Romney’s Economic Proposal

I recently came across a decent summary of Romney’s position, on a Facebook post by Michael Barry who blogs at Campaign For Liberty. He kindly agreed for me to repost his article so long as I warned my readers that its original publication was in February, so there are likely to be some tweaks since then. Still I think this is a great start.

The central feature of Romney’s economic proposal are five immediate proposals upon assuming office.  These five proposals are as follows:

1.  Reduce the corporate income tax rate to 25 percent

2.  Reinstate the president’s Trade Promotion Authority

3.  Direct the Department of the Interior to undertake a comprehensive survey of American energy reserves in partnership with exploration companies and initiate leasing in all areas currently approved for exploration

4.  Consolidate the sprawl of Federal retraining programs and return funding and responsibility for these programs to the states

5.  Immediately cut non-security discretionary spending by 5 percent, reducing the annual Federal budget by $20 billion

These proposals, while they might be beneficial, would be insufficient to stimulate economic recovery in the near term.  As a result these proposals would do little to reduce the effective unemployment rate much below its current 23% (see www.shadowstats.com)    The reduction of the corporate income tax rate to 25% would still leave the United States with one of the highest corporate rates in the world. The sad truth is that the Romney proposals would be much too little, much too late.  They would not bring about the necessary trillion dollar reduction in annual spending, restore the manufacturing base of the United States, or bring about necessary monetary reform.  Romney or Obama will not make any significant difference.

Thank-you, Michael, I’ll be updating in a future article to summarize the newer, more complete position, but I appreciate the head start.

Heterosexuals Don’t Get Aids?

The focus of this site is what Mitt Romney’s position is for economic matters. However, I’ve fast discovered that it’s tough to have such a narrow focus. It’s also tough to separate Romney from his party. What’s sad is that I used to consider myself a republican. Was I just young and stupid? Ronald Reagan was president from ’81′ thru ’89. He was the first president I voted for, and was in office for the first four years after I graduated college. I don’t remember republicans being anti-gay, anti-women, or well, just plain ignorant, back then.

That’s my introduction to why today I’m going to reference yet another moron republican. Stacey Campfield, Tennessee Senator was quoted early this year as saying “My understanding is that it is virtually — not completely, but virtually — impossible to contract AIDS through heterosexual sex…very rarely [transmitted].”

To be fair, the Senator later offered, “I’m not a historian on AIDS … but I’ve read and seen what other people have read and seen and those facts are out there.”

I’m not sure if that helps matters. But it does add to the list of those who represent us but are ignorant to simple facts. If you catch more quotes from congressfolk or senators showing such ignorance, let me know, and I’ll write about it or offer you a soapbox to share your find.

Advice to Republican Congressmen: Shut Up

This past weekend, Todd Akin (R, of course, Mo) declared that “the female body has “biological defenses” that prevent rape victims from getting pregnant.” When I first heard this on the news, I nearly choked on my sandwich. I’ve never heard of such a thing, but unfortunately, I’ve heard or read about women who have become pregnant this way, and had to struggle with their decision whether to terminate the pregnancy or go to term. I can’t imagine the pain these women have experienced, both from the violation of the act and then a second emotional issue of how to move forward. Now, a congressman shows his ignorance. Todd Akin literally does not know how babies are made. Which makes be wonder, is there no minimum IQ requirement to be elected to public office? A rhetorical question, I know there isn’t. Too Bad.

If this isn’t enough to make you cringe, Steve King (another R) decided to back up his ignorant colleague and offered that he’s “never heard of a child getting pregnant from statutory rape or incest.” I can’t say that I have the statistics at my fingertips, what I do know is when our congressfolk are so disconnected from reality, we should be very afraid of what laws they’ll try to push through. If no children are getting pregnant this way, why are they not going to allow the exception for an abortion for such rare circumstances?

Last today, Paul Ryan would like to make Romney’s son a criminal. Really. The Sanctity of Human Life Act, which Ryan co-sponsored, would have codified the belief that life begins at fertilization into federal law, criminalizing in vitro fertilization (IVF), the creation of an embryo outside of a woman’s body. Note – Romney’s son is now the proud father of twins thanks to IVF.  I guess now that Mitt is a grandfather, he’s okay to outlaw the process that helped his son and daughter in law produce their children.

I can’t help but wonder how any woman would be comfortable voting for people exhibiting such ignorance. They are pushing legislation that will impact you, and your sons and daughters, but they lack understanding of third grade biology. This scares me, are you okay with it?

By the way, if you agree with Akin, let him know your standing with him. Yes, Akin was sure to hire copywriters who are morons as well, it should be “you’re” as in “you are.” But I think spelling is minor compared to not understanding how babies are made.