Obama was for banning the sale and transfer of all semi-auto weapons?

[PaloAltoCougar]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

However, the idea of looking more seriously at career business acumen as the primary qualification is intriguing. The US is a company, lets get someone who knows how to run companies and do business with other companies.

It is intriguing, but I'm very uncertain whether a great business manager can be a great governmental leader. For better and worse, governments aren't run the way businesses are, due in part to that pesky Constitution. I suspect Romney would be very frustrated by the slowness of the legislative process, and his inability to implement policy at the speed of a Fortune 500 CEO.

A corporation's primary responsiblity is to maximize the wealth of its shareholders, and that mission statement is relatively easy to follow. The task of doing everything one can "to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity", all the while contending with checks and balances, to say nothing of the disparate interests of 300+ Million citizens and myriad special interest groups, presents challenges for which a corporate CEO may be ill-suited.

I'm on the fence about Romney, but given the choice Oxcoug offered this morning on CB of a Romney win in Florida, or Kaveinga signing with BYU, I'm leaning toward Kaveinga.

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by PaloAltoCougar

It is intriguing, but I'm very uncertain whether a great business manager can be a great governmental leader. For better and worse, governments aren't run the way businesses are, due in part to that pesky Constitution. I suspect Romney would be very frustrated by the slowness of the legislative process, and his inability to implement policy at the speed of a Fortune 500 CEO.

A corporation's primary responsiblity is to maximize the wealth of its shareholders, and that mission statement is relatively easy to follow. The task of doing everything one can "to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity", all the while contending with checks and balances, to say nothing of the disparate interests of 300+ Million citizens and myriad special interest groups, presents challenges for which a corporate CEO may be ill-suited.

I'm on the fence about Romney, but given the choice Oxcoug offered this morning on CB of a Romney win in Florida, or Kaveinga signing with BYU, I'm leaning toward Kaveinga.

I subscribe to the theory that the best government is one that has a difficult time getting anything done. Seeing how the republicans messed up the chance when they had the Presidency and the congress, I now am a fan of divided government. The only thing that spooks the heck out of me if Obama wins is a democratic congress with him.

You want to get really afraid. Think of Ted Kennedy as the ringmaster in the new Obama Presidency.

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by PaloAltoCougar

It is intriguing, but I'm very uncertain whether a great business manager can be a great governmental leader. For better and worse, governments aren't run the way businesses are, due in part to that pesky Constitution. I suspect Romney would be very frustrated by the slowness of the legislative process, and his inability to implement policy at the speed of a Fortune 500 CEO.

A corporation's primary responsiblity is to maximize the wealth of its shareholders, and that mission statement is relatively easy to follow. The task of doing everything one can "to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity", all the while contending with checks and balances, to say nothing of the disparate interests of 300+ Million citizens and myriad special interest groups, presents challenges for which a corporate CEO may be ill-suited.

I'm on the fence about Romney, but given the choice Oxcoug offered this morning on CB of a Romney win in Florida, or Kaveinga signing with BYU, I'm leaning toward Kaveinga.

Well of course, Kaveinga. But in making this deal with the devil (or his brother Jesus), I think we should ask for more, like JT's shot back and a 60% FT avg. for Trent. We can bargain back to 50%.

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by BYU71

You want to get really afraid. Think of Ted Kennedy as the ringmaster in the new Obama Presidency.

Correct. Teddy almost stroked out thinking about how he was going to "work" this young kid when he gets to Washington. No chance for that with the Clintons.

[PaloAltoCougar]

Originally Posted by BYU71

I subscribe to the theory that the best government is one that has a difficult time getting anything done.

That's rather cynical of you, and yet I agree with it. There are a number of things about Obama that I like, but the idea of his presidency coupled with a Pelosi- and Reid-led Congress is very disturbing.

[PaloAltoCougar]

Originally Posted by myboynoah

Well of course, Kaveinga. But in making this deal with the devil (or his brother Jesus), I think we should ask for more, like JT's shot back and a 60% FT avg. for Trent. We can bargain back to 50%.

Throw in a shutdown corner and a true PG and I'll vote for John Edwards.

[YOhio]

Originally Posted by PaloAltoCougar

I'm on the fence about Romney...

Perhaps you need a reminder...