Relevant and even prescient commentary on news, politics and the economy.

Richard Milhous Romney Gets Specific, Says He’ll Cut Out All Programs That Aren’t Worth Borrowing From China For

Yup. All those farmers in Iowa and Nebraska who’ve been waiting for the Farm Bill to pass are as nervous tonight as Richard Nixo … er … Mitt Romney was this evening during the debate, but their problem is different than his was.  Instead of babbling incoherently while wearing a frozen, glassy-eyed smile, the farmers are spending the night tossing and turning while trying to figure out whether the program that they rely on so much is much is worth borrowing from China for. 

Maybe tomorrow they can put in a call about that to Ohio senator and Romney “surrogate” Rob Portman, and ask him.  Portman, according to a very serious-faced CBS reporter Jan Crawford (of Clarence-Thomas-is-an-intellectual-leader book fame), told her immediately after the debate ended that Romney we’ll be “repeating” the “specifics” of his economic plan throughout the next five weeks.  Just as he did tonight!  Oh, and be just as confident in his manner as he was tonight!

As a Democrat, I surely hope so.  And once those farmers find out, specifically, whether the Farm Bill subsidies are worth our borrowing from China for them, the can call Portman back and verify that massive tax cuts for the wealthy are worth borrowing from China for. 

Seriously … do these folks really think that if they call this stuff “specifics,” people will think that Romney’s incoherent gibberish included specifics and they (the viewers) just sorta missed them?

And seriously … at least Richard Nixon was coherent.  I’ve seen the black-and-white clips of parts of that first 1960 debate.  Yes, he was obviously nervous.  But he was coherent.  And specific.  As the dictionary defines that word, not as Sen. Portman defines it. 

Romney Says Dwight Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and Bill Clinton Did Not Believe In Free People and Free Enterprise

Romney didn’t apologize for [his] comments, instead he doubled down, saying that his opponent, President Barack Obama, believes in “redistributing wealth,” while “we believe in free people and free enterprise.”

Democrats “believe you have to take from some and give to others. I don’t believe in that,” he said, repeating the same theme.

“I believe America was built on the principle of government caring for those in need but getting out of the way and allowing free people to pursue their dreams,” Romney said. “Free people pursing free enterprises is the only way we’ll create a strong and growing middle class and the only way we’ll help people out of poverty.”

— Mitt Romney, speaking to Neil Cavuto on Fox News today

Yup. That’s right. Dwight Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and Bill Clinton didn’t believe in free people and free enterprise. All presided over redistribution-of-wealth schemes of the sort that Romney warns against. 

Which is why George Romney made so little money in the ‘50s and ‘60s and why America’s economy and American society were so awful all those decades after we abandoned freedom of people and free enterprise after 1929, until George W. Bush restored some of our freedom and our free-enterprise system—but not enough of it.  No wonder George Romney left the auto industry for government.  He wanted to make some money!

We need to end this redistribution-of-wealth thing completely!  Forever! I don’t see why we have to tax people like Mitt Romney at all. Why does Romney want to reduce their taxes just 20% further?  I demand an answer! Free people pursing free enterprises is the only way we’ll create a strong and growing middle class.  Which is why we weren’t able to do that between the 1920s and the 2000s!
Poor Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and others so hampered by our non-free-enterprise system during the decades preceding 2001, toiling under Communist rule and longing for freedom and a non-redistributive economic system.


Seriously, folks.  If Obama doesn’t remove this straw man from this economic-history savant’s arsenal of parading apparitions by the end of the day tomorrow, I’ll be really frustrated.