Obama vs. Romney


I am a liberal, so it goes without saying that I voted for Barrack Obama and not for Mitt Romney.  Not because I blindly vote for a party, but because I believe we should all vote for the person that best represents where we want the country to go.  Every time I hear someone say they are voting AGAINST Obama, my skin crawls a little.  Not because I want Obama to win (although I do) but because I cannot understand voting for someone you really cannot say you know what he believes or stands for.

I hated George W. Bush.  I did.  I hated him when I lived in Texas and he was governor.  I truly disagreed with his politics, where he took the country, and how he seemed proud of not being able to find a coherent sentence with both hands and a flashlight.  I was crushed when he was elected in 2004, because I was in a liberal bubble and I truly believed people would be tired of him by then.  However much I hated him, I still respected him.  I respected his courage, his conviction, and I really liked his wife.  Every time I saw Laura Bush somewhere I would have to think “He can’t be so bad, if she is married to him.”  Although I disagreed with him on just about everything, people chose him for him; they all knew what they were voting for and what they were getting.  You win some you lose some you know? While I could not understand a majority of the country choosing him, I accepted it.

With Romney none of you know who he is.  I keep hearing people say things like “I just closed my eyes and voted.”  Or, “He is a moderate; he just said all those things to get the primary votes.” Or, “He’s a real conservative; he just had to govern that way in Massachusetts because it was such a liberal state.”  Basically, as with a lot of things, people are choosing to see the Mitt Romney that fits their belief system.  The reality is none of us know where he stands on most issues, because he is the king of the flip floppers, hands down; no competition. 

The other big argument for Romney I hear is the economy.  I hate to burst people’s bubble, but he is no more capable of really changing things than Obama is.  The reality of our economic situation is that it is not Obama’s fault; it is not W’s fault either.  They can all take a little blame for the bad; a little credit for the good. But the largest economy in the world does not turn around in a couple of years because of the almighty president.  Maybe if the president were a dictator that could implement policies by himself and totally control things, and even then – the external factors vary too much and are too unpredictable. What happened to our economy is 2008 is more Bush’s fault than Obama’s because he had 8 years and total control for 6 of those, with the Republicans in congress rubber stamping billions of dollars in spending and tax cuts.  You know, when they could give two shits about the deficit.  The reality is our economy was on the brink of collapse in 2008 because of bad decisions made for the previous 30 years and there is plenty of blame to go around.  Read “Too Big to Fail” (or watch the movie) if you seem to have forgotten (or never really knew) how bad it got and how close we got to the brink. 

People who think Romney is somehow going to magically fix this economy choose to ignore the fact that he cannot do much without the support of congress, so unless it is filled with rubber-stampers, it ain’t happening. Not to mention that he has no control over things like China, or Europe, and our economy depends on facts over there as well.  The fact of the matter is that our economy is like an 18 wheeler, and people think it’s a smart car. Turning it just a bit is harder than it looks. Making a U turn is really really hard.  Now if you are one of those people that think Romney hung the moon because of his business experience, I am sorry but running a business is not the same thing as running a country.  If experience is what matters then Obama’s 4 years as president trumps the one term as governor which would actually be more comparable.  This line that “Obama never ran anything in his life” or “he never had a real job” is just one of those things people say on Fox news and Obama haters eat up.  Most of our political leaders were lawyers like Obama, and I think they would take offense to being told they didn’t have a “real” job. 

I want to say I am not Obama’s cheerleader; never was.  I was a Hillary girl during the 2008 primary precisely because I thought he lacked experience.  However, after being president for 4 years that argument is obsolete. Nothing prepares you for the presidency like being president.

It is quite humorous to hear people talk about “Obama’s policies” like he has been able to implement much of anything the last 4 years.  You would be hard press to find an agenda that was obstructed more than his in history.  I saw a montage of all the things republicans on TV said would happen if Obama were president back in the fall of 2008.  The country would cease to exist if they let this man run things. None of it happened, but that does not stop them from making the doomsday prophesies again.  Except this time they say: if he is re-elected.  Yeah. 

In my humble opinion, the real problem in our politics is the lack of term limits and the money in politics.  As long as people can serve in congress indefinitely, and as long as they need lots and lots of money to get elected, nothing is going to get done.  They are all too concerned with keeping their job to actually do their job.  It is all about the money, because it gets them elected and that is all that matters.  It does not really matter what the party says, they are all bought and sold by corporate money, so stop telling yourself that it makes such a huge difference which candidate wins, or which party is in charge. I do believe, however, that if anything significant is to happen from 2012 to 2016 it will happen under President Obama and not President Romney because Obama does not have to worry about reelection.  His main concern will be his legacy, as it is with every second term president.  Meanwhile Romney will pander as he has done for the last two years in order to ensure he keeps his job.  Too busy raising money to get reelected to do anything – as Obama has been for the last two years.

My biggest disappointment in Obama is his foreign policy.  No, not Benghazi.  That is just the latest blow-it-out–of-proportion issue on the right.  Yes, I said it.  I am sorry those 4 people got killed.  How many people died in Iraq over lies? No outrage there.  So shut up about it already.  I’m talking about Guantanamo and the predator drones, and everything else.  But you see, after reading “Drift” by Rachel Maddow my cynicism grew even more.  And now I know that when it comes to foreign policy, it does not matter what party the president is in.  The military industrial complex wins and will continue to win so let’s stop pretending the party of the commander in chief matters on this issue either. Our foreign policy is one that has evolved over the years with little difference to who was Commander in chief.

As far as I can tell there is only one issue where it makes a difference who is president and where his beliefs lie, and that is the Supreme Court.  If you look at the decisions that have shaped our every day lives the most, it matters who is on the court.  Let’s face it, the Supreme Court is appointed for life and they have a level of independence that the other branches of government do not have.  Now, no matter who the president is, he or she will do everything they can to nominate someone so uber qualified it will be hard not to confirm them.  Unless you are W and think you can get away with nominating your friend, remember that one?  She withdrew, as she should have. 

The Supreme Court gave us W as president by the way, when they decided to stop the recount.  A decision so overwhelmingly bad they stuck a PS on there that said “this can never be used as legal precedent.”  Yeah.  Nice work.  That was the court that was mainly a legacy of the 12 years of Reagan and Bush, with a touch of Clinton.  We all know who W nominated, as you could expect, very intelligent qualified conservative white men.  In four years Obama has put two women on the court.  One is Jewish and rumored to be gay, the other is Puerto Rican.  Of course, they are very intelligent qualified liberal WOMEN.  I am sorry, but in a time when we feel it is ok to discuss what qualifies as legitimate rape, this matters.

I hate to bring it down to social issues.  But really, who is Romney going to put on the court.  No one knows for sure.  If the guy who was governor shows up they might be moderates.  If it is the guy who won the republican primary, they will be to the right of Attila the Hun.  My gut tells me if he nominates someone in his first term, he will pick someone who is very ultra conservative because he will need to run for re election ad will need the religious right to win.  Which means we will have to have the conversation about whether or not a one week old bag of cells in a uterus has the right to sue somebody for land.  I am sorry, but if my daughter is raped and gets pregnant, I will kill any man who dares tell me she has to carry the rapist’s baby to term because it is, after all, a life.  And I say this while 36 weeks pregnant with my second child.  Pregnancy is hard, and it is life altering, and our government has no place forcing a woman to go through it against her will; any more than the Chinese government has the right to force an abortion on a woman. That’s right.  If we go down this road we are just like the Chinese, or the Taliban, deal with it.

This is the main reason I cannot bring myself to vote for Romney and do not understand why half of the people voting for him are doing so.  They do not know who he is.  They cannot.  Now, if you are one of those people who do not care about these issues, then I understand this is not on your radar.  But if you care about the right to decide what happens to your body, if you care about equal pay, or marriage equality, civil rights, immigration issues and others.  You can expect the right to privacy to come up soon, as well as internet independence, and other 21st century issues.  Is it really smart to hedge your bets with a guy you have no idea where he stands?  I could never do it.  If I were not such a liberal, I would vote for Gary Johnson, or Jill Stein, or just stay home, rather than vote for the etch-a-sketch candidate.

I hope Obama is reelected and I believe he will be.  Thanks to the presidency having term limits, he might actually be able to get something real accomplished in his second term.  Still, he passed health care, he got two women on the court, he implemented the best part of the dream act and he killed Bin laden.  Not too shabby.  I read this is the last election where having a majority among white men can actually make a difference, and that is scary to a lot of folks.  I will save racism and sexism for another blog though, because I have a lot to say on those subjects.

I will leave you with an article from The Economist.  For those unfamiliar with the British magazine, it is a conservative publication who usually endorses someone for the American president with an objectivity that only comes from an outsider.  In 1980 they picked Reagan over Carter, in 84 and 88 they did not pick anyone for they felt none deserved an endorsement.  Clinton in 92, Dole in 96, W over Gore in 2000 and I believe reluctantly chose Kerry in 2004.  In 2008 they chose Obama, and this year they are unenthusiastically endorsing Obama over Romney.  They are right on every point, with a fairness that makes me sad because it is so seldom seen in journalism today.  I encourage you all to read it if you care about politics and economics, and so you can see a truly fair and balanced account of who these two guys have shown they are:





Comments

  1. Since you ask, here’s why I’ll vote for Romney. I am a moderate – socially liberal and fiscally conservative. I am frustrated with both candidates, and like a lot of things about both, too but my decision comes down to actions over words.

    Both are full of BS when it comes to rhetoric. Obama made hundreds of promises that went unfulfilled. I disagree with those who say it was because he had republicans blocking him. Obama, who I voted for, had a mandate and complete control of both chambers the first part of his presidency. They did little. Economy? Bailouts for car companies to keep union wages artificially high (they eventually went to bankruptcy, as they should have initially. Push green-energy programs that failed (money went to more supporters whose businesses failed). At the end of two years, healthcare reform, which was so bad (with a few good things Romney has vowed to keep) that liberal bastion Massachusetts elected a Republican to stop it, but was passed admittedly without being read.

    So how can I trust Romney? Actions over words. Romney said many, many things that irked me in the primaries, but I look at his record. Say what you want about his binders of women - no other state government has had more women in top positions that Mass. did under Romney. Democrats SAY they don’t need binders, but no Democrat has a record that comes close to Romney’s. Notably, the Obama White House pays women less than males. All talk no game. Romney was a moderate and governed as one. (By the way, Obama was all talk no game in Chicago also, where he voted “present” on important bills likely to avoid risky votes that could tarnish his record)

    But I will admit, it is a major struggle for me. I feel dirty. I hated Republicans under Bush oh-so-very-much and many have gone out of their way to say so many stupid things cycle. But Lisa, Romney has never said that if your daughter gets rape, she has to have her baby. If we are to attribute to candidates what other members of their parties have said, there are a LOT of ugly things that can be attributed to President Obama.

    Anyway, my ultimate vision for this country? Teach people how to fish, not keep feeding them fish. I believe if re-elected, the democrats will continue to push for a bigger government, more handouts and more government entitlement. You and I have seen first-hand in PR what “mentengo” has done for our native country of Puerto Rico. We’ve seen people go from being embarrassed for getting gov’t benefits, to being embarrassed if they do not. Too many stories from our friends rejecting jobs because the gov’t benefits they get are as good, without having to work. I’ve been through Europe too, in good times and bad, same deal. The modern socialism, unions, and high taxes keep low classes from wanting to work harder or going to college. Why? That only leads to more taxes, to live, in the end, as the guy who cleans the streets. By the way, I am highly offended when people suggest that because I am in a way an immigrant and work so much with the Hispanic community in Atlanta, I must support Democrats since they are offering us so much in terms of handouts. Ask the great majority of immigrants. They did not come here for handouts, they came here for the opportunity to work, study and succeed. That is what I did and I want my daughter to have AN OPPORTUNITY – not that she will be rich, but that if she wants to, she can.

    As to social issues, based on record, President Obama will continue to do nothing. Romney? His record as a moderate does not lead me to believe he’ll do anything to hurt the causes about which I believe like gay marriage, which is a state issue. Neither will touch immigration. The Obama mandate destroyed the changes the Rubio bill had of passing. Not until the next cycle will anyone do anything.

    And so, this is how some people, people you’ve been friends with for years, can and will vote for Romney.
    Still love ya, babe!
    G

    ReplyDelete
  2. Still, you are choosing to ignore most of what Romney has said for the last 2 years over what he did a decade ago. I feel that is a leap of faith. Most people in rural GA voting for Romney are making the opposite leap, they are choosing to ignore his record and go with what he says.

    On social issue we know the president cannot do much on way of what happens to ROe V Wade, other than who he or she puts on the court. Romney may not have said he personally supports no exceptions, but the party took the exceptions out and he is running on that ticket. Not to mention he supports candidates that do believe this, including his choice for VP. Everyone will say that the first presidential choice a candidate for president makes is who he chooses for VP, and he chose Ryan. You can choose to ignore his support of the personhood ammendment, but I cannot.

    Michael is a registered republican and he is not voting for Romney because he cannot in his words "get in bed with the crowd that believe Adam and Eve rode on dinosaurs."

    Anyway, to each their own. I would Politifact a lot of what you claim about Obama. According to the fact checkers there are more stalled promises than unkept promises.

    I guess we will see what happens.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Whoa whoa whoa... political discussion aside, I'm super intrigued by the "adam and eve rode dinasaurs" bit, does someone believe that?? I have never heard that come up anywhere, ever. What a funny image.

    ReplyDelete
  4. http://creationmuseum.org/

    "The state-of-the-art 70,000 square foot museum brings the pages of the Bible to life, casting its characters and animals in dynamic form and placing them in familiar settings. Adam and Eve live in the Garden of Eden. Children play and dinosaurs roam near Eden’s Rivers."

    ReplyDelete
  5. ladies, vote for jill stein, she's one of yours. ppl need to get away from choosing the lesser of two evils when there are other choices, better ones. it sickens me to see, for example, that in puerto rico we have 4 formidable candidates and 2 wastes of human flesh. the wastes are with the two main parties and thus even tho' most ppl here are in agreement that they both suck, they will put one of them in the governorship. same deal there. while, admittedly, there are pro'ly more hardcore fans of both, there is a large group that feels that they have to vote against the other fellow to keep him from winning. meanwhile perfectly good candidates can't even get in on the debates. ppl who would pro'ly make way better presidents. i hate politricks. glad it'll all be over tomorrow.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I'm with you Lisa, but I want to know--why are people replying to your blog as anonymous?????

    ReplyDelete
  7. LOL The first one is Michael, I suspect he does not know how to otherwise do it and he does not have a google account. The other is my brother, bot quite sure why he is listed as anonymous...I just outed him. Funny I know it is him even if he doesn't sign it.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Day 19

Priorities....

Still here...