Supporters might claim that Mitt Romney’s two books should also be considered:
The first:
Turnaround: Crisis, Leadership, and the Olympic Games.
The second:
No Apology: The Case for American Greatness.
The second has been revised with new material and a new title:
No Apology: Believe in America.
So…what about these two books, neither of which I’ve read by the way?
The first seems too limited in scope and (this is the deal killer for me) was published by that fascist press, Regnery Publishing. As for the second, I suppose I’ll get around to at least skimming it, though in all honesty, I find it hard to read about why the United States shouldn’t apologize – at all. Remember: The title is “No apology,” not “The good outweighs the bad” or “Obama apologizes too much.”
As for “The Case for American Greatness” (aka, American Exceptionalism), haven’t we ridden that pony long enough now? For the record, I don’t believe in American Exceptionalism, since that’s been used as a cloak for a lot of very bad behavior on our part. Continually harping on how great we are makes us numb to our faults, which is why I suppose Romney saw fit to claim we shouldn’t apologize – at all.
On to Romney’s Website
For all material from the links cited below, I will insert my own indented comments.
QUOTE:
But I have never seen an enterprise as large, as poorly led, and as badly in need of a turnaround as our federal government.
The USA is not an enterprise nor is its government. Yes, it is “poorly led;” yes, it’s “badly in need of a turnaround.” But Romney doesn’t even broach the single-biggest reason for our dysfunctional government – party politics. My own campaign is based on creating an electoral environment which sends only independents to Congress, doing completely away with the political party system.
Romney can’t broach this subject simply because he’s very much a product of our long-standing, power-center based adversarial system.
[I now skip some material, arriving at this point.]
There are three ways to reduce spending, which combined, will achieve a fiscal turnaround of this size.
First, eliminate every government program that is not absolutely essential. There are many things government does that we may like but that we do not need.
Define “we,” White Man.
The test should be this: “Is this program so critical that it is worth borrowing money to pay for it?” The federal government should stop doing things we don’t need or can’t afford. For example:
· Repeal Obamacare, which would save $95 billion in 2016.
Oh, that. I’m sure this is one of the first bills Romney will try to push. However, I doubt that same bill will contain provisions that will reform our national health care system. Romney will probably defer, saying something like, “We’ll deal with specific reforms later, after I’ve consulted with experts to obtain proposals. The important thing for now is to kill ObamaCare.”
One proposal that will not be included in any later Romney bill: The proposal to include the insurance industry under the same anti-trust regulatory coverage mandated of all other big businesses.
· Eliminate subsidies for the unprofitable Amtrak, saving $1.6 billion a year.
I’m surprised Romney picks on a rather small target for saving, whereas he could proclaim, “I will not sign any bill into law containing pork barrel provisions benefiting only the constituencies of individual lawmakers.” Oh, wait…that might get Congress riled up against him.
· Enact deep reductions in the subsidies for the National Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the Legal Services Corporation.
Ah, excellent… and true to form for the aspiring President of the one-tenth of 1%. Go ahead, throw the arts under the bus when times are tough. And, better yet, scuttle the LSC which, according to Wikipedia:
QUOTE: The Legal Services Corporation (LSC) is a private, non-profit corporation established by the United States Congress. It seeks to ensure equal access to justice under the law for all Americans by providing civil legal assistance to those who otherwise would be unable to afford it. The LSC was created in 1974 with bipartisan congressional sponsorship and the support of the Nixon administration, and is funded through the congressional appropriations process. :UNQUOTE.
Heaven forbid we have equal access to the judicial system for those who can’t afford it!
· Eliminate Title X family planning programs benefitting abortion groups like Planned Parenthood.
By calling PP an “abortion group,” Romney is wielding the knife a bit clumsily and inaccurately – much in the manner of a true back-alley abortionist! The contraceptive services offered by PP, if cut, would add social welfare costs to our budget after the birth rate goes up. That is, unless Romney would prefer not to deal with social welfare and let our quality of life deteriorate for everybody. Yes, “for everybody,” for when the poor are not a budget factor, their plight sooner or later affects all of us.
· End foreign aid to countries that oppose America’s interests.
And which countries might those be, Mr. Romney? What criterion would you impose? Or will you mention that only after you get elected?
:UNQUOTE.
This paragraph is from my next source: http://www.mittromney.com/issues/afghanistan-pakistan
QUOTE:
Mitt Romney will never make national-security decisions based upon electoral politics.
Why doesn’t Romney come right out and say Obama’s guilty of treason by having made decisions that place our national security at risk based on political considerations? Romney wants the benefit of insinuating treason without having to come right out and say it.
Oh, that tired old promise. Even Obama said he’d consult with the commanders in the field. When Obama said it then and when Romney says it now, the intention is the same – to stroke our military establishment’s ego.
And suppose the resulting assessment informs Romney that that point can never be reached? Or that “the level required” for the time required would break the bank?
And what if those commanders tell Romney that our continued presence, especially in support of the corrupt Karzai regime, will do more permanent harm than good? What if our best intelligence assessment concludes that a return of the Taliban, or of some other Islamist group, to power would actually enhance US security – especially if we offered to work with that regime?
This paragraph is from my next source: http://www.mittromney.com/issues/china-east-asia
QUOTE:Our objective is not to build an anti-China coalition.
Okay, keep this first sentence in mind as you read the rest. Then you’ll easily see that it is precisely our objective (denials to the contrary) to “build an anti-China coalition.” In the old days, we used to call that “Containment.” In this case, Romney’s not even a very good liar.
:UNQUOTE.
This is from my next source:
[NOTE: This time, I comment first – Steve.] If you click on this link, you’ll see these words, at the top of the page: “An American Century: A Strategy to Secure America’s Enduring Interests and Ideals.” Immediately beneath is an intimate photo of Romney among a group of about 40 young military officers, shaking hands with one while others applaud. Before I continue, I will repeat my dislike of candidates and elected officials alike using our military as props for photo ops. Have they no shame?
As for the term highlighted above – An American Century – some of you might remember the infamous Project for the New American Century. The think tank of that name lasted from 1997 to 2006, but was heavily influential concerning GOP plans for US world domination. Romney is obviously pandering to those who still long for empire. [What? You think with Cheney out of office those schemes died?]
If you scroll down from the photo mentioned above, you’ll have these choices to click on for more information:
QUOTE:
To learn more about Mitt’s plan, select an issue below:
Afghanistan & Pakistan…An American Century.
Iran… An American Century.
National Defense…An American Century.
Israel … An American Century.
China & East Asia…An American Century.
Russia…An American Century.
Middle East …An American Century.
Latin America…An American Century.
:UNQUOTE.
I inserted ellipsis marks above to indicate images I’m unable to reproduce here – such as silhouettes of countries. In all fairness, though, Romney’s page doesn’t highlight (as I did above) the words “An American Century.” But he might just as well have, you know, just to be sure that the slower among us “get it.”
And now we have this paragraph: http://www.mittromney.com/issues/iran
QUOTE:
Mitt Romney believes that it is unacceptable for Iran to possess a nuclear weapon.
Mitt Romney is entitled to his personal opinion. However, according to Article X of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, any nation providing 90 days written notice is free to withdraw from that Treaty and pursue its own nuclear weapons building program. In spite of Mr. Romney’s personal opinion.
Should Iran achieve its nuclear objective, the entire geostrategic landscape of the Middle East would tilt in favor of the ayatollahs.
Not really, especially since Israel already has the bomb. Not to mention a sophisticated delivery system made possible with the assistance of US advisors.
A nuclear Iran will pose an existential threat to Israel, whose security is a vital U.S. national interest.
Israel’s security is not a vital U.S. interest. I suppose that saying so will keep AIPAC happy but it doesn’t happen to be the truth. I don’t think Romney has any clue about what the word “vital” really means. For if he did, he’d realize that a world without Israel wouldn’t endanger US security – at all.
As Iran’s ballistic missile capacity improves, it will endanger Europe and eventually the continental United States.
What’s the point in saying that? Every nation in the world has the right to develop missile technology, though I suppose the US will indulge its “right” to suspect that all such missile programs could be covers for evil intentions. So far, thank God, we haven’t gotten around to saying to the nations of the world: “Thou shalt not…”
It will provoke an arms race in which the Arab nations themselves forge ahead with nuclear programs of their own.
And why shouldn’t they? For decades during the Cold War, the US and the USSR had no problem with Mutual Assured Destruction as the best way of keeping each other in check. Never mind that an accident or unintended nuclear exchange could threaten the entire world. But that was okay, since we were the civilized ones. We were the good guys who were so on top of things, nobody need ever have worried.
Also, never mind that we’re still on hair trigger alert and still speak of upgrading our nuclear arsenal. More important than world peace is keeping military contractors happy. Welcome to the world of Mitt Romney, which is the same world as Barack Obama’s.
:UNQUOTE.
Some additional thoughts
After reviewing Mitt Romney’s website, I can only conclude that he could have done much better. He’s a wealthy man with time and resources on hand, so he really has no excuse for something this lame. I read in between the lines to figure this much out:
“Vote for me, Mitt Romney, because I’m NOT Barack Obama. As for independents and Democrats who might vote for me, don’t worry about a President Romney caving in to Tea Party pressure. I’ll be more of a centrist than that [wink, wink] because not only do I want to get elected, I’d like to get reelected.”
Romney also talks about the importance of growth but I think the real issue is assuring sustainability. When Romney the businessman enriched one company, that had to mean other companies lost business or at least that the health of the competing companies was not at all a concern of his. As President, though, Romney would have to concern himself with the health of the overall matrix (and not just the part within our borders) and not with scheming on how to enrich part of it at the expense of other parts.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party
“Fairly early on, all tyrants and malefactors tip their hand. And it’s not really that hard to see where they’re coming from.”
Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com
No comments:
Post a Comment