Monday, September 25, 2023

Mitt Romney’s Game Plan: Past The Smoke and Mirrors.

September 26, 2012 by  
Filed under News, Opinion, Politics, Weekly Columns

Like Love Haha Wow Sad Angry

( For the past few months, all we have heard is Mitt Romney yelling about what Obama is doing. But have we ever asked ourselves: is Romney using this tactic to take attention away from his own shortcomings? Many Americans on both Democratic, and Republican sides are beginning to understand this methodology of “pointing fingers at President Obama”. A perfect example is Mitt Romney’s recently released 47% video, where he says that he is not concerning himself with the 47% of the United States population that does not pay income taxes. After the video went viral, Romney immediately called a press conference, and stood by the comments made in the video. Romney also claimed his statements were “not elegantly stated” and “off the cuff”. All that means is the video portrayed how he really feels when he thinks the cameras are not rolling. We got a glimpse of Romney without the evasive political jargon.

The very next day Mitt Romney pointed the finger at a statement Obama made years ago. In 1998, when President Obama was still a senator he said, “ I actually believe in redistribution, at least to a certain level to make sure everybody’s got a shot”. Besides the fact that most of America agrees with Obama’s statement, I do not appreciate Romney using President Obama’s statements in an attempt to make himself look good. It is a strategy the GOP has been using for months to avoid discussing their own plans. The real question is why doesn’t Romney ever talk about the details of his own economic plans? It is about time we start really focusing on what Romney plans to do with this country.  We already know Mitt Romney can attempt to discredit Obama’s strategies, but how much does Romney’s own economic plan stack up?

Mitt Romney’s economic plan is based off of a strategy called supply-side economics. Supply-side economics is derived from the theory that the best way to create a strong economy is to minimize taxation and government regulations, as much as possible, for rich Americans who are likely to produce economic growth. So, if we reward the wealthy by letting them use their  money however they want, and take away regulations on how their corporations treat people, then the wealthy are supposed to create economic prosperity. Of course, this is assuming the wealthy will use all this freedom to create jobs and give back. The problem with this theory is that it has not worked, and it does not support the common American like you and I. And you want to know the funny thing about it? Mitt Romney knows the consequences of this plan. So lets take a closer look and examine why it will not work.

There is no doubt about it; the supply-side theory looks good on paper, but not in practice. As a Nation we have tried it, and it has not worked yet. Trying it again will only produce similar results – an even worse economy. The idea of pampering the wealthy in hopes they give something back is commonly called the “trickle-down approach”. If this sounds familiar, then it probably is. This is the same strategy George W. Bush used for the past decade. You know, the one that failed, and they have been blaming President Obama for not cleaning up fast enough?  By almost any standard the economic performance under Bush was awful, and Romney plans to carry on that idea using similar policy.

A policy which will produce; you guessed it, similar results, and everyone is starting to catch on. According to a new report by the Congressional Research Service (CRS), cutting taxes for the wealthy does not cause economic growth. All cutting taxes for the rich does is “merely exacerbate income inequality” – it makes the problem worse. It is also to be noted that Mitt Romney is not just trying to mimic some of the Bush administration’s policy, he plans to augment them; using an even bigger shovel to dig the country into a hole. 

But what about the government spending? Surely Romney’s plan to teach Americans to stand on their own two feet by taking away their government support has some merit to it … Right? Wrong. Recently, the House Majority Leader Eric Cantor finally admitted that government spending cuts kills jobs. A deal called the “Sequester” will cut into both military, and other government spending, is being proposed. But Eric believes that “The sequester will harm important domestic priorities such as education, medical research, law enforcement, National Security, and jobs.” Cutting government spending to teach self-reliance is like teaching your child how to swim by throwing them in the deep end of the pool- it’s a bit risky, and rarely works. Still loving his economic plan? Then lets hit home, and paint a picture of how Romney’s economic plan affects you.

Mitt Romney wants to accommodate the wealthy in order to create a better overall economy. However, one must wonder: where is this money coming from for this plan? Well the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, also known as TPC, has done all the math; putting all of Romney’s plans in the most favorable, numeric, light possible. After the number crunching, they concluded that Romney’s plans are actually “mathematically impossible”. The end result is Romney cutting taxes on the rich (while increasing the deficit), raising taxes on the middle class, and cutting government programs for the poor.

Furthermore, if you think big companies will hire more Americans, while we let them run wild, you’re wrong. With less government regulations, corporations will just do more job outsourcing to save money. Then they don’t have to worry about those all those pesky fair wages you and I require. This means that the common people will pay more, suffer more, and gain nothing, with Mitt Romney’s economic plan.

Of course some Americans would not mind Romney’s plan, but only because it is not Obama’s economic plan. You know, the ones who say things like “I don’t want to give my hard earned money to some poor, lazy person, so they can buy an iPhone 5 and rims”. However, most who say that don’t realize that under the President Obama administration they do not make enough money to get their taxes raised. A person has to be making over $200,000 a year to legitimately make such a claim concerning the small percentage of freeloaders. Otherwise they are just beneficiaries of a policy masquerading as a contributor.

The bottom line is that regardless of how much some Americans dislike leveling the playing field under President Obama, they only risk messing up their own standard of living under Romney. According to Mitt Romney, middle and lower class is defined by having an income of $200,000 to $250,000 and less per year. If you are voting for Mitt Romney, and are part of the middle or lower class, then you are voting against your own interests. And Mitt Romney is going to let you.

Romney is well aware of his goals; whether he decides to share them with the rest of us or not. He is aware that he can use red smoke and mirrors to deceive the majority of America­; distracting us from his own plan that doesn’t even work. He is aware that his plan does not benefit anyone but the top 1% of America; a monetary bracket him and his contributors fall into. Even with his most recent publicity focused on what people are calling the 47% video, he says it is not his job to worry about an almost half percentage of Americans. These are our soldiers, risking their lives to protect mine, and your, freedom.  These are the college students, working hard day after day to make a better life for their selves. He is talking about the senior citizens, the ones who paved the way for you and I. Romney even offers a swift kick to the Americans who are down on their luck, and are too poor to even pay income taxes.

Unfortunately, when asked if he was worried that he may have offended the 47% of Americans, he responded with “It’s a message which I am going to carry and continue to carry.” –proving he doesn’t really care how you and I feel about it. So what have we found? After all the deceit, distraction, and false information, Mitt Romney wants to implement an economic plan that only works to worsen the economy at the common American’s expense. It is only people like you and I that will suffer. So when we wake up, and go to the polls this November, it is imperative that all of us, as Americans, focus on casting a vote that is less Anti-Obama and more Pro-America.

Staff Writer; Robbie Robinson

Connect with this brothers via Twitter; Kamakiro and Facebook; KamaKinto.

Also feel free to visit his Official website; Everetts Transition.


10 Responses to “Mitt Romney’s Game Plan: Past The Smoke and Mirrors.”
  1. lewis orr says:

    Mr Ohio Historian your comment is a bunch of half truths and lies. If you want to vote for Romney, vote for him but don’t come here with a truck load of bull! First off Mugabe’s economy was not undermined by the redistribution of land. It was sabotaged by racist and their cohorts angry over Blacks taking charge in their own country. Just like the embargo placed on Haiti in the Americas for over-throwing White rule. You can’t ask President Obama to cut benefits to the service men and women of this country and the college students and elderly and disable, and have the millionaires and billionaires not pay a dime. Only the uneducated, the rich and bigots would go for that. Which one are you?

  2. I came to this site looking at the article on “Toure”, which I found to be really interesting. I then decided to read this article about Mr. Romney. This article, however, has no mental acuity, instead being full of the idea that 47% of the people can benefit from 53% of the people, that the lower class is $200,000 (the same level that President Obama says are “millionairs and billionaires that pay too little taxes” and that there is enough money to go around. I would encourage readers here to read Dr. Thomas Sowell, a black economist who will tell you how badly this “tax the rich” lie is spun.

    Anybody who believes that the problem is that the rich are taxed too little ought to go live in Robert Mugabe’s Zimbabwe where the dollar is not even good toilet paper. Zimbabwe has gone from the relatively prosperous Rhodesia to a terrible economy. They tried the “free stuff” approach, redistributing the wealth. As a result, they have trashed their economy to the point where they have become a net importer of food. This redistribution was also done for similar reasons to those of Mr. Obama, which were that the colonialists had robbed the indigenous people.

    Mr. Romney is not my ideal candidate but does offer a clear contrast with Mr. Obama. The Obama administration has gone from serious issues such as hunger and poverty to stupid issues like free birth control, free abortions, free cell phones (not even paid for by the Government, but instead a fund), and free colonoscopies without medical advice. The operative word for President Obama is “free stuff”.

    I am sure that most people, if they would think about it, know that “free stuff” HAS to end at some point. I am also sure that all communities worry about getting THEIR “free stuff”, but their kids and grandkids paying for it. This is the Obama promise, however. If he would go ahead and either cut spending or raise taxes to pay for it, we could respect him. However, his refusal to cut spending, abetted by Harry Reid, John Boehner, and Nancy Pelosi, or even to offer a serious budget (no one voted for the President’s budget in Congress), shows that he is the “free stuff” President. When we can no longer print enough money, or borrow enough money, the “free stuff” will have to end.

    Do we want to trash our economy that badly? With what will we replace it? Mugabe’s vision has failed. Do you really think President Obama can make it work?

  3. Tim Herb says:

    Both sides try to act as if their **** doesn’t stink, but it’s as rotten on the left as it is on the right. There are no clean hands in this business. No one in this election is “Pro-American” in the traditional sense this country was founded on. Everyone is “Pro-‘insert party name’s’ Agenda.” The incumbent seems way more focused on being well liked(not working all that well according to Rasmussen), while the challenger is focused on trusting the rich to reinvest their tax savings. If I wanted a “pro American” president, I’d write in Warren Buffet, but that’d be a wasted vote.

    To say that the Romney camp is solely attacking Obama, and that it isn’t just as bad coming from the other side is unbelievably naive. To think that attacking job numbers isn’t justified is naive as well. Americans should look at jobless numbers, not unemployment. They’ll open your eyes.

    I always find it interesting to hear people harp on outsourcing jobs. I feel a huge number of jobs are outsourced due to unions. Take for instance the big three in Detroit. It’s absurd the amount of money that the unions are/were demanding. It’s not unreasonable given the regulations that companies look to employ elsewhere. Then look at foreign companies that create massive plants in the southern, non union states, that create tons of jobs. Have you ever driven past the KIA plant in West Point, Georgia? It’s literally a small town. Why is it that companies like KIA are able to create jobs down there and we are still struggling through unemployment? Entitlements don’t help. People feeling “above” working certain jobs don’t help. Unions don’t help.

    Entitlements should be, by nature, a bandaid and swift kick in the rear and not a permanent crutch. Many government regulations need reform, on both sides – entitlements and business regulations. There’s a way to have a moderate administration, but no one wants that. No one is willing to compromise, not just the GOP Congress.

    Any way, good thought provoking read, Robbie.

  4. lewis orr says:

    James, let me let you in on a secret, the jobs are gone and they aren’t coming back! The jobs have been outsourced to Asia and the factory in your town isn’t opening back up. Cotton isn’t king anymore, we’re not in the industrial age anymore, we’re in the information age. The Republicans know this better than anyone, because they’re responsible for harvesting factories to Asia, that’s their term. The Republicans are using this job issue against the Democrats because they know the Democrats can’t bring the jobs back. The Democrats know the jobs aren’t coming back but they can’t admit to it, because it would make them look weak to Asia. You seem to have access to a computer, use it and get information that you can use along with your individual gift that everyone has and create your own business and job. Don’t hold your breath waiting on the govt to give you a job, trust me it ain’t gonna happen.

  5. James Davis says:

    Reality Check ….

    Mr. Romney’s plan of low taxation on the very wealthy and low taxes for American businesses has proven to be a failure. However, if we are honest and we should be, because it is we as citizens who will pay the price for our lack thereof, Mr. Obama and the Democrats do not have a job creation plan either. The American Jobs Act which many pro Obama folks like yourself will point to is not a job creation plan. It is the federal government who will pay the salaries of the fire-personnel, construction workers, police officers, and teachers. That’s not a job creation plan! Anyway you look at it, it is an expansion of the federal payroll. (How long would they be able to keep these people on the payroll- How many can they hire? ) Mr. Obama and the Democrats cannot begin to hire or even start to impact the great number of unemployed people estimated to be north of 23 million people. Democrats say they they want to give tax credits to so call, “green energy companies.” This maneuver will not have an immediate impact upon our joblessnes, as these companies will take time to come on line. We need to stop being naive and admit this election is about talking heads who have no substance. We need to call a spade a spade and demand if you are voting Democratic that Mr. Obama articualte a job creation plan. Many in the news media are cognizant of the fact that neither one of these gentlemen have a plan of job creation. Look for this question to come up in the debates and for the moderators to drill down on this question. It will be interesting to see how they dance around and away from this question.

  6. Robert says:

    Best part is that Romney’s 53% includes millions of blacks. Romney does not talk race at all, he talks about makers versus takers and that “takers” will vote BHO. And no doubt, takers will vote BHO 9:1. Just like makers will vote 7:3 Romney.

  7. Robert says:

    Summary: I hate wealthy white people for no earthly reason. The President has a great record. BHO 2012.

  8. lewis orr says:

    Great Article! I couldn’t have said it better myself, it’s good to see everyone isn’t blind, walking around parroting Fox News.(Republican zombies)

  9. Fritz says:

    There is no doubt about it; socialism/collectivism looks good on paper, but not in practice. Since 1848, many countries have tried it, and it has not worked yet.

  10. B. Maple says:

    An incredible article. I am so glad I came across this. I actually had to Google words like “Romney” “Plan “Game-Plan” “Proposal” because I feel the same way and was curious to see what I would find. I am so sick of Republicans saying such horrible things about the President. We get it. You don’t agree with him or his administrations policies. But bad mouthing people never helps anyone – what we need so badly from the Republican Party right now is a clear, concise, intelligent platform that explains what their stances are and why they feel those stances will lead America into a better, brighter, more equal future. It doesn’t matter if we ‘agree’ with them or not – but they do need to make logical sense – they do have to stand by them consistently – and they do have to be in the best interest of all people. We don’t get that. We get extremist, embarrassing, stereotypical hillbilly thinking by people spouting untruths and bigoted views all under a thin-ass mask of so called ‘patriotism’ that isn’t patriotism at all. I am grateful for articles like this that outline clearly how destructive this kind of approach is. Transparency, honesty and integrity from both sides is how we can move forward. And at this time – we these options – the choice is so clearly – so glaringly not – Mitt Romney/Paul Ryan. Cheers.

Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!