Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Sunday, Oct. 7, 2012 | 2:02 a.m.
Another view?
View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:
• Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.
• Columnists - local and syndicated writers.
• Letters to the editor - readers' views.
Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.
Today, it seems to me, many people in this country have given up on the long view and want things to happen today or maybe tomorrow at the latest. Contrary to this tendency, that is not the way to run a reasonable economy, the country or foreign policy.
I believe Nevada voters are changing and becoming more informed; they are realizing that President Barack Obama takes the long view and has put this year’s campaign on a slow but steady course toward his re-election in November, just as he put the hunt for Osama bin Laden on a slow but steady course to bin Laden’s demise, and he put the economy on a slow but steady course toward full recovery after the disaster near the end of 2008.
What is needed now is for informed voters to come out on Election Day and support the president and the Democratic candidates for Congress so that the president will have the congressional support necessary to enact laws to speed the recovery to full employment and to lower the debt and deficit in a reasonable and balanced way.
Parrish say "he [Obama] put the economy on a slow but steady course toward full recovery ..."
Parrish is dreaming - the growth in the economy is slowing down to 1.3% lower then last year 2011 which was lower than 2010.
23 million under or unemployed
17 million more on food stamps - up to 47 million
Stop with thinking that after 4 years we have any recovery
-----
Obama has declared his jobs policies a SUCCESS. really
WHY?
UNEMPLOYMENT IS AT THE SAME RATE 7.8% AS WHEN OBAMA TOOK OFFICE.
----
Remember when a campaigning Obama bashed and excoriated the September 2008 unemployment rate of 5.4%
----
Obama says "We have made too much progress" as the Obama Labor department for two months ahead of the election put out questionable unemployment numbers.
So the unemployment rate is at the same as when Obama took office. And Obama says this is "too much progress"
Mr. Parrish has a right to advocate for President Obama and D's and others have a right to advocate for Mitt Romney and R's, but if anyone is interested in seeing a 'credible' plan for tackling our deficit and debt, don't go to either man's website or listen to what they say. Go instead to www.taxpayers.org, and read what is there.
I don't know what the President's objective really was with Simpson-Bowles, but the biggest mistake of his Presidency was not supporting that plan in some form. The R and D parties should both face scorn from voters for not supporting that plan. Congress could have taken it, with support from President Obama and used it to make a start down a 'sane' fiscal path.
No matter who we elect President, we are all a bunch of fools if we accept the plans put forth by Obama and the D's or Romney and the R's. Neither are 'credible' and we all need to demand something along the lines of Simpson Bowles instead. If we don't, we are all going to be very sorry.
Michael
Charles Parrish is entitled to his opinion but it's obvious he doesn't know the economy and the hardship of the 23 million who are still unemployed/underemployed.
Letter writer wants us to take the long view. 4 years of president Obama to move the unemployment rate from 8.1 to 7.8 percent. That's as long as it gets before infinity and beyond.
CarmineD
Charles,
Excellent letter. I completely agree with you and thank you for sharing your opinions.
If you are reading the negative comments, please ignore them; dismiss them as they do not matter. It is the propaganda machine that can, at times, run full blast and boy can it get ugly, mean-spirited and down right nasty. So, if you read any belittling and/or disparaging comments, take it for what it is worth ~ absolutely nothing :)
Odd that each member the R Party says exactly the same thing in their speeches, like little birds. The people that support them also use the same talking points. HUM!
Well, it is early for me, but I wanted to express my appreciation for your letter.
Obviously Parrish has been relatively unaffected by Osama Obama and his fellow travelers ignoble record when it comes to the economy, deficit spending, home foreclosures and unemployment. The Cheshire Cat grinning, wanna-be-celebrity, president certainly can take a "long view" at those critical problems. He's busy hob-nobbing with the ladies of "The View" and doing hard stuff like appearing on entertainment shows. However, the 23 million unemployed or under employed American workers are the ones suffering, not Osama Obama and his ilk. Soon, when the "chickens come home to roost," as the dingbat Jeremiah Wright put it, we will all suffer. When the IOU's this economic moron continues to pile up come due, that's when the S**T will really hit the fan. And, like Parrish, there will be plenty of apologists for Osama Obama, his putrid policies and his pitiful performance.
Yeah....Obama is taking the long approach.
It will be really a long, long, long, long, long, long, long and long time before he will be able to fix anything.
It might be decades or centuries before we see the economic benefits of his approach.
If you want a tid quicker approach. Vote for Romney.
Kepi says "
- If you are reading the negative comments,
- please ignore them;
- dismiss them as they do not matter.
- It is the propaganda machine that can,
- at times, run full blast
- and boy can it get ugly,
- mean-spirited and down right nasty.
- So, if you read any belittling and/or disparaging comments,
- take it for what it is worth ~ absolutely nothing"
Kepi Quite the Rant you spewed out
Quite amused when you say "please Ignor them"
Apparently you have not ignored us
But to let you know absolutely nothing you have ranted about is true or worth anything; but I wanted to express my appreciation for your rant
--
Keep reminding me Obama is 'smart'. So difficult to tell otherwise.
Especially off-teleprompter.
When considering the unemployment rate, keep in mind it does not count those individuals who have given up looking for work.
I believe the letter writer is correct in his view that it will take time to correct all the damage that has been done to our country.
Even V.P. running mate Paul Ryan agrees with this.He has put a plan together which he claims will take 28 years to balance the budget of our country.But most Republicans are not happy with Pres.Obama for not balancing the budget in 4 years.It simply can't be done in 4 years,it will take sometime for a correction, as the letter writer points out.
Michael:
You know I respect you, and the only one in this forum. I do agree with you and I have only disdain for politics. However, I cannot excise myself entirely from politics because we live in a society that requires this system for it to thrive.
I will never understand politics nor do I ever wish to. The reason I am voting this time and for Obama is simple: Whatever appears in the news, I cannot believe. I simply listen to Obama and Romney when they talk, I observe their demeanor, and understand their words and what is 'between' the lines. It comes down to this:
I have a difficult time trusting Romney. I am conservative in many ways. I am Catholic and all that it stands for. However, in my humble opinion, Obama's nature from what I have seen, will allow me to be that - be who I am without the government telling me who and what I should be. I am responsible for myself and my soul, not the government. No amount of attack against that freedom will convince me otherwise.
Romney's performance during the debate astounded me. He appeared to me he would say anything to gain power, and most of the things he said were said as if they were absolute truth. Add to that the previous 'performances' while campaigning, I am now convinced he is not the kind of person that should lead this country.
There is a grain of truth to the saying "what the heart feels, the mouth speaks' and no amount of 'data' will sugar-coat it.
Nancy,9:30am A accurate and good post.I think a lot of voter's feel the same way.Gov. Romney seems to be very good at boobing and weaving.I believe most commenter's enjoy what you have to say in your posts.
Obama, unions and Occupiers can't produce jobs. If Americans prefer to have 23 million unemployed/under-employed then vote Obama. If Americans prefer to have a $16 trillion dollar national debt balloon to $20 trillion then vote Obama. If Americans prefer deficits of $1.1 trillion per year then vote Obama. If Americans prefer to have a President who produces unserious Budgets like in 2011 & 2012 that did not get one single republican/democrat vote the last two years then vote Obama. If Americans prefer to have Class Warfare then vote Obama. If Americans prefer to have a tax plan that picks more winners/losers via the tax code then vote Obama. If Americans prefer to have a President who started his term with 60.9% of the population working but now has only 58.7% of the population working then vote Obama. If Americans prefer to have only 50% of college graduates to get jobs in their chosen field then vote Obama. If Americans prefer a President who is anti-business, anti-capitalist,anti-religion, anti-authority, anti-police, anti-bank, anti-oil, anti-wealth creation, anti-military/guns and anti-state rights then vote for Obama.
Future Oct. 7, 2012 6:59 a.m.
Kepi says "
- If you are reading the negative comments,
- please ignore them;
- dismiss them as they do not matter.
- It is the propaganda machine that can,
- at times, run full blast
- and boy can it get ugly,
- mean-spirited and down right nasty.
- So, if you read any belittling and/or disparaging comments,
- take it for what it is worth ~ absolutely nothing"
Kepi Quite the Rant you spewed out
Quite amused when you say "please Ignor them"
Apparently you have not ignored us
But to let you know absolutely nothing you have ranted about is true or worth anything; but I wanted to express my appreciation for your rant
**************
Darlin',
Why in the world did you think I was talking about you? Why did you take that comment so personally? It was not intended for you Futu! Not everything is about you. I am sorry if you thought I was talking about you personally; I was not ~ is was a broadcast; nothing more nothing less. Now, as much as I would like to stay and play. I think I will have a spa day.
Don't worry, I was not talking about anyone in particular; just everyone in general.
Have a fabulous day. I will :)
Carmine; Some perspective. Bill Clinton, a democrat, left the republican administration with a budget surplus and a 4.2% UNEMPLOYMENT RATE. In October 2009 two months before George Bush, under the tutelage of Dick Cheney, left office, the unemployment rate was 10% and the nation was in dire financial straits and in tremendous debt.
With no help from the Republican Party, and a promise by them to make sure the President failed, the gains made by the Obama administration have been remarkable. Get real.
Birth certificate provided onrequest.
Willie T
A summary comparison of where the candidates stand on key issues:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canad...
Nancy,
I respect you and your decision. I am socially moderate so I have disagreements with the social conservatives in the R party. I believe in the right to choose although it pains me to see so many abortions, when just common sense behavior could eliminate the need for many of them. I have no problem with gay marriage although I understand why some people of faith have a problem with it. I could list more ways in which I part with R's but you get the point. I also don't believe we can cut and grow our way out of our debt, as many R's do.
But now, let's talk economics. I believe we will suffer an enormous financial calamity if we don't find a way to reduce spending while growing the private economy. I could name many areas where I disagree with President Obama, but let's take just one very important one. I see the data that seem to show the earth may be warming. It may be cyclical and it may be man made or it may be a combination of both. I believe nobody knows for sure.
I also know we badly need more jobs. Since I know we have many, many emerging nations in the world, I also know they will use fossil fuels to power their economies, so fossil fuels ARE going to be used for a good while into the future.
Recently, technology has allowed us to find and tap much more fossil fuel energy that we thought possible just a few years before. While I know we need to start the turn toward renewable energy, the government should be funding green energy 'research' (to find ways to make it less expensive so it can compete in the market) instead of funding retail green energy companies that cannot compete without subsidies and forcing utilities to purchase the green energy. We should also develop and use our own sources of fossil fuels to be less energy dependent and create more jobs.
Romney, I suspect, would skimp on green energy research spending, which I would fight, but he would unleash our industries to develop and use our own sources of fossil fuels.
President Obama has struggled for 4 years to find a way to increase employment. The results have been poor. Because he will not use the best tool he has to increase employment, which is all out energy development (with safeguards) and instead funds retail green energy instead more prudent green energy 'research', he condemns millions of Americans to struggle financially, when there is a way to help them.
For that reason alone I cannot support the man. My business is slowly failing precisely because so many Americans are unemployed and underemployed. We need more employment; there is a way to make that happen in short order and this President refuses to do it.
Michael
If President Obama had taken the smart approach he would have stepped aside and let Hillary run this time instead.
I agree BOFTX. That was the reason I did not vote for Obama the first time. I was disgusted at how idealistic those who vote for him that time. Obama didn't know Washington at that time and to me that was such a crucial moment for our country after Bush.
And to Michael: I really cannot believe that Obama wouldn't do what you think he should do because of simple reasons. There aren't any simple explanations. The presidency has with it enormous 'sides to every question' that making a decision is tremendously daunting. Decisions are made with an array of advisers and I honestly believe Obama makes those decisions with the American people in mind -whether or not the decision is popular. I believe that history will prove him correct.
I am sorry, but I do not believe Romney would do that. I see clearly what and who he would favor when he makes those crucial decisions.
Nancy,
I understand your views and that you'll vote for Obama. I am not trying to convince you otherwise. I don't and can't know Romney or Obama in any way that could really help me. I can only watch what they've done. Obama has been in office 4 years. Unemployment has been awful for 4 years. The opportunity for much increased energy development and its associated employment has been there 4 years. Obama chooses not to use that to reduce unemployment. I can only surmise that he doesn't think the increased employment would come. He thinks its environmental costs outweigh any benefit it might provide. He feels it will stifle green energy progress. Or it could be another reason.
Bottom line for me: He either should do what I believe is the correct course, with my limited knowledge.... or he should in an understandible and straight forward way... explain why he is not doing that and thinks the path he is following is the correct one.
He has been willing to do either one and I am very disappointed in that.
Michael
Nancy states "I see clearly what and who he would favor when he makes those crucial decisions".
I see clearly that what and who Obama would favor is not the unemployed/under-employed. 4 years of stagnate economic growth under Obama is enough evidence to form my conclusion.
As I said, we make decisions based on our personal frames of references.
I can only hope our decisions would be correct and we will be able to deal with it whatever may come.
At this point, we pretty much have decided who to vote for and no arguments would change that.
Good luck to all of us.
I think I have seen it all ""put the hunt for Osama bin Laden on a slow but steady course to bin Laden's demise""
The hunt started before 9/11 but intensified after. The letter writer is saying when B. Obama was elected he called the cia and all agencies involved in the hunt and said, "listen, no rush, take your time, slow and steady" REALLY???
We do not have time for four more years of this kind of smart.
Bush destroyed the country in the first four years, then you gave him another four years to destroy it some more. Yet, you will deny Obama who slowly is trying to reverse the damage, which will probably take the same number of years, or even more?
That's so typical!
Charles.......GREAT LETTER.
YES, PRESIDENT OBAMA is taking the smart approach.
PRESIDENT OBAMA is a strong, steady, calm leader.
THE BEST KIND OF PRESIDENT.
Romney is the biggest flip-flopper who will lie
and say anything while running around with his
hair on fire.
The kind of guy WE DON'T NEED.
WE'RE KEEPING PRESIDENT OBAMA!
ASadTeacher......
Very good comments.
PRESIDENT OBAMA has turned our economy around from
the biggest republican crash in our lifetime.
We now have 7.8% unemployment.
It seems like some kind of insanity has over taken
over 40% of Americans willing to vote for the
same republican policies that destroyed our
middle class and economy.
Even worse, romney wants to double-down on the
horrible bush policies.
ROMNEY IS WORSE THAN BUSH!
Charles! Well put !! The quick fix Republicans cant stand an long view of progress.. they need a big quarterly profit! Never mind the country or the unemployed !! They need to show a big Quarter!!!!
You exposed their underbelly! Great letter..
Just like Switch hitter Romney.. they will say and do anything to get elected.. they have no plans that will be a quick fix.. but they want everyone to believe it! I Prefer a steady long term approach than the quick fix quarterly earnings approach of the right!
How can you trust people that don't even understand the term FOSSIL fuels! Do they think FOSSIL means renewable? Or Global Climate change is a hoax? So Islands are underwater, glaciers are melting, half of the Corals are bleaching, and we are just stupid monkeys created by god with tools? Is this the mentality we want our next leader to have? if so lets just close the universities there is no point in competing in science .. we don't believe in it.. Your computer just works by magic... your cell phone is an evil hoax! You cant see the words in the air! It is the work of the devil ! Lets let everyone else in the world do the devils work! Thats not for a smart country like the USA .. The republicans have said so!!!
Science bad! Blind ignorance GOOD! God bless America and its blind ignorance!
Nancy,
I'll end with this. Many on the left believe that President Obama is former President Clinton, just with another name. They also believe that Mitt Romney is former President George Bush and the Tea Party all wrapped into one guy.
The reality is that President Obama is quite different than former President Clinton, and Mitt Romney is much closer to what he was in the debate than he is to being former President Bush.
I wanted R's to nominate a 'moderate' because I felt that very conservative people like Bachmann, Santorum, etc had no chance to be elected. Romney was forced to run to the right to get the nomination and the D's said: 'Fine, you want to run as a Conservative to get the nomination, we will paint you as we would have a Bachmann or Santorum'.
That worked really well... until what I believe is the 'real' (based on his record as a Governor) Romney showed up at the debate.
I think it is too late and President Obama will be re-elected, but I don't think Romney was ever the guy the D's painted him to be.
Many Conservatives are distrustful of Romney and they have good reason. Romney is a 'MODERATE'.
Michael
"Carmine; Some perspective. Bill Clinton, a democrat, left the republican administration with a budget surplus and a 4.2% UNEMPLOYMENT RATE"
President Clinton had a Republican controlled Congress that "forced" him to move to the center. Example: 1996: Welfare Reform. Welfare to work. I believe Clinton famously said: This law will end welfare as we know it. Can you imagine President Obama saying this? Of course not. President recently changed the law by executive order rather than allow Congress do so through the reauthorization process. GAO ruled the President's actions were illegal.
CarmineD
Things were fine until Harry Reid and Pelosi took over congress in 2007 declaring the iraqi war lost and fannie/freddie fiscally solvent. They obstructed any reform as well as voting against a surge thereby ensuring an iraqi quagmire.
This is a 'smart' approach to a Dem. Go figure.
Right Michael. Had he showed who he really is/was, maybe a lot of people like me would consider voting for him.
Without that fortitude - standing for what you believe in - disqualified him in my book. It is very telling what he is after.
Romney can never be trusted, PERIOD!
Hiding his tax returns.
Hiding money in the Caymen Islands.
This man is no moderate.
Don't believe a word that comes out of his lying
mouth.
Romney and republicans can't stop lying.