• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

At Harvard, a Master’s in Problem Solving

D

donsutherland1

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
11,862
Reaction score
10,300
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
For those who are interested, The New York Times has a profile on Mitt Romney (under the title that is this thread's heading) that concerns his studies at Harvard and provides insight on his analytical approach. The article does not discuss ideology.

The newspaper writes:

Eager, driven and tremendously hardworking, he mastered the Harvard Business School method of literally looking at the world on a case-by-case basis, approaching each problem completely on its own terms and making recommendations based on data.

In the classrooms where Mr. Romney distinguished himself, there were no “right” answers — no right questions even, just a daily search for how to improve results. The Mitt Romney classmates knew then was a gifted fix-it man, attuned to the particulars of every situation he examined and eager to deliver what customers wanted.
Click to expand...

The piece can be found at: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/25/u...aped-mitt-romney.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=all
 
donsutherland1 said:
For those who are interested, The New York Times has a profile on Mitt Romney (under the title that is this thread's heading) that concerns his studies at Harvard and provides insight on his analytical approach. The article does not discuss ideology.

The newspaper writes:



The piece can be found at: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/25/u...aped-mitt-romney.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=all
Click to expand...

Mr. Romney couldn't have been wrong at Harvard. He had several answers for each problem, just like he does now. :mrgreen:
 
danarhea said:
Mr. Romney couldn't have been wrong at Harvard. He had several answers for each problem, just like he does now. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Hey when can we see Obama's profile and studies and papers? Is that coming with the promised transparency behind the hope and change? :mrgreen:
 
Ockham said:
Hey when can we see Obama's profile and studies and papers? Is that coming with the promised transparency behind the hope and change? :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Does that mean you support Romney, just so long as he is just like Obama?
 
danarhea said:
Does that mean you support Romney, just so long as he is just like Obama?
Click to expand...

It means when are we going to see Obama's profile, studies and papers? Does your question mean you're all hope and changed out or still among the throngs of wishful dreamers?
 
Ockham said:
It means when are we going to see Obama's profile, studies and papers? Does your question mean you're all hope and changed out or still among the throngs of wishful dreamers?
Click to expand...


danarhea

lean: conservative
 
Ockham said:
Hey when can we see Obama's profile and studies and papers? Is that coming with the promised transparency behind the hope and change? :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Do people still actually have no ****ing clue what the transparency quote was? Really? Educate yourself sir. Then whine about other people's education.
 
Ockham said:
It means when are we going to see Obama's profile, studies and papers? Does your question mean you're all hope and changed out or still among the throngs of wishful dreamers?
Click to expand...

This thread isn't about Obama. It's about Romney. :mrgreen:
 
poweRob said:
danarhea

lean: conservative
Click to expand...

I guess that means that you have surmised that I didn't vote for Obama. Gee, how in the world did you figure that one out? If Ockham couldn't figure it out, then it must be a really hard question. LOL.
 
On a campus rife with political and social ferment, he willfully distanced himself not only from politics, but also from larger ideological frameworks and heated debates.
Click to expand...

Well he sucks.
 
TurtleDude said:
He's by far the most competent and smartest guy in the race
Click to expand...

And he doesn't like heated debate.

I mean.

I don't know how anyone can support such a . . . person.

what's wrong with him :D
 
danarhea said:
And the most Liberal. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

the most important issue to me is the appointment of federal judges. 99% of the federal judges are picked by the relevant party leaders not the president. In other words, Newt, BatGirl, Paul, Perry, Mitt-we will get the same judges and they will be better than those chosen by the Dems.


and Romney has a better chance of winning. He's smarter by far than any of the other contenders though Newt comes close but Newt is a gaping hypocrite when it comes to lobbying money and "family values" and pisses off a lot of independents. Romney's biggest problem comes from the Mindless bible thumpers on the right
 
Redress said:
Do people still actually have no ****ing clue what the transparency quote was? Really? Educate yourself sir. Then whine about other people's education.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should educate the WSJ... apparently they don't see it either..

Obama's Empty Transparency Rhetoric - WSJ.com



You see it as some narrow specific quote, I see transparency as a broad requirement of all government. It's the classic: Do as I say, not as I do. And when someone points that out, it's "whining". :lamo Perhaps if you could set aside your partisan hypocrisy for a moment you could look at the obvious hypocrisy as just that... obvious. But somehow you'd rather attempt to spin this ... :shrug: It's you're credibility your flushing... no one else's.
 
danarhea said:
This thread isn't about Obama. It's about Romney. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

So comparison and contrast between two people running for President isn't allowed then?
 
Ockham said:
Maybe you should educate the WSJ... apparently they don't see it either..

Obama's Empty Transparency Rhetoric - WSJ.com



You see it as some narrow specific quote, I see transparency as a broad requirement of all government. It's the classic: Do as I say, not as I do. And when someone points that out, it's "whining". :lamo Perhaps if you could set aside your partisan hypocrisy for a moment you could look at the obvious hypocrisy as just that... obvious. But somehow you'd rather attempt to spin this ... :shrug: It's you're credibility your flushing... no one else's.
Click to expand...

It is a very specific quote. That is why I suggested you look it up. Just because some WSJ op/ed lies to you does not mean you are any more right than you where without the WSJ op/ed.
 
Redress said:
It is a very specific quote. That is why I suggested you look it up. Just because some WSJ op/ed lies to you does not mean you are any more right than you where without the WSJ op/ed.
Click to expand...

Ahh so now the WSJ is a liar... I guess anyone else who doesn't agree with your narrow application of the quote is also a liar. Reason and logic has exited the room and that's my cue to leave as well...
 
Ockham said:
Ahh so now the WSJ is a liar... I guess anyone else who doesn't agree with your narrow application of the quote is also a liar. Reason and logic has exited the room and that's my cue to leave as well...
Click to expand...

So you are not going to look the quote up? I will provide it, but it will embarrass you when I do. You really might want to look it up.
 
Ockham said:
Ahh so now the WSJ is a liar... I guess anyone else who doesn't agree with your narrow application of the quote is also a liar. Reason and logic has exited the room and that's my cue to leave as well...
Click to expand...

So let us see what Obama actually said:

Barack Obama said:
Going forward, anytime the American people want to know something that I or a former president wants to withhold, we will have to consult with the Attorney General and the white house counsel, whose business it is to ensure compliance with the rule of law. Information will not be withheld just because I say so; it will be withheld because a separate authority believes my request is well-grounded in the Constitution. Let me say it as simply as I can: transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency
Click to expand...

So what we learn is he is talking about his presidency, not his college life, and we learn that he said what information is withheld will be within the law. So whining about his college papers is a double fail.
 
TurtleDude said:
the most important issue to me is the appointment of federal judges. 99% of the federal judges are picked by the relevant party leaders not the president. In other words, Newt, BatGirl, Paul, Perry, Mitt-we will get the same judges and they will be better than those chosen by the Dems.

and Romney has a better chance of winning. He's smarter by far than any of the other contenders though Newt comes close but Newt is a gaping hypocrite when it comes to lobbying money and "family values" and pisses off a lot of independents. Romney's biggest problem comes from the Mindless bible thumpers on the right
Click to expand...

TD - Don't you think Romney's problem is that there are a large amount of Conservatives who don't know where this guy really stands on anything?
 
danarhea said:
I guess that means that you have surmised that I didn't vote for Obama. Gee, how in the world did you figure that one out? If Ockham couldn't figure it out, then it must be a really hard question. LOL.
Click to expand...

There's a difference between not being able to figure something out, and stoking the fire to promote more conversation. Then again Dan, you tend to do the same thing and much more often than I.
 
Redress said:
So let us see what Obama actually said:



So what we learn is he is talking about his presidency, not his college life, and we learn that he said what information is withheld will be within the law. So whining about his college papers is a double fail.
Click to expand...

The double fail is your... Obama has not been transparent in his Presidency - in fact, the direct opposite. (Let me know if you want links). Second, it's just what I already said: Do as I say, not as I do. Third, anytime someone says something you don't like Red, they are "whining" like you are now - the old "accuse others of your own behavior". So old school....

So not weighing in on whether or not Obama's College or Harvard records will be examined like Romney's? :lamo


Color me surprised... back to your partisan little rantings Red. Oh I know, why not claim I'm "whining" again - that's always a good one!
 
Ockham said:
The double fail is your... Obama has not been transparent in his Presidency - in fact, the direct opposite. (Let me know if you want links). Second, it's just what I already said: Do as I say, not as I do. Third, anytime someone says something you don't like Red, they are "whining" like you are now - the old "accuse others of your own behavior". So old school....

So not weighing in on whether or not Obama's College or Harvard records will be examined like Romney's? :lamo


Color me surprised... back to your partisan little rantings Red. Oh I know, why not claim I'm "whining" again - that's always a good one!
Click to expand...

So even after I supplied the quote, you still have not read it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom