Mitt Romney — He won’t need on-the-job-training to ignite economy
November 04, 2012 12:33 AM | 3837 views | 11 11 comments | 12 12 recommendations | email to a friend | print
This newspaper endorsed Mitt Romney for president on Oct. 21. And the events since then have only reinforced the reasons for our having done so originally.

Topping the list was Friday’s dismal news about the economy, which shows it at a virtual standstill with unemployment going back up to 7.9 percent — exactly where it was when Barack Obama took office in January 2009. He and his supporters like to talk about what a great job they’ve done putting people back to work. Yet if he had campaigned four years ago on the slogan “Vote for Me and I Promise to Have the Unemployment Rate Exactly Where It Is Today Four Years from Now,” he would have been laughed out of town.

Meanwhile, Obama’s credibility has been further eroded by the gut-wrenching revelations and continuing deceptions about the mishandling of the Benghazi attacks that killed the U.S. Ambassador to Libya and three other Americans, including two former Navy SEALS.

Team Obama, including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, were quick to describe the incident as a “spontaneous” attack prompted by an obscure YouTube video no one had ever heard of. And they stuck to that preposterous story for more than a month until it inexorably began to unravel, thanks to the tenacity of CBS and Fox News. Now it’s known that al-Qaida — which Obama had argued had been decimated by his efforts — was behind the attack. His efforts to blame the attacks on the video were nothing but an attempt to shift attention away from facts that would undermine his boasts.

There now are highly credible allegations that key administration figures were aware of the attacks on the consulate as they were happening — yet failed to summon help for the embattled Americans, even though there was a Joint Special Operations Command team nearby. No air cover was sent, not even an armed drone, during the seven-hour battle. That’s not a profile in courage. In fact, it doesn’t even qualify as “leading from behind,” which is Obama’s preference. Now four brave Americans are dead.

What was Obama’s response? Why, he jetted off to party with fat-cat fundraisers in Las Vegas.

Too bad he couldn’t have shown as much concern for our dead ambassador and the others that he did for those without power in the Northeast following last week’s storm. That storm was a godsend for Obama, a perfect way to distract the public from his ineptitude and a final chance to look “presidential.”

You can be sure Mitt Romney will never have any trouble “looking” presidential. And unlike the present occupant of the Oval Office, he won’t have any trouble acting like one either.

If the country were once again perched on the verge of a major war, it would make no sense to elect a president with a pacifistic background. And with the economy continuing to be the overriding issue in this election, it makes no sense to re-elect a president who has shown utter ineptitude on economic matters. Rather, the logical approach would be to elect a president who has shown time after time after time that he understands what makes the economy tick and won’t need on-the-job training.

That man, needless to say, is Mitt Romney.
Comments
(11)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
RomneyIsAnIdiot
|
November 21, 2012
The people decided we cannot tolerate any more idiot presidents. Republicans wanted to elect him despite the fact he's dumb. But thank goodness the rest of the country decided differently. O'bama is much smarter than Romney, and his family is much more attractive than Romney's family. So, this first family has no semblance of the Bush or Romney families.
SevenOneFour
|
November 05, 2012
It is amazing that people still hold out hope for the failed poilicies of this administration.

Obama's vision for fundamentally changing the way this country was meant to work is proving a very poor fit for his socialistic agenda.

Just as the Muslim countries in the Mideast have a cultural aversion to democracy and freedom, this country has an inate aversion to anything other than the way our founding fathers designed it.
make a fortune
|
November 05, 2012
The latest bookie odds are Obama -375; Romney 315. Every $100 bet on Romney wins $315! Get in on this sure thing! On the other hand, though, those boys aren't in business to lose money.
Kevin Foley
|
November 05, 2012
It's a pretty safe bet the country will be perched on the verge of another (upaid for) war if Romney is elected. He's surrounded himself with all the same neocon chickenhawks who talked Bush into invading Iraq.
frogbreath
|
November 05, 2012
@Foley

rubbish
CobbCoGuy
|
November 05, 2012
Mr. Foley wrote, "...the same neocon chickenhawks who talked Bush into invading Iraq."

Bush did not invade Iraq "alone."

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."

--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."

--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."

--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."

--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."

Letter to President Clinton, signed by:

-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."

-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has...chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."

-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."

Letter to President Bush, Signed by:

-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001
Not back to Bush
|
November 05, 2012
I will not support someone who wants to go back to Bush economics. Things are getting better, I am positive about the future.
Pelligra
|
November 04, 2012
Well of course "...Mitt Romney will have no trouble looking or acting presidential..." All you and your readers know about the President of the US is that HE should never be BLACK! Your paper epitomizes the GA racist's views...(I guess you probably will not print this comment, huh?)
VFP42
|
November 04, 2012
Why would you say "Mitt Romney will never have any trouble “looking” presidential?"

That is a very interesting assertion, but it lack any explanation.

PLEASE explain! ANd don't forget the quotes around the word "looking" in your explanation, while leaving quotes off "acting" in the next sentence.

The real question regarding Benghazi is why is hell we keep people there. You and I pay for that. What is the benefit? Political for the other party when it gets blown up?
if by....
|
November 04, 2012
if by "shown time after time he knows what makes the economy tick" you mean to laden his takeover targets with incredibly high debt levels (using JUNK bonds, just FYI), then sure Romney "understands what makes the economy tick" -- his entire business record is based on this economic model...taking on high loads of debt to fuel a recovery in the takeover target's finances -- but these recoveries were simply a mirage...what it fueled were a stream of bonuses and management fees for Romney and his debt vultures -- while these companies were burdened for decades trying to work off these debts. Yes, that would be the ideal candidate to run our ecomony -- yay go Romney. Great idea MDJ editorial board.
CobbCoGuy
|
November 05, 2012
@if by....

I'm getting a lot of mileage out of the research I did to come up with the below information. This is the 3rd time I've posted this on MDJ.

About Bain Capital...

Staples: only had one store when Bain invested; now employs 90,000.

Steel Dynamics: “…one of the largest domestic steel producers and metals recyclers in the United States…”, according to Yahoo Finance.

Dominos: Dominos delivers!

Bright Horizons: a childcare company. “In 2011, First Lady Michelle Obama praised Bright Horizons and its role in society…” according to Yahoo Finance.

Sports Authority: employs 14,000. Sports Authority and the National Sports Center for the Disabled raised more than $400,000 at the 11th Annual Sports Authority Hal O’Leary Golf Classic. Proceeds will benefit children and adults with disabilities.

Stage Stores: a Bain investment that went into bankruptcy, but recovered. Note that bankruptcy is not a death warrant. Companies can survive bankruptcies and often emerge stronger.

DDi Corporation: builds circuit boards and employs almost 2,000. DDi also went through bankruptcy reorganization. They are still in business.
*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides