Replies

Place minimal faith in this prediction. Romney still has not indicated that he, as candidate, will really expend the effort and the charm offensive to sufficient degree to lure the “middle”, which is looking for someone with a statement of principles.

It is one thing to do smashmouth campaigning against fellow Republicans, and another altogether to carry the same fight to an incumbent who has been hiding his incompetence behind affirmative action, a vast shield erected by the main stream media, and a set of urbane mannerisms that define him as “clean, articulate, light-skinned and no Negro dialect”, as described by Harry Reid, or the “first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean”, as described by the famous wit and deep-thinking scholar, Joe Biden. Mitt Romney has already declared several vulnerabilities the Current Occupant has as being out of bounds, choosing instead to “take the high road”.

There are several very useful arguments that would support the case for dismissal of Barack Hussein Obama from office, and the first is a failure to live up to his own promises. He has failed to keep the federal deficit under control, running up annual shortfalls that are greater than the entire Federal budget of only a few years ago. Diplomatic ventures come to nothing, as despotic regimes are removed (as in Libya and Egypt) only to be replaced by regimes even more despotic. Even the situation in Syria has no way remaining that shall end well. Iran remains the 900-pound gorilla in the room, efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan are feeble and ineffectual at best, and Pakistan is an ally only on paper.

The economic situation in regards to China either indicates the Chinese are the biggest suckers in the world, or we are effectively under their hegemony. They have a claim against the wealth and resources of this country that, by now, far exceeds that of any other single entity in the rest of the world. We are effectively almost as much of a vassal state as North Korea, and nobody seems ready to shift the paradigm. It is only that China lacks a blue-water navy of sufficient size to impose their will on US shipping and commerce, that they have not come to foreclose their mortgage on us.

But one of the biggest emotional arguments of all, the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act”, popularly known as Obamacare, is for now essentially another of the vulnerabilities that it looks like Romney will not pursue.

Nobody, but nobody, likes Obamacare as of right now. Some of the provisions that have kicked in, like covering adult children until age 26, are frankly, a bid to win the affections of those who are under 26, although that advantage ends as those same adult children age out of the coverage, and have to start paying on their own. And new coverages are MUCH more expensive than older, established coverages, an economic fact that reflects the greatly increased mandates that have been placed on new policies, as compared to existing policies.

One of these mandated policies is that birth control and abortion coverage must be covered. For religious reasons, many insurance providers disagree with this demand, and quietly have dropped all coverage, rather than have to comply. Note that this only applies to Christian and Jewish religions, as the coverages through Islamic organizations are not required to provide the birth control or abortion provisions.

And the provisions will only grow more draconian over time. As employers drop insurance coverage for their employees, they shall have to pay a fine for each of the formerly covered employees, which is less than the cost of providing coverage, a HUGE disincentive for employer-based coverage plans. All these now uninsured employees are themselves mandated to obtain coverage, or face a SECOND demand from the IRS to pay a fine now in their own name. The fine does NOT provide medical coverage, it only flows to government coffers as a new revenue stream to feed current spending elsewhere, and does nothing at all to reduce the current imbalance of government spending and government revenues.

This, of course, leads to all those individuals who have had their employer-based coverage cancelled, to find an alternative, which is to buy into a government-administered health “program”, which in practice, would be a rationing program for delivery of services. Most of the more sophisticated procedures would be placed on a cost-analysis basis, taking into consideration the “quality years” the potential victim, er, patient has remaining, and the answer will be, in most instances, denial of services to alleviate or cure the medical problem. Almost certainly, this leads to early death in many instances, thus the designation of “death panels”, for those boards that rule on the economic impact of providing these services. And the verdict of the board is without any effective appeal, because of the bureaucratic nature of slow action will almost certainy continue longer than any remaining lifetime of the victim, er, patient.

And it seems this whole argument will be out-of-bounds for Mitt Romney, simply because of the perceived similarities between the version put in place in Massachuetts and the Obamacare provisions.