BEFORE THE DEBATE

Hey, Mr President, the debate is about to start, where are you?

You're busy???      This is important, you've got to be here!

Your wedding anniversary ?

Go ahead without you???

Wha   Wha  What???

You say just give them the facts?


Should we use some of that funny stuff they said in their primary debates?

No???    You say just let him talk and he'll screw up again?

Should we mention his remark about the good for nothing 47%?

No???    You think that this wouldn't be polite? 

What do you care if the pundits would think you are rude?

Well, I think you should be here.  If you don't make it you can't play basketball with us next week.

That's more like it, see you in a few minutes. 

TO THE DEBATERS

Mr President and Candidate Romney, may I suggest that you both get on the same page tomorrow.  No need to make wild promises or tell what a great leader you would be, and no need to be overly polite and assume that everyone already knows the facts and you don't need to remind them.  Just tell us your positions on the issues.

Are you going to continue the tax break on the Middle Class and poor?

Are you going to continue the tax break on the wealthy 1%?

Are you going to bring the troops home in 2014?

Are you going to cut spending for the Military?

Are you going to  have affordable Health Care for all citizens?

Are you going to  keep pressure on Iran  not to develope an A Bomb?

Will you support a preemptive Military strike on Iran?

Will you restore vital govenment spending to support Education and Public Service?

Will you cut unnecessary spending in an effort to balance the budget?

Will you cut government spending as much as necessary to balance the budget regardless of any unintentional consequences?

Will you maintain rules and regulations on business to protect citizens and the environment from harm? 

Will you honor and defend the Constitution of the USA?

Will you vigoresly defend the Bill of Rights for all citizens?

Thank You!

THE ROMNEY ADVANTAGE

Like all candidates, Candidate Romney can make all  kinds of wild promises  whether they are promises  that he can keep  or not, and as a result,  he can really excite the crowd.  The incumbent President on the other hand must stick to the facts that even though they show success, they  can't compete for excitement with the promise of greater success.

Candidate Romney has criticized the President's leadership and  lack of full success citing his leadership and success in the corporate world.  Unfortunately, leadership is not the same in  the Government as it is in the Corporate world.  In the Corporate world, leadership is based upon risk taking.  The bigger the risk, the greater the gain or loss.  If the risk is successful, both the stockholders and the corporate officers make great gains.  If the risk is a failure, the stockholders are the loosers and the Corporate Officers bear no personal liability; that's the law.   In Government,  failed risks cause a loss for the Nation as a whole,  This dual approach cannot. be ignored.   The President  just cannot  take chances.  Failed decisions  cost lives  as well material losses.

A perfect example of this dangerous leadership concept is Mr. Chaney in government as Sec. of Defense, then Mr Cheney in the Corporate world  with Halburton,  Then Mr Cheney  in the Government as Vice President.

Cheney as Sec of Defense went along with President Bush's decision not to
occupy Iraq  in the first Iraq "encounter."  After  a successful role as a leader  in the Business world, when he became  Vice President he pushed for the invasion of Iraqto take the chance of finding wpw's that just didn't exist.  History will attest to the tragic consequences of this failed decision.

Romney's big advantage is not his personal success in the business world which may be a disadvangtage, but it is rather his freedom to be flexible and make any promise that the people would like to hear.

A SCENE WITH THE EMPTY PODIUM

(A take off on the famous Clint Eastwood Empty Chair Scene)

You looked good last night, Mit, but let's face it, wild promises look good even if  we know that those Promises just wouldn't be kept.

You are going to have a health care plan that cancels Obama care and still takes care of everyone? --  Your own party opposes such a plan, and you promise to pass such a plan that your own party opposes?

I'll bet $10,000, that you would simply cancel Obama care and turn the problem over to the states, which, will result in 50 million people being without health care, the condition we were in before Obamacare. 

There are a couple of promises that I feel sure that you would try to keep.  1) Keep the tax break for the top 1% and 2) Keep the billion dollar gift to the Oil Companies.  Neither of these parties need these gifts, and not having these gifts won't make one bit of difference in the number of jobs gained or lost


Thanks for reminding us of the fact that President Obama did not fully suceed in all of the many problems he has tackled. ---Perhaps  Four Years just isn't long enough to  solve all of the problems caused over the previous 8 years.

What concerns me the most, Mitt, is your claim to be a superior leader.  You must know that you can't do this job all by yourself; you have to surround yourself with top level experts like President Obama did.  I have to question your judgement in this regard.

You pick a young light weight like Ryan to take over and keep your promises
if something happens to you?  Who are you going to pick for Secretary of State, Donald Trump?

Mitt, you did a great job of imitating a young Obama, but you're no Ronald Reagan.  You're acting just won't do the job!

THE HIGH COST OF FREEDOM

Freedom of speach is one of our most charished rights and yet, when missused without consideration of its consequences that might effect the lives of other innocent people, it can be a curse.

It looked like another frustrated American, fed up with the outrageous extremists, foolishly used his freedom of speech to make a movie against the leader of the Muslems.   This led to an uprising in which 50 innocent people were killed.  Further investigation reveals that the movie maker was much less than an upstanding citizen.  However, freedom in a demcracy is freedom for  all,  and abuses like this simply have to be chalked up to the high cost of freedom.


Our only defense against such abuse is education; education not only from the schools but from the Churches, and from the homes and from each other.
In a democracy we have the responsibility to be our brother's keeper; to understand that our freedom ends where the other persons freedom begins.
We must learn to respect each other  and  when we disagree we must do so without being disagreeable,

REACTION TO FED RESERVE PURCHASE OF SECURITIES

Yesterday's Blog on the Federal Reserve's buying of Securities stimulated (or provoked) a number of comments.  Some are presented below:

This was a simple bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac!

A needed stimulus; stead and manageable!

A needed stimulus, but too lttle too late!

Another Democrat trick to increase the debt!

Will start a currency war with foreign nations !

Another attempt to ease the pain!

More wasteful use of funds!

FEDERAL RESERVE TO BUY SECURITIES

The Sec of Treas and the Federal Reserve came up with the same plan some time ago with a 600B stimulus that many felt was too little, but it may have been too much too quick for foreign currency to handle.  However the  "gradual" stimulus may more acceptable.  The View from 2217 of this plan was expressed last month in a Blog on 8/15 and the view remains the same today.

An excerpt from the 8/15 Blog is presented below:

If deams could come true the Federal Reserve could gradualy issue dollars to pay off debtors,  devaluating   the dollar  and causing inflation that would increase prices which would also increase wages and taxes, all born fairly by consumers and businesses alike in the purchase of goods and services..

Real Estate and Capital Wealth would retain their value through appreciation.  The only losses would come from large amounts of uninvested dollars in corporations and banks. (and also of course, cash horded under mattresses)

Higher prices would be offset by corresponding higher wages and business would not be effected.  The possibility of low income consumers unable to save for down payment on a first home could be offset by government backed, low interest, capped mortgages that could also help small business entrepreneurs in need of capital for start-up and/or expansion.

Any change would be opposed by those satisfied with the statis quo.  Even if the tax break for the top 1% was ended, it wouldn't be much of a hardship for them.  However, massive cuts in entitlements and health care would tragically reduce the standard of living level for millions of  middle class with millions of the poor living at a third world level.  Continued cuts in  education would greatly jeopardize our future leadership role in the world.  Neglect in maintaining the infrastructure and public service will impede progress and result in choas.  The budget challenges today are astronomical!

The effect on foreign trade would vary according to the financial adjustments made by the countries involved, but basically prices on imported goods would be higher with lower prices on exported goods.  This would be good for our economy as this would promote more demand for domestic goods.  Admittedly, this may reduce profits for outsourced domestic corporations.

 If you think that the doubling of prices and wages would never happen, consider the prices and wages from 1960 to 2000 and we still surived.