IMHO, this quote from the article for this thread is the best argument for an Open Republican Convention in Tampa:
” - - - by Monday Romney had the edge in the race once again, 46 to 45 percent.”
It is difficult to imagine a more failed performance record than Obama’s.
Hence, to have an “Anybody but Obama” Candidate in an opposing Political Party be statistically tied in voter polls with such a sorry, incompetent, incumbent brings several speculations to mind as follows:
1.) The Republican Party is held in low repute by those polled voters;
2.) Romney is held in low repute by those polled voters;
3.) Those polled voters find little difference between Republicans and Democrats;
4.) Those polled voters find little difference between Romney and Obama.
5.) Those polled voters are receptive to a “Dump Romney” Campaign at the Tampa Republican Convention in Tampa.
BTW, if the voters can FIND a difference, then how can the election MAKE a difference?
_________
[ To Jim Robinson: No need to reply, as this is just a FYI.]
I too find it hard to believe that out of 300 million plus CITIZENS, we can't find ANYONE better than a kenyan/indonesian foreigner.
By "rank-and-file" I'm not referring to just people who belong to a labor union; I'm talking about every single Jane and Joe who files a tax return, particularly those Janes and Joes who have a positive number in the box "total tax due". (Remember, refunds were not supposed to be gifts, they were supposed to be returns for overpayment of withholding.)
The community organizer in chief is more worried about a fraction of the population that are considered "needy" then about the health of the United States as a whole. In particular, I've not seen much from Obama and Friends about a "hand up" for those people less fortunate, just "handouts". Unemployment benefits should include a requirement that the people receiving the benefits should have responsibilities to take action to get off the dole. Now. I allow that's tough to do given the business climate that Mr. Obama has created, one that has companies holding onto cash "for a regulatory rainy day" (some might say "thunderstorm") than putting that cash to work.
Then there is the problem that this Great Talker seems to say things that are false to fact, or fall short of predictions. The infamous stimulus didn't meet its target of eight percent unemployment. This is almost as good as the blarney spouted when the 16th Amendment was presented to the States and the people -- and look where it has led us.
Ah, yes. Taxes. Want everyone to pay their fair share? Have Congress start removing pages wholesale from Title 26 of the US Code -- do we really need social programs and a whole raft of obsolete incentives in our tax code? Harmonize personal and business deductions -- I still remember when credit card interest was deductible for individuals, not just for businesses and corporations, or specific classes of people. Perhaps a Fair Tax is too steep a change, but we can start carefully whittling out sections of the Tax Code to the point that even the IRS agents can understand it. Not to mention the average Jane and Joe.
It's time for the Tax Code to apply equally to everyone, not be selective. That includes taxing all income equally, and not making different classes of income. That includes making deductions available for everyone, not just for particularly-crafted organizations. Going to hit seniors too hard? Craft the deductions and the tax rates -- for everyone, mind you -- to eliminate the impact, and perhaps improve, the senior's position. Raise the $600 filing floor to something more reasonable, indexed to inflation, so that people who don't earn a living wage aren't burdened with an unnecessary 1040 form. Then reduce the rates to a level that makes the change revenue-neutral, or perhaps a little revenue-positive.
(And while you are at it, laws that apply to The People should also apply to The Legislators and White House Executives. But I digress.)
Then there is that "document" that implements the laws that Congress passes: The Code of Federal Regulations. How about Michelle Obama champion putting that obese, 145,816-page (2007) collection of paper on a diet, too? That's where most of the job-killing regulations live. But there is a surprising amount of duplication in the Code of Federal Regulations, duplication that could be removed by harmonizing common administrative procedure across the many departments of the Executive. If the Supreme Court thought that reading 2700 pages of statute constituted "cruel and unusual punishment", what does 54 times the number of pages constitute to the American public?
(When I made a bid in answer to a RFQ published in the Federal Register it took me more than two weeks to read all the rules and regulations I could find for preparing the bid. Must have missed something; my bid was rejected "for procedural reasons.")
Mr. Obama had three years to implement "Hope and Change". Two of those years was with a Democratic Congress. If his ideas were sensible, then the Republicans could be convinced (if not by Obama, by the people) to get behind those ideas -- but ObamaCare was not sensible: it treated the symptoms, not the disease, and it was universally panned by the political equivalent of the FDA, the American people. American said "No". Congress decided not to listen, thinking "Congress knows better."
If Obama wants to change the economy for the better, he starts with cleaning the Executive of the deadbeats that boast about how little actual work they do. Show them the door for cause, and chop off their pensions and "Cadillac" medical benefits.
I agree that American can do better. Obama can do better. Congress can do better.
And each voter needs to do better, or we will lose this great country.
Obama doesn’t want America to do better than this.