Just a nice guy who gutted thousands of jobs for personal gain.

He has a nice smile and smart ties!

He also hates his own dog.

He intimated that half of the US only votes for Democrats because they're freeloaders and sucking at the tit of the government. It's an extremely disgusting, incorrect, mean spirited and dangerous opinion. It's not hard to figure why people would think he's a bad person.

BERNIE BERNIE BERNIE

this is a great 39 minutes and 23 seconds. If anyone cares about the state of our economy and socioeconomics, it's well worth the time.

I'd love to see the counters to any of these points- particularly the chart which demonstrates with total certainty how trickle down economics was always and still is a sham.

He's a commie!

I thought we liked Mitt after the documentary?

God damn that's a speech

Virtuosity. Bravo.

jerseyhoya wrote:Do I really question politicians' character all that often? Maybe I do, I dunno. I think Obama is a good guy, who just happens to be wrong about most things politically and also kinda sucks at being president.

I guess I think Harry Reid is a total piece of shit, and if you were to say Chris Christie was an asshole, I wouldn't think that was weird. But Romney's a good guy. The vitriolic reaction seemed out of place.

Well, I'm going to apologize for not exactly contributing to an air of civility and mutual respect in the thread myself, but no, I don't think you go out of your way to acknowledge good intent on those you don't agree with, or to point out the failings of those you do.

I'm still a little puzzled though about what might have set you off about JFL's criticisms. all of which except the dig about the dog were political rather than personal. I'm assuming JFL has had no more personal relation with Romney than I have. I'm sure Mitt is a very personable guy to be around, however, and is a general "good guy" in the way that people who shape their views to whatever crowd they find themselves in can certainly seem to be, and who feels himself insulated from harm whatever the case.

I can also understand frustration that can stem from someone having that level of power, experience, connections and support, and not only not using it to address the needs of the neediest Americans, but lacking the character to even directly address them.

I'm sure Mitt is a great guy with the people he knows and likes and agrees with. I'm sure he looks like a good father. Being that kind of person is easy. He fails whenever it gets difficult.

The person who talked down to 47% of the country is the real Mitt. And if it isn't the real Mitt, then he never should have stood there and said what he did. If he meant it, he's a complete asshole; if he didn't mean it, he has no character or integrity. It's a lose-lose scenario.

But I'm sure the GOP and JH would love for us to stand around talking about Mitt and his character because it keeps the focus off the other collection of people very similar to Mitt that are lined up to try to win the GOP bid. So even though I would like to conjecture about the decency of a man who would tie his dog to the roof on a cross country journey, I'm instead going to focus on the many failings of Christie and Bush or whoever else crawls from the musk to tell us that big business needs our help more than the average Joe.

Monkeyboy wrote:I'm instead going to focus on the many failings of Christie and Bush or whoever else crawls from the musk to tell us that big business needs our help more than the average Joe.

why're you commies always so down on job cremators

I see what you did there.

I love Bernie Sanders. Wish we had more politicians with the passion and intellect that he possesses.

jerseyhoya wrote:loves his family

Whether for Mitt Romney or anyone else, this is really a terrible measure of whether someone is "good" or not. Sure, you are BAD if you treat your family like garbage, there is no question about it, but this is a little like that old Chris Rock routine: you are SUPPOSED to love your family. Why should you get any credit for it? On a psychological level (and on a very practical level, for ultra-rich people like Romney who are worried about passing on fortunes and doing whatever they can to avoid the tax man), the family is really, at bottom, the extension of the self. Loving one's family is, therefore, little more than loving oneself, and not a mark of any tremendous character. The ABSENCE of love for one's family, or (and especially) any active nasty behavior directed at one's family, can certainly be used, quite reasonably and quite fairly, as a mark of someone's lack of character; but love of family is no mark of true human kindness or morality. How you treat and think of people whom you don't know - who mean nothing to you - is a much better guide to what kind of person you are.

swishnicholson wrote:I can also understand frustration that can stem from someone having that level of power, experience, connections and support, and not only not using it to address the needs of the neediest Americans, but lacking the character to even directly address them.

I assume you mean Romney the presidential candidate? He was quite moderate as governor. I think his record doesn't reflect those comments.

is there any point at which his job of liquidating shit for short term financial gain and creating nothing becomes shameful? or is the principle just if it's legal, it's all good? how about payday loan operators? security mercenaries? high frequency traders?

What are security mercenaries?

If yoy think layoffs are immoral, which I do not and you may or may not, then you probably don't have a problem with people buying companies that are worth more without the employees.

Congress really needs to change the carried interest laws, as well as allowing people to put founders' shares into IRAs. Romney took advantage of both, as I would have, but that tax incentive is wasteful govt spending IMO.