Remarkable Democratic progress moves forward in a divided Congress

Congress Is Shooting for the Moon, and Getting Close

Democrats are on a positive agenda trajectory- dreaming for the political moon and catching a few stars. 

Echo report published in The New York Times, written by Farah Stockman who is a member of the newspaper's editorial board.

• In March, 2022, the Congress overhauled the U.S. Postal Service, which had been on the brink of insolvency for years.
• Then, in June, 2022, the Congress passed the first major gun safety legislation in nearly three decades.
• In July, Congress also voted to make the most significant investment in American industrial policy in half a century.
• Now a bipartisan group of 16 senators is working to fix the Electoral Count Act of 1887, a step that legal experts say is needed to save our democracy from another January 6th-style attack.

Is it everything that Democrats dreamed of? Not by a long shot.

But it’s major progress — all the more remarkable for the fact that it is happening under an evenly divided Senate. It flies in the face of the prevailing narrative that Washington is irreparably broken and that President Biden is a nostalgic old fool for even trying to reach across the aisle. Regardless of what plays now on cable news, historians of Mr. Biden’s first term will have to admit that a surprising amount got done.

Of course, we are living through a toxic and deeply polarized era in which some politicians seem to prefer seeing the country fail than helping the opposite party succeed. But as compelling as the intractability narrative is, it might be a bit overblown. Obstructionism has limits. People who win elected office can get fed up with gridlock, too. Consider what happened when Mitch McConnell tried to hold the CHIPS Act hostage for political reasons. It didn’t work, partly because too many Republicans had worked on it and wanted to pass it.

And maybe Mr. Biden’s original, sweeping Build Back Better plan failed, not because of obstructionism, but because the country wasn’t sold on everything in it. 

Unfortunately, when it died a slow death, many Democratic voters grew despondent. Presidential popularity poll numbers sank.

President Joe Biden to sign important landmark legislation to create the Inflation Reduction Act

But, that doesn’t mean that nothing was getting done. For the past two years, lawmakers have paid workmanlike attention to a series of bipartisan bills on things that have been on the country’s to-do list for years. 

Some who threw red meat to the base with one hand were also quietly hammering out bipartisan deals with the other to expand health care benefits for veterans, secure what has been called the largest investment ever in public transit and protect local and tribal governments from cyberattacks.

Fifty-five senators have played a leading role in one or more of 16 significant bipartisan initiatives over the past two years, according to Jason Grumet, the president and a founder of the Bipartisan Policy Center. Eight of their bills have become law, and more could pass in the lame duck session. A 50-50 Senate meant that much of what passed had to be bipartisan, with at least 10 Republicans in support. It was harder than it used to be, but not impossible.

“The democracy is badly bruised, but it is not broken,” Mr. Grumet told me.

Alas, it is a function of our hyper-partisan era that such productivity is often kept under wraps. Many politicians feel they’ve been elected to fight rather than compromise. It’s uncool to crow about working with the other side.

That leaves the public with the impression that their government is more broken than it actually is, and it robs voters of the hope that it could ever change. The notion of endless, absolute gridlock isn’t just wrong. It’s dangerous. It’s causing Americans — and people around the world — to lose faith in democracy as a model of governance.

Politically speaking, when Democrats have controlled the White House and both chambers in Congress, the widespread notion of do-nothing government has also been self-defeating.

Democrats have spent much of the last year battling the perception that they were helpless in the face of Republican (or Sinemanchian) obstructionism, so much so that many activists who worked hard to elect Democrats began to wonder why they had bothered.

But the party kept at it. Build Back Better stayed on secret life support throughout the winter and spring. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm and Interior Secretary Deb Haaland toured laboratories in West Virginia with Joe Manchin, the infamous holdout. 

Brian Deese, the director of the National Economic Council, went zip-lining with him. Even though talks had been declared dead umpteen times, Chuck Schumer, the Senate majority leader, kept reaching out to find a slimmed-down version that Mr. Manchin could live with.

Now, after years of eking out bipartisan progress where they could, Democrats are getting two more big things accomplished on a party-line vote. 

The Inflation Reduction Act contains what Bill Gates described as the “single most important piece of climate legislation in American history.” It’s a vindication of the approach of both wings of the Democratic Party. Progressives made climate a priority. Moderates patiently struck the deal that got it done.

Will it do all the things climate activists had hoped for? Of course not. But, “Finally, a climate bill has passed the Senate,” Varshini Prakash, the executive director of the Sunrise Movement, tweeted. “This isn’t the bill my generation deserves, but it is the one we can get. It must pass to give us a fighting chance at a livable world.”

The Inflation Reduction Act will also make it possible for the government to negotiate the price of drugs for Medicare patients, a common-sense but maddeningly out-of-reach goal that groups like AARP have been fighting for since at least the early 2000s. Donald Trump campaigned on a pledge to do just that. He didn’t get it done. Democrats did.

Will that fact filter through to voters? It’s not clear. News of these Democratic victories has been quickly drowned out by coverage of the F.B.I. search of Mar-a-Lago. To the extent that these legislative achievements are being discussed, it’s in the context of the midterm elections. “Joe Biden’s Presidency Is Suddenly Back From the Dead,” announced New York magazine’s Intelligencer. 

“Biden approval rating jumps to its highest level in two months,” read the headline of an article in The Hill detailing a two-percentage-point bump in the polls.

Ah, well. it’s what is possible right now.

Even if today’s voters aren’t clued in to the larger legacy of these bills, future generations will be.

These achievements “will not rival F.D.R.’s New Deal or L.B.J.’s Great Society programs, which truly reshaped the political and policy landscapes for decades,” Barbara A. Perry, the director of presidential studies at the University of Virginia’s Miller Center, told me. “Yet in light of what were expected to be incremental changes at best, Biden’s accomplishments are more on par with J.F.K.’s New Frontier legislation — somewhere between simply tweaking policies around the edges and wholesale refashioning of American government.”

It’s not as big as Build Back Better, although it’s still big. It’s shooting for the moon and landing among the stars. 

Indeed, that’s a good thing, not just for Joe Biden and Democrats but also for the country, and for democracy itself.

Lawmakers must protect Social Security, Medicare and health care for America's people

MaineWriter opinion:  Republicans and the inept Donald Trump administration are ignoring the needs of hard working Americans. Rather than support Americans, the Trump administration, followed in lock step with Trumpzi zealots, are risking to negatively impact the quality of life for the people who pay taxes, by contributing to our nation's economy, and who are entitled to receive the Social Security, Medicare, and health care benefits they earned by living and working in the United States.

This is a call to action from the American Association of Retired People titled "Where We Stand", published in the advocacy section of  the AARP Bulletin:

As a new Congress — America’s 116th — gets down to business in January 3029, the top issues on the minds of people 50 and over are their health and their financial security. 

Jo Ann Jenkins CEO "Where We Stand"

Democrats now control the House of Representatives, while Republicans maintain their majority in the Senate. But all Americans need lawmakers to work together on these issues.

A survey commissioned by AARP after November’s elections found the issues that motivated voters 50-plus were not a surprise: More than 3 in 4 listed Social Security, Medicare and health care as reasons they voted as they did. And 3 in 4 listed the economy as a factor in how they voted.

With budget deficits projected to rise dramatically, some in Congress are targeting programs like Social Security and Medicare for potential spending cuts. But older Americans are clear about the need to protect and strengthen the benefits they earned through a lifetime of hard work.

Also, voters 50 and older want Congress to stand up for key provisions of the Affordable Care Act, such as the ability to get insurance even with preexisting health conditions and the limits on how much more insurers are allowed to charge older clients — the so-called age tax.

And they want lawmakers to find common-sense ways to lower health care costs. One place Congress can start is by preventing drug companies from hiking drug prices. While this issue has an impact on all Americans, it hits those on Medicare especially hard. People who rely on Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage take an average of 4.5 prescription medications per month. Lawmakers took an important step in reducing the financial burden on older Americans last year when they included in the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 a provision that will close the Medicare Part D coverage gap on brand-name drugs, known as the donut hole, this year.

AARP strongly supported closing the donut hole. It will save billions of dollars in out-of-pocket costs on medications through lower copayments. But the pharmaceutical industry is lobbying Congress hard for what it calls a “technical fix.” That so-called fix would pad company profits at your expense.

AARP will continue to fight the pharmaceutical industry’s attempts to reverse the closing of the donut hole. And we’ll continue to urge Congress to take steps that would foster competition among drug companies, allow faster access to lower-priced generics and give Medicare the power to negotiate lower drug prices.

At AARP we embrace our role as a nonpartisan advocate for people 50 and older. We’ll continue to work with members of Congress from both parties and the administration to address the issues that will help our members and all people live better as they (and we all) age.

Protect and improve Medicare ~ A Mid Term 2018 urgency

Although the 2018 mid term elections are reported to be a referendum on Donald Trump's failed administration, the fact is, there's more at stake for Medicare beneficiaries.  I was pleased to read this accurate analysis on this public policy urgency,  published in the opinion page of the Texas-Fort Worth Star-Telegram newspaper, by Bob Jackson, the director of AARP Texas .  

Seniors rely on Medicare. Don’t let Congress gut it

Medicare turned 53 years old last month. The Congress elected during this year’s midterm elections will likely determine what Medicare’s future is, including whether it will continue meeting the promise made to those who have paid into the system over the years.

That’s why it is in the best interest of every American voter to find out whether their member of Congress will work to improve Medicare on behalf of beneficiaries or cut Medicare and pass the costs on to the rest of us. 

With this in mind, voters need to show up at the polls and vote for candidates who support protecting Medicare.

Medicare accounts for 15 percent of the federal budget, no small sum. (But Jackson should point out that beneficiaries pay for their coverage during their working career and, moreover, they subsidize the benefit with their Social Security contributions).

So when politicians in Washington start talking about deficit reduction, some of them always look for ways to reduce Medicare spending, despite the fact that most of us have been paying into Medicare for years in advance. Proposals for cuts mean less coverage and more out of pocket cost for Medicare recipients.

One proposal has been to give people a voucher of a fixed amount to buy private insurance, and if the voucher doesn’t pay for needed coverage, recipients pay the rest. 

Americans pay into the Medicare out of every paycheck, and they have the right to fully expect Medicare to live up to the promise that it be there for them.

Medicare is an incredibly good value. 

Every year 98 percent of the Medicare budget pays directly for the health care needs of its 60 million beneficiaries—people 65-plus and adults with disabilities. Only about 2 percent of the Medicare budget is spent on administrative overhead. Private health insurance companies invariably spend double digit amounts on overhead and profit.

Prior to Medicare’s enactment, three quarters of older Americans had no health care coverage. They and their families were just a minor illness away from financial ruin just trying to get well. Before signing the bill creating Medicare, President Johnson said, “No longer will older Americans be denied the healing miracle of modern medicine. No longer will illness crush and destroy the savings that they have so carefully put away over a lifetime so that they might enjoy dignity in their later years.”

Medicare is important to you if you are disabled or 65 years old—or if you plan someday to be 65. 

Further, there is something you can do to assure Medicare is protected. Hold every candidate for the U.S. Senate or the House of Representatives accountable for Medicare’s future. When you vote in the midterm elections in November, be sure the candidates are on the record with an answer to four questions:

1. Do you believe Medicare should be cut as a way to reduce the budget deficit?

2. Do you favor converting Medicare to a voucher program?

3. What changes would you make to ensure that individuals continue to get their promised benefits?

4. Do you support expanding coverage to include hearing, vision, and dental care?

Politicians in Washington argue and posture, but they don’t seem to get very much done. When it comes to Medicare though, midterm election voters can change that by raising their “do no harm to Medicare” voices at the polls.

Bob Jackson is the director of AARP Texas.

Republican tax scam is a middle class shell game

Republican tax cuts for the rich are a political "slight of hand"- playing games with the nation's growing deficit.

"The tax cuts for the rich legislation, according to CBO, will have the largest deficits between the 2019 fiscal year and the 2022 fiscal year. The finding comes as GOP senators have largely ignored warnings that their tax plan would increase the deficit."

Here are 7 reasons why Republicans wrongly sold their party on the middle class shell game.

In passing a bill giving tax cuts to the rich, the Republicans have passed the burden of paying for their cash cow on to the middle class.  It's like the tax bill gives the middle class a short acting injection of anesthesia, by offering some up front cuts, for the purpose of socking it to the same people when the effects wears off and the deficit grows.

1.  Nobody read the tax bill when it was voted on.  In fact, the bill was scribbled together in such an ineligible manner that it was unfit to enter into the Federal Register in it's draft form.  There's no way possible that scribbled bill that was voted on by a 49 to 51 partisan vote can be transcribed just as it was presented. (I think the last time the Congress hand wrote legislation was in 1789~ Twitter post by @Thor_Benson.)

2.   Passing the tax cuts for the rich will inflate the nation's deficit by $1Trillion forcing future generations to pay for it.  In fact, the Congressional Budget Office reports that the Senate tax bill increases the nation's deficit by $1.4 trillion.

• The Senate GOP tax plan will increase the deficit by more than $1.4 trillion over a decade, according to a new analysis by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

• The CBO score came as senators were already voting on amendments to the legislation and are expected to pass the bill in the early morning hours of Saturday.

3. Americans do not support the tax cuts for the rich. In fact, Senator Angus King took calls from constituents.  For every one call his office received in support of the tax cuts, there were 10 who opposed the bill and asked him to oppose it.   

4. Moreover, The Washington Post reported about 400 millionaires who requested that their taxes not be cut. More than 400 American millionaires and billionaires are sending a letter to Congress this week urging Republican lawmakers not to cut their taxes. The wealthy Americans — including doctors, lawyers, entrepreneurs and chief executives — say the GOP is making a mistake by reducing taxes on the richest families at a time when the nation's debt is high and inequality is back at the worst level since the 1920s.  The letter called on Congress not to pass any tax bill that “further exacerbates inequality” and adds to the debt. Instead of petitioning tax cuts for the wealthy, the letter told Congress to raise taxes on rich people like them. 

5.  The United Way and the American Association of Retired People (AARP) opposed the tax cuts for the rich. 

• United Way Worldwide, the world's largest privately-funded nonprofit, came out against the Senate's tax bill early Saturday as senators voted on amendments to the plan.  In fact, the nonprofit organization argued that the tax plan wouldn't provide much benefit to low-income families and would hurt charities. “On behalf of those who will be impacted in nearly every community we serve, I am deeply troubled by many aspects of the tax reform bill the Senate is now considering,” United Way Worldwide President and CEO Brian Gallagher said. He added that "the elimination of the charitable deduction for 31 million middle and upper-middle income taxpayers causes such damage to our ability to help people, we have no choice but to oppose the bill.”
• AARP Opposes Senate Tax Bill Older filers would get few if any tax breaks — and millions would likely see their taxes increase.

6.  Given the rare opportunity to invest tax resources into improving the lives and quality of life for all Americans, the Republican bill takes money away from future generations for the purpose of generating short term individual and corporate wealth.

7.  Although the middle class tax incentives will expire in 10 years, the corporate tax cuts do not have an expiration date.

Given the tax cuts for the rich will become a greedy law, the Democrats will be in the long term position of opposing the terrible impact of the daunting list of provisions, that will be shifted to all middle class and poor Americans.  

In fact, the tax cuts for the rich is the shell game of tax policy.  Whenever a criticism is made against the wrong minded plan, the shells quickly move, with the political slight of hand.  None ~ none~ who voted for this shell game know what they really passed and they can't tell us, with certainty, what the long term impact will be on the US economy.

Opposition coalition to TrumpCare aka RyanCare is formidable

American Medical Association leads a formidable coalition to oppose the Ryan proposal while Republicans force committee votes.

American Medical Association leads an informal but strong coalition to oppose RyanCare health bill

As far as I can tell, the still growing informal but strong coalition unifying, to oppose the RyanCare (TrumpCare) overall to #denycare, by repealing the Affordable Care Act (ACA) includes the American Medical Association and:

1. American Nurses Association
2. AARP (American Association of Retired Persons)
3. American Hospital Association
4. Heritage Foundation - conservative "think tank"- calls GOP plan "bad policy"

This is a strong and diverse coalition of consumers, public policy experts and health care providers who cannot be ignored by Congress, regardless of their political party affiliations.  In fact, the time is long past for Donald Trump to realize how he cannot bully his way to force public policy. Moreover, Speaker Ryan must understand the consequences of his wrong minded approach to helping people pay for health care coverage.

American Medical Association Opposes Republican Health Plan By REED ABELSON

The American Medical Association, a powerful lobbying group representing the nation’s doctors, announced on Wednesday that it opposed the House Republicans’ proposed legislation to replace the federal health care law, saying it was concerned the bill “would result in millions of Americans losing coverage and benefits.”

The group, which provided crucial support for the Obama administration’s contentious health care legislation before it was enacted in 2010, also sent a letter to the two House committees responsible for drafting the Republicans’ bill, called the American Health Care Act. The group’s concerns echoed some others raised this week among industry organizations like hospital groups worried about the possible losses of coverage that could result from the proposed legislation that was released on Monday.

All of the major hospital groups, including the American Hospital Association, also came out against the bill. “We are very concerned that the draft legislative proposal being considered by the House committees could lead to tremendous instability for those seeking affordable coverage,” the hospitals said in a letter to Congress. The hospitals also raised concerns about Republicans’ plans to significantly alter Medicaid, which they said could result in a loss of coverage and cuts to health care services. 

The doctors’ main concern focused on the Republicans’ replacement of the subsidies now available to millions of low-income Americans with a flat tax credit for low- and middle-income people that is adjusted by a person’s age. 

The A.M.A. emphasized the need for the credits to “be sufficient to enable one to afford quality coverage,” but it also emphasized that the credits should be closely tied to an individual’s income as a way of covering more people and being a better use of taxpayer money. The doctors also voiced their opposition to the proposed rollback of Medicaid. (In MaineWriter's opinion- these tax credits are only as good as the beneficiaries' ability to pay out of pocket for the coverage and most middle income Americans won't be able to afford them given the premiums are adjusted based on age...stupid!)
Even as the Republicans seemingly rush to pass a bill that would undo much of the current law, the doctors and hospitals urged them to be careful about whatever changes they made. 

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has not yet weighed in with estimates of how many people the new legislation will cover and what the cost of the plan might be.

“As you consider this legislation over the coming days and weeks, we hope that you will keep up most in your mind the potentially life altering impact your decisions will have on millions of Americans who may see their public, individual or even employer-provided health care coverage changed or eliminated,” wrote Dr. James L. Madara, the association’s chief executive.

The A.M.A. had earlier endorsed Dr. Tom Price as President Trump’s choice to head the Department of Health and Human Services, provoking a split with rank-and-file doctors and nurses who opposed his nomination.

(In summary - Congress must realize how the strong coalition growing to oppose Speaker Ryan's proposed legislation must be given respect and the expertise of the group must be responded to by dumping this useless #RepealCare legislation. "DOA"- stop forcing this needless legislation on Americans and the ACA beneficiaries. Doing so is blatant ignorance because their coverage is being taken against their will.

Social Security beneficiaries need a defense budget

Americans are subjected to daily news about how our US military are fighting Middle Eastern terrorists, using many millions or billions of dollars of super-duper techologies. Meanwhile, the US Congress spent eleven hours of taxpayer paid time on October 21, 2015, drilling Secretary Hillary Clinton about a tragic September 11, 2012 murder of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans, in Benghazi, Libya. 

Yet, the Social Security cost of living allowance in 2016 is zero.

Millions and probably billions of dollars are spent on defense technologies and useless Congresional probings (like the Benghazi inquisitions), while our American Social Security beneficiaries and military retirees are told the low inflation market basket doesn't justify a 2016, paltry cost of living raise. In the past, this cost of living raise has been decreasing to about 1-2 percent.

Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders speaks about how millionaries, and billionaries are taking money away from the American worker and padding their own greedy pockets.  

Much of the moneies the millionaires and billionaries earn are received through multi million dollar defense contracts awarded to their friends. 

In fact, the millionaires and billionairs are benefiting from the American tax money spent on building strategic equipment for the American military. The military seldom accounts for how the tax money received is actually spent. Maybe, Social Security beneficiaries should sign up to serve in the US Military.  

Of course, many US military veterans receive retirement income as compensation for the years they gave, in their youth, when they defended their nation, while on active duty. Military retirees will not receive a cost of living adjustment in 2016, either, because the US Congress felt the inflation index didn't justify a raise.  

In my opnion, many US miltiary retirees would gladly volunteer to defend our nation again, if asked. Maybe, in so doing, their earned retirement income would justify exemption from Congressional cost of living oversight. In other words, US military retirees would give their lives again for our nation. They deserve a cost of living raise today.

Our nation's Republican driven US Congress talks vehemently about cutting taxes. But, in so doing, the politicians are putting at risk the safety net programs, relied upon by hard working people, to pay for their cruel austerity. Nevertheless, the military budget hardly receives any scrutiny. Moreover, only a few who serve in the US Congress have ever even served in the American military.  

It's time the US Congress puts aside the money needed for a cost of living increase for Social Security beneficiaries and military retirees. These hard working beneficiaries and military retirees have earned their benefits.  On the other hand, the US Congress that decides about authorizing the cost of living raises have only earned scorn for their inability to accomplish anything to help average American citizens. Still, there's a chance to help Social Security beneficiaries and military retirees with a COLA, but the Republcian Congress is planning, instead, how to shut down the American government. It's time Social Security beneficiaries and military retirees take action against the wrong minded decision about no 2016 cost of living increases. 

If the Congress doesn't think these hard working beneficiars earned their cost of living increases, maybe they can ask us where can we sign up to serve in the US military? There's no problem with their budgets. Retirees need a defense budget!

Call the American Associaiton of Retired Persons (AARP) - 1 (888) 687-2277, to insist they use their influence on Congress.

Likewise, let's call our US Senators and Congress to demand the COLA!

Romney Campaign - Ryan's Boos and Ann's Gripes

This could be a premature Halloween story!
http://www.latimes.com/health/la-na-campaign-2012-20120922,0,7176447.story

Neither Congressman Ryan or Mrs. Ann Romney were properly briefed when they faced audiences last week during public statements. Ryan wasn't prepared to defend his call to eliminate "Obamacare" while Mrs. Romney did not have  a prepared response for Republican critics of avoidable campaign glitches. 

It's obvious, Ryan isn't equipped to handle criticism of his own "Ryan Plan". He had the audacity to stand before an audience of the American Association of Retired People (AARP) and call for repeal of the health care law (the Affordable Care Act) without offering any alternative.  I suspect Congressman Ryan was never prepared to defend his austere budget plan before a national audience of consumers of health care.  My impression is, Congressman Ryan is a spoiled rich kid who simply gets his own way by demanding attention.

From the Los Angeles Times:
Paul Ryan runs into trouble with AARPMitt Romney's running mate and architect of the Republican proposal to change Medicare, Paul Ryan is booed by the AARP crowd as he talks about plans to repeal President Obama's healthcare law. Just five minutes into his talk at the gathering of the powerful 50-and-older lobby, Mitt Romney's running mate — the architect of the Republican proposal to change Medicare for the next generation of seniors — was repeatedly interrupted as he criticized President Obama's healthcare law (Affordable Care Act).

"The first step to a stronger Medicare is to repeal Obamacare, because it represents the worst of both worlds," Ryan said as the crowd in New Orleans booed audibly.

"I had a feeling there'd be mixed reaction," Ryan acknowledged, pausing briefly. "So let me get into it."

When he suggested Obama was cutting $716 billion from Medicare over the next decade to pay for the costs of insuring more Americans under the healthcare law, those gathered booed. Ryan's own budget relies on using the same savings from Medicare, but he applies it to paying down the nation's deficit. Ryan also elicited a round of objections when he suggested that the healthcare law "weakens Medicare for today's seniors and puts it at risk for the next generation."

President Bill Clinton explained during his Democratic National Convention Speech:  

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/05/us/politics/transcript-of-bill-clintons-speech-to-the-democratic-national-convention.html?pagewanted=all

"Look, here’s what really happened. You be the judge. Here’s what really happened.  There were no cuts to benefits at all. None. What the president did was to save money by taking the recommendations of a commission of professionals to cut unwarranted subsidies to providers and insurance companies that were not making people healthier and were not necessary to get the providers to provide the service."

"And instead of raiding Medicare, he used the savings to close the doughnut hole in the Medicare drug program — and — you all got to listen carefully to this; this is really important — and to add eight years to the life of the Medicare trust fund so it is solvent till 2024. So — so President Obama and the Democrats didn’t weaken Medicare; they strengthened Medicare. Now, when Congressman Ryan looked into that TV camera and attacked President Obama’s Medicare savings as, quote, the biggest, coldest power play, I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry — because that $716 billion is exactly, to the dollar, the same amount of Medicare savings that he has in his own budget. (Cheers, applause.) You got to get one thing — it takes some brass to attack a guy for doing what you did." (Laughter, cheers, applause.)

In Iowa, Mrs. Romney showed the stress of the campaign in her response to a radio interviewer.  She should have been better prepared for this question. When asked for her response to Republican critics, she demanded they "stop it!".

Excuse me, Mrs. Romney, with all due respect, you and your family asked for this debate, nobody forced you into the "ring", it was voluntary.  Using your own analogy, boxing takes an extraordinary amount of preparation and training.  You certainly were not prepared for the radio interviewers question. Rather, your defensive response indicates frustration rather than confidence.  

https://news.google.com/news/section?pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&csid=b57fab583df61c9f&redirect=true 

"(CBS News) Amid ongoing criticism over the management of her husband's presidential campaign, Ann Romney on Thursday responded to the critics in an interview on Radio Iowa: 'Stop it. This is hard. You want to try it? Get in the ring,' she said."

Griping and booing are certainly negative indicators on the popularity Richter scale.  In fact, this public behavior is downright demoralizing for the candidates and supporters.

Moreover, this behavior is even more indicative of a poorly run national campaign.  Which, of course, is the entire problem.  If Romney cannot run a convention (which was poorly managed) and he can't stay ahead of his messaging or the stress involved in conducting an exhausting campaign, then, he certainly can't run our country.  Quite simply, Romney doesn't have what it takes to be President of the United States.  He doesn't have the right stuff.

A potential Romney presidency is downright scary! Let's not let it happen by voting to re-elect President Barack Obama.