Tag Archives: election

Political Rants

Everything he bakes.

Coming down to the wire, here. A little more than two weeks to the general election and it’s going to be a nail biter. Thing is, it shouldn’t even be close, but it very likely will be. And that’s not good news for the 47%. Or the 99%. Because we all stand to be screwed big time if it goes the wrong way.

Right now, Mitt Romney is running around the country like the freaking Candyman, promising everyone everything they want with zero cost. We’ll cut your taxes twenty percent and you’ll get to keep all of your deductions! We’ll make sure rich people pay the same percentage (key term) of taxes that they pay now! All of you middle class folks will be able to deduct 18%, no, 25%, no, 40% of your taxable income! Pick a number! We’ll do all that, raise the military budget a trillion dollars, and reduce the deficit at the same time! I’ll create 12 million jobs! No rain ever again … unless, of course, you like rain!

It is often said that incumbency has its advantages, and it certainly does, but it has many drawbacks. One is that, as president, it’s harder to go around saying what you are going to do because the first thing people wonder is, well, why aren’t you doing it now? You are, in essence, applying for the job you already have. Your performance in that job is an actuality, not an abstraction. On the other hand, if you’re the challenger, you can promise anything, make any wild claim, run against mathematics itself, and act as though you have a big vat of miracle sauce locked up in your car elevator, and that once you take the oath of office, you’ll start ladling that stuff all over everything that’s bad and make it good.

The president did much better in the second debate. Plenty for me to disagree with, to be sure, but a better performance. However, that first debate had an impact. It encouraged voters – particularly women, it seems – to feel more comfortable with the idea of a Romney presidency. I’ve said this before and I’ll likely say it again before November 6 – there is no reason to feel comfortable with the notion of John Bolton running American foreign policy. If you’re worried about the economy, think of what extremist austerity and another decade long war will do to it.

Let go of your childhood wishes. Or you may end up really eating those dishes. More on this later.

luv u,

jp

Political Rants

Ryan’s express.

So it’s budget guy. Interesting choice, governor. At least we know where he stands (even if your position is still a little vague). We’ve apparently reached a pass in American politics where an unapologetic acolyte of Ayn Rand can be put forward as a candidate for vice president. This may have been unthinkable a year ago, when the Occupy Wall Street movement was in full swing, at least in terms of media coverage. Now that the “austerians,” as Tom Tomorrow calls them, have once again found their full-throated voice, Ryan can be seen as a serious contender for high office. Though they are backing away from the details of his Medicare proposal like it’s a live grenade, concentrating instead on Medicare reductions in the Affordable Care Act – reductions that are included in Ryan’s budget, incidentally.

My favorite dodge, though, is the one about sparing current retirees and near-retirees from painful cuts. Everyone 55 and over will keep the same system as current law, they claim; people younger than that can expect a voucher. Maybe that will buy some time with the elderly, I don’t know. But it seems to me that they’re risking pissing off people in the 45-55 bracket (namely, people like me), who have been in the private health insurance market their entire lives and have seen the magic of the marketplace at work first-hand. After decades of that, I can tell you that the notion of being handed a voucher when I’m finally allowed to retire is unacceptable.

Let’s take a closer look at Ryan’s competitive healthcare marketplace that will somehow work for seniors now better than it did prior to the advent of Medicare in the 1960s. The fact is, we’ve had competition in health insurance basically forever with respect to people under 65. Has the price gone down at all? Next question. If competition results in skyrocketing premiums for younger, relatively healthier people whose healthcare costs tend to be  more manageable, what will happen with elderly people who inevitably incur higher costs due to deteriorating health, age-related illness, palliative care, etc? That’s the reason why Medicare was created in the first place as a government guarantee of coverage for elderly people. Pushing more of its costs onto the people it’s supposed to be protecting is hardly a solution.

Same deal with Ryan’s Medicaid brainstorm. The super-genius wants to whittle that down by replacing it with block grants and reducing it by a third. People hear Medicaid and they think poor people (and, therefore, get apathetic about it). But when it comes to being elderly and needing nursing home care, practically everyone is poor… poor enough to need Medicaid. That’s where a good deal of custodial care funding comes from. Ask someone with elderly parents or someone who has done basic estate planning. Only the Romneys of the world need not rely on some kind of insurance support in their dotage.

This is a good conversation to have, frankly. Let’s have it, and make certain the elderly and the near-elderly understand what’s at stake before the November election.

luv u,

jp

Political Rants

Mitt’s excellent adventure.

Did you hear it last week, over the noise emanating from the London Olympics? That collective groan from points east? That was the world reacting to the man who might be president next January. There are, I’m sure, millions in Europe and the Middle East thinking, Really, America? So soon after Bush, you’re going to elect yet another ham-fisted idiot? Really? In many respects, our president is president of the world, if only because he (and thus far, it’s always been “he”) wields enormous power – military, economic, and diplomatic – over virtually everyone else. (They should probably get a vote in the matter, but then here in America we’re not even guaranteed that right, depending upon which state we live in.)

Though his spinmeisters have been working overtime to put a positive gloss on it, Mitt’s softball trip to friendly nations was an unmitigated (or un-Mitt-igated, perhaps) disaster, from the crypto-racist tone of the adviser referencing our shared “Anglo-Saxon heritage” with the British, to the Olympic gaffe, to name-checking MI6 (psst, Mitt: it’s supposed to be a secret), to blaming Palestinian poverty on their “culture” or lack of same. That last comment is something of a bookend to the Anglo-Saxon trope he started off with, making Romney seem strangely fixated on issues of ethnic identity. (He later doubled down on the Palestinian remark in an essay in National Review online.)

Of course, the stop was another opportunity to signal his willingness to countenance war with Iran, whether started by Israel or by the United States. In this we hear his neocon Bush-era advisors speaking, such as Dan Senor, former military flack during the early days of the Iraq invasion, who said on Romney’s behalf that the governor would “respect that decision” if Israel chose to strike Teheran militarily. No doubt. I hope everyone over here is listening closely to what Romney and his campaign are saying about foreign policy. They seem anxious to get another war started, having tasted what they seem to consider “success” in the Iraq catastrophe. And for those who say the economy is the only issue that matters, it’s worth considering what yet another pointless war would do to the federal budget.

Mitt’s got FoxNews syndrome – too much time spent with friendly media. He just doesn’t know how to behave in the real world. Ergo, his press availabilities were practically zero during this trip. I’ll bet he’s glad to be back home, in the comforting embrace of Sean Hannity.

luv u,

jp