Romney Victorious

YouTube Preview Image

 

It was a total rout.  Romney dominated the debate from beginning to end.  Obama was attempting to sit on a lead which is the worst strategy against an able opponent, and Romney demonstrated that he is a very able opponent tonight in spades.  A few thoughts:

1.  Best Performance Since Reagan-I have watched every presidential debate.  Except for the 1980 Carter-Reagan debate I have never seen any debate where one candidate dominated as much as Romney did tonight.

2.  Jobs, Jobs, Jobs-Romney kept the focus fixed throughout the debate on the 23,000,000 unemployed and continually returned to the subject of job creation.

3.  Teleprompter Where Art Thou?-Obama gave a wretched performance.  He rarely looked at Romney, while Romney always looked at him.  Obama either looked at the moderator or had his head bent down, looking at his notes, with a half smirk on his face.  His answers meandered and often had no point.  Obama needs to dump Lurch, (Senator Kerry), and get someone to coach him who can actually prepare him for a debate.  His performance was pathetic, and even his most rabid partisans, as indicated by the video of Chris “Tingle up my leg” Matthews at the beginning of this post indicates, realize it.

4.  Mitt the King Wonk-The amount of detailed knowledge that Romney had at his fingertips was astounding.  I know it astounded Obama, the pretender policy wonk.

5.  Lehrer the Zombie-Before the debate began I thought Jim Lehrer was looking incredibly old.  Romney was able to push him aside effortlessly and talk about what he wanted to talk about.  Lehrer attempted to throw a few lifelines to Obama when Obama was floundering but his efforts were futile.  Lehrer has moderated many presidential debates, but I guarantee the Democrats will make certain this is his last one.

6.  Change-Romney clearly indicated throughout the evening that he was going to change the policies of the Federal government, and Obama was cast as the champion of the status quo.  In a time when the great majority of the American people believe the nation is on the wrong track, standing pat is a disastrous stance.

7.  Drinking his Kool-Aid-Obama obviously believed his own campaign propaganda of Romney being an inept rich guy who wasn’t in his league.  One of the biggest errors in politics is to believe your own campaign talking points.

8.  With a Smile-Like Reagan Romney unleashed a root and branch attack on his opponent and did it with a pleasant demeanor.  That is a devastating combination against an incumbent president.

9.  Stature Gap Gone-Any challenger has a stature gap with a President.  Debating a President usually closes the gap.  After tonight, Obama has a negative stature gap with Romney.

10. Biden to the Rescue!-One Democrat stated that after this debacle the pressure would be on Biden to win his debate with Paul Ryan.  Yeah, good luck with that one!

YouTube Preview Image

 

61 Responses to Romney Victorious

  • If this were a fight, it would have been stopped. The referee would have determined that one fighter (President Obama) didn’t want to be there. Therefore for his own safety, the fight would have to be stopped. One need only look at the meltdown that Chris Matthews just exhibited toward President Obama on MSNBC. In addition, look at the comments of Andrew Sullivan, “disaster,” and Bill Maher saying maybe the President does need a teleprompter. Governor Romney won a lot of votes tonight which means the attack machine is going to be amped up like never before.

  • Rozin says:

    Romney was very smart not to let Obama and Lehrer work as a team. However debates don’t change votes; at best they keep everyone who is not sold on the other guy from defecting or staying home. Romney would need to do something similar in every debate to get a point or two from the other side.

  • Don the Kiwi says:

    Watched the debate at my mate’s place on Fox, with a check on CNN afterwards, plus Hannity. Romney waa certainly a clear winner. Obama’s body language was not good – looked like a loser. But things will be very different next debate. i don’t think Romney has any illusions about winning the first debate – a good mouthful does not a meal make. Obama’s team will have him attack much more, and Romney will be aware of it – the gloves will be off.
    I think it was telling that, in his closing address, Romney referred to the Constitution, with an emphasis on “Our Creator”. Excellent. I hope he keeps up the attack, and the principles.

  • PM says:

    The closings:

    Seems like the debate reminded the current President that he likes Americans tonight; for giving up perks to stay in business and finding meaning in building cars ‘n stuff, because he promised to keep on supporting them the way he has been, and if they vote for him … he promises. Maybe during October, November, and December, he’ll do some good for a change as a courtesy to Americans, if he can rise above the msnbc plan.

    Gov. Romney wants to do the work of President of the United States because he both loves this country and its foundation and is capable to do so. For how much more can Americans ask? We are so lucky to have this man for a candidate. Things are a such a huge mess.

  • Keep in mind there are 8 days before the next debate which is the Vice Presidential debate. The onus is on the President now who is a known commodity. Though Mitt Romney is well known to us political junkies, he was not to a good many Americans. The Governor can simply say the characticature of me seen on the negative attack ads are false and what you saw in the debate and in my term as Governor of a very liberal state (the Commonwealth of Massachussets) is the real Mitt Romney.

    The President and the media going on the attack against Governor Romney risk being seen in a even more negative light than they are already seen by a good many Americans. A very good night for Mitt Romney, a real game changer as seen by a CNN poll that shows he won 2-1, and focus groups of independent voters that state they are definitely leaning toward Romney. Remember before the debate, polls indicated that voters expected President Obama to win the debate 2-1.

  • Don the Kiwi says:

    David.
    I can’t believe that the result from the first debate is a game changer. Sure, Romney has shown himself to be “human” – not the ogre portrayed by the Dem attack ads. But if he can perform in the next two debates as he has done here, then the game MAY change.

  • chris c. says:

    Jim Lehrer did what any good moderator should do. He got out of the way and let the candidates have at it. The last thing I want to see in a debate is the moderator demanding “control”. In fact they should not even be there at all. The candidates should question each other directly, with only a timekeeper to keep some semblance of order, but as long as there is a moderator and/or panel, picked from the national press corps, Jim Lehrer is about as good as it is going to get.

  • T. Shaw says:

    Happy to hear that Mitt did well.

    I was watching the Bronx Bombers put away the AL East championship against their arch-rival BoSox, 14 – 2.

    I wouldn’t have watched the debate if they paid me. Obama nauseates me.

    Don’t get cocky.

    Seems even Matthews can’t put lipstick on that incumbent. Put Chris on suicide watch.

  • Don the Kiwi, hope all is well down under. Actually, I am not being a big Romney cheerleader, as I didn’t vote for Governor Romney in the primary (I voted for Senator Santorum.) However, when any candidate, sports team actor, actress, business leader etc rises to the top on emotion, hoopla etc. they are bound to have a big crash. It is the law of physics.

    The Middle East expert Dr. Fouad Ajami noted in a revelatory Wall Street Journal article in October of 2008 that he had seen the Obama effect before in the Middle East; where leaders were treated as conquering heroes only to come crashing down to earth. The Greek columns from President Obama’s 2008 Denver convention speech are cracking as we speak. He wouldn’t be the first charsimatic leader to see his fortunes come tumbling down Mt. Olympus.

  • Paul Zummo says:

    I didn’t get to watch the debate last night, but this is about as unanimous a verdict I’ve ever seen regarding a presidential debate since I started following politics.

    I disagree slightly with Rozin. First of all, John Kerry was helped by good debate performances, closing the gap between he and Bush after the first set of debates (though one could argue that correlation does not equal causation). Second, many Republicans and conservatives before last night had become convinced that Romney was all but finished, and now there has been a marked revitalization of spirits. Don’t discount the impact on voter enthusiasm, especially among the GOP.

  • Anzlyne says:

    what I enjoyed was the gentle and forthright way that Romney corrected the mendacity, pointing it out quietly (not shouting– as that one guy did during a State of the Union speech)
    I would have liked a direct discussion of the Three Branches. The arrogance of this pres is to in effect put the Supreme Court on trial in a real battle for Supremacy.
    Pres. Obama disrespects of the Supreme Court- dissing them at his S of the U speech, and on a regular daily basis with DOMA etc –

  • Rozin says:

    PZ I think we are in violent agreement. Debates don’t convince the other side’s voters to switch, they can only work on people who already are leaning against the other candidate. If a majority has decided or “all but decided” to vote for Obama (or Romney) then the debates wouldn’t matter at all. Fortunately, I don’t think Obama has anywhere close to 50% committed to him (FWIW Rasmussen put the number at 42%).

  • Anzlyne says:

    wow- blame atmospheric pressure! Blame Mr. Lehrer. Is there any way Sarah Palin can be blamed?
    Credit Romney, credit all the thorough Republican debates last year. Credit the power of all the prayers going up all over this country!

  • PM says:

    Anzlyne, yes as to your credits. Last night, I couldn’t turn on the TV thinking about preserving my mental ‘health’ from media, as I already have the season’s ‘flu’. I went to mittromney.com debate page and watched the tweets. Don’t have tweets or facebook things here, but it was as close as possible for me. I had time to allow consider ation of how deeply we, as a people, need some reason and sanity to antidote the daily government and media poison dosed out for these years – not as an excuse to be ‘cocky’, but as an acceptable reality in the world to breathe, if even for an evening.

    Mostly, it was a powerful experience to consider that Our Lord in Heaven has somehow had a hand in bringing hope to so many with this event by lifting hearts. I fell asleep trying to say thanks for so much.

  • Mary De Voe says:

    Anzlyne says:

    “I would have liked a direct discussion of the Three Branches. The arrogance of this pres is to in effect put the Supreme Court on trial in a real battle for Supremacy.
    Pres. Obama disrespects of the Supreme Court-”

    I, too, enjoyed the gentleness of the debates. I appreciated the way Romney did not let Lehrer cut him off, William Buckley style.

    from President Obama, one of his 923 executive orders:
    “EXECUTIVE ORDER 11921 provides that when a state of emergency is declared by the President, Congress cannot review the action for six months.”
    Who will reinstate representative government if Congress is defunct? Who will represent the people? Obama has overruled all of our unalienable rights and our sovereignty and wishes to give us over to be taxed by the United Nations. Anything Obama might have said last night would have given away the fact that he does not ascribe to our founding principles. The anger on his face when Romney did speak of our Constitution and Declaration of Independence, but I did not hear Obama growl. Maybe next time.

  • Pinky says:

    I’ve got to pat myself on the back for a moment. I’m usually terrible at calling this kind of thing, but a couple of weeks ago I said that Romney needs to embrace Romneycare as proof that he can work with the opposition, and then hammer at the President for his partisanship. The President wouldn’t be prepared for it. It seems to have worked. Although, from the look of it, the President wasn’t prepared for much of anything.

  • Dr. Sam says:

    DID OBAMA REALLY LOSE—OR WAS HIS PERFORMANCE PART OF AN OVERALL DEBATE STRATEGY THAT HE WILL DEPLOY IN THE FUTURE?
    It is so easy to conclude that Obama lost in the last debate or for Obama’s antagonists to claim that he can’t debate. Sen. McCain cautions against such assumptions, saying Obama should not be under-estimated by his opponent. Let us recall that Obama did quite well in many debates as he sought the Presidency in 2007-2008. Now, here is my take on Obama’s debate encounter with Romney on September 3, 2012:
    As it unfolded, I, like almost everyone else, was puzzled, frustrated, even angry about Obama’s performance. Upon further reflection long after the event, I have come to the following conclusions:
    1. At that debate, Obama was feeling his opponent out, trying to draw him out knowing there are future debates. That partly explains Obama’s smiles and smirks as the debate went on. So, he let Romney exhaust himself on his main arguments, talking points and spins, some would say on his many prevarications, about-faces and falsehoods. He made these statements before a huge national. He can’t retract or correct them in future without losing credibility—and, by pundits’ count, Romney made about 28 mendacious statements that night. He has already tried to correct one—that his own health care law in Mass. has a provision for pre-existing condition.
    2. Therefore, since the debate, Obama has gone on the offensives debunking or making fun of Romney’s false and misleading assertions. Expect him to do so even more aggressively in the second debate! He would be hammering Romney on his false logic, bad math and deliberate lies, though he may not outrightly call them “lies.”
    3. At the debate, Obama revealed little of himself. So Romney has little to work on. At the debate, Romney was out to prove himself and reverse a bad trend. Obama simply watched—at the end he said ominously that he “enjoyed it.” Obama did not even get into Romney’s disastrous 47% comments. Thus, he denied Romney the opportunity to pedal back before a national audience.
    4. Having set Romney up, Obama would be ready for the kill in the next encounter! He knows and can anticipate Romney’s well-rehearsed answers. Obama will do his home work on all of those. Romney can’t on Obama’s; he doesn’t know.
    5. The final debate on foreign policy is uniquely Obama’s territory. Romney know little that is meaningful here except what former Bush aids would feed him. But Bush is toxic for this election season. Here, Romney would receive his final body blow!
    6. Finally, the new job report bodes well for Obama. It takes the wind out of Romney’s sail. It undercuts severely his main selling point. Obama wins!

  • “It is so easy to conclude that Obama lost in the last debate”

    Because it is a self-evident fact.

    “At that debate, Obama was feeling his opponent out,”

    If so, what Obama discovered is that he is up against an opponent who can out-think and out-talk him.

    “Therefore, since the debate, Obama has gone on the offensives”
    Completely ineffectually, judging from the polls and early voting which show Romney surging, especially in the key states of Florida, Ohio and Virginia.

    “At the debate, Obama revealed little of himself.”

    Little that we didn’t already know. He is inarticulate without a teleprompter. His policy knowledge is lacking. He tends to allow his unfiltered statements to meander badly and often pointlessly.

    “Obama would be ready for the kill in the next encounter!”

    The next debate will be the Veep debate and I expect Biden to be badly humiliated in that, adding to the Romney momentum. I doubt if Obama will manage better than a draw in the last two debates, and there is always the possibility that Obama will come across as over the top and desperate if he attempts to overcompensate for his passive and unagressive stance in the first debate.

    “Finally, the new job report bodes well for Obama”

    It really doesn’t. The vast majority of voters understand that the economy is wretched and these last minute “save Obama’s” job numbers are being met with cynicism and derision.

  • bill bannon says:

    I wouldn’t write off Dr. Sam completely. I saw the entire debate and Obama could have embarassed Romney to no end on two points that I was aware of…but Obama didn’t. Romney said he would create 12 million jobs but Wall Streeters like Romney know that Moody’s Analytics and other financial advisory companies are saying the economy will produce 12 million jobs no matter who wins.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/economy/247081-experts-say-economy-should-grow-despite-who-wins-white-house-in-november

    Secondly Romney stated he would increase Medicaid and do so by inflation plus 1%. That’s actually a big cut because unlike low ordinary inflation (2.4% for 2013), medical related inflation is projected to be 7.5% for 2013.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/31/us-usa-healthcare-costs-idUSBRE84U05620120531

    So Romney will really be giving Medicaid half what it needs ( if it had no misuse which it does like most programs ). When I saw both moments ( the 12 million jobs and ” I’ll increase medicaid” ), I said to myself…this guy could sell lemon ice in the Antartic. But Obama knew Romney was conning the average listener ( not the above average listener who already know who they’ll vote for…if they are in a state where it will make any difference electorially.)
    Obama could have murdered Romney on either the 12 million or the medicaid increase and he did not. My impression was that Obama had something intimate bothering him….or Dr. Sam can’t be ruled out.

  • “or Dr. Sam can’t be ruled out.”

    Oh yes he can be. Obama is no Machiavellian genius, but rather a fairly typical liberal politician who had immense good luck when he ran for the White House in 2008. Now he has four years of failure behind him, and is confronted with the first competent opponent he has confronted in his political career.

  • Rozin says:

    Perhaps both Bill and Sam agree with the college students reported elsewhere who think Obama should be allowed a teleprompter for the next two debates.

    Of course it is entirely possible that Romney, having demolished Obama in the first debate, will feel it would be running up the score if he made him look bad in the last 2 debates.

  • bill bannon says:

    Rozin,
    I’m against Obama way more than I’m against Romney but the debate showed that economics oral debates are a contradiction in terms. They should be done on paper as exchanges of researched responses…but the fast moving pragmatic US voter population would not read the debate on paper or on internet because the position texts would be hyper detailed and endless and boring to most voters.

  • Art Deco says:

    Secondly Romney stated he would increase Medicaid and do so by inflation plus 1%. That’s actually a big cut because unlike low ordinary inflation (2.4% for 2013), medical related inflation is projected to be 7.5% for 2013.

    1. You have a news report of an analysis done by one agency. I would not take the number at face value.

    2. Much of Medicaid is devoted not to medical care but to the financing of nursing homes. Nursing homes house people, feed people, and give personal care, not services given to technology-driven cost inflation. There are rehabilitation services on site and attending physicians, but these are not financed by Medicaid.

  • Rozin says:

    Bill,

    If you are saying that debates tell us very little about a candidate’s qualifications for executive office (as opposed to legislative office) I agree wholeheartedly. Also any plan is subject to the vagaries of Congress unless like Obama you plan to rule by fiat. However an incumbent has a quite different situation than a challenger. You would expect an incumbent to know exactly what he/she has done and why they did it and be able to explain in great detail how things happened. The debate proved what was apparent to anyone paying attention the last four years: President Obama is a goof-off who doesn’t work at the job but spends his time in recreational activities, and reading from a teleprompter at various places. Given his lack of experience and general arrogance it is not clear that him paying attention would have greatly improved the product I admit. The parties and the people have to wake up and stop nominating and electing people without sufficient executive experience and proven ability.

  • Rozin says:

    Bill,

    I’m not sure what your point is unless you mean to say that taxpayers have to subsidize any cost no matter what. This was known in the old days as a cost-plus contract and for good reasons no one engages in it anymore (I hope). This is the usual Leftist argument used by Obama and every other Dem.” How dare you cut anything from teachers contracts!! How dare you cut the size and budget of anything we are already doing. How dare you not increase every budget by 7% every year no matter what.” This is how Dems end up saying Repubs want to kill seniors women and children. Why don’t you call up some people in Greece, Spain, Italy and similar places and let us know how they are doing on all their cost-plus benefits and services.

  • T. Shaw says:

    Ahem

    “So Romney will really be giving Medicaid half what it needs . . . ”

    When I read that, here’s what jumped upon my alleged intellect “Who gives my family and me any of what we need?”

    But, that’s just me. I’m one of the execrable 53%.

    And, 48 (or so) years after they declared War on Poverty, 49,000,000 Americans live in poverty. That’s a poor return for the $16,000,000,000,000.17 invested.

    The progressives created a leviathan: ignorant, uneducated, illiterate, dependent, people filled with envy, hate, gluttony, lust, sloth, wrath all of whom voting Democrat. The demagogues promise more entitlements and are re-elected ad infinitum. Career GOP pols don’t cut entitlements for fear of being demagogued. Both gangs of scoundrels are united in perpetually expanding the entitlement/nanny state. The middle class is caught in the vise between the free everything entitlement hordes and Wall Street plutocrats. The elites are effective in using media, universities/public schools and think tanks to divert middle class angst to those living off the state. While the endangered middle class is fixated on poor people, elites are bribing politicians and the Fed to give them laws, Op Twists, QE’s, and stimuli that add billions to their net worths. Precious little gets to the middle class and the economy is a wreck.

  • bill bannon says:

    Rozin,
    I many years ago refused to strike with the Newark teachers’ union…fortunately I’m 6’3″ and 235lbs. with little fat. They’d drive by and yell….but no takers. But previous to that I worked one year in welfare and saw the problems of the both the real poor and the phonies on welfare. I was also in the military and I like the military but not big budgets…but I like the small smart war concept…kill lists and drones, snipers and assassins make for lower costs and fewer civilians hurt. Rearranging muslim groups at $4 trillion (Iraq/ Afghan/Pakistan/…Brown University) is more wasteful than welfare. I’ll leave you with one thought…we give the mentally ill on welfare enough money in New York to live in the most
    dangerous neighborhoods. I live tin such places now sporadically for real estate
    reasons. God is not pleased with our niggardliness toward the mentally ill. ” The
    day of the Lord cometh like a burning oven”….Malachi 4:1.

  • bill bannon says:

    Paul,
    People wonder when does God punish nations? When their sins like abortion and the neglect of the mentally ill are filled up. In Genesis 15 God notes this principle to Abraham and predicts 400 years for the sins of the Amorites to be filled up:

    13
    * Then the LORD said to Abram: Know for certain that your descendants will reside as aliens in a land not their own, where they shall be enslaved and oppressed for four hundred years.f
    14
    But I will bring judgment on the nation they must serve, and after this they will go out with great wealth.g
    15
    You, however, will go to your ancestors in peace; you will be buried at a ripe old age.
    16
    In the fourth generation* your descendants will return here, for the wickedness of the Amorites is not yet complete.
    ……………………………………………………………………..

    Christ tells His generation of Jewish leaders that they are at the tale end of a filling up period which is why Jerusalem will be destroyed and was:

    Matt.23:31-32.
    31
    “Thus you bear witness against yourselves that you are the children of those who murdered the prophets;
    32
    now fill up what your ancestors measured out!”
    ………………………………………

    The fire comes when the sins are filled up. Only God knows if that is two years or two hundred years. But once the filling up is complete, God acts fast. If you have a sinful relative, pray daily for them because they are moving toward the “filled up” point but your prayers can affect all that.

  • bill bannon says:

    T Shaw,
    If anyone in your family dies very slowly in old age from certain illnesses that require medical machines. Here’s what happens. They are in ICU first in a hospital.
    Then they are transferred to a skilled nursing home which is covted for 100 days by medicare. Then if they are the final spouse, they go through their savings at the nursing home’s rate which is anywhere from $50K a year to 80K a year. After they or you are broke, medicaid covers you or they in that home till death. Unless you have Ryan’s several million or Romney’s many millions, you could be there one day on medicaid. Young people should really note this. If you have parents who hope to leave you several hundred thousand or more or less, it may happen but a lingering, slow death by a final spouse could destroy that inheritance so retirement planning should not include that money. Slow acting lung cancer, late stage Parkinsons etc. could despoil the family saving even with medicaid’s help.

  • Rozin says:

    Bill,

    Yes, Money can be saved everywhere. However, you were saying that Romney was bad in not constantly raising Medicaid according to what the inflation rate is and he should be attacked for that. I asked how was that different from a cost-plus contract? The answer I guess is that you are 1 inch taller and 40 pounds heavier. If you are not going to seriously answer that question you are not serious.

    I did not say that the Left was wrong to advocate for welfare; they are wrong to advocate for more govt spending Regardless of whether it helps or hurts the beneficiaries or bankrupts the country. Are churches and other charitable groups to offload their charitable work to the Dept of Human Services? Why don’t they simply become divisions of DHHS? Obama is right there to make it happen.

    The Right is wrong to advocate for more military spending whether or not it improves our national security. However your so-called smart wars are doing very badly now. Despite all those drones and cyberwhacks, the Taliban is ready to march back into Afghanistan and the Middle East is going jihad. The old fashioned war in Iraq has produced the most stable Arab govt in the region (not that we weren’t lucky about that).

    Why are mentally ill patients in dangerous city neighborhoods? Well, medications have allowed many such patients to leave institutions and live somewhat normal lives. But their earning prospects are not good. They of course could move out of NYC or other such places to smaller cities. But if the economy was improving and you had less corrupt city govt those neighborhoods would be helped too. The Argentinian or Venezuelan model we are seemingly embarking on will make even normal neighborhoods as bad.

  • PM says:

    Old way: Work and earn, save and retire. God-willing, you are whole and can.
    The saving part in this way of life is the betrayal for whatever the % of people.
    ( losing track of %’s ) El banco grande will maybe allow 1% if they can have a sum for a year or more type thing – or else … . They no longer vie with little CD earnings rates ads.
    Vague Anxiety is the order of the new way.

    All I know is that it took only three days from the debate night lift to figure out that we each had better remember to maintain reverence for and communication with our Lord in a constant way for the rest of our lives.
    I think He reminded us with some hope Wednesday night and is watching.
    He called His people the remnant of His inheiritance. Oh, to be a thread and not unravelled.
    Truth, Beauty and Good are gifts for which we have to be thankful and protective.

    Today, for a minor example of signs of His hand in things, I went to a little service for Blessing of Animals commemorating St. Francis. It was at a St. Anthony of Padua Church in the parking lot and a cold autumn weather front was coming in on the wind. We had a circle of cats and dogs, so peaceful, the animals were quiet and seemed almost attentive during prayers. Easter lilies planted for next year were blooming at the Chapel door! (Both Saints are often pictured with lilies.) A magnolia tree had a few spring blossoms. Sadly, some of the dogs were rescued from puppy mills even from other states, but it seemed like a statement about caring for Creation any way we can.
    And, before we began, I was quick enough to pick up the cat carrier when a dog thought it was a hydrant.

  • I noticed the sarcastic comment about Ryan’s several millions and Romney’s many millions, but no reference to Nancy Pelosi’s many millions, or John Kerry’s many millions, or the many millions possessed by many other rich liberal leftist politicians and activists who want to tax your money and mine to provide for what they refuse to provide out of their own riches.

    If Ryan and Romney earned their riches honestly, then they are entitled to their riches. From what I have gathered, Romney has made significant charitable contributions, but none of that will ever dissuade criticism against him.

    BTW, there was a time when families cared for those family members who couldn’t care for themselves. But in this neo-pagan, post modern age, we don’t have families with grandparents and married parents and cousins and uncles and aunts. We have abortion, divorce, homosexual filth, contraception, fornication, adultery and every other family destroying disease. Then we advocate that government should do what our sins have prevented us from doing, and we wail when the Republicans say no. It isn’t government’s responsibility to take care of the mentally retarded, or the sick, or the lame, or the hungry, or the poor. That’s our responsibility as members of the Body of Christ. But we have destroyed our means of discharging our responsibilities. So don’t expect that Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney have to pick up our slack.

  • T. Shaw says:

    ND Victorious did not need to score that last TD: 41-3. Mitt didn’t do it to the zero.

    BB: Naked we entered the World. Naked we will depart the World. If God gives us good things; He allows us bad, as well. I know my Redeemer lives.

    All of us will be poor when Obama gets four more years.

    Anyhow, money is about the last thing I think about when involved in end of life issues.

    I have been through “it” three (father, mother, uncle) times in the last eight years. And now, a close (a saintly man who does not merit his horrid suffering) friend is in it. One of the three was a nursing home situation wherein I was PoA: I paid the bills; and I was the executor of the estate.

    Here is how it works when the government controls your health: Death Panels. They seem to be medical SOP for the aged and infirm in the UK.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2161869/Top-doctors-chilling-claim-The-NHS-kills-130-000-elderly-patients-year.html#ixzz1yLo1yfRc

  • bill bannon says:

    Rozin,
    Cost plus the apposite inflation is a perfect requirement for the truly needy. The waste comes from fraud and from other aspects.
    The mentally ill often do not take their meds and end up in the news for pushing others off the subway platform in front of a train…or stabbing random pedestrians. Deinstitutionalization was society trying to cut down on costs while calling it community based. Lol. I visited the insane in the bad parts of NYC for a year. I went upstairs in a tenement on east 4th street that was heroin row at the time and
    taxis would not stop on that block. I knocked on their apartment door after passing a line of 8 young men outside another door waiting to buy drugs. As the mentally ill couple opened the door to me, the smell of feces from their apartment almost knocked me over. Your portrait of their deinstitutionalization and my portrait of them are miles apart. Many of them live in transient hotels with a hot plate and a bed and no relatives loving them or taking them in. I arranged for one woman to visit her two children who were in foster care with other parents. When she was put in a room with them, she scared her own little children because she would not look at them or talk to them. I pray for her every week decades later as inclusive in my prayers for my family…her and Gladys M., a black schizophrenic who lived in a flop house hotel with a hot plate and bed in a 12 by 7 room…with thugs nearby. One hotel in that area on Jane St. was just for ex cons and was so dangerous social workers were
    not allowed upstairs. “Somewhat normal lives”… I never saw the ones you’re describing. You’re imagining paranoid schizophrenics taking their medications without being in an institution. That was the NY con job that closed sanitariums and sent delusionals back into the community to take medication on their own…and save
    money for the tax payer. The welfare check though was only big enough for them to live in bad neighborhoods. In Norway perhaps or Malta, you can be poor and insane and live proximate to decent people. In New York City, if you are poor and insane, you are living with ex cons.

  • bill bannon says:

    Paul,
    It is Ryan and Romney only that want to cut the medicaid that you or your family member might need one day in the last years of your life. I have no truck with Pelosi or any dem of that ilk. I mention R and R because they want to reduce that area which they will never need.

  • Bill,

    It is not government’s job to care for the sick, feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, clothe the naked, etc. That is our job as members of the Body of Christ. Government’s job is to defend against aggression, both internal and xternal, and to foster an environment of free enterprise, personal responsibility and accountability, stable families and religious freedom that empowers the various Christian denominations in their charitable good works. The Great Society program of Lyndon B. Johnson is an exercise in the extent to which man’s hubris will extend itself. Ideally there should be no Federal social welfare programs of any sort, and any such programs should under the principle of subsidiarity be developed and implemented at the local or state level. The Federal government needs to get out of the business of wealth redistribution under the false claim of charity for the helpless. All the federal taxes going to Medicare and Medicaid ought to be turned over to the states and each state should determine how to meet its needs. If a state can’t do that, then the people therein need to vote the politicians out or accept suffering the consequences of their decisions. No more bread and circuses.

  • bill bannon says:

    Paul,
    The Medicaid budget was recently over $400 billion a year. The Vatican has 1 billion in savings investments. The Vatican could not provide one complete day of medicaid bills if it gave all its money to medicaid.
    Catholic parishes gave $60 million to Haiti relief. That amount would only support
    1000 elderly countrywide in a skilled nursing home for one year only without paying the medical. Modern needs and modern medical costs make charity a small player in this area.
    Catholic nursing homes get most of their income from medicaid…60%. Catholic hospital neonatal units get 40% of their income from medicaid. Cardinal Dolan must have told all Bishops to go silent on Medicaid cuts by Romney because Obama’s threat to freedom of religion trumps all other issues and that is correct. But parishes cannot take care of the medical needs of even a handful of their parishioners through donations. Parishes on average gave $3600 each for Haiti relief. That’s one trip to the ER by one needy person on one day.
    Charity can no longer handle the bills of modern medicine for the poor.

    As to government fighting aggression, we were recently paying Boeing $643 each for a $12 part…25 years after the $640 toilet seat incident from an interesting c span interview on DOD waste whose general audit is now pushed back to 2017 from 1997:

    http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/300675-6

  • T. Shaw says:

    Bill wrote, “Secondly Romney stated he would increase Medicaid and do so by inflation plus 1%. That’s actually a big cut because unlike low ordinary inflation (2.4% for 2013), medical related inflation is projected to be 7.5% for 2013.”

    I suggest you factor in the equation the horrid (June 2009 to present) GDP growth rate: 2%, the weakest post-war recovery.

    Two points of information: One, the higher education (bubble) inflation rate is similarly far greater than the Ministry of Truth overall inflation rate; and Two, in the run-up to the great recession, the home price (bubble) inflation rate was about six-times the overall inflation rates and the rates of increase in median household incomes, disposable incomes and GDP until the bubble burst in 2007-2008.

    Here’s your Columbus Day assignment. Take out a piece of paper and a pen and write 50 times the word, “unsustainable.”

  • Art Deco says:

    Deinstitutionalization was society trying to cut down on costs while calling it community based. Lol. I visited the insane in the bad parts of NYC for a year. I went upstairs in a tenement on east 4th street that was heroin row at the time and

    IIRC, the Urban Institute estimated in 1990 that there were about 600,000 homeless. Given the increase in general population in the intervening years, one might extrapolate and arrive at a figure of ~720,000 today. Not all of these are schizophrenics. It used to be said that about half of the homeless were ‘mentally ill’, though that was in an era when all sorts of fictional and manufactured data were bandied about in the press.

    The thing is, ca. 1955, the population in state asylums was around about 850,000. Given the intervening increase in the general population, that would translate into about 1,500,000 people today. The last time I checked, the population of state asylums was about 87,000. We do not have 1.4 million lunatics wandering around as vagrants in this country. We might have 360,000 wandering about who would benefit from institutional confinement. It will largely be against their will and it will not be cheap.

  • Quite a few people who would have been institutionalized in previous generations now live in group homes. About 9500 people live in group homes in Illinois. In my opinion the quality of the supervision at group homes leaves much to be desired, but I could say the same regarding the traditional asylums.

Follow TAC by Clicking on the Buttons Below
Bookmark and Share
Subscribe by eMail

Enter your email:

Recent Comments
Archives
Our Visitors. . .
Our Subscribers. . .