Is this the reason Romney missed out on beng secretar of state?

[Jeanne]

Scott...how would you work with someone to whom you think is a fraud???

[thesometimesaint]

Trump is a mean vengeful psychopath. But he is not stupid. Romney was humiliated and choose to eat crow with those frog legs.

[stemelbow]

6 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

That and some added arrogance.  It would never have worked (IMO)...doesn't mean Romney would be a bad S of S...but I was routing for Rudy or Huntsman. 

Gotcha.  last night I went to my wife's work's Christmas party.  As we sat there were questions on the table to get people conversing.  The question was asked one guy--what are you blamed for which you don't think your at fault for?  He says, "Trump.  being a white male, it feels like people want to blame me for him".  It was a good response, we all got a chuckle.  But, the way things are, he's got a little bit of a point. 

[stemelbow]

3 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

Scott...how would you work with someone to whom you think is a fraud???

It gets easier each passing day. Scott knows he works for the church-owned Des news. 

just playin'.

Edited December 15, 2016 by stemelbow

[Scott Lloyd]

4 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

On the news this morning, it was stated that no apology was even asked for.

Do you have a link or a cite?

Not that I doubt this is what happened. It's just that it's good to document such things, especially when there is false rumor to be quashed.

[Jeanne]

Just now, stemelbow said:

Gotcha.  last night I went to my wife's work's Christmas party.  As we sat there were questions on the table to get people conversing.  The question was asked one guy--what are you blamed for which you don't think your at fault for?  He says, "Trump.  being a white male, it feels like people want to blame me for him".  It was a good response, we all got a chuckle.  But, the way things are, he's got a little bit of a point. 

He does have a point..there are people getting beat up big time for voting for Trump.

[Jeanne]

Just now, Scott Lloyd said:

Do you have a link or a cite?

Not that I doubt this is what happened. It's just that it's good to document such things, especially when there is false rumor to be quashed.

No link..you will chide me for this..but it was on Fox News this morning..from Kelly Anne!

[Jeanne]

2 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

It gets easier each passing day. Scott knows he works for the church-owned Des news. 

just playin'.

That is what I was thinking too..point taken..

[Scott Lloyd]

32 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I disagree.  Saying someone likely lied and calling someone a liar are two different things, particularly when you consider that all people have lied.  If we used the term liar in the way you and Calm seem intent on doing, every single person would be a liar, and there'd be no point to the term at all. 

I'm certainly not completely above name calling, but to force this on me seems silly.  I didn't call him a name. 

It seems reckless at best to say someone "likely lied" when all you have to go on is your own unsupported supposition.

Edited December 15, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[Tacenda]

4 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

He does have a point..there are people getting beat up big time for voting for Trump.

I try very hard to be tight lipped around people that voted for Trump, especially when I voted for Obama years ago, and there were so many that were saying some things about him also. So I try to remember how it felt when others downed someone I voted for. On here I've been a little more open about my feelings, where I probably shouldn't. 

[Sleeper Cell]

42 minutes ago, Alan said:

Just because you think something about someone, it doesn't mean you have to articulate it.

So he could have apologised for calling Trump a liar, or immoral or a phony, without rescinding what he said and without changing his mind about him. In other words, he could apologise for what he said, not for what he thought.

Obviously, he could only apologise for saying what he said if he was sorry for offending Trump and causing him to be upset.

But I maintain that simply to apologise for saying nasty things would not make him a liar even if he still believed those nasty things.

I am reminded of the following (probably apocryphal) story:

When a member of the British parliament was called upon to formally apologize for a breech of decorum, he said the following: 

“I called the honorable member a liar it is true and I am sorry for it.  The honorable member is free to punctuate my statement as he wishes.”

[Scott Lloyd]

10 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

Scott...how would you work with someone to whom you think is a fraud???

It depends on the circumstances. If it seemed clear to me that the person was turning over a new leaf, I could manage it.

 

[stemelbow]

2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

It seems reckless at best to say someone "likely liked" when all you have to go on is your own unsupported supposition.

It's also reckless to insist I suggested Romney's a liar when I didn't.  We're all a little reckless around here, I guess. 

[Scott Lloyd]

9 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

It gets easier each passing day. Scott knows he works for the church-owned Des news. 

just playin'.

 

5 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

That is what I was thinking too..point taken..

There is nothing humorous about this sort of thing.

 

[Scott Lloyd]

8 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

No link..you will chide me for this..but it was on Fox News this morning..from Kelly Anne!

That's better than no attribution at all.

 

[Scott Lloyd]

16 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

It's also reckless to insist I suggested Romney's a liar when I didn't.  We're all a little reckless around here, I guess. 

I've only said i don't see much of a qualitative difference between saying someone "likely lied" and calling the person a liar.

The dialogue is all here in black and white. It is not reckless to refer to it.

Edited December 15, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

5 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I try very hard to be tight lipped around people that voted for Trump, especially when I voted for Obama years ago, and there were so many that were saying some things about him also. So I try to remember how it felt when others downed someone I voted for. On here I've been a little more open about my feelings, where I probably shouldn't. 

You are to be commended.

 

[HappyJackWagon]

2 hours ago, Alan said:

If this is true, Romney should certainly have apologized.

It seems his personal pride has deprived the US of a potentially very good SofS.

No way. Romney did well. He made himself available and was deferential and respectful of the President elect but that doesn't mean he needs to sell out on principles. What kind of relationship would the SoS and the Pres. have if Romney had capitulated on something like this that was driven entirely by Trumps ego.

Romney would have been very good. It's the countries loss, but it's Trump's fault, not Romney's.

[Scott Lloyd]

21 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said:

Trump is a mean vengeful psychopath. But he is not stupid. Romney was humiliated and choose to eat crow with those frog legs.

And this is the sort of post that is going to get this, my third thread on this topic, summarily shut down.

Thanks for nothing, TSS.

 

[Scott Lloyd]

Here is a CNN report that supports the Trump-wanted-an-apology narrative. It cites three sources close to Romney.

[stemelbow]

22 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

There is nothing humorous about this sort of thing.

 

Well I certainly didn't mean to offend.  Sorry if offense was taken.  Just a joke. 

[stemelbow]

13 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

No way. Romney did well. He made himself available and was deferential and respectful of the President elect but that doesn't mean he needs to sell out on principles. What kind of relationship would the SoS and the Pres. have if Romney had capitulated on something like this that was driven entirely by Trumps ego.

Romney would have been very good. It's the countries loss, but it's Trump's fault, not Romney's.

How do we know whose fault it was?  I mean, I can see your scenario likely, but we don't have the details of what went on with them, do we? 

[stemelbow]

21 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I've only said i don't see much of a qualitative difference between saying someone "likely lied" and calling the person a liar.

The dialogue is all here in black and white. It is not reckless to refer to it.

It is all here.  You insisted I did call him a liar after the two times I said I did not, which obviously I did not because it's all here in black and white. 

But I'm happy to accept the reckless title as applied to my "likely lied" statement, if you insist, and move on. 

[RevTestament]

Knowing Trump he would like to get the apology, and then not select Romney. Romney may have been smart to feel out Trump about various issues, but to think he should seriously consider accepting the office of SoS given his history, is almost unthinkable. I really think someone with more international experience would also make a better SoS. Clinton was disastrous, and this led to the email thing also blowing up in her face. IMHO, it has really been awhile since we had a truly good, competent SoS.

[Scott Lloyd]

21 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

Knowing Trump he would like to get the apology, and then not select Romney. Romney may have been smart to feel out Trump about various issues, but to think he should seriously consider accepting the office of SoS given his history, is almost unthinkable. I really think someone with more international experience would also make a better SoS. Clinton was disastrous, and this led to the email thing also blowing up in her face. IMHO, it has really been awhile since we had a truly good, competent SoS.

I suppose this goes to the question of whether being a career politician is an essential qualification for public service. I don't see that as a given.