Romney's night, or was it "the chair's" night?

While many people were saying that Mitt Romney had a very higher bar to go over in his speech, but I disagree. Mitt needed to make himself less robotic and more human, and how could he go wrong talking about his parents. And yes, he did seem genuine, human, and caring when talking about their marriage. But did anyone else notice that while Mitt was talking about his mother and the need for women to make decisions, he was talking to a group that included many politicians that are trying to take choices away from women? And his own pick for vice-president was one of those carrying that banner. And Mitt, I'm glad that you were hoping that President Obama succeeded, but did you notice that every GOP legislator in Washington was doing everything in their power to deny passage of anything the president requested, including GOP ideas, for the last 2 years. You know Mitt, I also remember 4 years ago, and this was when the financial disaster was starting, and the economy started losing 800,000 jobs a month. So Mitt, the country is better off than it was 4 years ago. And do you really think that the country wants to go and attack more countries? Don't you think that it's possible that most of the country is ready to take and cut the excesses in the defense department and use them here in this country? Oh, that's right, I've seen your request for more defense spending. No, I guess you really don't think.
And finally, to Clint Eastwood. You and your bit with the chair just proved what my late grandmother use to say: Say nothing and people might think you're an idiot. Open up your month, and you'll prove them correct. And I said it after Tuesday night, but was this really planned, and was it a well thought out convention? If so, it explains why the Ryan budget that is being so tauted as needed for our children won't balance the budget until 2040.

Thoughts on GOP's Wednesday night

In thinking about Wednesday night's speeches, I do have to give it to all the speakers, and especially Paul Ryan. You do give great speeches, and as long as the truth doesn't matter, then I have to give you an A. And at least for one night, the speeches got better and more heartfelt as the night went along . But if facts are added in, I give Rice a B-, Huckabee a C-, and Ryan a D+.
First, do you Huckabee or any GOP member know that no woman will be forced to have an abortion? Not one. It's called choice, and I know you don't want to give a woman or a couple a choice, unless you live in a country that has religious rules as laws, then all people should be able to have choices. You don't like countries that have religious laws, do you? Oh that's right, Islamic law is wrong, but I guess Christian laws are okay to rule a country. And no, Churches won't have to give out birth control pills. But any business or university, whether it is run by lay people or a church, must give the same amount of basic health care as any other business. Yes, I know it's called nuance, and yes, I know you don't get it, GOP.
Now, Ms. Rice, I agree with the GOP person on MSNBC, Steve Schmidt I think his name is, that thinks the California GOP delegates must be looking at you and wondering how to get you on the ticket. But I think the Democrats must be wondering the same thing. Because the America you are looking for can't be found in most of the states that are being run by the GOP now. You talked about how anyone, man or woman, white. black, Latino, or Asian can dream to be and can become anything they put their mind to, including president, but almost 1/5 of the delegates there don't believe the first black president's birth certificate. You talked about growing up in a country where you were unable to get a hamburger at a white-only business, but almost 1/2 of the states under GOP control are trying to limit voting, disenfranchising millions of young people and older black Americans. Your speech would have been great in 1988, or 1992, or even 2000, but in today's GOP, it seemed completely out-of-step with the direction of the party.
Finally, Mr. Ryan, have you ever met a fact you liked? Or maybe met a fact you agreed with? You do remember that it was you that walked out of the "Grand Compromise" a few years ago and ensured its doom, right? You do know that the GM plant that you talked about in Wisconsin closing under president Obama, Chevy announced the closing in December of 2008, right? So while the plant may have actually closed while the current president is in office, the actual closing was announced before he took office. Now, are you saying that government should have taken a bigger hand in what GM did to restructure? Do you think that we need more government, and not less? Also, you do know that your entire Medicare argument  is a lie, right? Where the president is cutting money from future payments to hospitals and insurance companies and closing the prescription-drug donut hole, your plan takes the money from payments to seniors, ensuring seniors will have to add their own money to keep their current health care. And finally, you do know that while you say you and Mitt Romney will make the tough decisions and be honest to the American people, but your budget won't balance until 2040? Have you told the American people this? Of course not, and you won't until after the election. This is the straight-talking new face of the GOP? That's why I give you the lowest grade, Mr. Ryan.          

Was Tuesday night planned?

I was quite surprised to see the reaction of Tuesday night's speeches. I didn't watch the speeches, as I'm sure I know approximately what each person is going to say. And no, I didn't watch them because I don't care what they have to say. I won't watch the Democrats and their convention next week either. No, I'm sure that Ann Romney spoke very well and spoke glowingly about her husband ( It would be front page news if she didn't. No spouse has ever spoke about the bad time). You weren't expecting to hear about any times they may have fought, did you? And I'm sure that all the other speakers, from Walker and Christie to Mitt Romney himself will say how bad the President is doing in his job and how much better things will be under a GOP nomination. And I'm sure that next week, the Democrats will just reverse things. But while not much will surprise me, every day will bring small but important surprises. Tuesday's surprise was simply in the lack of planning by the GOP, and the reaction to it. So it was planned that after Ann Romney talked and Mitt came on stage, there'd be another speech? Yes, the tone of the 2 speeches couldn't be any different, but shouldn't the last thing of the night be Mitt's arrival? Now, as far as Christie's speech, was any of his words known to the Romney camp, or even his general overview? Gov. Christie, who presides over a state where the unemployment rate is almost 1.5% higher than the national average, spoke of respect over love after Ann spoke of love. Christie talked about how Mitt Romney would tell America the hard truth. Really? So, what departments would a Romney eliminate from the cabinet, as he has said he would get rid of 3 or 4? What plan does Romney have to be energy independent in 2020? Get the idea? Romney has given the American people no specifics about what he'd do because he knows when he does, it won't add up.
So, was Tuesday night at the GOP convention really planned? If so, is this the type of planning we can expect if Romney is elected? And if not, can we expect better planning if Romney's elected?           

Dome shows GOP doesn't care about the country

How can the GOP say they care about the country when they won't even authorize money to repair one of our finest, iconic structural landmarks? The Capital Dome is in need of repair, but GOP controlled House won't pass appropriations to fix it. How much to fix the exterior of the Capital Dome? $61 million, and while this may seem like a lot of money, it is less than .009% than what the House authorized for the Defense Department last year. No not a tenth of a percent, but less than a hundredth of a percent of the DOD budget. Is that 1 new jet for the Air Force or 2? Or is it just a part of one? I don't even want to guess if it would be the same as the cost of 1 smart bomb, but my guess is that the cost of the Dome can't be more than a couple of bombs. But yet the GOP House won't take money from DOD to repair an iconic symbol of our country? Are defense contractors really more important than the country to you, GOP? You don't have to answer that, I already know the answer. But tell me again why I should vote for anyone in a party that doesn't care about the country?
  

Can Romney go any farther right- or negative?

Just when some thought that Mitt Romney was trying to be a little moderate in his dealing with women in his admonishment of Todd Akin and his stance on rape exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother, he decided to go even farther right in a speech today. While talking in Michigan, he mentioned that both he and his wife Ann were both born in Michigan, and then added that "nobody had asked to look at my birth certificate" This wasn't code for anything, but an out and out seal of approval to the birthers in the GOP. And the crowd roared their approval, knowing exactly what Romney was talking about.
Now later, a spokesperson for Romney stated that Romney has never questioned where the President was an American. If that wasn't questioning it, it was an out and out statement that the President really isn't an American. Hey Mitt, with that, you can't go any farther right, or negative, or wrong. But I'm sure you'll try sometime in the very near future, and many more times before the election.  

What an old TV clip can show

I was taken aback by the old report that was shown on the Daily Rundown on MSNBC this morning. And no, it wasn't the fact that while showing Romney sign the Massachusetts Affordable Care Act he was actually  proud of what he did, or how monumental it was at the time. It was the fact that both the GOP and Democrats were happy with a piece of legislation and were talking with each other, and not yelling at each other. That doesn't happen much anymore. Well, that and the fact that he talked about Global Warming as if it was a scientific fact. After all, who'd make the basis of a joke about Romney and Kennedy agreeing on a hoax or a lie. Yes, a lot had changed in these few years, and almost all of it has been Romney himself.

Businesses ask the wrong question

In the Business Section of the Kansas City Star, a question was asked recently: Is Entitlement Spending squeezing out Federal Investments? And I must say, I was surprised that most of the letters replying didn't just agree, but the answers were varied and well thought out, bringing up many other factors. So, I think the question, one the business side of the GOP asks all the time, is very limiting and completely the wrong question to ask. My question would be: Do you want to increase federal investments, and if so, should entitlements and/or defense be curtailed, should taxes be raised, or a combination of all the above?
Yes, it is a much more involved question, but one that takes the entire budget (other than interest on the debt) into account. Why does the business section think that people wouldn't accept a tax hike on anyone or any business? Federal Income Taxes on the richest Americans are lowest they've been in years, possibly since the advent of the Federal Income Tax. And under the Romney tax plan, they'd be even lower (under the Ryan House budget, they'd be even lower). And why is the Defense Budget off limits? It is almost 50% more now than at the end of the Cold War. Right now, the United States defense budget is almost 41% of the world's defense budget. Russia and China together spend just 30% of what the United States spends on defense. And if you think that we'd be alone if attacked, the next 3 counties in defense spending is the United Kingdom, France, and Japan. Not enemies in any way, and their spending together is almost 80% of what Russia and China spend together. Why are we spending so much? I don't know, but under either the Romney or the House Ryan plan, defense spending increases.
So, ask your narrow question, businesses. But don't be surprised if, by not seeing other options, we think you're part of the problem.      

Akin is a bad spokesperson, not an outlier

While many people are calling for Todd Akin to resign, I would prefer he didn't. Not because I want to see him get trounced, although I do, but because in the GOP of this day and age, he's not an outlier, but one of millions who inhabit the GOP now. And I'm sure most of the people who will vote for the GOP this year don't know this. No, not their local Representative. I'm sure they know their beliefs. But I talking about everyone on the GOP ticket this year. Think this is harsh? Well think again.
Under this group of GOP leaders, they have tried to pass a bill that would say that life begins at the moment of conception, the Personhood Amendment. This would make illegal not only any abortion, but a miscarriage (If it's a life at conception, then it's a form of killing anytime afterwards), some birth controls used by women, and several forms out-of-body fertilization. Think this is extreme? Well, the sponsor of the bill was Paul Ryan, the GOP Vice-Presidential candidate. So yes, taking away a woman's medical decisions is a plank of the mainstream GOP.
Think this is just an unusually dumb and stupid man running for the Senate, a first-time fringe candidate? No, he is already a member of Congress, a Representative from Missouri. And think his views have been totally renounced? No, Tony Perkins, the president of the Family Research Center and the leader of the social right of the GOP, has said that Rep. Akin was correct and is saying he shouldn't step down or resign.
So why are so many GOPers asking him to step down and let someone elser run for the Senate in Missouri, because they disagree with him or they know almost all Americans find his view repulsive and all those who agree unworthy of holding office? Well, I have my thoughts, but I'll let you make up your own mind. Think he just mis-spoke, GOPers? Well, I'll say the same thing to you that you said about Biden's "chains" comment: A politician's gaffe is that person saying what they belief is really the truth.

Where's your leaders, GOP?

The latest singer to sing a song against the President is Hank Williams Jr., who says that the President is a Muslim and a Kenyan. This is after the lead singer for Megadeth stated that the President had staged the recent shootings in Colorado and the Sikh mosque. So where is the condemnation from the leaders of the GOP? Is it that they they are just entertainers? Now imagine that a Hollywood actor said that the GOP legislators that had enacted laws that stifled votes and took away women's rights were this century's version of the KKK. That just like them, these legislators wanted to put certain people in their place, take away their rights, and enforce their religious views through legislation and intimidation. Then when asked, President Obama, or Vice-President Biden, or Senator Reid, or Representative Pelosi said that while they disagreed with the actor's feelings, it wasn't their place to correct him or her. Think Fox News and all the radio pundits like Rush wouldn't rip them apart? Think it wouldn't lead most of the newscasts on all the stations? So where are the GOP leaders on this? Oh, that's right, they won't even admonish their own people in Congress like Rep. Bachmann and West who spout such lies. And to top it off, the actor would be telling more of the truth than the right-wing singers.      

Would you hire this person?

Imagine you ran a company and wanted to hire a new person to run the shipping department. When you interview this person, he agrees that his last job was as the head of a shipping department at a smaller company, but he wouldn't do anything like he did at that job. When asked for details, he says it doesn't matter, and refuses to answer. When asked what changes he'd make in his job with you, he says he'd slash the budget. When asked how, he states that he won't tell you until he's hired. Would you hire this person? Of course you wouldn't. But isn't this identical to Romney running for President? His last job was as Governor, but he won't do anything like he did there. He wants to slash the federal budget, but refuses to say exactly what programs he'd cut back on, and which ones he'd eliminate, saying he'll discuss this with Congress after he's elected. So, why would you hire him to run the country?

GOP balances the budget by when?

Paul Ryan has stated that under the Romney budget, expenditures would drop to 20% of GDP by 2016. When asked when the budget would be balanced, the leading GOP budget wonk said he hadn't looked into it that close. Really? While most people haven't read the Romney budget, and when asked he refuses to give details, a non-partisan think tank has run the numbers and found that the budget would be balanced in the year: 2040. What? So Romney, who wants to increase the budget for the Defense Department but decrease all other departmental budgets, would lower taxes so far that children under the age of 10 wouldn't see a balanced budget until their kids started high school? Is this the fairness that the GOP touts for our kids and grand kids when complaining about the current debt? Yes, to them it is.

GOP asks the question, but do they want the REAL answer?

While on MSNBC this morning, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus said that voters in November should ask themselves if they are better off now than they were 3 or 4 years ago. Chairman, are you sure you want voters to ask that question? Four years ago, the economy was losing almost 800,00 jobs a month, and the financial system was close to ruin. Even three years ago, although the economy was starting to pick up steam, unemployment was over 10%, almost 2 points higher than it is now. So yes, things aren't great in the country right now. But do you really want voters to ask if things are better now than they were back 3 or 4 years ago? And if you do, are you ready for the REAL answer?

What does the Ryan pick say about Romney?

I took time off during the Olympics to watch outstanding athletes from all over the globe, just as Romney seemed to do (How else do you explain his foreign affairs trip where he made the British mad, irritated moderate Israelis and all Palestinians, and had  a spokesman upset several reporters). But in naming Paul Ryan as his running mate, Mitt Romney re-revved his candidacy for President, exciting the right wing in the GOP almost as much as his pick excites the Democrats. But what does the pick say about Mitt Romney? In my view, it can actually mean one of two things. One is that Romney agrees with Ryan on most of the important points, and really believes in what the Tea Party and the religious conservative branches of the GOP (Are there any other branches, anymore?. That's a question for another column) If this is true, independent voters can forget about his time governor, which Romney through his actions and his speeches it looks like he has actually done already. And this should be a true warning to all Independent voters of where he'd take the country if elected. But the second possible reason is that Romney, after many gaffes and missteps in his campaign, needed to shore up the far right, which was getting nervous about several recent things said by his spokespeople. And if that is the reason, then all Americans should worry that Romney feels the need pander and cave to the Tea Party on such an important decision. If Romney will cave on this, what wouldn't he give the Tea Party, and others, after the election? Yes, that would be the worse of two reasons. But neither reason shows that Romney will be a moderate or compromises. That may be great for the Tea Party, but it's horrible for the country.