Skousen: Romney May Not Be Strong Enough To Turn Away the Globalists

[KingNothing]

It sounds like Romney is personally a morally good man.

He was an arrogant jerk when younger, how did he manage to change?

He probably still is, but it's silly to hold someone accountable for what they did when they were 16, or even 20. People grow up. I know I did.

 

[torchbearer]

I see Romney as someone who is very rich, a little bored because of it, and sees political successes as just something to do.

A governorship or him being president, is kind of like an expensive car for him. It's a symbol of his accomplishment, to himself and others who care.

He doesn't really care about any ideology. Any ideology that gets the trophy is fine with him.

His goal isn't so much wielding power either. He doesn't have any deeply held convictions to wield it upon anyway.
It's self aggregation of personal accomplishments.

He doesn't get his jollies from the state of having the authority and using it either, he gets his jollies from sitting in the seat of it and the recognition toward him it brings him.


The Ruling rod to be in his hand, and the Power sword in his other, the public Title throne he sits upon, are all a distant secondary perk to Romney, compared to to the Status Crown he could wear, to which the other things would come with. He wants the prize, of the Title of President. That is really what Romney wants.

Nixon lusted after holding the sword. Clinton wanted to sit on the Throne. FDR and Obama wanted to wield the Rod.
Romney just wants the self satisfaction of wearing the Crown.

Romney is very concerning, because the truth is he will be turn any way, do any action, and tell any thing, that would lets him gain his crown.


Ron Paul, wants to swing the rod to break the sword, shrink the Throne, and tear down entire wings of the Palace. He could care less for wearing the crown.
By the time Ron would be done, the rod would hold much less power behind it.

i see the ring of power corrupting almost any man.
not ron paul. he would be one of the few.

 

[KingNothing]

Romney May Not Be Strong Enough To Turn Away the Globalists

WTF
Romney is a Globalist. And a socialist.

No. He's a Mitt Romneyist. If he were a "globalist" and if you believe They control the world, why did They shut him down last time around and not rally around him this time until every other candidate proved himself completely inept and detestable?

He is a greedy power hungry bastard.

He was a vulture in business that destroyed companies for quick profits,, destroying both jobs and industrial infrastructure.

Oh come the hell on. Who's the anti-capitalist now, comrade?

 

[devil21]

Brooks is giving Romney begrudging credit mixed with snide cutting remarks. Romney, in fact, is anything but dull and has a lot of charisma. That’s what bothers them. But what they most dislike is that he got into the political scene on his own dime and his own merits. A kingmaker’s biggest nightmare is someone who has the means to bypass establishment screening.

Lost me at his opening premise. Romney's money is crap compared to those that finance his campaign. What did Chris Rock say? If Bill Gates woke up with Oprah's money he'd throw himself out a fuckin window. Guess which one is Romney and which is Rockefeller? Romney is a puppet. Did anyone consider that he was offered a future presidency in exchange for being the "architect" of the national health care program? A guy like Romney already had very strong connections. He didn't just show up with a checkbook and write a campaign check and start winning. His dad was Michigan Governor ffs. This is not to say that Romney will win. The promise of winning would be enough to secure his allegiance though.

 

[PierzStyx]

Romney's "sympathy" for the man comes off as extremely fake. Not sure if Romney is amoral or just socially awkward.

I think he is just really socially awkward.

 

[devil21]

No. He's a Mitt Romneyist. If he were a "globalist" and if you believe They control the world, why did They shut him down last time around and not rally around him this time until every other candidate proved himself completely inept and detestable?

Romney 2008 was more formidable than Romney 2012 imho. If status quo Pres nominees are decided long in the future, as I believe but ymmv, then it's better to put up the weaker (but remotely viable) candidate if you wish for that side to lose. Romney is a weaker candidate this time around because everyone knows his dirt. I think we generally agree that McCain was sacrificial lamb in 2008. Romney is a terrible candidate now and garners even less enthusiasm than McCain did. If you WANT to lose then why not do it that way?

 

[Indy Vidual]

Yes, I agree.

He probably still is, but it's silly to hold someone accountable for what they did when they were 16, or even 20. People grow up. I know I did.

It's silly to hold Rand Paul (for example) accountable for smoking pot and being a bit wild in college. At the same time, it is highly probable that some of his independent spirit survived even as he matured.

With Romney, it's highly likely part of the arrogant jerk is still there.

 

[HigherVision]

Romney fucking sucks, I just don't want Rand Paul to lose so I understand why he 'endorsed' him. But I would never vote for the guy.

It's silly to hold Rand Paul (for example) accountable for smoking pot and being a bit wild in college. At the same time, it is highly probable that some of his independent spirit survived even as he matured.

What's wrong with smoking pot and being a bit wild, as long as you don't hurt anyone?