Among last night's Hofstra University audience of undecided voters -- and those are the voters that count -- the themes of American exceptionalism that rankled during the Republican primary were shuffled to the bottom of the deck. During the Republican primaries, the jarring cries, USA! USA!, reminded Americans that in tough economic times, nationalism and scapegoating is never far from view.
The subject lurked beneath the surface in one question to Mitt Romney: how are you and how will your administration be different from George W. Bush? Bush, you may recall, came to office with the same Harvard Business School credentials and applied exceptionalism to outsourcing military functions in Iraq, turning Bagdhad into profit centers for the US Chamber of Commerce and its big member like Halliburton.
That didn't work out, did it. Romney, for his part, pushed back by criticizing President Obama's foreign policies; continuing the Fox News meme linking the attack in Libya to the unravelling of US Middle East policies in general. I wouldn't buy that argument in a heart beat and don't think independent voters will either.
To me, the most discordant note of the Romney presentation last night was his repeated attack against China as a "currency manipulator". I thought President Obama handled the issue well; noting that Romney's wealth derived in part from investments in companies that shipped jobs to China, as well as his administration's continued tough positions in trade negotiations.
The problem is that our leverage against China is extraordinarily limited. Neither candidate wanted to dwell on this simple fact. China supports our debt-- and cheap interest rates-- through massive purchases of US treasury bonds. Our standard of living is dependent on cheap imported consumer goods, mostly from China. Romney is suggesting is that we start a trade war with China. That's an interesting way to stabilize the economy and would painless as having a root canal without novocaine.
I give President a lot of credit for showing up last night as a tough competitor. He was sharp and disciplined and measured in his responses. The shitstorm he inherited still casts its pall over the nation. He didn't need to say so. What he needed to do was to persuade enough independent voters that Romney's claims that in four years he can materialize numbers from thin air on jobs and economy are spurious; as spurious as Gov. Rick Scott's in Florida.
We will see soon enough if American voters discern the difference between the two candidates on very complex issues and outcomes that turned American exceptionalism into fodder for shrill demogogues.
The subject lurked beneath the surface in one question to Mitt Romney: how are you and how will your administration be different from George W. Bush? Bush, you may recall, came to office with the same Harvard Business School credentials and applied exceptionalism to outsourcing military functions in Iraq, turning Bagdhad into profit centers for the US Chamber of Commerce and its big member like Halliburton.
That didn't work out, did it. Romney, for his part, pushed back by criticizing President Obama's foreign policies; continuing the Fox News meme linking the attack in Libya to the unravelling of US Middle East policies in general. I wouldn't buy that argument in a heart beat and don't think independent voters will either.
To me, the most discordant note of the Romney presentation last night was his repeated attack against China as a "currency manipulator". I thought President Obama handled the issue well; noting that Romney's wealth derived in part from investments in companies that shipped jobs to China, as well as his administration's continued tough positions in trade negotiations.
The problem is that our leverage against China is extraordinarily limited. Neither candidate wanted to dwell on this simple fact. China supports our debt-- and cheap interest rates-- through massive purchases of US treasury bonds. Our standard of living is dependent on cheap imported consumer goods, mostly from China. Romney is suggesting is that we start a trade war with China. That's an interesting way to stabilize the economy and would painless as having a root canal without novocaine.
I give President a lot of credit for showing up last night as a tough competitor. He was sharp and disciplined and measured in his responses. The shitstorm he inherited still casts its pall over the nation. He didn't need to say so. What he needed to do was to persuade enough independent voters that Romney's claims that in four years he can materialize numbers from thin air on jobs and economy are spurious; as spurious as Gov. Rick Scott's in Florida.
We will see soon enough if American voters discern the difference between the two candidates on very complex issues and outcomes that turned American exceptionalism into fodder for shrill demogogues.
6 comments:
Romney knows how to run a business where there must be balance. Can't spend what you don't have. Have to make tough decisions. Knows how to draw a line.
Obama is a smart guy. His agenda is about spending other people's money.he is a Muslim and will not handle America's issues due to his loyalty to Islam. He's deceptive and cunning. Our country will follow the way of Greece without discipline. He says everyone should have a chance. We do! You just have to get your head up and work. School, family, job, life...and you'll improve. You also must realize that we all may fail. If you take away the possibility of failure, the system fails. Capitalism dies.
It's time for Obama to return to his fantasy world of bliss and let a real leader take the reins!
Reagan inherited Carter's shit storm and yet, without complaining, had the economy moving in the right direction again.
Romney's big mistake of the night was actually answered the Bush questions the way he did. It was a great chance to cast the Obama administration as the reincarnation of the Carter administration; bad economy, bad foreign policy. The way American cleaned up the Carter mess was that we fired him and brought in a President that understood economics, foreign policy and the Constitution. Now I am not saying Romney is another Reagan but Obama is another Carter and after four years Obama is just as unqualified to be President as the day he took office as evidenced by his failed economic and foreign policies.
Fire Obama like we did Carter and the country will start to heal itself.
Sometimes, reading the comments left by other here makes looking at porn the superior intellectual pursuit.
The first two comments here have to be some of the most ignorant ever submitted.
I watched .... sort of, All I could hear anytime Barry or Willard where moving their lips was BLA BLAH BLAH BLAH.
Can't understand how people who have seen this movie before actually get excited about who the next Commanded and Queef is.
IT WON"T MAKE A BIT OF DIFFERENCE UNLESS YOU ARE A GAZiLLOINAIRE EITHER OF THESE TWO WILL SCREW YOU
It is always interesting reading the comments of those who make a lot of money by backing a bad guy.
What I want to know, is:
Where the Hell is Ana Alliegro?
Have we forgotten her?
That's more interesting than both Obama and Romney, and Democrats who don't respect the opinion of Republicans - or vice versa.
Post a Comment