Mitt Romney and Health Care - Selling Hypocrisy

While Mitt and his wife Ann smiled enthusiastically during opening Olympic Game ceremonies in London, they also viewed an unexpected lesson on England's National Health Services, known to American right wing conservatives as socialized medicine.

Brits love their health care system enough to include its success in an entertainment version of the nation's history. Danny Boyle took advantage of an opportunity to educate the viewing world about his nation's roots as agrarian groups that evolved into an international melting pot, giving humanitarian credit to the National Health Service. .

Danny Boyle's brilliant production must have caused the Romneys to give thanks they weren't asked for their top of mind response to the pan-history production. Just imagine Mitt responding to a reporter with something like, "Gee, Ann and I really enjoyed the part about how British people love their National Health Service." Following Romney's fiasco comments, about whether or not Londoners were "ready" to host the Olympics, any critique about the opening ceremony would be like composting political disaster with dung from a horse farm.

Although Mitt Romney panders to right wing conservatives who slam health care reform as "Obamacare", he was the governor of Massachusetts who modeled the plan he's now openly criticizing.

Complicating Romney's health care communications was his lack of preparedness in a speech given during a visit to Israel, where he complimented the nation on managing health care costs. They do it through regulatory oversight provided by a health care delivery system built on efficiency, rather than on utilization. In other words, Israel provides health care for all its people by mandating they purchase insurance coverage, while providing a financial incentive to the insurers by keeping down the cost of covering the beneficiaries. Costs are controlled by keeping people well through public health initiatives and reducing unnecessary utilization of expensive elective procedures. Of course, it's true, rich Brits or Israelis, who want elective procedures, must pay for them out of pocket. But, what's wrong with that? Americans have the same plan, but we often pay twice, with extraordinarily high insurance premiums that hardly cover the cost of many procedures, forcing expensive co-pays.

When Mitt Romney finally gets back home, after photo-ops trying to be an international leader, the reality of questions he'll receive from the American press will inevitably be about how he'll roll back "Obamacare". He uses this line in stump speeches, so reporters must ask how he intends to recall a law that will benefit many Americans, especially when the Supreme Court ruled it Constitutional.

Romney must sell the hypocrisy of supporting health care reform as a governor, while complimenting Israel on it's efficiency under a mandated insurance purchase policy, while calling for an end to "Obamacare".

I don't think he should go there anymore.

But, here's an idea!

Rather than sell hypocrisy, Romney should invite Danny Boyle to the Republican National Convention, scheduled in Tampa Fla, to repeat his entertaining tribute to Britain's National Health Service. Nearby Disneyland could provide flying nurses, shown caring for the nation's tired, poor and infirm who will have insurance coverage under Obamacare.

Maybe, Romney could stand in front of Americans and claim ownership of Obamacare, so right wing extremists would finally learn something about how his model for the Affordable Care Act was created.

Instead of hypocritically criticizing Obamacare, Romney should boast about his leadership in bringing about health care reform in Massachusetts.

The Republican National Convention should open with Romney's gubernatorial portrait, now hanging in Boston's state capitol, where his health care reform law is painted, laying right next to his wife's photograph.

Getting back to the point, Romney is selling right wing hypocrisy when he stumps about repealing Obamacare. This horse is "out of the barn". Rather than selling hypocrisy, Romney should show leadership and educate right wing extremists about the value of health care reform.

Romney can't sell his hypocrisy for much longer. It's estimated 35.8 million viewers watched Boyle's tribute to Britain's National Health Service during the Olympic opening. It's possible this "educable" moment moved popular opinion away from the slander socialized medicine has experienced by right wing extremists. 

Whether Romney learned anything by watching Boyle's tribute is a question American media must ask when he's defending his hypocritical position on health care reform.

Talking Religion and Politics - But not Mormonism?

Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is. Mahatma Gandhi
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/keywords/politics.html#50elaPzRYc7kIlek.99

Blogging about Governor Mitt Romney's Mormonism receives lukewarm responses from readers who feel the Republican candidate's religion is politically off limits.  This is mystifying because both Presidents John F. Kennedy and Barack Obama took time to explain their positions on religion.  Why Governor Romney gets a pass on explaining his relationship to Mormonism, the Church of Latter Day Saints (LDS), is unacceptable. 


Kennedy and Obama "got" what Gandhi knew.  Romney seems to get it, too, just as long as it's not about his Mormonism.

Romney speaks haltingly about being a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. He acknowledges his faith in public interviews, but quickly moves on.

In a TV interview with Brian Williams, he brushed off the religion's familiar name,"Mormon", saying "it's okay" to call him Mormon. Romney showed virtually no passion whatsoever about his religion during the interview. In other words, "Don't go there."


Could it be because Mormons don't believe in using contraception and the LDS religion isn't Bible based?


Although Mormonism seems off limits in blogs and during TV interviewers, Romney is more than okay wooing Christians, Jews and Catholics to vote for him.  He's traveling to Israel and Poland to demonstrate a connectivity to Evangelical, Jewish and Roman Catholic voters who know very little about Mormons, mostly because, the religion itself is enigmatic. 

Like the Mormon temples closed on Sundays, the religion snubs those who probe it's secrets:

"Even non-Mormons sometimes object to articles such as the one you are now reading, since such articles reveal Mormons' religious secrets to a curious - and perhaps unworthy and even mocking - world. Many people, not only devout Mormons, feel that it is wrong to do this. Usually two reasons for the objection are given: 1) things that anyone holds sacred should not be profaned, mocked or ridiculed by anyone else, even by one who does not consider them sacred; and 2) the person who is revealing the secrets usually is someone who obtained the secrets only by swearing an oath of secrecy, and thus is breaking an oath. http://home.teleport.com/~packham/temples.htm

Clearly, Romney is engaging religious voting blocks while sidestepping answers about his own LDS faith.  Will it work?

http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/27/politics/romney-trip-jewish-vote/index.html?hpt=hp_bn3

Shmuel Rosner's review in the Jewish Journal:

"Here is a truism we all already know: Jews are news. The fact is, no matter how tiny the American Jewish community might be -- between 1.5 and 2 percent of the population -- the battle for Jewish votes will be extensively reported and analyzed," Rosner wrote in a Jewish Journal article titled: 
"So, how many Jews will vote for Mitt Romney?"


Perhaps Jewish voters are disappointed in President Obama, but are they smitten with Romney?  Catholic voters break into right wing conservatives and social progressives. Regardless of what American Bishops say, there's no lock-step Roman Catholic voter.  Evangelicals are skeptical about Mormonism because it's not a Bible based religion. Mormons believe in the Bible, but their LDS religion is revealed in the Book of Mormon as disclosed by an angel named Moroni, to founder Joseph Smith.


Religious voters value sincerity. Do politicians talk the talk and walk the walk?  Although Romney calculates how to impress religious voters, he doesn't demonstrate empathy toward any of them.  His Mormonism doesn't teach how to identify with other religions.  Rather, LDS are converters of those who are outside their faith, even practicing the controversial baptism of the dead. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptism_for_the_dead

As a Mormon missionary, Romney learned to evangelize others. As a presidential candidate, he shields his own faith from public view.  


In the privacy of the voting booth, few Americans will vote based upon their's or the candidate's religion alone.  But a candidate's sincerity matters.  Romney's lack of sincerity about religion, other than to protect Mormonism, is an aloof warning about how he will lead, if elected President.  Protecting Mormonism and the sources of his wealth, by holding back his tax returns, Romney gives us insight about how he will lead our nation- with the same secret aloofness.


Religion and politics are interconnected because faith is a window into a person's soul.  But courting religious voters, because it's useful, rather than with sincere respect for these faiths, is disingenuous.  


A wonderful truism in the French proverb fits:  
Plus ça change plus elles restent les mêmes.
(The more things change the more they stay the same.)

In fact, Roman philosopher Lucius Annaeus Seneca agreed with this proverb, writing eons ago:  "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful." http://www.egs.edu/library/lucius-annaeus-seneca/biography/

Miss Manners and our mothers taught us to never discuss religon and politics.  Hmmmm. Could Mahatma Ghandi and Lucius Annaeus Seneca possibly be politically wrong?  Neither of these gentlemen were Mormons.  We don't know enough about Mormons, because many of their religious beliefs are kept secret.

Americans might elect a Mormon President, but we don't want the nation's leadership style to protect a secret administration.

American Free Speech and "Mitt the Twitt"

No answer yet from Tweets to Twitizens, when I asked esteemed American media the Washington Post and New York Times if either would consider a headline like "Mitt the Twitt".  

In my opinion, the British Press's boldness in printing the headline boasts more than a sensational way to sell newspapers. Their freedom to print an international eye catching headline is the result of free speech rights more liberal than the American media!

This attack ad was a bargain for Democrats, who can take a week's vacation while the British press does their political work. But, our American media could learn a thing or two about Free Speech, as a result of Romney's new international "Mitt the Twitt" label. American media are often cowardly when compared to the British press.  England's politicians are usually thick skinned about their media, but Americans are often paranoid - like President Nixon, for example, when several journalists were put on a watch list.

Democrats saved money, as well as finger pointing political grief from Republican fact checkers, by simply allowing "Mitt the Twitt" negative publicity to define Romney, the unofficial GOP presidential candidate.  

"Mitt the Twitt" himself brought the slogan on, when the former one term Massachusetts governor opened his mouth during an American television interview, by impolitely criticizing London's readiness to host the 2012 Summer Olympic games.  

Given an enormous value added, just about every news organization in the world showed "Mitt the Twitt" headlines, creating a reverberating negative political message, for free.

After just three days in London, on a tour that was supposed to demonstrate Romney's qualities as a statesman and a leader, he left the United Kingdom widely reviled as a laughing stock and, worse, a "twitt". http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/highway-2012/mitt-the-twit-disconcerting-trip 

Although Romney's remarks made British tabloid entertainment, the serious overriding issue is about how his candidacy, as potential leader of the free world, is perceived by the international community. Okay, let's give Romney the benefit of the doubt, knowing how most of the international press has no idea who he is (likewise, many Americans). So, he was an easy tabloid target.  Nonetheless, the "Mitt the Twitt" headline is a difficult image to over come, especially when it fits.

But, for Democrats, it's free negative publicity, brought on by Romney's inability to engage in civil discourse.  He should have instinctively known that an interview with news anchor Brian Williams was supposed to be a non-headline type of puff piece. Yet, he simply didn't demonstrate the ability to spontaneously connect with the viewing audience on the salient Olympic theme.  

In other words, he was supposed to say "London's Great!" (stupid!).

Apologetic pundits risk saying the "Mitt the Twitt" headline has "no legs". This means, the story will eventually go away.  But Romney, the candidate, continues to accumulate bumbling media missteps. Having this much "candidate fatigue" showing up early in the campaign doesn't bode well for Romney's media image. Which is precisely why a billion or so contributions are begged from filthy rich supporters to pay for his political messages. Romney can't deliver a salient message himself, because he wastes time talking about why he won't disclose the sources of his enormous wealth.

Since it's obvious Romney is a flawed candidate, he needs paid political action committee ads to prop up his campaign. But all the money in the world won't fix him as a presidential candidate.

Nevertheless, I suspect Romney's "Mitt the Twitt" message will get a pass from main stream American media because our Constitutional right to freedom of the press is mitigated by the need to generate profits. Rich advertisers don't like negativity.  Of course, the Brit newspapers have the same bottom line incentives, but they seem to understand just how to sell newspapers. So, while the American media hides from sensational headlines, the Brits trump our own stoic moguls by truthfully exposing the real Mitt Romney. Even Twitter's 140 character limit can't compete with "Mitt the Twitt".

I'll probably never hear from the New York Times or the Washington Post about their feelings on the British sensational, character grabbing, Romney headline. But, maybe Saturday Night Live comedy will get the message, instead.

New Majority Agenda and Orwell Old Media

Rather than creating anything "new" for voters to think about, the New Majority Agenda is just old style negative political advertising.  

Missing from the ads are ideas, because, there's certainly nothing new in the New Majority Agenda, except for the "new" anonymous sources of money used to pay for them.

Although the ads are expensive and old fashioned, they're nonetheless dangerous.

Rich political action committee contributors, who anonymously pay for these antiquated messages, rely on throwbacks to the past. They'd rather waste money on tired messages, reminiscent of broken Nixon's "Silent Majority", than to create anything "new", at all. "New" should be analogous to "Progressive", but the New Majority Agenda is RE-gressive. The PAC throws millions of dollars on propaganda, using destructive images, film noir stereotyping President Obama as a dark personality and 1950s style nostalgia for "Leave it to Beaver" era fans. Even as old and tired as these ads are, they're, nonetheless, dangerous.

These exhausted media style ads are dangerous for two important reasons:

1. They're Orwellian: We cannot know who pays or who owns The New Majority Agenda, because the US Supreme Court protects the donors to the PAC under the free speech "Citizens United" ruling. Therefore, if these negative messages work, the contributors can claim ownership of the candidate, ie, the Romney campaign. In other words, they'll be puppeteers who control government, protected from disclosing who they are, because they're entitled to free speech. The New Majority Agenda, if it succeeds, can have the power to influence future political campaigns for as far into the future as the money behind them extends. This would be worse than un-Democratic government. Even Orwell couldn't imagine this kind of lowly totalitarianism.

2. They have a cumulative negative impact: When The New Majority Agenda is coupled like DNA molecules with other negative PAC ads, the total impact is so overwhelming that we're likely to be crushed by the negativity. The cumulative impact of negativity will proliferate widespread cynicism about our government. Government approval ratings are already at all time lows, perhaps the lowest since pollsters began tracking this information. Creating even more cynicism, for the purpose of winning political elections, will not improve our human condition. Rather, the effectiveness of the ads will continue to control our responses to almost any social nuance desired by the anonymous contributors.

How do informed voters turn the public away from Orwell Old Media ads, paid for by the rich New Majority Agenda? A response to contrast the dark, cynical messages is to create bright and optimistic counter images. Rather than film noir, use tasteful fantasy. Rather than "Leave it to Beaver" nostalgia, use social media advertising. Rather than bleak Orwellian messages, use up-beat flash-mobs to make positive points. These top of mind ideas have in common the joining of ordinary people to build positive messages. They contrast bleak New Majority Agenda with optimism.

Our nation's economy isn't entirely based on the actions of one single individual, like President Obama, as New Majority Agenda lies. Economies are built on optimism and confidence, as well as on fiscal systems. Let's counter New Majority Agenda with something really "new". Let's call it "confidence". Let's theoretically name it the New Orwellian Society media campaign, where people are fed optimism, and confidence, instead of negative and mind controlling propaganda.

Indeed, let's throw away the impaired political past by creating a New Majority Future. Begin by re-electing President Obama to continue moving our nation forward, while soundly rejecting the tired negative politics of the Old Majority Agenda.

Romney's Bad Manners - He Didn't Learn Civility in Prep School?

Where are Romney's manners? 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mitt-romney-meets-british-officials-in-london/2012/07/26/gJQAfqixAX_story.html?wpisrc=nl_pmpolitics

Romney embarrassed the Olympian people of London, during their time in the torch-light, by questioning their ability to be ready for the challenges of running an ambitious international undertaking. 


You know what's wrong?  Romney, obviously, never had a boss at Bain Capital, (his private equity firm) because he'd know that you don't pretend you're in charge, when you're clearly not.  Romney was in charge of the Olympics, at one time, back in 2002, when he used government money to lead a successful Salt Lake City, Utah Olympics.  He isn't in charge at London's summer 2012 games. Mr. Romney shouldn't act like he's king of the Olympic games, just because he was once in charge. It's simply not good manners.


One term Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney's parent's should have demanded some of their tuition money back from the expensive schools he attended.  It's no doubt, they spent loads of money sending their politically aspiring son to high class preparatory schools, but he apparently learned very little, if anything, about good manners and civility during his expensive education.  


He also never had a boss, or he'd know how to be civil when not in charge.


Romney learned how to bully during his private school years.  Reports were never denied about an incident where he and a gang of boys forced a hair cut on a fellow student.
http://politicker.com/2012/05/mitt-romneys-history-of-haircut-bullying/


"...Mitt Romney bullied and pranked classmates during his time at a tony Michigan prep school in the 1960′s including one story where he and a group of boys pinned down another student and cut his hair. This is now the second story to emerge of Mr. Romney giving someone a forced haircut."

Although Romney supporters brush this school incident aside as childish behavior, the overriding issue is about Romney's lack of civility.  He flippantly told Americans he doesn't care about the poor.  He told Londoners that they might not be up to the challenge of running Olympic Games.  

Whether or not London is, or isn't, up to the Olympian challenges, is not for Romney to criticize. His time being in charge was over, 10 years ago.  Moreover, Romney is a guest in London.  You don't insult your guests in their own home.  It's not showing good upbringing.  It's bad manners.

If Romney's arrogant style is allowed access to the White House, we Americans will spend four years of his administration defending statements he makes by not paying attention to the consequences of his comments.  

Let's face it, Romney led a privileged life. It's hard to say who his role models were.  He surely won't be a humble president, if elected, because he's already demonstrated a lack of humility. 

In fact, humility, civility and  good manners need training. His expensive education didn't provide much polish, or it doesn't show.

Romney may no be up the the challenge of learning how to be humble, civil and polite. These are not Romney's attributes. 

Being a world leader demands civility when in the public eye.  Every leader knows this, even dictators.

Before Romney pretends to be a world leader, he needs to read Miss Manners.  

His privileged life doesn't excuse his insensitive remarks about any of us who are on the spectrum of the human order.  

In "Manners 101", Romney must learn respect the poor and how to applaud Londoners. 

.

Young Royals - Britain's Amazing Young Royals and the Poor

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/26/kate-middleton-olympics-prince-william-prince-harry_n_1704946.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-207_162-20078271.html


Americans might call on the brilliant Britain young Royals to help breath life into our educational institutions besieged by budget doldrums, compounded by partisan politics. It's ridiculous to include education of our children in a political discussion, because we should be all about supporting the best for our nation's schools. Nonetheless, our country's best resources, the education of our children, have put inner city schools at the mercy of budget battles and the effects of urban decline.

While America's education leaders justifiably lament program cuts hurting teachers, schools and public colleges, the amazing Royal Brits - Princess Kate, Prince William and Prince Harry are investing their personal charisma in children. They're going beyond budgets and partisan politics by touching the lives of our future, visiting and engaging in the education of children. 

During Prince William and Princess Kate's honeymoon, they even took time to visit a Los Angeles, California inner city school! It's been political eons since Americans saw one of our own politician take such a photo-op with the poor.

Young Royals seem to create beauty wherever they go. To create enthusiasm for children around the opening of London's Olympics 2012, the three alluring young Royals played soccer and basketball with "impoverished" kids, who have dreams and ambitions to become sports coaches.

As Americans, we're proud of being a Democratic nation, void of the super power of a monarchy. Yet, there's something to be said about having a ruling class of admirably compassionate leaders who are respected, admired, that people identify with and who aren't running for political re-election.

Certainly, it helps that Britain's three young and particularly charming Royals are individually bewitching.

So, maybe in their spare time, the three magnetic young Royals, Kate, William and Harry, could take time to bring energy and morale boosting enthusiasm to poor children in America's schools. In fact, schools could be a place where movie stars, sports heroes and Royals could visit, as part of their contracts and official duties.

Although I'm not an educator, my common sense tells me that motivated children are the basis for a good educational program. Building self esteem by exposing children to positive and supportive role models will create enthusiasm for making schools a place where student want to "learn how to learn" and where teachers want to teach.

Bravo to Britain's amazing young Royals! They are examples for adults and children to imitate as they engage in education for all, regardless of economic situations, social, or immigrant status or religion.

Thankfully, Britain's young Royals don't run for election, because they would likely obliterate any political opponent with their progressive and compassionate charm.

The New Majority Agenda and Negative Trifecta - Triple Political Attack Ads

Negative political TV advertisements - like the trifecta of ads running against President Barack Obama, sponsored by rich political action committees (PACs) New Majority Agenda, the Crossroads America and the Republican National Committee, are spreading lies faster than horses out of the gate at Churchill Downs.

A trifecta is type of bet in which the bettor must select the first three finishers in exact order. So, the negative PACs are betting on defeating President Obama with this triple pronged strategy.  Hopefully, President Obama is ready to place his own trifecta of ads

There's money to burn on negativity among the three well funded Republican PACs. So, they're using seemingly unlimited funds to create negative ammunition to bounce off of voters, in the hopes at least one  messages will reach the ultimate destination, to block the President's well deserved re-election.  

These wasteful expenditures are creating lies.  None of the wrong-minded messages in the terrible ads provides a shred of evidence to confirm their veracity, because there's no truth to this miserable trifecta.

Why these negative ads are permitted to fabricate lies about President Obama is an issue now defined as "free speech", under the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling.

This summer is unGodly hot in lots of places, particularly in political battle ground states where coveted electoral votes will re-elect President Obama.. But, we're just beginning the negative political TV season. Just like ricochet buckshot, the reverberation of negative ads designed to cause political wounds has yet to be determined. Tragically, these ads must be causing harm. Why else would the creators waste money producing and airing the current trifecta of propaganda, now showing on TVs close to you, unless they're harmful.  Millionaires like the Koch Brothers aren't giving these ads away, without expecting something in return.  Their contributions to the negative litanies are expected to be rewarded when they eventually own the candidate who could win with their geyser-like money.  

PAC contributors bet money on negative ads. They want these ads to resonate a particular message with the voters, so their selfish interests will be sustained when they own the winning candidate.  Think of "Swift Boat", effectively used to discredit Senator John Kerry's Presidential election.  It was unthinkable to believe anyone could lie about Senator Kerry's military record, but, unfortunately, the negative ads worked.  

"Swift Boat" was like ricochet political buckshot that reverberated until Senator Kerry's credibility was damaged.  It was a bet created by the Karl Rove negative ad team, that worked.

It's grossly unfair for President Obama to be in a position of defending his reputation and his administration against a trifecta of negative PACs where lies are funded to deflect truths.  For example, it's not true that President Obama spent stimulus tax money to send jobs overseas, unless, of course, we count the millions spent on defense contracts to end Republican wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Voters should demand accountability, rather than rhetorical lies, when we're force fed negative ads running in expensive prime TV time.

In the absence of truthfulness, however, the trifecta of PACs is highly likely to grow into a stampede.  

President Obama must respond strategically to these ads, because PAC monies are ready to drown every political nuance, when an opportunity to create more lies shows up.

Democratic PACs don't have unlimited monies to find the truth behind Mitt Romney's lies regarding the sources of his amazing wealth and where it's all hidden.  In fact, Romney's trifecta includes hiding the truth about why he keeps a great deal of his wealth protected from taxes, as well as not answering when he was the CEO of Bain Capital and how is it he has $100 million in an independent retirement account (IRA)?  

Romney's trifecta of lies are worthy of negative ads, if the Democrats can find the money to pay for them.

Romney's Individual Retirement Account - Ire in the IRA

How does one person put $100 million in an individual retirement account?  Even with compound interest, this is an extraordinary amount of money to tax shelter.


Governor Romney didn't take any salary while he was the one term governor of Massachusetts, yet he sure found revenue from someplace to maximize his Individual Retirement Account - aka IRA.  Why does Governor Romney report having $100 million in his individual retirement account?  
http://dagblog.com/reader-blogs/romneys-ira-unearthing-golden-goose-14313

In "Romney's IRA: Unearthing the Golden Goose", CNN's Steve Rattner writes "...Romney...used 'every trick in the book', He...referred specifically to Romney's $100 million IRA...."

News reports about Governor Romney's amazing wealth must raise the candidate's ire. His reticence, not being forthcoming regarding his finances, makes it difficult to break through the quagmire of personal wealth information and to get out his political message.

But what is Romney's political message?  I sincerely believe Romney wants to be president for three reasons (since he won't candidly answer this question, I'll try to do so on his behalf:

1. By being president, he can protect his personal wealth from scruity by the Internal Revenue Service, from the media and from the Securities and Exchange Commission.

2. His rich friends are counting on him to become president so he can help protect their wealth from similar or worse scrutiny.

3. Romney wants to be the first Mormon President of the United States (I apologize to those put off by this Mormon issue, but it's what I believe. There's nothing wrong with this religous ambition, I simply believe it's one of Romney's motivations in wanting to become President.)

Since revealing Romney's tax information was squelched by his wife on Good Morning America, let's look at his Individual Retirement Account, instead. 

How did Romney sequester, from taxes, an astounding $100 million into an IRA when only about 5 percent of a person's income is allowed, by law, to be put into this particular tax shelter?

Romney knows how to keep secrets, but, as a candidate for President of the United States, he can't break the law.

Rattner writes in CNN: "If one makes quick resort to the compound interest tables and/or attempts to place Romney's results in the context of financial industry standards for return on investment one might conclude that $100 million in 33 years is an un-worldly pile of money, even fantastical. Forget that Romney should, respectfully, unearth the golden goose and show it to the American people, and that if he did so even I would vote for him---it's just that when I contemplate Mitt's kind of investment return I don't give a damn who wins this election, I just want to learn the secret tricks of Private Equity---perhaps the most apt term ever coined in the financial industry."

Private Equity is certainly Romney's private affair with money. But, Romney's cash cow IRA is a mystery we should understand. Really, does a person get a golden goose when one becomes a Venture Capitalist? If so, where do we clone the goose? 

If we had the opportunity, like Romney, to amass $100 million in an IRA, then, indeed, we could agree with the Republicans plan to eliminate Medicare, Medicaid, Pell Grants for college students, Veterans Benefits and Social Security for retirees. America's streets would, indeed, be lined with gold laid by the golden goose, if Romney would reveal his IRA secret.

It's time for Governor Romney to stop sending surrogates to speak with the media about why he can't or won't release his tax information or how he was able to sequester $100 million in a tax sheltered Individual Retirement Account.

My ire at Romney grows every time I hear how he puts his wealth in off shore accounts, where the Internal Revenue Service can't audit his wealth. Where did his money come from?

As a potential leader of the United States, Romney should invest inside of our country, especially when Political Action Committee negative ads preach about how the national debt is dragging down our economy. Romney's taxes could  help the national deficit hole.

Let's demand more fiscal transparency from Governor Romney. Otherwise, if his money and the contributions he receives from wealthy colleagues, are able to skew this 2012 Presidential election, we'll be anchored to a leader who will outsource the safety net programs so badly needed by America's middle class.

Does anybody know how many Social Security beneficiaries $100 million would support?

Curing America's Perpetual National Mourning From Gun Violence

Okay! Here's the reality. We're a nation in perpetual mourning resulting from gun violence. We continue to bury innocent victims, most of them are young.

But, gun toting Bubbas, who can't abide anybody curbing their Constitutional Second Amendment Gun Rights, can be part of the solution to curing this violence. Let's allow all the Holms type of weirdos, who want to buy guns, the opportunity to own all the weapons they can possibly afford. These purchases can satisfy the weapons hoarders while helping to resolve the national debt. All guns and explosives purchased outside of law enforcement should be taxed at three times their retail value. Plus, all fire arms should be registered like automobiles, with an assessment attached.

Moreover, let's create and enforce laws whereby the ammunition sold to those obsessed with Second Amendment Rights are just blank rounds- like big caps. These blanks can go "bang-bang", but will have no deadly impact whatsoever. Plus, the blank ammunition will also be taxed.

Chief Justice Roberts of the US Supreme Court will love this plan. If implemented, the inviolable sacrosanct Second Amendment rights are protected while the government can enforce its Constitutional right to tax.

It's beyond time to do something bold to end gun violence. When Americans can't even engage in a recreational pastime like going to the movies without being victimized by gun violence, then our perpetual national mourning might have finally hit a threshold of resistance. It's like when a disease causes widespread morbidity and moralities, a prevention plan is immediately put in place to protect public health. Americans might finally be waking up to the need to treat gun violence like a deadly disease.

Of course, disease isn't mentioned in the US Constitution, like gun rights.

So, a prevention plan must address public health. As a result of being a nation in a perpetual state of grief and mourning, we are suffering from an epidemic of clinical Depression. A Depression epidemic can be prevented by instituting public health measures.

How do we prevent Depression, caused by the fear of gun violence, from infecting every living American? In a medical science world of "cause and effect", we look to ways to eliminate the root cause of the Depression. We can't change the US Constitution without causing widespread civil strife, but we can remove explosives in ammunition. Possibly, even the National Rifle Association would agree that guns don't kill, but the ammunition is deadly.

Gun hoarders and paranoid monster people who simply can't get enough weapons to fight the government who they believe is coming after them, should delight in being able to reduce the national debt by paying purchase and registration fees on their multitudes of guns. Their contributions might even help balance national and local budgets while reducing the tax rate for everyone, including the super rich.

Plus, by helping with prevention, these gun obsessed individuals can claim pride in participating in a cure for our national epidemic of clinical Depression caused by perpetual mourning from relentless gun violence.

President Obama and the National Debt

Negative campaign advertisements shroud solutions. 


Mud slinging media accusations are easy, but solutions take intelligence.


Accusatory political action committee (PAC) messages never offer help to people who want to understand how America got into this fiscal hole, called the national debt, or how to crawl out. 


Force feeding a message that President Obama is responsible for the national debt is like saying mountains cause avalanches or deserts cause droughts.  President Obama was elected during the Great Recession, he didn't cause the economic crises any more than a mountain causes an avalanche.  Yet, the New Majority Agenda, along with the Republican National Committee and other super-rich-super-PACs use the power of paid television advertisements to blame President Obama for the national debt. They're plain wrong.
President Obama is leading us out of the debt desert, but Republican obstructionists won't support solutions. They won't support a jobs bill or the Simpson-Bowles budget recommendations.


We can begin climbing out of the debt by forcing the US Congress to raise revenues while reducing expenses.  Simpson-Bowles is a reasonable alternative to debt, named after the two authors. They offer fiscal alternatives to growing debt.  A short list of bi-partisan Simpson-Bowles supporters is available at the Concord Coalition  
http://www.concordcoalition.org/tabulation/fiscal-heroism?gclid=CJaLmeKHrbECFcrCOgodBVcARA

Blogger Robert Bixby writes in the March 30, 2012, "The Tab-ulation":  "Sometimes it (seems) like none of our elected representatives are willing to buck their own party leaders, let alone vote for something because it’s for the good of the country, rather than serving (an) ideological purpose.  That’s why bipartisan support this week in the House to use the Simpson-Bowles commission recommendations to guide the 2013 budget was like a breath of fresh air. No, the amendment did not come close to passing, but the 38 members who broke ranks and voted aye are true heroes of fiscal responsibility. Political considerations took a backseat to doing the right thing, and we enthusiastically commend these brave men and women for stepping up and being counted."


Another alternative to helping resolve the national debt is to increase taxes on the super rich. Some of these wealthy individuals, who could pay more taxes, are the ones funding super-rich-super-PACs.  These incredibly wealthy Americans would rather pay big bucks to produce negative TV propaganda than help solve the country's debt.  


I'm mystified by Americans who don't "get" how super-rich-super-PAC contributors don't spend their wealth on negative ads without expecting something in return.  They obviously want to control Republican candidates, who they bribe with their unlimited campaign contributions, made anonymously, a freedom provided by the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling on free speech.


Although rich Governor Mitt Romney, the one term governor of Massachusetts, doesn't need bribes. What he covets is cash fuel for his high political ambitions. Romney has no plan, outside of wanting to win the 2012 election. 


Rather, Romney's austere fiscal proposals protect tax loop holes for rich people at the expense of middle class safety net programs. His campaign strategy is simple. He just keeps up those anti-Obama sound bites.  Romney never offers solutions.


President Obama did not cause the National debt.  


Negative ads are lying about the National debt.  Although paid advertisement should be monitored for truthfulness, the Citizens United ruling protects the donors to these lying messages as well as their right to lie in their messages.  


Americans have no place to turn for the truth, unless they read the fine print in unbiased news reports. Unfortunately, finding truth in political advertisements is as rare as discovering a lake in a desert.  


We need solutions, rather than propaganda, to resolve our National Debt. President Obama is an intelligent leader who offers solutions. We must re-elect President Obama to resolve the National Debt rather than put a person in his place who wants to protect the rich.

New Majority Agenda, Unemployment and Romney's Economic Plan

Although the New Majority Agenda pushes lies with the finesse of a gambling croupier, there are no solutions in their serial negative ads, other than to damage President Obama's popular image.

Gambling with American minds, by saturating TV with negative ads, while not providing solutions to our nation's unemployment slow down, is propaganda dealing that will hopefully loose when voters cash in their votes this fall.

Unemployment can be reduced if the completely ineffective US Congress passed President Obama's jobs bill. Of course, The New Majority Agenda's negativity doesn't focus on real time solutions. Rather, the sloppy ads trick naive viewers into believing in a simplistic solution to finding jobs for the unemployed.  It's just not true that the nation's unemployment will be improved if the national debt is resolved!


Rather, New Majority Agenda ads should soak the root cause of our nation's unemployment in their expensive media blitz, which includes the failures of US banks, and mortgage companies to self regulate lending and investing practices. But, of course, truth isn't part of The New Majority Agenda's intentions. Yet, the fact is, the New Majority Agenda isn't a majority at all, but just the fabricated messaging created by a few very wealthy people who enjoy spending copious amounts of money on Political Action Committee attack ads.

Even worse, the New Majority Agenda doesn't offer any opinion by Governor Mitt Romney about how to improve the US economy. Romney was a one term governor of Massachusetts. When he left office, all of his staff's hard drives went out the door with his administration. Meaning, there's no paper trail to reconstruct the ineffectiveness of his one term as Massachusetts governor.

If Governor Romney's master economic plan to reduce unemployment is to bring jobs sent out of the US by the venture capitalist firm Bain Capital back home from India and China, then American voters meed to know about this intention. Yet, we don't hear anything of the kind from either the Romney whine ads or from the New Majority Agenda's propaganda campaign.

Romney rails on issues out of his control, like trying to bring down President Obama's health care reform initiative, finally ruled as being Constitutional by the US Supreme Court. Yet, Romney doesn't offer an alternative plan. This confusing response is contradictory, because the Affordable Care Act, aka "Obamacare", that Romney beats up on, is the Massachusetts plan he put in place as governor, including a mandate for individuals to buy health insurance. Yet, the New Majority Agenda doesn't explain how a majority of Americans will now have health insurance as a result of President Obama's Affordable Care Act. Doesn't it make sense for Romney and New Majority Agenda to support what's good for improving access to health care for a majority of Americans? Positive messaging isn't part of the agenda of either the New Majority Agenda nor Romney's campaign. Both are disinterested in helping a majority of uninsured people to access health care.

They aren't interested in helping the unemployed to find jobs, or else they would call for supporting investment in America's infrastructure, like roads and bridges, included in President Obama's jobs bill.

Let's get a majority of facts on public policy gambling tables for voters to evaluate.


There's a lot at stake this fall when Americans have the final say about how our nation will move forward, with help for the middle class, beginning with passing the President's jobs bill. 

Americans deserve a government that works for the people, rather than for a minority of rich venture capitalists, like Romney and his colleagues, who won't share their wealth through fair taxation policies.

Most important, when faced with a choice between two candidates who want to lead America, we need a real New Majority Agenda that includes an action plan rather than a propaganda campaign funded by the rich who will benefit by buying a Romney presidency.











,

Christian Talk Radio and Guns

I was so outraged, it made me want to throw my car radio out the window, smashing it into the highway, after what I heard when my scanning of stations landed on Christian talk radio today, July 20, the day of the Aurora CO killings. 

What I heard on Christian talk radio was as Un-Christian a message as I've ever heard.

While scanning stations during my drive home to Topsham from Portland, Maine, I happened to land on a Christian discussion about praying for the tragic victims of yet another mass killing of innocent people, this time in an Aurora, Colorado movie theater where victims were gathered at midnight to see "Batman".

In a surreal segue, the male-female disc jokey duo switched their discussion of prayer for victims of the killings to a quick change of subject about guns. Putting the two topics in the same paragraph is incongruous, to say the least. They are two incompatible subjects. These self righteous Christian DJs verbally glowered like buzzards on people they stereotype labeled as "liberals". They leaped to the conclusion that "liberals" will immediately blame the root of the murder of 12 innocents and 60 injured in Aurora, on guns.

I wish there were a URL link to their quote, as they made a disgusting rush to judgement on the people they pompously called "liberals". Even more, their assault created victims of yet another group of people beyond those who are dead, injured and their families.  They victimized people they consider to be "liberals".


These DJs made an immediate defense against any accusation that guns caused these senseless murders. They defended guns while accusing liberals of being wrong about stating the obvious! In fact, the duo really dared liberals to claim guns are the root of the killing of those innocent Aurora victims! They said (paraphrase) "it won't be long before liberals are blaming guns...." But, the killer used guns to kill and slay people. In fact, he used several weapons. Are we to believe the Aurora killer murdered those people with weapons, other than guns? Paleeeze! What are these Christian people talking about? They're obviously delusional.

Listen, blog readers, I didn't invent this radio discussion. Yet, I believe it's irresponsible for me to be silent when right wing Christian radio nuts defend murder by guns in the same broadcast where they call for prayer for victims of the murders.

Tell families of the victims that guns didn't cause this preventable massive harm.

Indeed, the operational word in this tragedy is "preventable".

Christian radio DJ's obviously didn't know anyone murdered in the Aurora mass murder.

Like many others, I'm praying for all the victims and families of the senseless casualties in Aurora, but it will take me time to calm down and pray for the redemption of those irresponsible Christian DJs.

Bachmann and Limbaugh Cacophony

A medical grand rounds for health care professionals might find plenty of clinical issues to discuss in the self centered personalities of Rush Limbaugh and Michelle Bachmann.

Rush Limbaugh is a right wing radio talk syndicated Don, who creates news while spewing venomous commentary. His female counterpart, in the political world, is Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann. They are masters of headline making cacophony, creating hoots, cackles and wails about tangential issues, just to be sure their names make headline news. Each of them should be in a narcissism recovery program. Both thrive on erotic self gratification, regardless of how their relentless egotistic pursuits harm others.

Although painful, let's resurrect the horrible incident where Limbaugh inappropriately blasted a young Georgetown University law student who exercised her right to free speech when testifying before Congress about women's reproductive rights. Limbaugh blasted the student with the equivalent of broadcast voyeurism by questioning what form of birth control she personally used to prevent pregnancy?  http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/03/01/updated-limbaughs-misogynistic-attack-on-george/184248.  Well, that's not entirely what Limbaugh really said about the young lady. It's just my way of reporting what Limbaugh said, because his descriptive language should, in fact, be considered blog pornography. In other words, it was disgusting. But, in blaspheming the law student and her message, Limbaugh got his name in the news. That's important to narcissists. They must create cacophony or they get depressed. (I believe Limbaugh has alluded to being treated for depression while in drug addiction recovery. Obviously, we can't know if narcissism is a co-occuring Limbaugh disorder, because his confidentiality is compromised if anyone discloses his health records.)

So, it turns out Limbaugh hasn't made his own news during the recent media questioning of Governor Mitt Romney's

reluctance to release tax records, like his father George did, in 1968, when he ran for president.  Rather than respond to this important issue with productive radio commentary, Limbaugh, instead, came up with a preposterous concept about how the 2012 "Batman" summer hit movie created a villain named "Bane", being a tangential reference to Romney's nemeses "Bain Capital".  Under the rubric, "I can't make this stuff up", this ludicrous association defies even Roschach analysis. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-axelrod/rush-limbaugh-bane-batman_b_1686869.html?utm_hp_ref=elections-2012

Narcissists have a cunning ability to keep their issues ahead of all others, regardless of the topic on the table. It's a limelight character trait they don't often share. But, whoa! Move aside, Limbaugh, because the company you keep in your delusional thinking is Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann.

Bachmann fell off her narcissism recovery plan when she lost the limelight after the Supreme Court's ruling about Health Care Reform.  I suspect former US Presidential candidate Bachmann  stayed up all night, before the Chief Justice Roberts ruling on the law, writing her own speech to the media, prepared in response to what she expected to be the Court striking down President Obama's signature accomplishment, the Health Care Reform or Affordable Care Act.  Instead, Chief Justice Roberts upheld the law and Bachmann had to trash her speech.  So, it's possible Ms. Bachmann clinically de-compensated. Her out of control symptoms include delusional thinking.  Now, she's creating harmful headlines by accusing Secretary of State Hilary Clinton's aide Huma Abedin of being associated with the dark group called the Muslim Brotherhood.  

Worse, Bachmann found four zealous colleagues to join her in this weirdly slanderous accusation.  Ms. Bachmann has no evidence, outside of self centered thinking, to support this claim she seemed to pull out of nowhere. Clinically speaking, narcissists seldom, if ever, consider the misguided sources or consequences of their delusional thinking.  Yet, if Bachmann's mental unreasoning capacity isn't enough to cause alarm, focus on the credibility breach Bachmann potentially opens when considering her position on the US House Intelligence Committee, whereby anything she says can be misinterpreted as "inside information".  Bachmann's conjured up lies are a reason for her to be removed from this committee. 

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2012-07-19/boehner-huma-abedin-clinton/56336046/1

Why would Bachmann create such a terrible claim against an aide to Secretary Clinton? Well, I can conjure up my own thoughts about motive.  Bachmann gratifies herself as believing she can be the first woman US President. When Bachmann looks into her narcissistic mirror, however, she sees, instead, Madame Secretary Hilary Rodham Clinton taking her place.  Well, I don't want to contribute to Ms. Bachmann's delusional thinking, but given her tangential and ambitious ideation, anything is possible.

Unfortunately, Bachmann and Limbaugh create a cacophony of misinformation during a time of highly partisan political discourse.  Confusion stirred by their delusional comments causes many Americans to become even more anxious about government and those who are in charge of our national security.

Tragically, delusional cacophony duos may even have contributed to other tangential actions (perhaps the murder of over a dozen innocent people in an Aurora Colorado movie theater by a deranged suspect dressed like the evil Bane character in "Batman". Although we don't know the murder's motive, we do know Limbaugh brought the character to national attention).

Bachmann and Limbaugh need mufflers.  We need protection from the harm of cacophony caused hearing impairment, or possibly, worse damage, by deranged people, during a time when sensible political issues should be discussed.

  

Republican National Committee and New Majority Agenda - Dual Negativity Against a Progressive Agenda

Now President Obama has two groups running negative TV advertisements against him, at the same time.

Obama is running for re-election as President against Republican National Committee and New Majority Agenda ads, running nearly back to back. Obama's response must be equal in its impact.

Both well funded negative groups are creating a synergistic attack, meaning each potent TV ad increases the lethal lying impact of the other. It's no wonder Obama's re-election campaign is going deep early on for the facts on Romney's job outsourcing history at Bain Capital and his lack of credibility in not releasing more than 2 years of tax returns. In the face of being out numbered on television and outspent by opponents, the President must forcefully and definitively respond. To do otherwise will give this year's election away to right wing extremists who want to force regressive tax and social policies against our nation under the smokescreen banner of freedom.

Right wing T-Party extremists ignore freedoms from fear of want and financial insecurity. Rather, their concept of freedom seems limited to second amendment gun rights, before all others. Among the freedoms that come and go on their radical right wing list, voting rights appear to be expendable.

A currently running Republican National Committee ad softly tells voters how it's okay to elect change in our nation's leadership. In other words, President Obama is a nice man but let's not re-elect him because, after all, the entire US deficit is his fault.

This ridiculous deficit premise ignores the history of our national debt, a financial condition that coincides with all our nation's wars, beginning with the War of Independence. President Obama inherited a national debt grown by the Republican Bush administration's two unfunded wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, while creating a new entitlement program called the Medicare D drug benefit.

An ad by the Republican National Committee targets Independent voters who are undecided about voting for President Obama, but apparently like him personally as being a good family man.

For President Obama to win re-election and save the nation's progressive agenda, he must go on the offense and keep up relentless pressure against the dual barrage of negative ads. These ads will obviously grow in number and intensity. Therefore, it's essential for President Obama to stand firm by pushing back with facts about Republican Romney's outsourcing business history at Bain Capital and his mystifying tax status reticence.

Nonetheless, polarizing negative messages won't improve the nation's economic condition. There's no Republican plan to improve the nation's economy. Cutting taxes, like Republicans tout to improve the economy, will only improve the economic condition of rich people while cutting middle class safety nets.

A shallow economic recovery plan reliant on tax cutting is especially weird, considering it was the Bush Republican wars and entitlement expansion that spiraled the national debt out of control.

Of course, a political re-election strategy can't be totally dependent on Romney's business and tax history.

Given the pressure of unlimited money and the resulting synergistic efforts in place to defeat him, President Obama must divide the Republican party by raising legitimate questions about Governor Romney's competency to run the nation.

In his rebuttal to Republican lies, President Obama must take no prisoners. He must forcefully respond.

Republican National Committee and New Majority Agenda Political Advertisements: Cut From the Same Cloth

Now President Obama has two groups running negative TV advertisements against him, at the same time. 

Obama is running for re-election as President against Republican National Committee and New Majority Agenda ads, running nearly back to back. Obama's response must be equal in its impact.

Both well funded negative groups are creating a synergistic attack, meaning each potent TV ad increases the lethal lying impact of the other. It's no wonder Obama's re-election campaign is going deep early on for the facts on Romney's job outsourcing history at Bain Capital and his lack of credibility in not releasing more than 2 years of tax returns. In the face of being out numbered on television and outspent by opponents, the President must forcefully and definitively respond. To do otherwise will give this year's election away to right wing extremists who want to force regressive tax and social policies against our nation under the smokescreen banner of freedom.

Right wing T-Party extremists ignore freedoms from fear of want and financial insecurity. Rather, their concept of freedom seems limited to second amendment gun rights, before all others. Among the freedoms that come and go on their radical right wing list, voting rights appear to be expendable.

A currently running Republican National Committee ad softly tells voters how it's okay to elect change in our nation's leadership. In other words, President Obama is a nice man but let's not re-elect him because, after all, the entire US deficit is his fault.

This ridiculous deficit premise ignores the history of our national debt, a financial condition that coincides with all our nation's wars, beginning with the War of Independence. President Obama inherited a national debt grown by the Republican Bush administration's two unfunded wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, while creating a new entitlement program called the Medicare D drug benefit.

An ad by the Republican National Committee is targeting Independent voters who are undecided about voting for President Obama, but apparently like him personally as being a good family man.

For President Obama to win re-election and save the nation's progressive agenda, he must go on the offense and keep up relentless pressure against the dual barrage of negative ads. These ads will obviously grow in number and intensity. Therefore, it's essential for President Obama to stand firm by pushing back with facts about Republican Romney's outsourcing business history at Bain Capital and his mystifying tax status reticence.

Nonetheless, polarizing negative messages won't improve the nation's economic condition. There's no Republican plan to improve the nation's economy. Cutting taxes, like Republicans tout to improve the economy, will only improve the economic condition of rich people while cutting middle class safety nets.

A shallow economic recovery plan reliant on tax cutting is especially weird, considering it was the Bush Republican wars and entitlement expansion that spiraled the national debt out of control.

Of course, a political re-election strategy can't be totally dependent on Romney's business and tax history.

Given the pressure of unlimited money and the resulting synergistic efforts in place to defeat him, President Obama must divide the Republican party by raising legitimate questions about Governor Romney's competency to run the nation.

In his rebuttal to Republican lies, President Obama must take no prisoners. He must forcefully respond.

New Majority Agenda and Freeport Illinois

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45755822/vp/48218943#48218943

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/16/mitt-romney-freeport-illinois-outsourcing_n_1676991.html 


The New Majority Agenda spends mega-millions promoting propaganda, lying about President Obama's administration, but the wealthy group funding the negative TV ads overlook truth, as in the true story about Freeport, Illinois.

"...The city council of Freeport, Ill., approved a resolution Monday evening that will call on presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney to step in and save roughly 170 local jobs being outsourced by a company owned by Bain Capital."  (Huffington Post link above)

"Last year, Massachusetts-based Sensata Technologies announced that it was closing its Freeport plant by the end of 2012 and shipping the jobs to China. The U.S. positions, the company claimed, would be phased out gradually. Sensata Technologies makes sensors and controls that are used in aircraft and automobiles."

This timely jobs story is conveniently overlooked by vitriolic Fox News, but gained national media attention by Huffington and The Ed Show.

If The New Majority Agenda has any honorable intentions whatsoever, the Political Action Committee paying for the anti-Obama ads would be telling the Freeport Illinois- Sensata story. This is a real story, told by people who have no place to go when Sensata closes out their jobs.  Even more weird, Sensata wants the soon to be let go employees to train their Chinese counterparts in how to do their job tasks!

Of course, The New Majority Agenda has sinister intentions. Anonymous rich donors contribute to the clandestine PAC, to spread lies on video tape, creating negative buzz about President Obama.  Like flashbacks from the novel "1984",  The New Majority Agenda creates myths without any opportunity for truth to counter the expensive lies.  In fact, The US Supreme Court cleared the way for PAC lying, in the Citizens United ruling giving corporations the same free speech rights as humans. 

But, 170 middle class workers in Freeport, Illinois have no such PAC in their town to cover their plight.  So, the town government came to the rescue and took the desperate situation right to the source of the problem, ie, Bain Capital. Yes, it's the same Bain Capital Venture Capitalist firm where Republican Mitt Romney was once the Chief Executive Officer.

Americans need to understand Bain Capital arithmetic.  It goes like this:

Bain Capital buys companies. Bain Capital subtracts costs required to operate the company by cutting expenses, especially focused on reducing employees. Bain Capital sells off assets of the company that brings a return on investment for the entrepreneurs who share in the profits of the venture capitalistic initiative. Profits from the sales are invested in off shore tax free havens.  

Workers in Freeport, Illinois asked President Obama and Governor Romney to debate the Sensata closing in their town. More important, the employees who will soon be laid off without an intervention to save their jobs want Governor Romney to use his influence to call off the Sensata sale to China.

If The New Majority Agenda intends to live up to its PAC name, the rich funders of the negative ads should put their money into helping Sensata employees and others who need financial help, rather than wasting resources spreading lies. 

Romney and Presidential Truthfulness

Romney must be truthful to the American people.  By his arrogance, he isn't releasing all his tax information, just because he doesn't want to defend his amazing wealth, or where it came from. This reticence needs to be examined for what this secrecy says about Romney's inability to be truthful. Even Romney's Republican allies are increasing pressure for more disclosure.
http://www.nationalmemo.com/six-more-republicans-who-want-to-see-romneys-tax-returns/


Was there advance notice to Americans when past US President's lied to us?  Let's dust off video tapes of President Nixon, who said, "I am not a crook".  It turns out, Nixon turned a blind eye to crooks who worked on his behalf, by ignoring the Watergate Hotel break in by a group of sleazy political spies- it cost him his Presidency. Prior to this watershed illegal incident, President Nixon had long been suspected of being untruthful to the American people, but he was caught blindsided by Watergate, causing a national crises.


How about Weapons of Mass Destruction that never existed in Iraq? Not a shred of evidence came forth about WOMD, but 4,486 American military lost their lives defending our nation against a mythical threat.  Even worse, the lie continued when President George Bush II (43) prematurely declared "Mission Accomplished", after dictator Saddam was toppled, but 4,347 more American deaths followed his brazen announcement.  http://antiwar.com/casualties/



Bush 43 led those lies about WOMD and falsely declared "Mission Accomplished" because he wanted to kill Saddam, who had plotted to assassinate his father, Bush 41.  Curious, how George Bush II often spoke about how much he read the Bible, but he must have skipped over the part in Roman's 12:19 Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," says the Lord.


Now we have candidate Governor Mitt Romney, who says he can be a better US leader than our current President Barack Obama.  But where's his truthfulness?  If Romney can't produce tax returns to demonstrate good faith truthfulness to the American people about his wealth, then why should voters hire him to replace our current President?  Of course, the answer is, we shouldn't.  


Although Romney's super-wealthy status certainly doesn't disqualify him as a US president, his willingness to  hide the truth about the sources of his wealth, in the face of bi-partisan calls for disclosure, creates questions about his competency to lead.  


Romney claims he's better qualified to lead Americans into a faster economic recovery than the current president.  But the concept of confidence is a huge component of any economic system.  We'll find ourselves in a regressive time warp, like the Watergate days, if our nation becomes embroiled in a potential Romney administration's inability to be truthful. We'll return to the daunting days when politics froze on every undisclosed detail about what President Nixon knew about the Watergate break in, and when he knew it.


Americans must demand truthfulness from our leaders.  This Ten Commandments quality is as important to leadership as having business experience.  After all, who wants to do business with companies where the products are misrepresented?  We'll be poorly served by an untruthful president, and Romney is clearly demonstrating his inability to be forthcoming.


Romney's management style as a potential president is out there for evaluation. He's giving us plenty of advance notice about how a potential Romney administration will run our nation - and truthfulness appears to have been pushed aside. Americans will not tolerate another Watergate or Iraq era filled with lies.

New Majority Agenda and Prestidigitation

Dear New Majority Agenda, please help Americans understand how Bain Capital's Chief Executive Officer Mitt Romney signed Securities and Exchange Committee (SEC) Documents when, by his own admission, he had left the company, or was on a leave of absence or some other magical prestidigitation of corporate structuring? If he was on a leave of absence, why was he paid? If his leave of absence was agreed to because he ran the Olympics, please find out if he was paid twice - both by the Olympics and by Bain?

By the way, has the media asked how much total money is wasted on buying those currently running New Majority Agenda national negative political ads? Sponsors of these ads appear to have magical access to money. Maybe these money supporters can use their affluence to help inform voters, rather than subject us to the sleight of hand negative ads they're buying like glutenous Romans at an orgy.

We can't know if the filthy rich Koch Brothers are funding this series of myths under the Political Action Committee (PAC) name of The New Majority Agenda, because sponsors of the propaganda are protected from disclosure by the Supreme Court's Citizens United Ruling providing for free speech.

But, let's pretend The New Majority Agenda is a crystal ball, rather than a political action committee. Can we pretend to gaze into this mystical abyss and ask how it is Mitt Romney gets away with not disclosing as many years of tax returns as other presidential candidates have done over the past 30 years?

It's entirely possible Romney's tax returns will disclose the man behind the curtain, if it turns out he really was Bain Capital's CEO, when he says he wasn't, because his tax returns will absolutely reveal his income sources.

Therefore, dear New Majority Agenda Wizards of Oz, it would be wonderful if you could use your considerable funds to help Americans understand Mitt Romney's wealth, rather than pour money into negative advertisements, inventing myths, with no credibility behind the messages.

For example, it's simply not true that romping children who are 11 years old can't find jobs...."hello!", there are child labor laws. Another example, it's not true that President Obama is responsible for the growing national debt when Republicans have cast aside the Simpson-Bowles recommendations and killed job creating legislation. Indeed, unemployment isn't caused by President Obama's administration, when those seeking jobs without success are largely white collar workers who were victims of corporate downsizing, which has increased the profit margins for many corporations.

Litanies of The New Majority Agenda myths are expensive political magic acts, creating the aura of a President who is somehow responsible for all economic woes. Meanwhile, in the absence of tax reforms, as in Simpson-Bowles, many wealthy Americans are getting much richer while the middle class picks up the tab for running government.

If The New Majority Agenda wants Americans to understand who to vote for in the 2012 Presidential Election, the hooded supporters should put their money into disclosing the truth behind Mitt Romney's off shore mega investments and where he receives his considerable wealth.

Certainly, if Romney's time at Bain Capital was legal and clearly documented, then The New Majority Agenda can claim credit for revealing truth, rather than continuing the prestidigitation of deceiving American voters with lies on videotape.

New Majority Agenda and Mad Hatters Disease

"Is a Raven like a writing desk?," asks the Hatter in one of the many entertaining Lewis Carroll quotes from "Alice in Wonderland".

Being forced to watch The New Majority Agenda's negative ads during prime TV time makes me wonder if the Hatter's confused analogies are infectious. Is The New Majority Agenda a victim of Mad Hatter Disease? "Oh my ears and whiskers!," I think the ads are even crazier than Alice's Rabbit.

Expensive propaganda ad buys by The New Majority Agenda creates ridiculous conclusions. 

"Well, I never heard it before but sounds uncommon nonsense," said Alice's Mock Turtle.

In the latest film noir style production, President Obama is blamed for the nation's growing national debt. It's another in a series of outrageously Ravenesque Mad Hatter national negative and untrue TV ads.  

The propaganda doesn't tell viewer that President George Bush 2nd (43rd) blew a balanced budget handed to him during the turnover from the Clinton administration, but he engaged Americans into two wars, plus created a new entitlement called the Medicare D benefit, without increasing taxes.  Republican policies grew the national debt, and that's the truth.

In reality, money used to pay for The New Majority Agenda's negative lie campaign could fund some of the national debt, if the wealthy ad backers, (probably the filthy rich Koch brothers) paid their fair share in taxes, rather than fund propaganda.

But we can't know who the real wealthy buyers are because they're protected by the Citizens United Supreme Court free speech ruling. In other words, it's legal for money to buy lies.

It's makes as much sense as the Mock Turtle's definition of the different branches of arithmetic,"...Ambition, Distraction, Uglification and Derision".  

What would Alice say?  Well, "I think I should understand that better, if I had it written down, but I can't quite follow it as you say."

Here is real arithmetic:

When Republicans started wars, that's Addition.

When Republicans created a new entitlement under Medicare without providing revenue, that's Addition.

When Republicans obstruct all attempts to raise revenue through tax reform, that's Subtraction.

To claim, through propaganda advertising, that President Obama's administration has grown the national debt is as inaccurate as Distraction and Derision.

Rather, President Obama inherited was a hole as deep as the Mad Hatters subterranean home.

Mad Hatter's Disease describes the symptoms associated with mercury poisoning, an occupational hazard of those who once worked in the hat-making industry.  One symptom is hallucinations.  

Although Mad Hatter's Diseases isn't supposed to be contagious, the unfortunate occupational exposure causing the symptoms were described long before television existed. Maybe television has revived the Mad Hatters Disease bacterial spore.

The New Majority Agenda spread lies like people with Mad Hatters Disease create hallucinations.

Americans need an antidote.  We need relief from the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling, so truth can be the antiseptic to cure the propaganda. 

Meanwhile, we must remove those Uglification New Majority Agenda lies from our media.