Romney on Hillary: 'United States is not a place for a president to be an intern'

C

Chapdog

Abreast of the situations
M. ROMNEY:
And I think the greatest drawback beyond the direction she’d take us is that she’s never run anything. She’s never had the occasion of being in the private sector, running a business, or, for that matter, running a state or a city. She hasn’t run anything, and the government of the United States is not a place for a president to be an intern. You need to have experience actually leading and running things.

http://thepage.time.com/excerpts-from-romneys-hannity-colmes-interview/
 
Chapdog said:
M. ROMNEY:
And I think the greatest drawback beyond the direction she’d take us is that she’s never run anything. She’s never had the occasion of being in the private sector, running a business, or, for that matter, running a state or a city. She hasn’t run anything, and the government of the United States is not a place for a president to be an intern. You need to have experience actually leading and running things.

http://thepage.time.com/excerpts-from-romneys-hannity-colmes-interview/
Click to expand...

Obviously, the intern crack was an attempt to link hillary to monica lewinsky.

Are republicans ever going to get over obsessing about a blow job from ten years ago? Or, do we need to send them into the men's room to tap their feet, and get their own blowjob?
 
Last edited:
He shouldn't have made the intern comment, because his main point is bang on. What the hell has Hillary ever run? She is just annointed to power based on her name.
 
TheDanold said:
He shouldn't have made the intern comment, because his main point is bang on. What the hell has Hillary ever run? She is just annointed to power based on her name.
Click to expand...

so if you want to base it on running stuff, bush ran every oil business he ever had into the ground and bush is the president now..

personally id trust someone who never ran anything than someone who only ran businesses into bankruptcy.
 
So what is Mitt proposing to fix things ? Or is he just running on mudslinging and such in the traditional Republican way ?

I was not aware he was running against Hillary in the pirmary anyway ?
 
uscitizen said:
So what is Mitt proposing to fix things ? Or is he just running on mudslinging and such in the traditional Republican way ?

I was not aware he was running against Hillary in the pirmary anyway ?
Click to expand...

It is not mudslinging to point out something that is accurate. She has not run anything. He HAS. It is a typical strategy for politicians to point out their strengths, especially when it is a weakness of an opponent.

Rob... the fact that Bush sucked at running businesses does not change the fact that Romney was highly successful. Nor does it alter his statement that Hillary hasn't run anything.... other than her failed attempt at Hillarycare.

As far as his phrasing.... I thought the use of "intern" was a nice little jab. Certainly no worse than the non-stop chimp comments from the left.
 
what it shows super is that running something is a moot point since we have a president who can't keep a business in the black so its irrelevant.
 
Robdawg said:
what it shows super is that running something is a moot point since we have a president who can't keep a business in the black so its irrelevant.
Click to expand...

It isn't irrelevant. It means that maybe next time we should vote for someone that does have a positive experience at running stuff.

Romney isn't the one though lol.
 
Chapdog said:
M. ROMNEY:
And I think the greatest drawback beyond the direction she’d take us is that she’s never run anything. She’s never had the occasion of being in the private sector, running a business, or, for that matter, running a state or a city. She hasn’t run anything, and the government of the United States is not a place for a president to be an intern. You need to have experience actually leading and running things.

http://thepage.time.com/excerpts-from-romneys-hannity-colmes-interview/
Click to expand...

What a cocksucker. Romney just wishes HE had been that intern.
 
Superfreak said:
It is not mudslinging to point out something that is accurate. She has not run anything. He HAS. It is a typical strategy for politicians to point out their strengths, especially when it is a weakness of an opponent.

Rob... the fact that Bush sucked at running businesses does not change the fact that Romney was highly successful. Nor does it alter his statement that Hillary hasn't run anything.... other than her failed attempt at Hillarycare.

As far as his phrasing.... I thought the use of "intern" was a nice little jab. Certainly no worse than the non-stop chimp comments from the left.
Click to expand...

Umm Hillary is not romneys opponent . yet anyway.
 
No, next time we should elect a pot smoking hippie who has no desire to do his job, unless it has to do with legalizing pot. That way we don't have to worry about the government for the next 4-8 years.
 
Superfreak said:
It is not mudslinging to point out something that is accurate. She has not run anything. He HAS. It is a typical strategy for politicians to point out their strengths, especially when it is a weakness of an opponent.

Rob... the fact that Bush sucked at running businesses does not change the fact that Romney was highly successful. Nor does it alter his statement that Hillary hasn't run anything.... other than her failed attempt at Hillarycare.

As far as his phrasing.... I thought the use of "intern" was a nice little jab. Certainly no worse than the non-stop chimp comments from the left.
Click to expand...


" She has not run anything. He HAS."

SF, could you elaborate on something?

I'm always seeing the I don't like Bush-I'm not a republican-I might vote Democratic posters constantly mentioning Hillary's or Obama's alleged lack of experience, or lack of having "run anything".

John McCain and Ron Paul have never "run" anything, or been Executives. As I recall, you loved McCain.

Care to explain?. :)
 
Robdawg said:
what it shows super is that running something is a moot point since we have a president who can't keep a business in the black so its irrelevant.
Click to expand...

No, what it shows is that we should consider having someone who has been successful as President. As Bush has shown that being unsuccessful as a leader in business translates to a lack of success as President. Others have shown that a good leadership role in politics (typically as a governor) also tends to translate to success (aka Clinton/Reagan). Then you also have the military leaders that have shown success. (Ike)

We need leaders that are experienced at being good leaders. Whether it be in business, politics or the military. So we should be looking (from a leadership standpoint) at individuals like Wesley Clark, Romney, Richardson and Rudy.
 
Cypress said:
" She has not run anything. He HAS."

SF, could you elaborate on something?

I'm always seeing the I don't like Bush-I'm not a republican-I might vote Democratic posters constantly mentioning Hillary's or Obama's alleged lack of experience, or lack of having "run anything".

John McCain and Ron Paul have never "run" anything, or been Executives. As I recall, you loved McCain.

Care to explain?. :)
Click to expand...
An officer in the military has run something, as well as a doctor with a private practice.
 
Damocles said:
An officer in the military has run something, as well as a doctor with a private practice.
Click to expand...


Weak!

My 'bro was a captain in the air force, and he wasn't really an executive. What rank was Ron Paul?

I've been told by the I hate bush-I might vote Democratic posters that Edwards experience running his own Law Firm doesn't count. So running a doctor's office is out too. :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top