Tag: Romney

DEBATE or DE(THE)BAIT

Looking forward to Wednesday’s debate between President Obama and candidate Romney, I began to wonder, can the President lose or can the candidate win?  The only way, I believe that the President can lose is if he takes the bait, and get’s drawn into a lot of tangential hypothetical’s.  You know, the could’ve, would’ve, or should’ve(s).

The common wisdom on the right is that President Obama can not run on his record.  What they are counting on is that the vilification of his accomplishments and his efforts to improve life in these United States has worked, or is working.  I don’t believe that it has, or will.

As more and more of his policies roll out, policies that were, in many cases delayed or watered down by a congress committed to bring him down, the American people are seeing the benefits of Obama’s presidency.  With the Affordable Care Act, Financial Reform, Workplace Equality, the ending of the War in Iraq, the killing of Osama bin-Ladin, the decimation of Al-Qaeda, the fall of Khaddafi, and [of] Mubarak, the drawing down of the War in Afghanistan, the Auto Bailout, and perhaps the most important, The American Recovery Act, without which the country, as we know it, would not have survived, there is much the American people and the President can point to with pride.

When all of this is considered, along with the fact that the Republican leadership, including House Speaker John Boehner, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Senate Minority Leader McConnell,  and the entire Tea Party caucus, have walked lock-step in their attempt to defeat his efforts even at the expense of America’s recovery, these accomplishments seem all the more remarkable.

This is, though, where the potential problems may arise.  The president does not need to oversell his accomplishments, though there may be some temptation to do so.  The risk is to become the “I” candidate.  The president has been careful, over his time in office, to encourage the American people to become more involved, more vocal, and it has worked.  Much of what he has been able to do has come as a consequence of an energetic, involved, citizenry.  If he is baited into defending or overselling what he has done, he risks turning off the support his accomplishments have garnered.

The other trap, would be to be baited into ascribing  motive’s  to the constant stream of misrepresentations, distortions, and outright lies coming from his opponents on the right.  To play the victim.  He should let “them” explain their motives.  The American people see them for what they are (lies).  They also know who is telling them.   These are not just lies “about” him, they are lies “to” the American people.  I believe we (the people) are smart enough to realize that.

Now, I know I haven’t mentioned how it may be possible for candidate Romney to win.  Well that’s the truth.  I mean, “the truth” is the reason that Romney can’t win.  If he tells the truth, the American people see him for who he really is.  If he doesn’t, well, the American people will see him for who he really is.  Either way he can’t win.  This first debate will, rightfully, include discussions about the candidate’s campaign, the republican convention, his ill-timed misstatements about the events in Libya, and definitely about his 47% comments.  I can’t wait to hear his responses.

This is President Obama’s debate to win.  As long as he doesn’t take the “bait.”

WHEN IS A LIE NOT A LIE? WHEN IT’S THE TRUTH!

The “right” is upset, again.  The “right” has been outflanked, again.  The “right” has been out “strategized,” again.  The “right” has been out-maneuvered, again.

What has become painfully obvious is that the Romney campaign, indeed the entire Republican campaign, to unseat the President, is ill-prepared for the task.

At some point the Romney campaign strategists had to know this and other situations would arise to call into question the candidates’ past, his present, and to challenge his vision of the future for the nation, he desires to lead.  They were not ready, it seems, leading one to suspect that they are not ready for the questions and challenges to come.  We’ll see.  In the meantime, they whine.

You’ve got to at some point wonder are they upset at what the Democrat’s did, or are they upset that they did it?

Let’s start with what the Democrat’s did.

At the beginning of the week Priorities Usa, a Democrat leaning super-PAC rolled out an ad titled “Understands.”  The ad features Joe Soptic, a steel worker at a plant named GST Steel, that was purchased and then managed by Bain Capital, beginning in 1993.  The company took on hundreds of millions of dollars in debt while, at the same time paid Bain investors millions in dividends.  The company filed for bankruptcy protection in 2001 and ultimately closed it’s Kansas City, MO plant.  700 employees lost their jobs, their healthcare and portions of their pensions.  (Their pensions were partially protected by the federal government.)  Joe’s wife, Ilyona, was still employed at that time and maintained her healthcare. After later losing her job, and health insurance, Ilyona was diagnosed with cancer.  At that time, neither of the Soptic’s were covered and less than a month after her diagnosis, Ilyona succumbed to her illness.

The Republican’s, from the party to the pundits, were horrified.  The President was accused of accusing Romney of killing Joe’s wife.  Bill Burton’s Priorities Usa PAC was accused of lying.  Joe Soptic was accused of lying.  The President’s campaign was accused of complicity in the accusing of candidate Romney of being complicit in closing of the plant, and it’s subsequent consequences.  From the House to the Senate, from the Romney campaign to the pundits, all were up in arms [that] such an assertion could be made.  But, their assumption about the assertion, misses the mark.  For those who are upset, about the ad, I’ve got a “movie parable” for you.  This is from the movie “Enter The Dragon,” Bruce Lee’s character speaking:

Lee: …..It’s like a finger pointing at the moon.
[Looks at student who is looking at the finger; smacks student again]
Lee: Do not concentrate on the finger or you will miss all of the heavenly glory!
[Student bows; Lee smacks him again]

The right is so busy focusing on Joe Soptic, they are missing the entire point of the argument [that] the ad raises.  Actually there are two arguments raised, successfully.  First, had the “Affordable Care Act” been law at that time, both Joe and his wife would have been able maintain their healthcare after losing their jobs.  (A fact that was pointed out by a Romney spokesperson when she was challenged by a reporter about the ad.)  Second, the ad demonstrates what Bain Capitol did, and, does to workers and their communities.  What Bain does is by no means illegal.  But, let’s be clear, their purpose was/is not to save jobs.  What Bain does [is] try to save companies,  If jobs are saved in the process, good.  If jobs are saved at that job location, well that’s even better.  But that is not their purpose.  Even saving companies is secondary to making profits for their investors.  Now, again I say there’s nothing illegal with what they do, but what they do is germane to the discussion about Romney, because he touts his experiences at Bain as, an example of, his qualifications to be President.  We as citizens “do” get to ask, if the way Bain Capital operates is the way the country will operate, under a Romney presidency?  If so, then, is “that” the country we want?

The ad does not accuse  candidate Romney of anything other than being associated with, indeed the leader of a company that has had a profound effect on this individual’s life, and other’s at GST Steel.  The ad could have and should have gone further.  It should have told about the effect that losing 700 jobs out of a community, can have.  The effects on the dry cleaner, the corner store, and other small entrepreneurial business’ that depended on them to survive.  It should have told about the loss of revenues to the city, the county, even the state due to lost tax dollars.  How those lost revenues affect public safety, teachers, and community services.

Now the right can and will make all manner of nuance based arguments about the ad.  The timeline, the offered buyout from Bain, the fact that Joe’s wife had healthcare (after Joe lost his job), until she didn’t.  But, nothing in the ad is untrue.  Nuance can sometime be a tricky thing, though.  It can sometimes lead to truth and the truth can sometimes be painful.  Just ask, Romney spokesperson, Andrea Saul.

This ad is about a man, and a community, that was hurt by Bain Capital.  And that’s the TRUTH!

Can you imagine the surprise around the right-wing world when this ad was presented.  My guess is that their surprise matched or even exceeded their horror.  This type of attack is not what those, on the left, are known to use.  They’ve dropped their dichotomous passive aggressive nature, or at least the passive part, and have began to pursue answers to questions the right is not accustomed to being asked.  They are being challenged in areas that democrats past have feared to tread.  That’s where the real failure of Romney’s campaign rests.  Areas such as the economy (Congress’ failure, not the President’s), foreign policy (Bush’s wars, not the President’s), and taxes or should we say tax fairness are now off the table for Republicans.  Not that they won’t try, though.

What’s left is personal and personality.  Personality first.  Mitt Romney is no match for President Obama in this regard.  The Presidents “favorable” ratings are much higher than Romney’s, and among independents, the gap between the two is widening.

As for personal, well, there are some who will not vote for President Obama for any reason.  They didn’t before and they won’t now.  One can read into that whatever one choose’s.  We know, though, that it is not because he pulled us back from the brink of depression, that he saved the auto industry (saving more than a million jobs), that he passed financial reform, or the affordable care act.  It’s not because he gave everyone making under $250,000 a year, a tax break.  It’s not because he ended one war and is ending another.  We know it’s not because he killed bin-Laden (and about 20 other terrorist leaders).  We know he’s done these things, and many other’s, with little or no help from the republicans in the legislature.  There is a painful TRUTH in there, as well.

And that’s no lie!

OUTSOURCING vs. OFFSHORING

So the Romney team wants to debate the difference between “outsourcing and offshoring.”  Does it really matter?
 

“A distinction without a difference is a type of argument where one word or phrase is preferred to another, but results in no difference to the argument as a whole.” (Wikipedia)

One can argue the definitions and nuances of the words, but the meanings, in this particular context, are the same. So, also, are the outcomes. American’s are losing jobs and communities are losing revenue as a result of these job losses.

The loss of revenue results in the loss of services available to the communities. These communities are made up of real people.  Family’s.    Family’s that are left to fend for themselves, feed their children, pay their mortgages, plan for theirs, and their children’s, futures.

Without jobs the people are unable to support their local businesses and schools.  Unable to support their police and fire services.  Unable to support one another through their churches and charities.  Without these things the communities, and the people in them, will fail.

The automobile companies found out, the hard way in the early 70’s,that people without jobs do not buy cars. My hope is [that] our american industries, and politicians, don’t have to re-learn that lesson.



Working people pay their own way, pay their “fair share” of taxes, and build their lives and their communities together.


I know that I’ve posted this quote before, but, “Each time history repeats itself, the price goes up.” (Author Unknown)


As frustrating as it is, between now and the election, I will probably have to post it again, and again, and again……!  

OBAMA/BIDEN 2012
FORWARD