In contrast we have Barack Obama who, after three years in the White House, is
still unable to articulate exactly what his plans for American are.
No question our educational system needs a re-haul, in everything from teacher
competency to our pathetic record in science gradutation, but how does
abandoning a centuries long success model of public education for the
privitization of education help? I fail to see how allowing someone to make a
profit off of teaching my kids, creationism, builds a stronger and smarter
America. I may be fooled by the idea that I can now choose to have my children
taught correct christian principles in school..but it's a bad, bad, choice
for the nation.
So far, kitsch conservatism is what Romney's had to offer. On education,
another voucher program, the Republican solution to everything. An excuse to
destroy what's left of our struggling public education system which has
become a soft target for conservatives.An assault on religion, he
calls the HHS mandate on contraception. A war on job creation, he accuses Obama
of at a time of high unemployment. Really? Does Romney think voters are are
stupid enough to buy that?Obama wants this election to be a
referendum on free enterprise, Romney claims. Tell that to Warren Buffett.
He'll be shocked.I can't take seriously anything Romney is
saying. He blurts out the first thing that pops into his head and hopes that it
Privatize, privatize, privatize, oh and give more money to a military that
already spends more than the top 20 other countries combined spend on their
militaries.Good grief, how many bomb do we need?
Vision? Political pandering more like it. Typical of a former moderate, son of
a Republican liberal, trying to maintain his bona fides with the Tea Party wing
of the Party.Romney's vision is restricted to maintaining the
wealth and power of the current rich and powerful patrons of the Republican
Party. Since "corporations are people", according to Romney best in
need of government attention are the "people" he sees as his people. If
anything slips through the net and benefits the people below his select social
class, then Republican will point at those droppings as an example of their
largesse.It must be difficult for a Romney speech writer to find
ways to come of saying things of political import while actually saying nothing.
Politics today has devolved into a pathetic game of money to pursuade people
that their interests not really, but rather a diversion from the
"interests" of greatest importance (i.e. corporations and the
moneyed-people who game the system under the eye of Republican (and, yes,
Democratic) legislators.So, we continue to hear this
"vision" nonsense from both sides backed by unbelievaable sums of Super
PAC money to maintain the divisions and ignore real issues.
"give more money to a military that already spends more than the top 20
other countries combined spend on their militaries."If you look
at military spending as a percent of GDP or per capita, the U.S.'s spending
isn't obscenely high (this is even including what we're spending in
Iraq, Afghanistan, and other places in the world); there are a number of
countries that spend more relative to their GDPs than the U.S. does.But what happens if the U.S. stops spending less on its military? Are the
other nations going to spend more to pick up the slack? Will other nations do
their part and help out more in Afghanistan or other nations? Not likely. Most
of the other countries in the world rely on the U.S.'s military spending,
like it or not.For the record, I'm in favor of streamlining our
military and reducing military spending (by maybe 15%-20%) but there are many
issues that need to be considered before cutting back on military spending.Privatization works very well for most things. Anyone have an example of
where privatization of a government program failed?
His vision, getting past all of his flip flopping campaign rhetoric.Further erosion of constiutional rights.Increased police state
surveilance.More pointless foreign wars without a clear obejctive
other than to gain control over natural rescources and police the world.
Fighting to preserve our freedoms is pure propoganda. No repeal of
obamacare. Obama basically gets 2nd term regardless if he wins the
election or not because their policies are exactly the same.
Two words for Jared: Halli-burton.
Mark B,Great point. The Government would have spent less using U.S.
troops for security in Iraq than hiring Blackwater. The contract paid to
Blackwater's senior manager in Iraq was more than double the salary paid to
General Petraeus at the time. Privatizing doesn't mean that taxpayers
aren't still footing the bill or being saved money.
I often cannot believe the number of people that follow Obama rhetoric blindly
with no critical thinking or research of the facts on their own. If you want to
know why the country is on the path it is on, you can at the results of
different ideologies and their effect on a smaller scale in the individual
states. If you look at the states with the worst economies, most unionized
workfoces, the highest unemployment rates, the highest entitlement spending per
person, and highest debts, it is states that are left leaning. California, New
York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Wisconsin, New Jersey and others are consistently
at the top of the lists, while other more conservative states are at the other
end. What Obama wants is what many of these states have done to themselves for
the entire nation and then some. The man is not a leader but a pawn in the
ideology of the left, which has never shown positive results when implemented,
as these "lefty" states as well as European nations have well proven.
Mark and Craig,And the government getting involved at a higher level
has proven to be so successful! GM, Solyndra, have cost us billions because the
government did not let private enterprise determine the market demand.
Halliburton have been given a contract that did not go through the process of
giving competitors a equal shot, but the money wasn't completely wasted as
you see when government is fully involved. Name one thing that the government
runs or that is highly involved with that isn't a problem. All the
entitlement programs, education, post office, Amtrak, Solyndra(amongst others).
Just tell me how is that Chevy Volt doing? Exactly!!!
Too bad what we need at this point in our nation's history is a bit of
fiscal responsibility, and replacing entitlements with defense spending is
hardly cutting the fat.Romney, too bad you lack the gall to make
plans of serious cuts to our government and get us back on track with fiscal
responsibility. I hope you prove me wrong.
Thank you for the daily dose of Mitt love. With hard hitting artilces like this
there he will win Utah for sure.
minimite, Thanks for reading another Romney article on the DN and your daily
dose of Mitt hatred.Though I doubt you complain to the other online papers
who constantly bash Romney.Guess it's ok if it goes the other way
hmmm.And he will win Utah for sure, along with most of the other
states...if you're able to read the recent polls.Or in the case of
Obama, who's counting on winning most of the 57 states.
jbp,"....The man [Obama] is not a leader but a pawn in the
ideology of the left...."For such an iconic “pawn of the
left,” the President has incurred a lot of ire from his party’s left
wing for making too many concessions to Republicans with so little to show for
it in return. An old lefty like myself knows that the Dems aren’t perfect
but it’s today's GOP that is far and away the more ideological and
@craigYour response is predictable and typical of the left. Always
making statements with nothing to back it up or subjective information peddled
as fact. What has Obama truly compromised on? The fact that there is such a
divide between the parties is due to his inability to lead, he is tied to
tightly to his ideology rather than meaningful discussion that will create the
best solutions. Obama claims that can go in a meet with our enemies and somehow
change their motives, and he campaigns on this strategy preventin or ending
wars. Yet, he cannot even do that within the borders of his own country by
bringing together the two parties for meaningful discussion that will create
results. Instead, he speaks nothing but I'll will toward the other side,
this because of his unwillingness to bend his own ideologies and in doing
creates a divisive environment. Republicans say no because of all the far left
policies and he is pushing for without regard for other or the possibility that
a better solution may exist. A real leader would find a way to bring sides
together. The fact he can't or won't shows his inability to lead!
@jpb"...A real leader would find a way to bring sides together.
The fact he can't or won't shows his inability to lead!...".Leadership?Romney said today he only needs 50.1% of the
vote.The other 49.9% can eat..."7-11 cookies"?Romney is not interested in bringing anyone together.Romney is
only interested in getting elected.Period.
Mad Hatter,You're right. We should eliminate or regulate
wealth. I live a few miles from the Mexican border and see people begging on the
streets, because there are no wealthy people supplying employment. It's
those rotten wealthy Americans who give money and bring business to the little
shops on the streets.Shame on Romney for promoting wealth.
So JPB, what is it that Romney is going to do? More of Bush polices that got us
here, yep that's leadership, turn the cannons on the deck and give the
orders to fire as he steps into his life raft.jpb said: Republicans
say no because of all the far left policies and he is pushing for without regard
for other or the possibility that a better solution may exist.Nope
wrong again, they say No because they were told to by Mitch, remember, the
republicans #1 job "make Obama a 1 term President, that sounds like the
Right pushing their agenda without regard or the possibility that a better
solution may exist. A real leader doesn't set an agenda to remove someone
from office just because they are part of the other party.Mitt only
attacks, no solutions, just like his party of NO.Unless we're talking
Military then it's yes, would you like some more!
@there you go againThere you guys go again!! Accusations with no
facts to back them up, the go to liberal strategy. Yes it is true that all he
needs is 50.1% to win, a statistical fact. How do you extrapolate that he
doesn't care about the other 49.9% out of that. When I play basketball,
all I need to do is out score the other team by one point. That does not mean I
want to hurt the other team or that I dislike them. When the game is over, win
or lose I congratulate the other team for a good game and move on. Why
don't you lefties defend Obama with facts instead of making unfounded
accusations about the other guy. Oh, and by the way. Do you think Romney would
have made himself as wealthy as he is without leadership ability. I think not!!
Will someone please explain how Obama polices have improved the economy? What
are his polices, and budget projections. Beside golfing and vacationing,-what
has he done?When it comes to visions of America. Let's see
both Obamas and Romneys for comparison. Let's examine the work record of
Yes, Mitt, there's always money for war. (Tony Benn to Michael Moore)