"Skin in the game" has zero relevance to whether a candidate is fit for the job.
LP your obsession with this is baffling. It's about as relevant as shoe size. There's no sense to it. At all.
What is your fixation? Do think that Romney is doing this on a lark? That he doesn't actually care? Because he thinks it will be fun? Because he thinks he can profit from it personally? And whatever is your fixation, how does it not also apply equally to Obama?
__________________
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” – Mark Twain
LP, what is it you think Obama is personally risking with his policies? He also has zero risk of losing his monetary wealth. What is his skin in the game?
LP, I don't understand why you think the only thing that is important to people is money. When you get to the level that these guys are at, reputation, legacy, doing honorable things for the country, fixing the problems....that is what is important to them. People who have gotten to that level, Bush, Clinton, Obama, Romney---they aren't thinking about their checking accounts anymore. They know they are going to be wealthy forever, and the earning potential is just fine, they don't have to worry about those issues. But that doesn't mean squat. Ego and conscience are far more powerful motivators than money.
So, because Obama's family is perfectly healthy and he has millions of dollars, he has no skin in the game as far as health care? Perhaps someone whose family has suffered (early death heart attack with Ryan's dad, and Romney's wife with MS) are the only ones who can understand those concerns?
"But he didn't, did he? Instead, his whole life has been nothing so much as a greased skid to the top. Any empathy he's carrying is more likely due to guilt than an ability to relate."
I imagine, a few of us had the skids greased-however, one has to take advantage in having the skids greased, Just as W had his path greased by God.
Ideas, Quotes, & Writings From The Founding Fathers (The Founding Fathers Series) , by John Walton.
Geo Washington, richest landowner in America at that time, risked everything. B Franklin, richest businessman in America, risked everything. A Lincoln, poor lawyer, risked the United States. MR risks what, win, lose, or draw?
-- Edited by longprime on Saturday 11th of August 2012 09:40:35 PM
250k/yr seems to be where a certain party feels the nutcracker needs to be both reached for and used but this is America, after all, and there's room for independent thinkers to ponder that question abover any other, I suppose.
As to the last, I don't see the point. That both parties are littered with the independently wealth isn't really news and that some of the same have long been thought as champions of the little man isn't either. Now if Obama had worked his up off the streets as a self-made man, one who's never lost his love of the downtrodded he choomed... um, chummed.... with his in younger days, I suppose one might believe he's loaded with earned empathy for those struggling to get by and ahead.
But he didn't, did he? Instead, his whole life has been nothing so much as a greased skid to the top. Any empathy he's carrying is more likely due to guilt than an ability to relate.
-- Edited by catahoula on Saturday 11th of August 2012 06:57:41 AM
Seriously, longprime, at what point do you consider someone wealthy enough not to have any skin in the game? Yeah, Obama admitted there was a point - in his opinion and I suppose relevant to at least his circumstances - when he could say "you've made enough money" but isn't it amazing that he only said that after Michelle's hospital gig, the land deals, book deals, and... finally arriving at a spot where you can take an entourage on a foreign vacation?
So, How is MR going to fix this country? Does it really matter, when we all know that whatever his "fix", he risks nothing save not being elected for a second term.
I agree that that's the tactic Obama is using.
Obama can't run on his own record because that's been a dismal failure by practically any criteria one can think of. Jobs? Worse. Economy? Worse. Security? Worse. Standing abroad? Worse. You name it? Worse.
Plus, it's common knowledge that the Keynesian "stimulus" approach not only doesn't work, but it is what caused the whole mess in the first place, not just here, but around the world.
Plus, recent history has proved that Romney's solution (tax cuts and tight monetary policy) has worked every time its ever been used.
So the only option Obama has left is to distract the conversation away from anything that's actually, you know, important and somehow make this election about inane trivialities like whether Romney has anything to lose.
If Obama's record weren't abysmal enough, his campaign demonstrates how utterly clueless he really is.
__________________
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” – Mark Twain
MR risks nothing: If he doesn't have health insurance, nor Social Security, nor losing a job, nor having the stock market crash, nor collapse of bonds, nor value of his homes, nor the fix of LIBOR - FRB interest rates, rise and fall of gasoline, nor even a rise or fall of income tax rates. He may not even care if the other 80% of us become successful or not.
So, How is MR going to fix this country? Does it really matter, when we all know that whatever his "fix", he risks nothing save not being elected for a second term.
This is all about Obama's team wanting us to get distracted by Romney's wealth.
When the big important issue is what are we going to do to fix this country?
This is Axelrod campaigning at it's finest.
Go back and look at the shell game played when Obama ran his first campaign against Jack Ryan.
Dirty campaigns work. That is why they are used, time and again.
Reducing Romney to his tax returns works perfectly with President Obama's class warfare campaign.
If we just have the rich give a little more, then we can balance the budget he said, recently.
Only, you can't.
If the standard for Presidential campaigns is to release 2 years, and he has complied, than any more is not necessary.
Unless every Presidential candidate does.
Bob Dole released 29 years of taxes. It didn't get him elected.
I would be hard pressed to even track down 10 years of tax returns. You only have to save them for what, 7 years?
MR is looking to be a wimp's wimp. - Show your taxes, already.We know you are wealthy, we know your marginal tax is low. We know you income is residual from the time you were with Bain. We know that were successful in business. ... We think.
BO is already a wimp's wimp. - Show your college transcripts, already. We know you are smart, we know your IQ is high. We know you're brilliant (Oprah said so). We know you were sucessful in, um, something....
MR should release his tax returns when President Obama unseals his Columbia transcript.
Or after the convention.
Or never.
Transparent government? Yeah, right. Only when it serves the agenda of the administration.
Anyone remember that campaign slogan for Obama in 2008? There are more lobbyists than ever.
Nope, don't release. Keep talking about building the economy and let the Dems sweat it out.
MR would be insane to release his tax returns. The attack dogs have already accused him of being a felon, a tax cheat and responsible for people's deaths. They will take anything, and even what is not there to make up smears about him. There is no upside whatsoever to releasing them. It will not get people to shut up, it will shadow everything and we will be talking about his tax returns forever (because God knows, we can't talk about the real issues).
MR is looking to be a wimp's wimp. - Show your taxes, already.We know you are wealthy, we know your marginal tax is low. We know you income is residual from the time you were with Bain. We know that were successful in business. ...
I think Tomasky writes for a select audience, lp -- I tired out before clicking on the second page, which is kind of a shame since I wanted to see him fully develop that "scared of his base" thing.
Even though he's not my choice for the republican challenger to Obama, I'll be sure and vote for him for the simple reason he isn't him. No reason on God's earth to assume he could be do as dismally as our current has and he certainly hasn't anything to fear from me. Doesn't matter if he picks a Portman, or even a Huntsman, he needn't bother with porch lights or checking under the bed.
