Post Reply
Switch to Forum Live View Bill Clinton's arithmetic really endorses Mitt Romney
2 years ago  ::  Sep 16, 2012 - 10:34AM #1
withwonderingawe
Posts: 5,074
Article I found on Yahoo News but is writen by By Rodney K. Smith | Christian Science Monitor – Fri, Sep 14, 2012

" If one looks at reality not rhetoric, and past performance not promises, one could say that Clinton was not so subtly endorsing Mitt Romney......But some of Clinton’s arithmetic puts a dubious spin on the numbers themselves. And more generally speaking, Clinton’s focus on arithmetic as what matters in presidential leadership actually makes a case for Romney as president."

 news.yahoo.com/bill-clintons-arithmetic-...
Wise men still seek him.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Sep 16, 2012 - 11:10AM #2
Unworthyone
Posts: 2,489

Clinton endorsed Romney   ... mathematically?  That's rich.  Can you say pretzel?


Reminds me of a guy back in the 1970's who used to call into Larry King's syndicated radio show (prior to his CNN gig).  This guy could prove mathematically any point.  He once 'proved' that God was a Yankees fan using math.  Go figure.

I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend.  Thomas Jefferson

Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.
Albert Einstein

You can get anything you want out of life if you will just help enough other people get what they want. Zig Ziglar

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/03/29/opinion/why-i-m-for-the-brady-bill.html
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Sep 16, 2012 - 11:51AM #3
christzen
Posts: 6,392
I guess when your own Republican convention was an exercise in lameness and bumbling , and your own candidate is incapable of defining himself as presidential and qualified , you co opt the highly regarded speech of the other side and twist it to your purposes.

This just shows how utterly bereft of ideas and inspiration the Republicans are. Their best bet for a victory is to say  " well , Clinton COULD have been talking about Romney also" .

Complete desperation on the part of Republicans. Can you imagine Reagan having to run on something like this?
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Sep 16, 2012 - 11:46PM #4
JohnQ
Posts: 5,623

Sep 16, 2012 -- 11:51AM, christzen wrote:

I guess when your own Republican convention was an exercise in lameness and bumbling , and your own candidate is incapable of defining himself as presidential and qualified , you co opt the highly regarded speech of the other side and twist it to your purposes. This just shows how utterly bereft of ideas and inspiration the Republicans are. Their best bet for a victory is to say " well , Clinton COULD have been talking about Romney also" . Complete desperation on the part of Republicans. Can you imagine Reagan having to run on something like this?



I agree.


A point on your comment regarding Reagan.....I don't think Reagan would be running, not because he has passed on....but rather, because the current GOP would not nominate him.

Peace!                 
------

Christian LIES wed Christian HATE......Begot a child....it’s named Prop 8! 

Supreme Court let it stand.....which means we can vote away the rights of others in our land.

Sad as that may be...it hurts all of us.....not just me.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Sep 16, 2012 - 11:51PM #5
aarroottoonn
Posts: 3,128

Since the Republican Party is still dominated by the same philosophies that Reagan espoused, it is always funny to hear liberals try to tell conservatives that Reagan wouldn't be running today. So few liberals say it, probably because they are only as good as the talking points they can find from Huffpo or MSNBC, but a much better criticism of the Republicans would be to point out that we are still using the same philosophies from the 1980's, and the world has changed dramatically. I would point out the timelessness of those philosophies, but at least your argument would be intelligent sounding and real, not the bleeting of sheep.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Sep 17, 2012 - 11:21AM #6
Unworthyone
Posts: 2,489

Sep 16, 2012 -- 11:51PM, aarroottoonn wrote:


Since the Republican Party is still dominated by the same philosophies that Reagan espoused, it is always funny to hear liberals try to tell conservatives that Reagan wouldn't be running today. So few liberals say it, probably because they are only as good as the talking points they can find from Huffpo or MSNBC, but a much better criticism of the Republicans would be to point out that we are still using the same philosophies from the 1980's, and the world has changed dramatically. I would point out the timelessness of those philosophies, but at least your argument would be intelligent sounding and real, not the bleeting of sheep.




The GOP of today is not the GOP of Reagan.  Back then Republicans were pragmatic and willing to negotiate and compromise in order to move the country forward.  Reagan and Tip O'neill were friends "after 6pm".


Today, the GOP filibusters everything.  They hold up hearing for federal nominees for no other reason than they can.  They want to roll back the clock to a time when women knew their place and minorities did as well.  They question the integrity and the patriotism of anyone who disagrees with them.  They take people like Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck seriously, as if these people with large microphones and no accountability have their best interests at heart.  They take unlimited amounts of money from billionaires and then claim they are not beholden to them.  They sign 'no taxes ever pledges' and consider that more sacred than their oath of office.  They are ready to send our sons and daughters into war at the drop of a hat all the while protecting their own kids from the horrors of war.


While you may like to espouse the Reagan philosophies as 'timeless' your contrary actions speak volumes more than your rhetoric.  I believe Reagan would cry if he could see what has happened to his beloved GOP.

I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend.  Thomas Jefferson

Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.
Albert Einstein

You can get anything you want out of life if you will just help enough other people get what they want. Zig Ziglar

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/03/29/opinion/why-i-m-for-the-brady-bill.html
Quick Reply
Cancel
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook