Final Presidential Debate Thoughts, a Book Recommendation and Email from Africa

Planning to Vote "By Mail."?  You Should Have Your Absentee Ballot by Now.  Don't Let it Sit There.  Fill it out Carefully, Signing it as Instructed, and Mail it in.  Today!!  And if you plan to vote at a polling place, check out "Early Voting" times in your area, if they are available.  Get it done before Election Day, at which time there will be long lines.  

The Final Presidential Debate, Economic Positions and Further Political Commentary

The final Presidential Debate is history.  Its topic was "foreign policy," but President Obama and Governor Romney touched on other areas as well.  Insofar as foreign policy was concerned, there really was little disagreement, even over Afghanistan, Iran, Israel, China or the Middle East.  One TV commentator even felt that Romney was about to endorse the President's positions.  (Even if he actually did this, the advisors he would appoint will swing him back to the right if he should be elected.) 

Generally, the President seemed to be in charge, frequently sharply criticizing Romney's factual errors and reversals of positions.  To his credit, Romney for the first time seemed "presidential," and somewhat distanced from his earlier right wing pseudo neo-con positions.  Nevertheless, to sum up the debate, it appeared to be a contest between a President and a Presidential "wannabee."

To me, it seems that undecided voters will be making their decisions based on economic questions, not on foreign policy, and that will determine the results of the election in the key battleground states (Ohio, Virginia, Florida, Iowa, Colorado, Wisconsin and New Hampshire) the electoral votes of which will determine who will be our next President.  

So, if you agree that restoring the economy and job creation are the crucial issues in this election, it comes down to this:

Do we trust the government to  (a) “prime the pump” with low interest monetary practices which will put more dollars into circulation, (b) make  job creation loans available to industries and small businesses which are in distress and to local government to rebuild our roads, bridges and schools thereby reducing unemployment, (c) re-enforce the social safety net including unemployment benefits for so long as it is necessary, (d) enforce regulations on businesses, banks and the investment community so that consumer spending and job creation have the highest priorities?  This will require an increase in revenue (taxes) despite any cuts in spending if the debt is to be stabilized and ultimately reduced.  Restoring the temporary “Bush” tax cuts for those with incomes over $250,000 would be a good way to start this process. 

 (Those who disagree with this position fear it will lead us down the path to a “nanny” state and eventually, socialism.)

or

Do we trust the business community, the banks and Wall Street to operate in a manner, less restrained by government regulations, which will cause business to grow, with a resultant increase in jobs, gross domestic product and return on investment?  In addition to significant spending cuts, this will require a reduction in taxes, continuance of the “Bush” tax cuts particularly on businesses and investors to kick-start the process encouraging them to rebuild the economy and create jobs.  Business growth will trickle down to nourish the entire economy. 

 (Those who disagree with this position fear it will return us to the policies that under President Bush severely harmed the economy.)

If you believe in what appears above in blue, you should be voting for Barack Obama and Democratic candidates for the House and Senate.

If you believe in what appears above in red, you should be voting for Mitt Romney and Republican candidates for the House and Senate.

                                                           **     **     **    **    **

Further Political Commentary

Followers of this blog have no doubt about my political leanings.  But I do try to be fair.
  
For example, I made a point of listening to Bill O'Reilly on Fox News the day after the final debate.  Fox reported that polls indicated Romney had a significant lead nationwide and was no worse than tied in Ohio and other toss-up states.  He had as his guest Scott Rasmussen, CEO of Rasmussen Reports.  I had never before seen a pollster, all of whom are supposedly non-partisan and objective, talking like he was part of one candidate's (Romney's) team.  Based on this, readers, you should disregard any polling information from Rasmussen.  It is tilted toward Romney.

Then, O'Reilly interviewed Dick Morris, disgraced former major advisor to Bill Clinton.  Even O'Reilly laughed when Morris said that Romney would win nationally by 8% and that he would carry all of the toss-up states, and even Michigan.  With such nonsense being spewed out by Fox News, which has more viewers than any other news channel, I can understand why the election is close, particularly in the battleground toss-up states.  Voters are being fed lies by Fox. Before I switched back to a civilized channel, I caught part of an interview with Allen Colmes (Fox's house Democrat) who defended the President's arguments with the ferocity of a red-headed feather duster.

                                                              *   *   *   *   *

Question: What did the Administration know about the Benghazi attack right after it happened?  Certainly, involvement of terrorists in the attack was part of the incoming raw intelligence information that was becoming available at the time.  That information though, was raw information and as such was subject to analysis and coordination with other intelligence information that had been already gathered or was still coming in.  Only after such analysis of the incoming material was completed would the Administration be able to act or comment definitively on the situation.  That’s the way the “intelligence business” operates.  Until then, the President’s broad mention of “acts of terror” against the background of the rioting caused by the viral video concerning Islam was all that could be voiced with a degree of credibility.  Turning this into a political issue in the campaign is another indication of the bankruptcy of the Republican Party,  There is a difference between a "Presidential" decision and one made just to fish for votes.

                                           *   *   *   *   *

My greatest concern at this moment is that Mitt Romney has changed his position so often on so many issues that it is clear that he has no principles whatsoever.  A devoted Communist or Fascist at least believes in something.  All Mitt Romney believes in is that saying something to please whatever audience is before him at the moment is the proper position to take.  



He is no more than a good looking rich boy with a pot of money who went into the business of buying into or buying up or arranging for someone to lend money to businesses which were in very bad shape and scavenging what he could out of the deal. This was the man's profession. 

It is not unlike what vultures do, circling over the bodies of dying wildlife in the forest. In fact, Romney's business activities have been referred to as "vulture" capitalism by some humorists. This is the way he used his law degree; contrast it with the way Barack Obama used his law degree. Romney's background is no preparation for becoming President of the United States.  If he should be elected, he will be no more than a pathetic tool for those who want to do away with all progressive legislation passed in this great country in the past 125 years. 

Jack Lippman

                                                                               

Email from Africa


Spurred on by the fact that one day last week there were four hits on the blog from Ghana, I am dropping in on a couple of African businessmen for a surreptitious (and fictional) visit.

Businessman #1:  Do you have the Email ready yet?

Businessman #2:  Yes.  I will read it to you.  “Dearest American Friend:  Your name has been highly recommended to me by sources known to both of ourselves as a trustworthy individual.  Let me get down to brass tax.  A trust fund containing two million British pounds, roughly $3,000,000 US, is available for one of our clients.  The law here will eat up 90% of this so we would like it to be deposited in a U.S. bank.  My client is willing to give 25% (the usual compensation for this type of services) of the corpus of the trust to a highly trustworthy individual in the U.S who is willing to accept the moneys from this trust and deposit them in a number of FDIC insured U.S. banks.  This is completely legal and you are a person of unsullied repute.  Our firm has done it hundreds of times. Please respond to this Email immediately so that we may start the paperwork.

Sincerely Yours Forever

Abraham P. Carruthers, O.F.”

#1:  Beautiful!  How many Email addresses are you sending it to?

#2:  Four million.

#1:  If ten of them reply, perhaps one or two will be willing to send us the $5,000 good faith money we want.

 

#2:  Let’s ask for $10,000 this time and let them bargain a little.

#1:  Okay.  I see you have the addresses loaded.  Just click “Send” so we can go out to lunch.

 

#2:    Done!  Let’s try Hooters today.  

JL

                                                                                            

                                                                                    

                        

"Gone Girl"

I just finished reading Gillian Flynn’s novel “Gone Girl” and found it great reading, insightful for women and revealing for men.  It is not only about a disappearance and a murder, but also delves into the depth of understanding of each others’ psyches which spouses should, but often do not, have.  Read it.  Don’t wait for the movie, or God forbid, the musical.

I missed a lot of the references to current, or recent, pop music lyrics … but the book still provides an insight into the world of young singles and couples in Manhattan which is educational to say the least.  By the way, most of what goes on in the narrative takes place in Missouri.   The author sent me to merriamwebster.com only once when she used the word “uxurious.”  That should not prevent “Gone Girl” from winning whatever kind of awards novels like this compete for.

JL

                                                                                     

                                  

Most readers of this blog are alerted by Email every time a new posting appears.  If you wish to be added to that Email list, just let me know by contacting me atRiart1@aol.com.  

Also, be aware that www.Jackspotpourri.com is now available on your mobile devices in a modified, easy-to-read, format.

Our family of web sites also includes www.politicaldrek.com.

Check it out, find out what “drek” really means and feel free to submit your thoughts and articles for publication on that site, as well as on this blog.  Just send them to me at riart1@aol.com.  Additional new material will continue to be posted on www.politicaldrek.com until the Presidential election, after which its future will be re-evaluated.

Jack Lippman

                                                    * * *   * * *   * * *

To view older postings on this blog, just click on the appropriate date in the “Blog Archive” off to the right, or scroll down until you see the “Older Postings” notation at the very bottom of this posting.  The “Search” box can also be used to find older postings.

To send this posting to a friend, or enemy for that matter, whom you think mightbe interested in it, just click on the envelope with the arrow on the "Comments" line directly below.