I’ve been looking at this election for a long time. Dozens of my blog posts address the issues that have been or should be foremost. I’m not totally satisfied with Obama but for reasons that the Republicans have not even begun to touch.

In my prior posts I have discussed more fully many of the issues which I touch upon here, presenting ample factual backup.

There are some negatives against Obama. They do not include Benghazi, Solyndra, the War on Coal, “death panels”, Fast amd Furious, excessive use of executive orders, socialism, anti-colonialism (after all, our founding fathers were anti-colonialists, were they not?), or the litany of petty and immaterial and irrelevant alleged offenses dreamed up by people unconcerned about fact or the precedents set by earlier presidents.

All those issues are gross distortions, outright lies, or the kind of failures nearly every administration in history has had.

My complaints are three:

  • He has continued prosecution of the war in Afghanistan when it is obvious the inevitable outcome will be that our eventual withdrawal will be like taking the Delorean back to the future leaving those tribesmen to stew in their own putrid vision of the world.
  • He has used unmanned drones to attack and murder “alleged” terrorists not without considerable collateral damage.
  • His leadership has too often been feckless in promoting a progressive agenda and remiss in not dealing more effectively with Republican recalcitrance.

Clear victories include health care reform, getting employment back on track, ending DADT, issuing an executive order furthering the goals of the Dream Act, and implementing cuts in Defense spending.

I could be picky and assert that some of these measures are not aggressive enough, but on balance they are praiseworthy.

Now, what does Mitt Romney have to offer?

That is the $64 Question.

Listening to Romney state his positions one should reasonably expect to have a sense of the man and his goals. One does not. These positions have fluctuated not only from stances he took years ago such as on abortion and gay marriage, but he promoted a different agenda  from his past in the primary debates and adopts yet another version in the final campaign.

If the economy is the number one issue…and in many ways it is….Mitt Romney touts his accomplishments in three areas as proof of his ability to do a better job than Obama.

  • Romney’s tenure at Bain Capital was wildly successful if you measure that success solely in the bang for the bucks he brought his investors. Yet there was no consistent effort to build businesses or create jobs. In fact there was no effort whatsoever. The profit from each deal was first and foremost.
  • Romney successfully ran the Salt Lake City Olympics. But for all his bluster about how government interferes with business and does not help it, an influx of federal money is what enabled him to pull that project off.
  • Romney served a term as Governor of Massachusetts where he instigated health care reform (that looks suspiciously like the Affordable Care Act) and worked with a legislature that was about 85% Democrat. Well much of the impetus for that health care reform came from Ted Kennedy and it was financially possible due to a Medicaid waiver from the federal governmet. As to working with the Dems? He vetoed about 800 bills or parts of bills, the vast majority of which were overturned.

Today the linchpin of Romney’s economic program and job creation is an across the board tax cut. He claims he will remove tax breaks for the rich but has not explained how he will manage that beyond, “I’ll work with Congress”. Otherwise those tax cuts will balloon the deficit.

On foreign policy he is both unrealistically aggressive and a mere echo of Obama’s policy, as evidenced in the final debate. Obama, almost equally inexperienced in foreign affairs when he took office, looked like a thirty year veteran of diplomacy compared to Romney’s chest thumping and stumblings.

There is an argument that whatever progress Obama has made, especially with the economy and jobs, has been too little and not fast enough. Romney has not offered a clear vision of how he would do things better or faster.

Aesop taught us in The Tortoise and The Hare that faster is not always better and slow and steady wins the race.

We are on a slow, steady course that I believe will bring us a full recovery and an optimistic future. Therefore I recommend you vote for the tortoise in this race.

Re-elect President Barack Obama!

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.


  • little_minx  On October 30, 2012 at 9:09 AM

    Did you see this yet? “Romney would pass the buck on disasters”:
    In relevant part:

    “Back when he was being ‘severely conservative,’ Mitt Romney suggested that responsibility for disaster relief should be taken from the big, bad federal government and given to the states, or perhaps even privatized. Hurricane Sandy would like to know if he’d care to reconsider […] ‘Every time you have an occasion to take something from the federal government and send it back to the states, that’s the right direction. And if you can go further and send it back to the private sector, that’s even better […] We cannot afford to do those things without jeopardizing the future for our kids […] it is simply immoral . . . to rack up larger and larger debts and pass them on to our kids.’ Now, with an unprecedented and monstrous storm bashing the East Coast, this glib exercise in ideological purity is newly relevant. Was Romney really saying that the federal government should abdicate the task of responding to natural disasters such as the one now taking place? Yes, he was…”

    P.S. Today’s the 74th anniversary of Mercury Theater’s legendary radio broadcast of “War of the Worlds.”

    • umoc193  On October 30, 2012 at 3:53 PM

      I’ve seen several reminders of Romney’s asinine statement from a number of sources. Just one of many reasons not to vote for him, though I’m certain he’ll say something completely different now.

  • Deke James  On October 30, 2012 at 10:00 AM

    Mitt Romney’s an extended ass.

  • little_minx  On October 31, 2012 at 10:56 AM

    And this — “Romney goes off-road with the truth”:

    In relevant part, “Let’s set the record straight: Jeep has no intention of shifting production of its Jeep models out of North America to China,’ Chrysler executive Gualberto Ranieri wrote in a statement, using italics for emphasis. ‘A careful and unbiased reading of the Bloomberg take would have saved unnecessary fantasies and extravagant comments.’ Ranieri said the conclusion that it was moving all production to China was ‘a leap that would be difficult even for professional circus acrobats.’ ”

    • umoc193  On October 31, 2012 at 1:08 PM

      HuffPo has an article about text messages being sent en masse that are virulently anti-Obama. Apparently they originate as emails but the phone companies send them as text which has imposed fees on many users.

      One message claimed Obama had a homosexual agenda. A gay woman was among those receiving it and her response is precious, if slightly off-color.

Please give me your thoughts.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: