Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Friday, Oct. 26, 2012 | 2 a.m.
Mitt Romney has presented himself as a reasonable alternative to President Barack Obama, the idea being that Romney, a seasoned and successful businessman, knows how to turn the country around.
That sounds appealing, given that the country’s recovery from the Great Recession has been painfully slow. But, after studying the campaign, we’re not sure who Mitt Romney really is or what he really stands for.
Romney has been called a flip-flopper, but his changes over the past year would make a chameleon blush. Consider:
• The Mitt Romney of the primary ran to the right of his opponents to curry favor with the Tea Party. He proclaimed himself to be “severely conservative,” a hawk who talked about cutting foreign aid and denounced Obama as weak on foreign policy. He pledged to dismantle Obamacare and said government should get out of the housing market and let it “bottom out.”
• The Mitt Romney since the primary has resembled the Massachusetts moderate whom conservatives complained about. On foreign policy, Romney says he wants to increase aid, and he was nearly indistinguishable from Obama in the last debate. And despite his opposition to Obamacare, which happens to be modeled on Romney’s own health care law from Massachusetts, Romney wants to replace it with policies that include key parts of Obamacare. And on housing? He pledges some unspecified help, blames Obama and plans to gut regulations designed to protect homeowners.
So what does Romney believe?
We’re not sure. His campaign has been short on specifics. Where he has offered detailed plans that differ with the current administration, they haven’t been persuasive. For example, his grandiose plan for the economy literally doesn’t add up, and it would put a new burden on the middle class to the benefit of the wealthy and larger corporations — the “job creators” that haven’t been creating jobs lately despite record profits.
How a Romney administration would govern is something of a guessing game given his ever-shifting positions. The indications, however, show that the nation would see a foreign policy run by neocons who have been all too willing to send Americans into harm’s way overseas, and on domestic policy, the middle class and the “47 percent” would be left behind.
While Romney and his positions remain murky, we know what Obama stands for, and his policies have been aimed at restoring the economy and helping all Americans. His administration’s actions — including the auto industry bailout and the stimulus — are the only reasons the country’s woes haven’t gotten worse. Of course, his term hasn’t been all we had hoped. For example, we would have liked to have seen bolder leadership on domestic issues, but he faced some incredible challenges, including an economic crisis that no one fully understood and an opposition party that has gone to incredible lengths to polarize the nation.
Despite a Democratic Congress in Obama’s first two years, Senate Republicans effectively used the threat of filibuster in incredible numbers to obstruct progress. Once the Republicans won control of the House two years ago, the obstruction became worse — to the nation’s detriment. We are especially troubled that the Republican Party was more focused on making Obama a “one-term president” than on working to stimulate the economy.
For the next four years, the nation needs someone with a positive vision to push the economy forward and to address the difficult issues.
Unlike his opponents, Obama has offered plans for the entire nation, and he has done a credible job of working to stimulate the economy and to help homeowners as well as businesses.
Obama has argued for extending middle-class tax cuts to help families. He has pushed for a better education system and more opportunity, which will help business and the economy well into the future. And he champions fixing the nation’s roads, bridges and other infrastructure, which would help create jobs and provide for further economic development. In Nevada, the planned Interstate 11 would be a huge benefit, but the lack of funding has slowed the project.
The president also has shown a strong hand in foreign policy. The killing of Osama bin Laden showed incredible courage, from the president on down. The coalitions he formed have worked, and his efforts to bring the troops home from the Middle East and wrap up the military’s actions are welcome.
Overall, the country is on the mend, but the middle class, small businesses and homeowners need more help. We see only one candidate who has the experience, plans and vision to provide that help. The Sun endorses Barack Obama.
Bravo! Thank you LVS for standing up for reason and logic. You have effectively summarized the reasons many of us who comment here have been hammering our keyboards for in hopes of enlightening those who have blinders and earplugs on.
Watch how they are going to take this article apart with minutiae and all about how they are not better off than four years ago. They bellyache about how much THEY have lost without any idea what real loss are - what real poverty feels like. They refuse to understand the idea of an economy that teetered on the brink of collapse affecting countries worldwide, including their own little world. An economy that requires sacrifice from everyone for it to get back on its feet.
They mention about unemployment and other economic woes and offer solutions as if they possess the magic bullet to fix the country. They are effectively led by a candidate who offers whatever they want to hear to get the power he salivates over for decades. It reminds you of another son who without credible leadership skills won the Presidency through the machinations of his party. The party who only thinks about how they can milk this country for the benefit of the few and abandon those who do not take 'responsibility' for themselves regardless of the circumstances of their birth and socio-economic status. They focus on the few on government dole, yet they won't mention those who take advantage of government by the millions.
Several research have shown that people with limited cognitive capacity tend to be conservatives. It is not for the lack of it, but for their refusal to examine and analyze issues due to their tenacious adherence to what they believe as the only truth.
Watch.
The Sun's endorsement of President Obama sounds alot like the proverb: You don't change horses in mid-stream. Might be correct for Dutch farmers but not for America. Real hope and change is exactly what America needs. Sadly for all number of reasons, President Obama couldn't provide it in 4 years and can't even if given 4 terms. A lesson America learned after Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
CarmineD
Long before this man with the Strange name became president a story from a lifelong friend of over 40 years came into my life about a new senator. I will let my friends words tell the rest of the story:
*************************
From My Friend Tony.
Written October 22, 2008
Well kids
Once again I am at the VA Hospital in Pittsburgh. And after reading all of your comments on the upcoming elections I've decided to share my views on the election.
I voted yesterday; for Obama. My reasons are a bit more personal than most. I literally owe Obama my life.
In may of 2005 my file was submitted to the VA in Washington for review prior to the approval (or disapproval) of my transplants. A process that should have had a turnaround of 45 - 60 days. 90 days later I had heard nothing and my inquiries went unanswered.
120 days later they told me that my tests were too old and had to be re-done. 150 days later I contacted my congressman. They did nothing, for an additional two months.
At this point I was getting a little worried, after all, my life was at stake. So I decided to see if our then freshman Senator could do anything to help. I sent his office an email and was surprised when they called me the very next day to ask what they could do to help. I explained what had been going on up to that point and they said they would be happy to find out what was causing the delay.
Imagine my surprise when they called me again an hour later asking for a fax authorizing them to check my VA files. Apparently the VA had given them a hard time about giving them any information about me. I sent it to them about twenty minutes later. And was further shocked when a couple of hours later they called me back and said a decision would be made within two days. That turned out to be untrue when the VA called me an hour later with an approval.
It had taken a total of seven months of delays, and one call from Obama to get final approval.
Since my approval, the liver transplant department at my VA Hospital has not had a single transplant approval.
Not one in three years.
I voted for Obama.
*********************************
Since then my friend Tony has met with President Obama to thank him. He is a good man. I will vote for him again with pride.
This President election come down to one single question...Who Do You Trust?
If your a responsible voter, a person who has taken the time to compare the candidates words and actions. Getting information from credible sources. Not Foxnews, or the extreme right, or the talking heads on AM Radio, or from opinion news.
If your a responsible voter using reasonable deduction, reasonable steps in making important decisions, steps you would want your children to consider before making important decisions....then there is no way a responsible voter would support Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan...if your a responsible voter. If, your a responsible voter.
The Sun Editoral is being kind to Mitt Romney in spelling out why Mitt Romney is not the Sun choice for president. If your an informed voter, you know one can use more direct commnents for the many reasons denying Mitt Romney the Oval Office.
President Obama wins re-election by 6 to 8 points.
From Paul Krugman:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/26/opinio...
"Mitt Romney has been barnstorming the country, telling voters that he has a five-point plan to restore prosperity. And some voters, alas, seem to believe what he's saying. So President Obama has now responded with his own plan, a little blue booklet containing 27 policy proposals. How do these two plans stack up?
Well, as I've said before, Mr. Romney's "plan" is a sham. It's a list of things he claims will happen, with no description of the policies he would follow to make those things happen. "We will cut the deficit and put America on track to a balanced budget," he declares, but he refuses to specify which tax loopholes he would close to offset his $5 trillion in tax cuts."
I love ya Las Vegas Sun....but Obama is done!
Capitalists and freedom loving people will finally be able to exhale.
I find it interesting that Mr. Romney says he can fix in 8 to 10 years what the President could not fix in four.
Think about it.
Are you people aware of the George Bush NeoCons Romney has surrounded himself with? They are currently his foreign policy advisors.
Where will Romney get the two trillion dollars he wants to spend on the military?
At Bain and as governor Romney did not create jobs; how will he create 12 million jobs as president?
All I heard from the gop is that Government cannot create JOBS so how is it they then tell you if you elect them they will create them JOBS... Which is it? can they or not.
I remember when bush was asked about was he still hunting Osama and his comment was No I'm not worried about him it's no big deal. Well Romney also said he wasn't worried about the 47%, Now I looked back at the people killed in the trade center and 99% of those people were of the 47%, so I Could conclude that the whole party cares not about the 47%.
OSAMA IS DEAD AND THAT's GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME!
The Sun Editorial is astute and I believe correct. Thank you for supporting President Obama!
I have spent lots of time reviewing both candidates material, and doing lots of independent research.
The sheer number of lies that Mr. Romney has told would result in his being on Santa's Bad List for many lifetimes. They seem encyclopedic in length.
Mr Romney's character is now in question due to his apparent lack of integrity. I can never stop being shocked at the lies I hear and read told by Mr. Romney. I can no longer believe a single word coming from him. He needs serious psychological therapy, in my opinion.
Even his obsessive-compulsiveness to become President, that has led him to run for so many years, is a dangerous indication of his potential to become a dictator, as is his secrecy.
I wouldn't be surprised to see him appoint Dick Cheney as Secretary of Defense.
My conclusion is that Obama has been and is on the right course, considering the imminent catastrophic economic collapse that was present when he entered the Presidency. A recovery will take time, but not only for us, for the world as well.
Obama has not gotten us into an new wars, and has gotten us out of the ones we are in, and cannot win. That certainly doesn't increase the debt, and gives us an opportunity to reduce it.
Anyone who thinks this economic crisis could have been over in 4 years either has some deficiency in understanding, or is deliberately misleading people about the reality of the severity of our economic collapse, which effected the world.
A President who is interested in the "general Welfare" of all the people is adhering to the Constitution. He doesn't exclude 47% of the People.
Obama has earned my vote! I have given it to him early.
I applaud the other posters here who have shared their very appropriate insights on why Obama is the only real choice for President. They have seen clearly the light of truth.
The US is by, for and of the People, all of the People. It is not an exclusive club of only the privileged or privileged wannabe's.
Most readers know of Obama's poor economic record.
Poll after poll these last four years showed Americans are concerned most about jobs, the economy and debt/deficit spending and Obama hasn't eased American's concerns.
But.....
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.
I cannot believe my ears, but it is true...
I just heard a clip from one of Romney's campaign stops with him saying "we have had enough of trickle down economics."
This is just too much! His plan is trickle down!
Obama hasn't erased what people don't understand, and because they don't understand, their expectations are unrealistic.
They are vulnerable to manipulation by Romney and those who, knowing better, try to add their own efforts at manipulation.
That is immoral.
RefNV,
"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"
Good example of false information for use in manipulating voters.
"We don't need more teachers"
-Mitt Romney 6/8/12
"The effort to reduce classroom size may actually hurt education more than it helps"
-Mitt Romney 2012
"When Romney was Governor...students and educators struggled under his leadership"
- Donnie McGee, Community College College professor in Massachusetts
"I love teachers"
-Mitt Romney, 10/22/12
"I will unite the Country"
-Mitt Romney, 2012
"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."
Yada yada yada!
Corporate profits under Obama:
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/10...
The Boston Herald's endorsement this week put it well:
'What this nation got in Barack Obama was a president who used an economic crisis to further his redistributionist agenda -- and, not surprisingly, failed miserably at restoring American prosperity. Oh, he brought change all right -- to a government-knows-best philosophy that has given us four years of high unemployment, higher gas prices, a $16 trillion deficit, and a job-killing regulatory environment.
And this nation that was once a shining beacon to those around the globe who love liberty, who knew that these United States could be counted on to defend its friends and keep a watchful eye on its enemies, has been relegated by this president to "leading from behind."
The simple fact is that this nation can't afford four more years of Barack Obama, four more years of his divisive class warfare rhetoric, four more years of his Chicago-style eco-cronyism and four more years of an administration that will lie and obfuscate -- even about the death of a U.S. ambassador -- to save its sorry hide.'
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/opinion...
In response to Peacelily's post on Oct 27th at 1:31am.
Peacelily, you finally admitted you favor socialism this week. But you lost credibility with me with your extreme idea to split the United States into 3 or 4 countries. You wrote
"I would like to split the country into 3-4 sovereign nations based on the political philosophy the people hold to. One for Republicans, one for Democrats, one for Libertarians, and one for Greens........If any of those countries want to be capitalists, fine. If any want to be democratic socialists, fine".
Your divide the country idea reveals that democratic liberals either can't or wont compromise with other political views.
Peggy Noonan put Obama's inability to compromise with Republicans well in her article linked below titled "When Americans Saw the Real Obama". Here is an excerpt:
'He misread his Republican opponents from day one. If he had been large-spirited and conciliatory he would have effectively undercut them, and kept them from uniting. (If he'd been large-spirited with Mr. Romney, he would have undercut him, too.) Instead he was toughly partisan, he shut them out, and positions hardened. In time Republicans came to think he doesn't really listen, doesn't really hear. So did some Democrats. Business leaders and mighty CEOs felt patronized: After inviting them to meet with him, the president read from a teleprompter and included the press. They felt like "window dressing." One spoke of Obama's surface polish and essential remoteness. In negotiation he did not cajole, seduce, muscle or win sympathy. He instructed. He claimed deep understanding of his adversaries and their motives but was often incorrect. He told staffers that John Boehner, one of 11 children of a small-town bar owner, was a "country club Republican." He was often patronizing, which in the old and accomplished is irritating but in the young and inexperienced is infuriating. "Boehner said he hated going down to the White House to listen to what amounted to presidential lectures," Mr. Woodward writes.
Mr. Obama's was a White House that had--and showed--no respect for trying to negotiate with other Republicans. Through it all he was confident--"Eric, don't call my bluff"--because he believed, as did his staff, that his talents would save the day.
They saved nothing. Washington became immobilized.'
Much like you, Obama does not have the skills to compromise so he seeks to divide us which is a large reason why we can't get pro-growth policies to speed our economic recovery.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424...
@RefNV,
"Poll after poll these last four years showed Americans are concerned most about jobs, the economy and debt/deficit spending and Obama hasn't eased American's concerns." (ReFreeman)
Making a cake without milk and eggs, again. Why not provide the entire picture of why we have the conclusions you posted?
Oh well. Again, not an attack, just an observation.
President Obama wins re-election by 6 to 8 points.
Longtimevegan,
Thanks for repeating my point that "Poll after poll these last four years showed Americans are concerned most about jobs, the economy and debt/deficit spending and Obama hasn't eased American's concerns."
I'll vote for Mr. Obama again while recognizing that we won't receive fair government again until we once again strip media ownership from those whose control poses conflict of interest. Past significant political changes have been forced by the weight of large public opinion, media holds opportunity to influence opinion and I recognize our nation's media as impeding our citizens in gathering the amount of opinion needed to force campaign funding reform. 99% of our media failed to carry the message of the members of Congress, The Senate, former Presidential Cabinet members and other noted citizens who've over the past year publicly attempted to inspire us to gather such opinion! Show me a nation that once had fair media, that conscience of nations and sometimes Sheriff, and I'll show you a nation that once had good government!
@RefNV,
Republicans conspired not to work with Obama as he was being inaugurated. What you say about Obama unwilling to work with Republicans is complete nonsense.
If Obama is a socialist doesn't that mean Romney and the Heritage Foundation are as well? It was they who instituted Romneycare which is exactly what Obama based the Affordable Care Act on. As a matter of fact, the same people were involved in both bills.
Hypocrisy, the foundation of far right ideology!
Vernos writes 'Republicans conspired not to work with Obama as he was being inaugurated. What you say about Obama unwilling to work with Republicans is complete nonsense.'
You didn't read Peggy Noonan's article. Here is another excerpt from her article:
'Bob Woodward's "The Price of Politics," published last month. The portrait it contains of Mr. Obama--of a president who is at once over his head, out of his depth and wholly unaware of the fact--hasn't received the attention it deserves. Throughout the book, which is a journalistic history of the president's key economic negotiations with Capitol Hill, Mr. Obama is portrayed as having the appearance and presentation of an academic or intellectual while being strangely clueless in his reading of political situations and dynamics. He is bad at negotiating--in fact doesn't know how. His confidence is consistently greater than his acumen, his arrogance greater than his grasp.'
Face the facts Vernos, Obama lacked negotiating skills.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424...
Peggy Noonan is a cuckoo for cocoa puffs republican who has left the building when it comes to rational thought.
Give it up Freeman, you are a republican hack with ZERO credibility.
RefNV,
I feel so sorry for you.
All,
A little levity:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvbnYxRtE...
Peacelily,
Tell us more about your idea to split the United States into 4 countries.
No duh. Sad little loons at the Sun. Obama could pull out a gun and shoot Las Vegans and you would blame them for getting in the way of the bullets.
RefNV,
I would be happy to expand on what was my sarcastic remark of dividing the US into 4 countries, as I have in the past to your persistent malicious intentions.
The rationale is the terrible political divisions that this campaign has exhibited.
They are so filled with hate and division that it displays an inability for reasonable people to live in peace, in the form of government they would like.
It is becomes one side disenfranchising all others.
If we follow the intent of the Constitution and really were able to live in true "domestic Tranquility", and if we were truly interested in "promoting the general Welfare", we would be better off.
What better way than to give each partisan group a part of the country to make their own?
Everyone could live in the way they believe is best, and which would work the way they wanted. No need to be subjected to the tyranny of one of the other groups.
Who are the groups? Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians and Greens.
It would be a way towards people living in harmony, peace and unity.
While a sarcastic remark, to live in harmony, peace and unity is still a wonderful thought for me.
Your objections give credence to the need for such an option. You seem to have a need to control others. So let the Republican control freaks control each other, and let the rest enjoy their freedom in their own ideologies.
Perhaps with all the increasing division and oppression, it will inspire a true division among the People, permanently into their own sovereign countries, just as occurred in 1776 in an effort for "domestic Tranquility" and to "promote the general Welfare".
To my fellow bloggers,
Something that has not hit the main stream Media is the fact that Democrats have endorsed same sex marriages. This particular issue has far more religious reaching implications other than does the obvious, which was to gather the homosexual life style support and Democratic vote. When the Democrats endorsed the same sex marriage proposition then effectively they "Spit on the Bible." Most if not all religious beliefs believe in the definition of marriage as being "One Man and One Woman." Most of if not all religious beliefs believe that "Homosexuality", is an abomination. Democrats believe that state and church need to be distinct and separated. Well me-bucko, endorsing same sex marriages is not keeping separate, state and church. Sounds a little hypocritical doesn't it? Just an old cop reflecting,
Gordon Martines.............curre.org.......p.s. Consider this; If we encourage the basic principles of the Bible in our Schools, then maybe later we wouldn't have to encourage the basic principles of the Bible in our prisons.