Romney on Iran: The Dangerous Non-Policy of the Hollow Man

by Nomad

L

ast night’s third and final debate proved once again that the Republican presidential candidate Romney really has nothing new to offer in terms of foreign policy leadership. And when it comes to Iran, Romney demonstrated last night that he is really a hollow man.

His statements on Iran and how he would deal with this sticky problem are really fascinating, though not in a good way. If you listen to the things he said, they might sound impressive but actually upon a closer inspection, they are filled with peculiarities, political posturing and sparkling fluff.

Sanctions

It is also essential for us to understand what our mission is in Iran, and that is to dissuade Iran from having a nuclear weapon through peaceful and diplomatic means. And crippling sanctions are something I called for five years ago, when I was in Israel, speaking at the Herzliya Conference. I laid out seven steps, crippling sanctions were number one. And they do work. You're seeing it right now in the economy. It's absolutely the right thing to do, to have crippling sanctions. I would have put them in place earlier. But it's good that we have them.

So basically then he would do what the president is already doing. No change of policy but he would be happy to take credit for the results. Begun in the last two years of the Bush administration, the sanctions were expanded and strengthened under the Obama administration, according to the Christian Science Monitor "at a speed that has made current US sanctions policy on Iran the harshest in contemporary history. This leaves a potential new Romney administration with few policy alternatives."

Mitt Romney’s Trickle -Down Government Nonsense

by Nomad

Mitt Romney's use of a new catch-phrase "trickle-down" government deserves a closer look. What does he mean? And why are his ideas about "trickle-down" downright wrong.

Trickle-Down
Maybe you heard it too. At first, I thought I had mis-heard what he had said. 

Near the end of last debate we heard Mitt Romney say:

This is the way we're going to create jobs in this country. It's not by trickle-down government, saying we're going to take more money from people and hire more government workers, raise more taxes, put in place more regulations. Trickle-down government has never worked here, has never worked anywhere.

In case you missed it, “trickle-down government” is a new catch-phrase that Romney has deploying at every possible occasion. Here’s another example in the first debate:

The president has a view very similar to the view he had when he ran four years, that a bigger government, spending more, taxing more, regulating more — if you will, trickle-down government — would work.

In one speech in Colorado, he clearly put pedal to metal and came out chattering like a manic shopping channel salesman:

”I saw the president’s vision as trickle-down government, and I don’t think that’s what America believes in….We have very two different courses for America – trickle-down government or prosperity through freedom. And trickle-down government that the president proposes is one where he will raise taxes on small business….

“We’re going to have a stronger America with more jobs, rising incomes, moderated prices – that’s a very different path than one with trickle-down government…Under trickle-down government, you have the president saying – well, you remember in his last campaign, that under his policies of energy, that prices of energy would necessarily skyrocket…

“The Congressional Budget Office says that by the end of a four-year period, if he were to be re-elected, trickle-down government would lead to a setting where we would have $20 trillion in debt…Trickle-down government will not create the jobs Americans need.Trickle-down government will not bring down the cost of energy. Trickle-down government will not allow incomes to rise…”

Well, the reasons for this rhetorical strategy are clear. By now most intelligent voters have caught on to the fact that the whole trickle- down theory has been pretty thoroughly discredited. Most people have understood that rewarding the super wealthy has not led to an increase in jobs. In fact, much of the money derived from the Bush tax cuts was apparently stowed away in offshore accounts in the Cayman islands or in Swiss banks. If the trickle-down theory actually worked, then we would have seen some sign of its success after ten years. 

So Romney’s idea? Continue with the same policy but re-frame the debate by changing the catch-phrases. Now it’s trickle-down government. 

Musical Sanity Break- Under Pressure

This Musical Sanity Break- UNDER PRESSURE, by David Bowie and Queen- is dedicated to the upcoming debate between Barack Obama, the 44th and current President of the United States and Mitt Romney, Republican candidate and former governor of Massachusetts.

Romney, whose campaign has largely become a series of missteps, is banking his hopes for winning the election on his performance at the debates. It is quite a gamble when you look at all of his gaffes and the possibility that he could fail under the stress is, indeed, high. On the other hand, Obama has repeatedly shown that he is able to maintain his poise when challenged. So it should be interesting.

This 1981 song is one of my favorites, by the way. For a popular song, the lyrics are pretty impressive. 

Why can't we give ourselves just one more chance?

Why can't we give love just one more chance?

'Cause love's such an old fashioned word

And love dares you to care for

The people on the edge of the night

And loves dares you to change our way of

Caring about ourselves

This is our last dance

This is our last dance

This is ourselves... 

under pressure.

The Smirk That May Have Cost Romney the Election

by Nomad

F

or quite some time, political observers have been declaring that Mitt Romney's greatest weakness (outside of the fact that he simply cannot be honest) is his complete detachment, his lack of empathy and his inability to hit the right emotional tone. In the early hours of September 12, Mitt Romney exposed his character flaws for all the world to see.

As embassy staff in Benghazi, Libya were fighting for their lives against a band of armed attackers, Romney was attempting to portray- without any justification whatsoever- that Obama had expressed sympathy for the attackers.

The statement he has used as evidence had actually been written prior to the attack and had come not from the White House but from the Egyptian embassy. That statement had been an attempt to quell protests there.

It stated that the US embassy “condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims…as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions.”

The Romney campaign reaction? Romney stated "that the Obama administration's first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks." 

The following day, Wednesday, while the grim news from Libya- the brutal murder of the ambassador along with four other embassy staff- was stilling filtering in, Romney held a press conference to restate his views. It might have been an opportunity to reconsider his hasty words. Alas, Romney pressed on, with what reporters described as a smirk.  Before the reporters, he said:

"... (T)he administration was wrong to stand by a statement sympathizing with those who had breached our embassy in Egypt, instead of condemning their actions. It's never too early for the United States government to condemn attacks on Americans and to defend our values."

According to a CBS article, when asked what exactly did he had objected to, Romney went on to say:

"Their administration spoke. The president takes responsibility not just for the words that come from his mouth, but also from the words that come from his ambassadors from his administration, from his embassies, from his State Department...They clearly sent mixed messages to the world and the statement that came from the administration and the embassy is the administration. The statement that came from the administration was -- was a statement which is akin to apology and I think was a -- a severe miscalculation."

It soon became apparent that the miscalculation was not the president's, but the candidate's. 
Romney's clear expression of glee was repulsive in light of the national tragedy. Making use of the event to score political points seemed to prove what most people had felt about this candidate. Romney has no sense of empathy and, for Romney, satisfying his ambition supersedes all other considerations.

The Republican Party’s Problem Child: We Need to Talk about Mitt

by Nomad

I f you have been following the latest campaign news, you have undoubtedly heard that the presumptive nominee has finally got himself in what I call, the classic liar’s bind. 

That is, he has told so many different lies to so many people (and under oath as well) that there is now no possible way that any of them can be plausibly fit together into a “workable” truth. In short, the man the Republicans are counting on to put them back into power is an unmitigated mess. 

His timeline about when he left Bain Capital has recently been cast in significant doubt. Again. 

From the latest news, it seems as though he has lied under oath to either the SEC or the Massachusetts Ballot Law Commission. And if those reports are true that he was still involved in the decision making at Bain Capital, it opens a whole Pandora’s Box of problems. Bain’s corporate behavior after 1999 regarding closing of American companies, firing of American workers and outsourcing to China and Mexico will all undermine his claims of being a job creator. (For a examination of that issue click here and here.. and here.)

The Long Con Continues: Eric Cantor and Mitt Romney’s Shameful Lies about the Vote to Repeal

by Nomad

Following the news that the Supreme Court had declared the health care reforms, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Republican congressman from Virginia, announced that the House Republicans would vote to repeal the Affordable Care Act on July 11. According to CBS report:

Cantor said that the continued debate over the health care law is "all about this election and whether this law is going to go forward or not... Mitt Romney will be the one that will, frankly, get the health care that most people want back on track."

Attempting to transform what would normally be considered a humiliating defeat into campaign rhetoric for the Republican challenger is an understandable, even bold, maneuver but it does sound strangely detached from reality. Obamacare was actually based on the plan that Romney as governor enacted in Massachusetts. This puts him in the rather idiotic position of calling for a repeal of a healthcare plan he once supported and hailed as his victory when he was governor.

When the Supreme Court Struck Back at Roosevelt 1/2

by Nomad
In the past I have written about Roosevelt’s forgotten battle with the Supreme Court in 1933 but I’d like to return to this lost bit of history for a closer look. It isn’t all about our grandfather’s history because at this time, in these days prior to the Supreme Court ruling on the constitutionality of President Obama’s healthcare reform program, the parallels, I think, are striking. 

It isn’t the first time the executive and the judicial branches have been at loggerheads and perhaps lessons can be learned from history.

Action Now

The 1932 presidential election was not even close. President Herbert Hoover’s failed policies and his apparent detachment from the trials of his own people during the Great Depression won his few votes. At no time in American history had the conditions been quite as unforgiving as this and yet Hoover seemed out of touch with the average Americans. 

Like most economists of his age, Hoover on the other hand had warned against "mindless experimentation" in established government policy. He felt that the best policy was to wait things out, the national economy would recover on its own. It always had before.

Deconstructing the Meme: “The Worst President Since Carter”

by Nomad

If you are unlucky enough to encounter a die-hard neo-conservative or tea-party member, you are quite likely to hear them use this phrase to castigate President Obama.

"Obama? He’s the worst president since Carter.”

Its use has all of the hallmarks of Rovian propaganda. As a phrase, it is mindlessly repeated without any clarification, and dropped into a discussion like a finely-rolled ball of manure as if these twin statements were facts beyond question or debate.

According to its own logic, Obama is a terrible president just like Jimmy Carter was a terrible president. They rarely elaborate or feel the need to, since it is, they seem to think, a matter of common knowledge.

Lately even Candidate Romney has been attempting to put this comparison into use. Recently Romney said. “Who would’ve guessed we’d look back at the Carter years as the good ol’ days, you know?” To some, that kind of talk smacks of desperation.

Given the disastrous interval between the years 2000 and 2008, I thought the phrase "the worst president" deserved a closer look. 

The Angry Right Wing Voter: Have We Gone Too Far? 2/2

by Nomad

In the previous post, we examined the problem of rage, hate and anger that seems to have become an integral part of American politics these days. The questions I want to look at in this post deals with the sources for this anger. Apart from the general state of the economy, where does all this bitterness come from? Who is inciting this overreaction? How exactly do politicians benefit from the angry mob? 

Well Springs of Anger

One of the problems with having a two-party system is the strong possibility of polarization; when the middle ground dissolves and the only voices you hear are the most strident and angry. 
This puts the mainstream media- which has long surrendered its impartiality to its commercial demands- in something of a quandary. A sensible discussion is next to impossible.

Present the unadulterated truth, and one side is insulted and claims bias. The next best thing is to try to give equal time to both sides. But in the past, this too has made neither side particularly happy. 

On Taxes, Reagan Sides with Obama against Romney

by Nomad

Though the Republicans of today like to consider themselves the party of Reagan, as we see, nothing could be further than the true. Reagan- whether you were fond of the man or not- would never have given his approval to a platform of  preferential taxation on the rich. That sly political fox would have told you that a politician would have to be completely  out of touch to try to run on such a ridiculous notion. 

Nevertheless, Mitt Romney wants to make the Bush taxes cuts permanent (or at least, for the foreseeable future.) Here is how he frames the discussion.

"I know there are some that say, look, we should lower taxes for the very highest-income people. My view is very simple: The people that have been hurt most by the Obama economy, has been the middle class. That's why I cut taxes for the middle class." 

Always careful to distract voters and frame the discussion but never actually saying one thing or another. Extending the Bush cuts? His answer is to talk about tax cuts for the middle class. Never mind that the middle class ARE paying their share. That's not the problem. That's not even the question. 

But back in 2008, he was far less careful about his pronouncements.

Faux Pas at the John Locke Foundation: Racist and Homophobic but Totally Apologetic

by Nomad

In an example of the dangers of crossing that invisible line between mere poor taste and into something mean-spirited, and socially unacceptable, I found this news item from North Carolina.

The Meck Deck, an official blog of the Art Pope-funded conservative John Locke Foundation, this week published racially-charged and homophobic imagery of President Obama in a piece this on the president's opposition to North Carolina's proposed anti-gay marriage amendment. The post, which claims Obama is merely pandering to gay voters, is accompanied by an image of Obama in apparent drag while sitting next to a bucket of Kentucky Fried Chicken.

In her defense, I have made my fair share of Photoshop-jokes and some of them might have crossed the line from amusing into poor taste. However, I can't recall any of my efforts that were quite as offensive as what appeared on that post.

On the Environment: Romney and Hannity Share a Dirty Joke 1/2

by Nomad

During times of extreme stress, it's always nice to see a person like Mitt Romney cut loose and have a good chuckle among his friends.  
We see far too little of this but it does make you wonder what kinds of things actually tickle Mitt's funny bone.
Here’s a exchange between Sean Hannity, Fox News host, and presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney from May 8 2012.

HANNITY: It's pretty clear now, I think, in many ways, what the Obama campaign has planned. They can't run on their record, I make -- I contend they can't run on their record. So, they're going to -- they're going to use a lot of class warfare. There's been a lot of rhetoric that's been thrown around.

Let me show you, for example, this is -- like, you know, bad it's gotten. And it's very early. We still have six months to go. This is what the president said about the Republicans' plan. I just want you to hear it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, OCT. 17, 2011)

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: My plan says we're going to put teachers back in the classroom, construction workers back to work to rebuilding America, rebuilding our schools, tax cuts for small businesses, tax cuts for hiring veterans, tax cuts if you give your worker a raise.

(APPLAUSE)

OBAMA: That's my plan.

And then you got their plan, which is -- let's have dirtier air, dirtier water.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: Is that -- do you want dirty air, Governor? I didn't hear you in the course of the campaign talk about dirty air and dirty water. Is that your plan?

ROMNEY: I think the only dirty air and dirty water is coming out of that clip that you saw of the president.

(LAUGHTER)

And that, my friends, is just an example of the kind of side-splitting humor that we will have to look forward to should Mitt Romney ever become president.

Firstly any time a man like Hannity moans about the amount of campaign rhetoric that is being “thrown around,” you may expect an mind-bending blur from hypocrisy to amusing irony.

Karl Rove and the Truth about the Hunt for Bin Laden 2/2

President George Bush 

by Nomad

Part One of this series

Distraction

In our examination of the Bush administration’s failure to bring bin Laden to justice, we now come to Jan. 29, 2002. It was the date of the president’s State of the Union address- known more famously known as the “axis of evil” speech.

In his speech, he identified Iraq, along with Iran and North Korea, as an "axis of evil." He vowed that the U.S. "will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons."

Two years later, in a speech on the floor of the Senate, Senator Edward Kennedy would astutely note what the president did not mention in the famous speech.

In the aftermath of the terrorist attack on Sept. 11th President Bush right spoke about the need to put Afghanistan on the right course....

Instead of finishing the job, however, President Bush foolishly and recklessly diverted America's attention from the real war on terrorism in Afghanistan by rushing to a war in Iraq, a country that had no operational links to al-Qaida terrorist.

That shift was all but sealed by the time of President Bush's State of the Union Address on January 29, 2002. Karl Rove had told the Republican National Committee that terrorism could used politically... That is Karl Rove in 2002: Republicans could "go to the country on this issue."

What did President Bush say about bin Laden in the State of the Union address that day? Nothing.

What did he say about the Taliban? Nothing.

Nothing about bin Laden, a fleeting mention about al-Qaida, nothing about the Taliban in that State of the Union Address.

With those words, we lost our clear focus on the imminent threat to our national security- Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida. The president had checked the box on Afghanistan and was poised to use the 911 attacks to advance his Iraq war agenda..

Without a doubt, the war with Iraq has distracted us from the hunt for Osama bin Laden.

Osama Bin Laden

One of the greatest challenges for the administration was not finding bin Laden but finding a way to seamlessly link Saddam Hussein with, if not bin Laden, then  al-
Qaida.

It wasn’t going to be easy. Only a month after the 9/11 attacks, an FBI agent met with a number of people who had had ties to bin Laden regarding any connections between Hussein and  al-Qaida  The informers laughed at the suggestion. Bin Laden hated the Iraqi dictator, calling him a “Scotch-drinking woman-chasing infidel.”

Pew Research Says: The More They Hear from the GOP, The More The Voters Like Obama

by Nomad

Campaigning for Free

According to a national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press and The Washington Post, the Republican campaign is doing wonders for drumming up support. Unfortunately, for the GOP, that support is not for any of their candidates but for the opposing party and the president.

The Republican nomination battle is rallying Democrats behind Barack Obama. Currently, 49% of Democrats say that as they learn more about the GOP candidates, their impression of Obama is getting better. Just 36% of Democrats expressed this view in December, before the Republican primaries began.

In contrast, there has been virtually no change in Republicans’ views of the GOP field during this period. Just 26% of Republicans say their impression of the GOP field has improved as they have learned more about the candidates. That is largely unchanged from December (30%).