Chrisoc13 wrote:Of course the reporter did. But the fact that one of the men questioned worked on Obama's campaign in 2008 makes me question that.
So volunteering makes him too partisan to accurately recall an incident from his school years?
This is the guy who also admits to holding Lauber down to help Romney.
Interesting article covering the same time of Romney's life can be found here.
Note there are some complete discrepancies between the two articles.
Because his father was determined "that his sons would not grow up to be spoiled brats," Dearth says, "Mitt didn't get a car at sixteen -- like many Cranbrook kids did. He didn't get to drive special factory cars -- like some Cranbrook boys did."
"He could have been an arrogant, stuck-up, snotty little brat," says Dearth. "But he was a great guy -- an all-American kid with a great sense of humor, very self-effacing." And although it's been documented that Romney played a teenage prank or two -- including once impersonating a police officer in order to scare some female friends -- Dearth remembers Mitt as the most straitlaced kid in the neighborhood.
"Those of us who tested the boundaries in high school still marvel at the self-discipline he displayed," Dearth continues. "With a father who was then governor, Mitt knew where the line was and never crossed it. I think it was a sign of his deep respect for his dad and the way he was brought up. I often tell people he has more personal integrity than anyone I know. And I was raised a Unitarian."
Interesting that they try to play his best friend off as independent when he states in this article:
"I'm a Democrat, so I won't vote for him," says Maxwell.
Whoops. Thought he was independent? Guess it depends on which slant he is going for.
Volunteering in the Obama campaign certainly makes anyone partisan fyi.
Combustible Lemur wrote:So what good has he done? I saw that he did missionary work. Not bad, probably more of a requirement for him. And he held positions of power or at least administration within his church maybe service but is that much of a sacrifice for someone who is infinitely independently wealthy? He seems to have family values which is good.
On the flip side, he was a bully in highschool, showed poor judgement in transporting an animal on the roof of his car, made a career out of dismantling companies and other peoples jobs, reflects an inability to communicate empathetically with working class either through actual aloofness or just poor word choice, has shown a willingness to take peoples civil rights in order to gain more power. Now, none of these things disqualify him and depending how you interpret them, make him more qualified. but I don't necessarily see reason to think that any his current action indicate that he is different from his previous self. Other than basic age and wisdom.
First of all his missionary work wasn't a requirement. Trust me, I served a mission for the same faith. It is asked of every young man and possible for every young woman but the majority still do not serve missions. I have 4 siblings. Of the 5 of us only 2 of us served missions. Two. And we were raised as staunch in the church as you can be. Of my 30 some odd cousins (all of which are LDS, or were raised LDS) there are 8 of us who served missions. Is it a requirement? No. If you want more info on what serving a mission for the LDS church means feel free to ask, but in a nut shell he gave up his life for two years to serve.
His church leadership positions require an absolutely huge amount of time given, and the service many of them do cannot be understated. Do you really think people get as rich as he got by simply laying around? Don't kid yourself. It wasn't like he was sitting around with tons of extra time on his hands.
In terms of what his company did, you can buy into the rhetoric of him preying on the weak companies and firing people, or you can do a little bit more research into what he actually did. If you really think his job was simply to get rid of jobs you are delusional. His company made money by saving failing companies. Sometimes budgets have to be cut so a company can survive. The hope is that they grow far bigger and eventually that will create even more jobs than slowly letting these failing companies slide out of business where even more people lose jobs. That is the best move the Democratic party has made is villainizing his career, but it is ridiculous to do such.
And lastly many of your other points are simply a difference in ideological belief. You see the taking of civil rights conservatives see protecting jobs and closing the border. Doesn't mean your opinion is wrong, just means that you disagree with his political ideologies.