DescentBB

Well well, it seems Condi Rice is not a top pick as Romneys VP choice. Like I said months ago, she would make a excellent choice as she brings a lot of pluses to the table. I suspect peeps like Slick and TC will jump in and nay say her on the ground that she served in Bush's administration and thus all her abilitys and experiences count for naught. I disagree. She brings much in the way of foreign affairs ability's from her stint as Secretary of State and is well rounded out with her initial post as National Security Adviser. Unlike Sarah Palin, the left will have a hard time portraying Ms Rice as a sad sack know nothing. What we will see is an attempt to paint her as a female version of a Uncle Tom but I'm wondering how that will backfire when it is pointed out the name callers are criticizing the first female black VP candidate and thus are racists (as defined by the left towards those who criticized Obama). At any rate if Ms Rice is the VP pick then we will have interesting times between now and election.

She'd be a good pick as VP for Romney, who has absolutely zilch foreign policy experience. But Romney is the rotten apple in this case, so that negates any positive effect she would bring to the ticket.

The real rotten apple is in the white house. Three and a half year later, Obama has zip zero nada in the way of any positive things to brag about. End result is all he can campaign about telling lies about Romney, latest being that Romney is a felon. Pretty sad really. OTOH if you want to label Romney as a bad egg because he is successful, then so be it.

woodchip wrote:Three and a half year later, Obama has zip zero nada in the way of any positive things to brag about.

loooool

Condi is damaged goods, IMO. I seem to remember that she had some involvement in the 9/11 cover-up.

He HAS been claiming on his campaign stumps that he'd left Bain Capital in 1999 and so had nothing to do with all those layoffs that happened after that date, BUT, he was still listed as CEO with the SEC until 2002. That's were the story about his lying came from. True or not, does it matter? He's a vulture Capitalist, that's what he did best for Bain and that's what he'd do to the country if elected.

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/art ... s_he_left/

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Condi is damaged goods, IMO. I seem to remember that she had some involvement in the 9/11 cover-up.

That's because she was working for Bush/Cheney. Their crap rubbed off on everyone they worked with. But at least she's got something that Palin never had, intelligence.

Now, now. Don't justify an unknown to damn your favorite targets. I'd wager she has some fault in the matter.

Ah TC, so you would hold it against Romney if he turned the country around like he did Staples or Sport Authority you would cry foul? Or are you perfectly happy with how Obama has successfully used tax payer money as venture capital for Solyndra? Successfully orchestrated the first ever American credit downgrade and the list is endless for all of Obama's "Successes". Problem is TC you voted for a guy with no experience and you will vote for him again even tho his opponent is light years ahead of Obama in the experience department. The real Vulture is Obama and friends...seen picking away at the last of the flesh on America's carcase.

um, woody, there are a few reasons Rice will NOT be the veep pick.

1. Her foreign policy is controversial and would invariably bring Bush into the election debates. Not good.
2. Her personality has led to some personal beefs with a few influential bigwigs in the GOP. No big deal, really.
3. She has stated that she is pro-choice on abortion, in several public interviews. Case closed. Move along, nothing to see here.

woodchip wrote:Ah TC, so you would hold it against Romney if he turned the country around like he did Staples or Sport Authority you would cry foul?................

Staples? Not quite. He's taking far more credit for the jobs he "created" than he deserves.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 81060.html

Then we have the Ampad failure, essentially a Romney squeeze play involving Staples, just to make money for investors, with those Ampad workers chalked up as collateral damage.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/20 ... d-defense/

Know your offshoring claims too, for both Obama and Romney.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics ... ims/54440/

After watching 2 of the major news networks tonight, when Romney was asked about his opinion of the latest "outsourcing" scandal, the uniforms of the America's Olympic Team having been made in China, Romney couldn't even give an opinion on the matter, one way or another. He wussed out like the flip flopper he is. You'd think he'd at least be smart enough to say it was unpatriotic or bad for America or SOMETHING, but all he could utter was some wishy-washy blame for the sponsors. Even Boehner, the Republican Speaker of the House, thought that Ralph Lauren botched things and said: "You'd think they'd know better".

As for poor Condi, she's getting her name scrubbed from a Chevron oil tanker. Nothing like being associated with those cozy ties between Bush and Big Oil.

http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/ ... 922481.php

callmeslick wrote:um, woody, there are a few reasons Rice will NOT be the veep pick.

1. Her foreign policy is controversial and would invariably bring Bush into the election debates. Not good.
2. Her personality has led to some personal beefs with a few influential bigwigs in the GOP. No big deal, really.
3. She has stated that she is pro-choice on abortion, in several public interviews. Case closed. Move along, nothing to see here.

In reply:
1) While Condi's prior association with Bush may be viewed as a negative, I suspect it will be so viewed only by those on the left who would never vote for Romney anyways. A good spin doctor would remind voters that the economy was much better under Bush and Condi was part of that.

2) A lot of voters would see no problems and even view as positive with Condi not agreeing with GOP higher-ups.

3) Being pro choice may indeed not sit well with the hard right but it certainly would counter the lefts argument of Romney not being for women's reproductive rights. So case not closed

There are a couple of very positive thing tho:

1) She's a woman. For those women who were sitting on the fence, Condi will get a certain amount to vote for Romney.

2) She's black. I suspect there would be a fair number of black women that would now vote for Romney because of that.

As you well know Slick, in a close election a small shift in percentages means the difference between winning and losing. In that regard Condi could be the real game changer. If Romney picks a white man for VP he gains nothing. With Condi he loses nothing and gains much.

woodchip wrote:A good spin doctor would remind voters that the economy was much better under Bush and Condi was part of that.

What? The same Bush who let the economy slip into the largest recession since the great depression?

woodchip wrote:

callmeslick wrote:um, woody, there are a few reasons Rice will NOT be the veep pick.

1. Her foreign policy is controversial and would invariably bring Bush into the election debates. Not good.
2. Her personality has led to some personal beefs with a few influential bigwigs in the GOP. No big deal, really.
3. She has stated that she is pro-choice on abortion, in several public interviews. Case closed. Move along, nothing to see here.

In reply:
1) While Condi's prior association with Bush may be viewed as a negative, I suspect it will be so viewed only by those on the left who would never vote for Romney anyways. A good spin doctor would remind voters that the economy was much better under Bush and Condi was part of that.

2) A lot of voters would see no problems and even view as positive with Condi not agreeing with GOP higher-ups.

3) Being pro choice may indeed not sit well with the hard right but it certainly would counter the lefts argument of Romney not being for women's reproductive rights. So case not closed

There are a couple of very positive thing tho:

1) She's a woman. For those women who were sitting on the fence, Condi will get a certain amount to vote for Romney.

2) She's black. I suspect there would be a fair number of black women that would now vote for Romney because of that.

As you well know Slick, in a close election a small shift in percentages means the difference between winning and losing. In that regard Condi could be the real game changer. If Romney picks a white man for VP he gains nothing. With Condi he loses nothing and gains much.

No. Bush tried 3 times to get banking reforms but Barney Frank didn't want his boy friend to lose his job.

woodchip wrote:1) While Condi's prior association with Bush may be viewed as a negative, I suspect it will be so viewed only by those on the left who would never vote for Romney anyways. A good spin doctor would remind voters that the economy was much better under Bush and Condi was part of that.

you're kidding, right? For eight years, we watch deficits soar because the nitwit-in-chief thought scaling back taxes, and weighting it to heavily benefit inherited wealth, would be a good way to finance two wars. All the while, anyone savvy about the real economy was seeing a lot of bad paper floating around Wall Street and could smell a bubble about to blow, which it did, all the while on GWB's watch. Now, Condi really didn't have anything to do with that, but did have a role in that obscenity of a foreign policy, which is despised on not just the left, by by 85% of the electorate.

2) A lot of voters would see no problems and even view as positive with Condi not agreeing with GOP higher-ups.

well, I sort of agreed with this view, but you see, voters don't decide the VP choice, only convention delegations. Therein lies the problem, albeit a small one.

3) Being pro choice may indeed not sit well with the hard right but it certainly would counter the lefts argument of Romney not being for women's reproductive rights. So case not closed

haven't been following too closely, huh? Romney has PROMISED that his VP choice would be pro-life. Repeated promised. He would get killed from the right if he chose Condaleeza Rice.


All in all, Romney would come off as desperate picking Rice, sort of like a Palin pick.

woodchip wrote:No. Bush tried 3 times to get banking reforms but Barney Frank didn't want his boy friend to lose his job.

"But but but... Democrats!"

If this excuse doesn't work for tunnelcat, why should it work for you?

He defintly needs someone like her:

He needs a smart conservative not a "gut"conservative consevative

Krom wrote:

woodchip wrote:No. Bush tried 3 times to get banking reforms but Barney Frank didn't want his boy friend to lose his job.

"But but but... Democrats!"

If this excuse doesn't work for tunnelcat, why should it work for you?

What Democrats? It was the do-nothing Republicans that mostly stopped up the works under Bushie. But if your referring to the (ONE) bill the Dems killed, namely the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, the death for that one can be blamed on Chris Dodd (D), so I'll concede the ONE example woody.

http://uspolitics.about.com/b/2008/09/1 ... othing.htm

Reading the comments at the bottom of this article, someone reminded me of what WAS important to the Republicans back, the Terri Schaivo circus.

But hey, in 2007, when the Democrats got back in control of Congress, guess what was finally passed? A bill by woody's most hated ex-House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, passed HR 3221, which became law in July, 2008.

Tell me TC, just what in Gods name does a amendment to the higher education act have to do with banking regulations?

Where does it say it's part of that?

Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008

EDIT: Has to add this one. Luke Skywalker thinks of Romney like I do!

Plastic Android Man