USFREEDOM911 (11-09-2012)
Multimillionaire Mitt Romney clearly doesn’t need a job. He is, after all, one of the “1 percent.” But if President Obama wants to enlist his help in avoiding the fiscal cliff, he could do worse than to approach Romney about replacing Tim Geithner as Treasury secretary.
When you look at the composition of Congress, the incoming one is much the same as the outgoing one; in other words, a recipe for continued gridlock despite the suggestion from House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) that “we’re ready to be led.” Boehner has already ruled out new taxes, so that’s not going to encourage the markets about the chances of a deal anytime soon.
Both Obama and Romney, in their speeches on Tuesday night, talked about unity and bipartisanship in the interests of the nation. Obama reached out to former rival Hillary Clinton, who joined the Cabinet in the first term. He has said he will talk to Romney about working together — so what about offering him a job?
Romney, although lacking a party base, which could diminish his value as a dealmaker in the corridors of Congress, chose House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) as his running mate. Ryan clearly respects Romney, who touted his business skills on the campaign trail. Obama should call Romney’s bluff and put together a “team of rivals” in this time of crisis.
You might think this is a long shot, but much to my surprise I am not alone in this campaign. None other than the New York Daily News has suggested Romney as Treasury secretary. So take off your “Romney for president” buttons and put on your “Romney for Treasury Sec” versions. Let’s see a real America’s Comeback Team.
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blo...or-mitt-romney
Won't happen, but it would be awesome if it did. Romney is a great public servant and probably my favorite politician - it would be sad to see him fade, especially when the country needs him. NY Daily News made the same suggestion:
http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/the...sury-secretary
"We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means, it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power." -O'Brien, Nineteen Eighty-Four
USFREEDOM911 (11-09-2012)
Is Romney an economist?
No, but neither was Lloyd Bentsen (under Clinton).
"We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means, it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power." -O'Brien, Nineteen Eighty-Four
Romney is off the reservation for this work except to looney rightwingers.
[QUOTE=SJJRSJJS;1110117]Are you a dummy?[/QUOTE
Your a cook, get you ass back in the kitchen you little bitch!
"None other than the New York Daily News . . ."
LOL. Mort Zuckerman can eat the peanuts out of my sheeeeeeeit.
Quote from Cypress:
"Scientists don't use "averages". Maybe armchair supertools on message boards ascribe some meaning to "averages" between two random data points. And maybe clueless amatuers "draw a straight line" through two random end data points to define a "trend". Experts don't.
They use mean annual and five year means in trend analysis. Don't tell me I have to explain the difference to you. "
the right will all hate robmoney in a couple of weeks so no need to give the lair any position
Cancel 2016.11 (11-09-2012), The Dude (11-09-2012)
Quote from Cypress:
"Scientists don't use "averages". Maybe armchair supertools on message boards ascribe some meaning to "averages" between two random data points. And maybe clueless amatuers "draw a straight line" through two random end data points to define a "trend". Experts don't.
They use mean annual and five year means in trend analysis. Don't tell me I have to explain the difference to you. "
The Dude (11-09-2012)
Maybe my memory is faulty or something, but I don't remember any Democrats saying that Al Gore (or any other Democrat, for that matter) should be appointed to a position in George W. Bush's cabinet. Near as I can tell, this is a strictly Democratic administration phenomenon.
christiefan915 (11-09-2012)
Their gall is absolutely stunning. It might have something to do with the recent proliferation of articles describing how "softly" Ann romney was "crying" after their stunning loss that not one of them saw coming. Which is terrifying. I read the articles this morning and I felt chilled to the bone. They truly did not accept the polls, the flat out did not believe them. They believed with all of their hearts they were going to win. All of them, not just Romney - everyone around him.
I found it so chilling because for a long time I have been puzzled over how they all could pretend climate change wasn't happening since their own children and grandchildren will spit on them. Now I realize they aren't pretending.
These people live in an alternate reality. They are clinically delusional.
Yeah, sure, let's give em all jobs! And hey, let's enact their policies too! It wouldn't be sporting if Dems didn't act as if they hadn't just won a big election.
DARLA: The Internet's Leading Cause of White Dude Butthurt 12 Years and Counting
Bookmarks