1. The presidential campaign thus far has been described as lacking in excitement. Romney has been criticized as being non-inspirational; compared to President Reagan, he has been found wanting.
Obama is running scared and his campaign tactics show it; he is divisive and certainly not presidential.
I don't think that these criticisms will amount to much in Nov. The foremost problem we have is the economy, unemployment and a huge debt. These are the issues that the public wants discussed and ultimately solved. Politically, style, excitement etc. may be desirable, but they are not enough. We had a candidate with plenty of style (and not much else) in 2008 and look where it got us. This time we want a president who is effective.
2. Condoleezza Rice would be a worthy candidate for vice-president. She is smart, experienced and articulate. Her tenure as President's Bush national security advisor and Sec. of State would provide Romney with expertise in foreign affairs and the inner workings of government. But she has a couple of drawbacks: one, she is pro-choice which would be a problem for many Republicans and second, her role in the Bush administration would give the Democrats an opening to bring up the Iraq war and all that goes with it. In my opinion, Romney should choose someone that represents the future (such as Mark Rubio or Paul Ryan) and not the past.
3. As I stated previously, Obamacare should be repealed and replaced. It will continue to be an issue in the campaign and rightly so. Consider:
*It was approved by SCOTUS by rewriting the law and dismissing other facts that did not support its rationale. The Court's decision sets a very dangerous precedent and should be negated by repealing the law.
*Obamacare will result in unprecedented government power and regulation. It gives government bureaucrats wide latitude in governing key aspects of health care that should be left to individuals and private organizations.
*It threatens fundamental liberties by use of the individual mandate and by forcing religious institutions to participate in practices that they don't condone, such as abortion.
*It increases our national debt to historical highs and risk the country's economic vitality for us and for future generations. One must ask what possible good Obamacare will do anyone if the underlying economy is bankrupt or near bankruptcy.
*Finally, it increases taxes to areas and to levels that will adversely impact private initiative and our free economy.
4. The choice in Nov. is between two very different approaches to government. The liberal agenda relies on more government involvement and increases in public spending for infrastructure to stimulate the economy. The conservative view is to grow the economy by providing American businesses with the conditions to compete in a global economy. How we choose will determine what kind of country we have going forward.
I welcome yiur comments.
Obama is running scared and his campaign tactics show it; he is divisive and certainly not presidential.
I don't think that these criticisms will amount to much in Nov. The foremost problem we have is the economy, unemployment and a huge debt. These are the issues that the public wants discussed and ultimately solved. Politically, style, excitement etc. may be desirable, but they are not enough. We had a candidate with plenty of style (and not much else) in 2008 and look where it got us. This time we want a president who is effective.
2. Condoleezza Rice would be a worthy candidate for vice-president. She is smart, experienced and articulate. Her tenure as President's Bush national security advisor and Sec. of State would provide Romney with expertise in foreign affairs and the inner workings of government. But she has a couple of drawbacks: one, she is pro-choice which would be a problem for many Republicans and second, her role in the Bush administration would give the Democrats an opening to bring up the Iraq war and all that goes with it. In my opinion, Romney should choose someone that represents the future (such as Mark Rubio or Paul Ryan) and not the past.
3. As I stated previously, Obamacare should be repealed and replaced. It will continue to be an issue in the campaign and rightly so. Consider:
*It was approved by SCOTUS by rewriting the law and dismissing other facts that did not support its rationale. The Court's decision sets a very dangerous precedent and should be negated by repealing the law.
*Obamacare will result in unprecedented government power and regulation. It gives government bureaucrats wide latitude in governing key aspects of health care that should be left to individuals and private organizations.
*It threatens fundamental liberties by use of the individual mandate and by forcing religious institutions to participate in practices that they don't condone, such as abortion.
*It increases our national debt to historical highs and risk the country's economic vitality for us and for future generations. One must ask what possible good Obamacare will do anyone if the underlying economy is bankrupt or near bankruptcy.
*Finally, it increases taxes to areas and to levels that will adversely impact private initiative and our free economy.
4. The choice in Nov. is between two very different approaches to government. The liberal agenda relies on more government involvement and increases in public spending for infrastructure to stimulate the economy. The conservative view is to grow the economy by providing American businesses with the conditions to compete in a global economy. How we choose will determine what kind of country we have going forward.
I welcome yiur comments.
No comments:
Post a Comment