above, you are incorrect.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 3:33 PM

You have a past of spouting your anti-Mormon bigotry. So I do not accept your weak justifications and refuse to address you as if you deserved one iota of serious thought.

csdeven on January 31, 2012 at 2:52 PM

And it goes back a long way.

http://74.84.198.234/archives/2007/11/20/baptists-cool-to-mitt-because-mormons-keep-luring-away-their-congregation/comment-page-1/#comments

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 4:05 PM

MontanaMmmm on January 31, 2012 at 1:26 PM

I doubt there is any real downside to having Sen. McCain campaign for Gov. Romney. He does nothing for Gov. Romney conservative credentials but for most voters he is a respected longer term senator who has put aside the past to support a former opponent for what he believes is the good of the country. Even those who’s blood pressures rise at the site of the world famous mavericky maverick aren’t going to vote for Obama. I believe primary voters who plan to vote for someone else, are just more convinced of their decision. Please lurk less and comment more, the more the merrier. Sorry it took so long to answer, I had to go vote.

Cindy Munford on January 31, 2012 at 4:24 PM

Here is a classic…calling someones religion “goofy” and then calling them a bigot…
Not voting for someone because they are Christian is not being a bigot, it’s just not meeting someone standard of faith.
But your post is a hoot…read it again and see the irony…

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Just to remind who the “bigot” should be…

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 4:39 PM

Not voting for someone because they are Christian is not being a bigot, . . .

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Really?

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 4:44 PM

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 3:33 PM

I guess you have a problem following a thread…we are talking about today, 2012.
The Creeds are used in every Christian Church, it is a summary, dictionaries are for quick definitions.
I.e. like this example, dict. foot…: the terminal part of the vertebrate leg upon which an individual stands.
However, if you want a more complete definition, than a foot is
“The end of the leg on which a person normally stands and walks. The foot is an extremely complex anatomic structure made up of 26 bones and 33 joints that must work together with 19 muscles and 107 ligaments to execute highly precise movements. At the same time the foot must be strong to support more than 100,000 pounds of pressure for every mile walked. Even small changes in the foot can unexpectedly undermine its structural integrity and cause pain with every step.”

See, both definitions, one more complete, but neither wrong…such it is with the creeds, it further defines…and btw, you can point out the Christian Churches that don’t use it in there liturgy…I am talking about now, since that is what was asked…try to follow along.

And here is a little history about the word “catholic”…you are so naive.

The word catholic (derived via Late Latin catholicus, from the Greek adjective καθολικός (katholikos), meaning “universal” comes from the Greek phrase καθόλου (kath’holou), meaning “on the whole,” “according to the whole” or “in general”, and is a combination of the Greek words κατά meaning “about” and όλος meaning “whole”. The word in English can mean either “including a wide variety of things;

It wasn’t until the 2nd century that it was used to describe a church…but used long before Christ was born. Good grief, all that time spent before school learning about your faith, and this is what they taught? No wonder Mitt has a hard time keeping his lies straight…

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 4:49 PM

Really?

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 4:44 PM

Absolutely…you would vote for someone practicing VooDoo and dancing to a full moon? No you would not, and it wouldn’t be “bigotry” it would be cause you don’t believe such things and do not want a person who does representing you.
If an athiest says I am not voting for a Christian, I would never call him a “bigot”, it’s his/her right to choose whatever method to eliminate a candidate.
You may vote for the VoodDoo candidate, but I wouldn’t…nor would I vote for someone who is all tatted up…call it being narrow minded, or whatever, but not “bigotry” the last desperate word that people losing a battle of wits use, like calling a conservative a “racist”, it’s a card played by people who view themselves as “victims”.

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 4:54 PM

It wasn’t until the 2nd century that it was used to describe a church…
right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 4:49 PM

And the Creeds were written AFTER that. So thanks for proving me right.

Thanks for playing.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Today’s definition of Christian.

Christian

adj.
1. Professing belief in Jesus as Christ or following the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.

2. Relating to or derived from Jesus or Jesus’s teachings.

3. Manifesting the qualities or spirit of Jesus; Christlike.

4. Relating to or characteristic of Christianity or its adherents.

5. Showing a loving concern for others; humane.

n.
1. One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.

2. One who lives according to the teachings of Jesus.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 5:07 PM

Not voting for someone because they are Christian is not being a bigot, . . .

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Really?

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 4:44 PM

Absolutely…

right2bright on January 31, 2012 at 4:54 PM

Let’s test it.

Not voting for someone because they are Jew is not being a bigot, . . .

Yes it is.

Not voting for someone because they are Black is not being a bigot, . . .

Yes it is.

Not voting for someone because they are short is not being a bigot, . . .

Yes it is.

Not voting for someone because they are Brown is not being a bigot, . . .

Yes it is.

Not voting for someone because they are White is not being a bigot, . . .

Yes it is.

Not voting for someone because they are Rich is not being a bigot, . . .

Yes it is.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 5:12 PM

The Romneybots have severe brain damage.

CoolChange80 on January 31, 2012 at 5:15 PM

For the morons and religious bigots.

Cult

1. a particular system of religious worship, especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies.

2.an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, especially as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.

3.the object of such devotion.

4.a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.

Christianity is a cult.

Gunlock Bill on January 31, 2012 at 12:23 PM

First thing I see when I look at the comments.

Looks like the thread has deteriorated pretty far already.

I suppose it would be inflammatory to say that the latest batch of Romney supporters remind me of a cult……

tom on January 31, 2012 at 5:40 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4