Romney and the Social Issues

Recently one of my Facebook friends made the following observation about the election.  She said, “Why are conservative bigoted white men wasting so much time and energy fighting homosexuality? It may take years, decades, who knows...but the LGBT community will eventually win the fight. They'll be able to marry, have rights with respect to their significant others, to be open without ridicule, etc. So why is the whole planet wasting SO much time dealing with this issue? Isn't it exhausting?”

So who are these conservative white men that she is referring to?  I consider myself a conservative who also happens to be white and male and here is where I am at on this issue.  If the citizens of a state, either through their elected officials or through direct referendum choose to expand the definition of marriage and confer these rights on same sex couples, I will respect the law and its citizens.  I feel that my position is shared by many thoughtful conservatives who like Bill Bennett, former secretary of education under Reagan who said on a Daily Show with John Stewart, “John, why do you keep harping on the gay rights agenda? you won! Its over.  Time to move on.”  This was in response to a brow beating that Stewart was giving Bennett on the subject even though it was neither brought up by Bennett nor did it have anything to do with the book Mr. Bennett was there to promote.

Most Conservatives/Republicans can identify with Bill Bennett.  The Gay/Lesbian agenda is a train that has left the station.  It is rolling and not worth fighting over, there are bigger issues to deal with.  For the most part, we simply want to avoid the question and avoid the inevitable beatings.  Its not as if we think that expanding the definition of marriage in this manner is a good idea (we don’t), we simply are resigned to the inevitable expansion/adoption of this right in our communities and have made a decision, it is not worth fighting for.

Not one major Republican leader actively promotes any policy that would suggest that they would interfere with a State’s right to determine its own laws when it comes to most social issues including the marriage issue.  Mitt Romney is a big state’s right guy and this issue would be way, way down on his agenda of items requiring action.  My evidence for this?  In neither of the two debates was the issue brought up.  I have not heard any major policy speech by either Romney or Ryan address this issue from a policy perspective.

Here is what I do hear from Mitt Romney: First, the economy is suffering, GDP has been growing more slowly for the last two years, jobs are down, people are suffering because they cannot find decent work at decent wages.  Secondly, our federal debt is over $16 trillion dollars.  Over the past 3 1/2 years the current administration has added to the debt by over $1 trillion annually.  Finally, we have an administration who is not leveling with the American people about our foreign policy as evidenced by the nearly two week time frame in which the situation in Benghazi was blamed on a you tube video by various administration officials including our Ambassador to the UN, when overwhelming evidence pointed to this being a terrorist attack.  Why would the administration mislead the American public on this issue for such a long period of time, even when their own investigators were saying otherwise?  Why would our State Department deny requests for additional security made by the Ambassador’s staff?

When I consider the issue of whether Frank can get married to Matt or Lisa can get married to Susie in the light of these three fundamental issues that lie at the core of what a federal government should be doing, the gay agenda does not hold a candle.  And I like Bill Bennett (and other thoughtful conservatives) are begging “ENOUGH ALREADY, YOU HAVE WON THE DEBATE ON THE ISSUE” lets move on to more important topics such as:

• Economic Growth and Job Creation
• Balancing the Federal Budget and returning our country to fiscal sanity
• Operating with a realistic and honest foreign policy that respects our allies, condemns acts of terror, pursues foreign policies that are designed to keep this country and its citizens safe.

These are the critical issues.

There is no credible evidence that a Romney/Ryan administration would focus on much if anything beyond these three critical issues (with perhaps the exception of education).  Yes I know social values are one topic of 27 issues addressed on his website, but I would argue that there is nothing in his speeches nor his advocates talking points that suggest that this would be anything besides a low priority issue.  According to his own website, his top issues are: 5 Point Plan, jobs for Economic Growth, Foreign Policy, Smaller, Simpler, Smarter Government, Taxes.  So the Social Issues don’t make it into the top 5 and is relegated to three paragraphs as one of 27 overall issues.  The threat to the GLBT community is way, way, way overblown.

So your concern for the Gay Lesbian agenda is Straw Man.  Meant to point to something that fires up peoples concerns but at the end of the day has little meaningful substance.  Stop with the straw man already, YOU WON!!!!  Let’s focus on the most important issues, jobs and the economy, creating a plan to get the budget under control and a foreign policy that avoids the murder of Ambassadors and keeps American’s safe.

What say you?

Is it a truly Affordable Health Care?

I am continuing to ask others what is important in this election.  Recently I have been getting the Affordable Care Act as a main issue and reason to vote for Obama.  One gentleman noted that without Health Care Reform, he would not have insurance.

I responded with a personal dilemma that I hope helps put this into perspective and as a Senior I am wondering if I am not alone on this.

I want to share with you something that is being impacted by the upcoming election that affects me personally.  I am asking all of you who support Obama, especially those of you who consider the Affordable Care Act to be the main reason for supporting Obama to reflect on my situation and help me to understand why I should vote for Obama.

Many of you know that I have a form of cancer called indolent, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.  This requires aggressive treatment from time to time and I am looking at a possible bone marrow transplant over the next several months.  While I am not certain what the overall cost will be, I am certain it will be well in excess of $100,000. 

We have been blessed with a good job that has allowed me to purchase decent insurance at a rate that has been fairly affordable.  One way we have tried to manage our health care expenses and to more directly be responsible for our health care costs is that I chose a higher deductible (about;$7,000) and opted for a health savings account (HSA).  We have funded this HSA with the difference between the deductible and our anticipated out of pocket expenses.

Because of Obama's So Called Affordable Health Care plan, beginning in 2013, I will only be able to set aside $2,500 annually into my HSA.  This means that I will be "on the hook" without tax assistance for the difference between my deductible and $2,500.

This leaves me with a dilemma.  My choices would be keep the high deductible, take the 2,500 into the HSA account and pay out of pocket the nearly $5,000 of the difference between my deductable and the HSA without consideration against my after tax income.  This means that at my current tax bracket, I must earn $6,100 in order to have a net of $5,000 for my deductible.

My other option is pay nearly double my monthly premiums in order to get my deductible down to close to $2,500.  In either case, the so called Affordable Care Act makes my health care less affordable.

So when Obama tells you that he is not raising taxes on the middle class, I submit my situation as evidence piece number one that he is being less than honest on this matter.  I am confident that this is not the only situation in which this legislation has not fully represented the costs, especially to seniors who often need the most health care.

So you tell me, how is the Affordable Care Act helping me and why is it in my best interest to re-elect the President?  I'll be listening.

What Issues Are Important to You in This Election?

Why I Am Voting FOR Mitt Romney and Not Merely Against Obama

For some time now I have been asking many people this simple question: "For you, what are the key issues of this campaign"?

I have been delighted to hear both the willingness to engage on the subject and the wide range of issues that people consider when voting. It has been illuminating and educational.

When those I have engaged in this conversation have the respect to turn the question back on me, here is my answer....

3 Critical Crises

Our country is facing a series of crises of unprecedented magnitude. While we could engage on many, for me the focus must be on 3 critical concerns:

1)  Economic Growth

2)  the federal debt

3)  National Security

 

To me these three critical issues dwarf all other considerations.

 

Why? Because no matter your stand on education, health, social issues, etc., (all worthy of concern) no meaningful action, one way or another, can truly take place, until we get our own house in order. To be concerned about who should be allowed to marry who or how health care should be distributed, is a little bit like choosing between removing my valuables from  a safe or saving the lives of people in a house that is in flames.  Clearly, if we have time and it is safe, you want to do both. Unfortunately I am afraid that we don't have the time to even have that discussion.

When lives are at stake, the priority should be on saving lives.

Economic Growth

In this election, the first and most dangerous fire is jobs and the economy. However, it is not merely about how many people we put to work but also what kind of economic philosophy is going to drive our country going forward. Here are our choices as I see them.

Do we work to restore a commitment to prosperity and the creation of wealth, or one in which we merely put people to work?

The President’s plan is one that relies on direct funding of work with little or no regard of the source of those funds.  To be clear, I believe in the great work of teachers, firefighters, police officers, and road construction workers. As the son of a man who taught unselfishly for 50 years, I can testify to the difference that one teacher can make in the lives of a human being.

But we need to take a step back to understand that what allows for great teachers to flourish is an underlying healthy economy that generates enough wealth to support the hiring of great teachers, firefighters and police officers. Small Business, Entrepreneurs and owners of private enterprise are the creators of goods, products and services.  These products and services, when they are successful, lead to wealth creation, good jobs and the ability to provide sufficient funding for necessary public works, schools and the services that protect all of our citizens, especially the most vulnerable. So, a vibrant economy is critical, because without it, all other services, programs, and initiatives become "at risk" regardless of their merit.

Mitt Romney Has a Better Approach

Instead of directly funding the middle layers of our economy in which the government takes the role of directing the funds of the wealthy and future taxpayers to our noble teachers, firefighters, etc, Mitt Romney proposes that the role of government  should be to encourage private sector growth, by freeing up funds, primarily through a fair and level tax policy and reasonable regulation that promotes private investment, creating opportunity for wealth creation and solid jobs for all. The wealthier all of us are as citizens, the more we have available to extend the judicious use of citizen led initiatives, including but not limited to government programs to address the wide range of the social challenges we face.  Simply put, people, with the freedom to invest and take risks, will do a better job of creating a wealthier society that impacts us all than well meaning, but limited government bureaucrats.

Federal Debt Secondly we have a federal debt  that is out of control. It is irresponsible and unconscionable that we would allow the federal debt to increase to $16 trillion. This puts at risk future prosperity and limits the options that we have available for the necessary work of government. I simply will not stand by to pass along this large debt to my children and their children.  It is immoral and unfair.  It also saps our nation’s ability to meet our basic responsibilities.

 

How so?  With every dollar that we spend on the interest servicing our debt, we lose a dollar for other necessary programs. This means every dollar sent to China to service the debt is a dollar we don't have for social security, medicaid, healthcare, programs for education, national  security – or anything else, just name it. This is a beast that must be controlled and the most powerful way to approach this is to combine a sensible way of reigning in the spending, combined with a “pedal to the metal” fueling up of economic growth. Bear in mind that for every 1% rise in the GDP we contribute almost $700-$800 billion is added revenue for the federal government. This is why having economic growth is the number one priority for taming the federal deficit.  Having success with this first and most important issue makes the tough work of the second much easier.  Most of the pundits who are looking for the specifics in the Romney/Ryan plan and state in pontificating terms "that it does not add up", are guilty of looking at the economic world from a static perception. It does not add up because they have no faith in the power of an American economy unleashed. Imagine what would happen to our government revenues if we could coax and extra 2% RISE OUT OF THE GDP? Why it might be enough to raise even the fortunes of California.

 

Here, Mitt Romney along with his partner Paul Ryan have an absolute sterling record of success in managing and controlling budgets and turning around difficult situations so that success could be achieved.  Whether   you look to his work in the private sector, his volunteer work during the winter Olympics, or his unpaid leadership as Governor of Massachusetts, Mitt has a superior track record of success in turning around challenging situations and leaving many much better off.

 

Foreign Policy Finally our current foreign-policy is a disaster. The question isn't should we have a foreign policy that enhances the security of the United States and leads to a safer world? That is a nearly universally shared goal. The better question is, how do we best achieve that? 

Here again I think that Romney has a distinct and positive solution. First and foremost he clearly differentiates himself from the president by calling for a stronger commitment to military and defense spending. It's a sensible 20% of GDP commitment to military spending which is consistent with our level of commitment for over 40 years.  Having the interest payments on our debt going to fuel Chinese expansion of their military is unconscionable.  If we reduce the level of payments to the Chinese we can afford to update and modernize  our own military, thus  enhancing  the strength of our military force. Obama has proposed over $500 billion in cuts to the military and a reduction in our military force. Compared to Ronald Reagan’s successful foreign policy initiatives, Obama couldn't provide a more diametrically opposed philosophy.   Ronald Reagan famously demonstrated, the effectiveness of “Peace Through Strength” -- and I believe that Romney brings that same essential proven successful philosophy to his approach on foreign-policy. Drones and Special Forces alone will not provide us the security nor offer us the options that come from a military that cannot be challenged. All foreign issues are not simply “criminal actions” that necessitate a limited police like response.  Nothing is as potent as having a complete top to bottom military that is second to none.

Now some may challenge this with, “How can we afford a military buildup when we are struggling with deficits?”  A sensible question.  I respond with three points:  It is a matter of priorities: 1) Economic Growth, key to all other issues.  2) Reduce foreign interest payments with fair budgets, 3) maintain security spending @20% of GDP.  This means that we manage security spending in a manner that is affordable and makes economic growth and reduction of foreign debt payment THE critical issues in order to achieve those security goals.

This then allows the United States to project influence into dangerous parts of the world and have our influence be taken seriously. I believe that the current administration's approach puts at serious risk our standing in the world.

 

So there you have it, these are my top issues and reasons for voting for Mitt Romney and not necessarily against Pres. Obama.

 

Mitt is a man who was successful in turning around businesses with  and setting them up for sustained success.  He turned a troubled Olympics around, , guiding the 2002 Winter Olympics into one of the most successful endeavors in Olympic history.  Finally, he demonstrated his ability to be an effective leader in a government executive position.  As governor of the state of Massachusetts, he was able to bring an out-of-control budget under control, while at the same time managing the education standards of that  state  in such a way that they were envy of others.  

We must elect Mitt Romney not merely to defeat President Obama, but because he is the right man at the right time that will tackle these three most important issues in a manner that, I believe. will help turn this country .

These are my issues and concerns.  That is why I am voting for Romney and not necessarily against President Obama!

What are your issues and concerns?

Top Ten Reasons To Dislike Mitt Romney

Why Mitt Romney is Unlikeable. A lot is being said in the media about Mitt Romney's not being "likable" or that he doesn't "relate well" to people. Frankly, we struggled to understand why. So after much research, we have come up with a Top Ten List to explain this "unlikeablility."     Top Ten Reasons To Dislike Mitt Romney: 1. Drop-dead, collar-ad handsome with gracious, statesmanlike aura. Looks like every central casting's #1 choice for Commander-in-Chief. 2. Been married to ONE woman his entire life, and has been faithful to her, including through her bouts with breast cancer and MS. 3. No scandals or skeletons in his closet. (How boring is that?) 4. Can't speak in a fake, southern, "black preacher voice" when necessary. 5. Highly intelligent. Graduated cum laude from both Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School... and by the way, his academic records are NOT sealed. 6. Doesn't smoke or drink alcohol, and has never done drugs, not even in the counter-culture age when he went to college. Too square for today's America? 7. Represents an America of "yesterday", where people believed in God, went to Church, didn't screw around, worked hard, and became a SUCCESS! 8. Has a family of five great sons....and none of them have police records or are in drug rehab. But of course, they were raised by a stay-at-home mom, and that "choice" deserves America's scorn. 9. Oh yes.....he's a MORMON. We need to be very afraid of that very strange religion that teaches its members to be clean-living, patriotic, fiscally conservative, charitable, self-reliant, and honest. 10. And one more point.....pundits say because of his wealth, he can't relate to ordinary Americans. I guess that's because he made that money HIMSELF.....as opposed to marrying it or inheriting it from Dad. Apparently, he didn't understand that actually working at a job and earning your own money made you unrelatable to Americans. My goodness, it's a strange world, isn't it? ***************************************************** Personal Information: His full Name is: Willard Mitt Romney. He was Born: March 12, 1947 and is 65 years old. His Father: George W. Romney, former Governor of the State of Michigan. He was raised in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan. He is Married to Ann Romney since 1969; they five children. Education: B.A. from Brigham Young University, J.D. and M.B.A. from Harvard University Religion: Mormon - The Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints Working Background: After high school, he spent 30 months in France as a Mormon missionary. After going to both Harvard Business School and Harvard Law School simultaneously, he passed the Michigan bar exam, but never worked as an attorney. In 1984, he co-founded Bain Capital a private equity investment firm, one of the largest such firms in the United States. In 1994, he ran for Senator of Massachusetts and lost to Ted Kennedy. He was President and CEO of the 2002 Winter Olympic Games. In 2002, he was elected Governor of the State of Massachusetts where he eliminated a 1.5 billion deficit. Some Interesting Facts about Romney: Bain Capital, starting with one small office supply store in Massachusetts, turned it into Staples; now over 2,000 stores employing 90,000 people. Bain Capital also worked to perform the same kinds of business miracles again and again, with companies like Domino's, Sealy, Brookstone, Weather Channel, Burger King, Warner Music Group, Dollarama, Home Depot Supply and many others. He was an unpaid volunteer campaign worker for his dad's gubernatorial campaign 1 year. He was an unpaid intern in his dad's governor's office for eight years. He was an unpaid bishop and state president of his church for ten years. He was an unpaid President of the Salt Lake Olympic Committee for three years. He took no salary and was the unpaid Governor of Massachusetts for four years. He gave his entire inheritance from his father to charity. Mitt Romney is one of the wealthiest self-made men in our country but has given more back to its citizens in terms of money, service and time than most men. And in 2011 Mitt Romney gave over $4 million to charity, almost 19% of his income.... Just for comparison purposes,Obama gave 1% and Joe Biden gave $300 or .0013%. Mitt Romney is Trustworthy: He will show us his birth certificate He will show us his high school and college transcripts. He will show us his social security card. He will show us his law degree. He will show us his draft notice. He will show us his medical records. He will show us his income tax records. He will show us he has nothing to hide. Mitt Romney's background, experience and trustworthiness show him to be a great leader and an excellent citizen for President of the United States. You may think that Romney may not be the best representative the Republicans could have selected. At least I know what religion he is, and that he won't desecrate the flag, bow down to foreign powers, or practice fiscal irresponsibility. I know he has the ability to turn this financial debacle that the current regime has gotten us into. We won't like all the things necessary to recover from this debt, but someone with Romney's background can do it. But, on the minus side, he never was a "Community Organizer", never took drugs or smoked pot, never got drunk, did not associate with communists or terrorists, nor did he attend a church whose pastor called for God to damn the US.