Post by Rob W. Case on Nov 6, 2012 3:51:20 GMT -6
As Americans go to the polls within the next several hours, there will be two fundamental and competing forces at play. One will be for the heart and soul of the United States of America as a nation that allows for freedom and prosperity, and the other, will simply be a “blind trust” allowing the president to do really whatever he wants. After all, the creepiest thing about this campaign is that President Obama has not offered any real specifics as to what he will do in a 2nd term, other than offer a repackaging of his 2008 talking points (which was the release of that 20 page booklet after the third debate). If anything came out of that, it will be more of the same, but with more restrictions, and higher costs unimaginable now because his avid promotional machine is currently at its strongest. Yet, once the choice is made, after the machine has served its purpose, then a reality far unlike anything we have ever seen will come into play. If we choose President Obama to lead the next 4 years, he will, once and for all, have the “mandate” he needs to not only continue what he has been doing these past 4 years, which has led to a $16 trillion debt, a severely shrunken economy, diminishing jobs (which will leave in a massive exodus if the President gets re-elected), and lesser employment opportunities, but there will be no hope at all in repealing the subtle, time released tax increases that are going to take effect if some of these bills are not stopped. Point blank, Obama’s 2nd term policies will COST you more of what you have, regardless of your current economic status (whether you are poor, middle class, and so forth).
Within the past 4 years, I have talked to people who once had jobs that paid them over $15 to $20 an hour, but were willing to settle for a minimum wage job just so that they can continue living independently. I remember this one man who worked for a local school as a janitor talked about how he had some 300 people apply for one job position as a janitor. That’s how bad things have been. Within the first 2 years of the Obama presidency, I have personally talked to many people who were on unemployment, but wanted to work again very badly. And when you talk to people, and see the reality of how these things affect them, you connect with them on a personal level. And once you establish that connection on a personal level, and then turn around and read about how much money is being wasted and abused for the benefit of special interests, it generates as spirit of outrage. I cannot even begin to tell you how many people are underemployed in that highly skilled, qualified people settle for menial jobs just to keep income flowing into the house. And for college students looking to get a career in the field that they studied for, you might as well forget it. Today over half of college graduates cannot find a job in the field that they studied for, so too many are stuck with a tremendous debt, having a menial job to pay for it, leaving (in many cases) the possibility of their newly acquired skills and talents to go dull and over time incompatible with the ever evolving advancements of technology and innovation.
The Mitt Romney Image:
After Mitt Romney sealed the deal in winning the nomination for the Republican Party, the Obama campaign came out with a false, conspiratorial image of Romney that suggested that he was an ultra-wealthy, out of touch elitist, who ran an “evil company”. Of course, with any Republican that enters the race; the Democrats always build a negative conspiratorial image of that candidate and from that image, try to incite tremendous fears and anxieties in those who simply do not know any better. Yet the truth of the matter is that Mitt Romney has a strong record of organizational leadership, restoring failed entities, and generating sustainable economic growth via sound economic policies.
A Case in Point:
In 2004, Mitt Romney wrote a leadership book called “Turnaround” in which he took a situation that was, weighed down by corruption and scandal, addressed the problems, set priorities, and applied a detailed strategy to fix those problems. Out of it came a successful Salt Lake City Olympics. The purpose of the book, if read today, serves as a sort of “guidepost” for how a President Romney would address the problems America is facing today. The book provides insight into his skills of fixing problems.
Bain Capital:
Mitt Romney has an incredibly large record of accomplishment leading up to his tenure at Bain Capital. He was an effective management consultant and worked his way to becoming vice president of Bain & Company, a company that would involve itself in a client's business and aide that company until constructive changes were implemented. Several years later, Romney would leave Bain & Company only to co-found a sort of “spinoff” company called Bain Capital, in which the company would purchase startup companies or failing companies that they thought had potential. With the right kind of skill, leadership, organization, and adjustments, Bain Capital would manage those companies, and then put them on the market for a corporation to buy from there and invest in themselves. Out of that firm came AMC Entertainment, Burger King, Dominoes Pizza, Staples, Sealy Corporation, Sports Authority, and many other businesses that not only have continued name recognition today, but have largely endured this extremely tough economy considering how many businesses with prominent name recognition went under within these past 4 years.
Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts Governorship:
In 2002, the Governor of Massachusetts was weighed down heavily by personal scandals and bad political decisions. In that, the Jane Swift administration became ineffective at governing, and she saw the “handwriting on the wall” in terms of her prospects for re-election and announced that she was not going to run for a second term. In that, Mitt Romney decided to run for governor. What’s so interesting about that is that Massachusetts is a deeply liberal Democrat state. So, how did a Republican get elected in such a state? He pierced through all of the projected stereotypes hurled against him, and brought the voters of Massachusetts to a point where they could think sensibly about the issues facing the state, and got elected on that merit. Even though he might not have always agreed with them, He simply respected the state’s positions on social issues. And when the people of Massachusetts wanted a health care reform bill (which they wanted for years and years), Romney simply gave them what they asked for. In terms of job creation, Massachusetts was ranked as the last in job creation (#51 if you count the District of Columbia) to 30th by the time his term ended. What makes that such an accomplishment is that Massachusetts is a state dominated stronly by public sector unions and government funded entitlements. And if the legislature was 85% Democrat (who relied on those influences to retain their dominance), one could only imagine what level he could have brought that state had he not had those constraints. In some areas, Romney had to cut wasteful government spending to allow for growth. The problem is, is that wasteful government spending has special interests (and thus political influences connected to them) that want taxpayer money to continue to flow to keep the status quo going. However, when you cut wasteful government spending, you free up some room to allow for growth to take place. Just like in life, when you cut certain areas of spending (like a magazine subscription, or change your cable/satellite provider), you will have more income to allocate to more necessary areas. When money is managed responsibly, the burden on businesses (and thus job creators) can be relaxed, which will allow for more advancement and more employment. If taxes are cut, and spending is under control, then people will not only have more money to spend, but their spending money will create in that community a demand for businesses to hire more workers to attend to the increasing demand. And to add another element to the situation, Mitt Romney also was able to organize with a Democrat Congress a balanced budget.
This election is a critically important one. We have two candidates with two fundamentally different records. Contrasting both records, President Obama costs money, Governor Romney makes money. President Obama will not compromise and work with Republicans. Governor Romney is pledging to work with Democrats (as he already did in his state). President Obama will not cut wasteful spending because he has too many special interests connected to it. Governor Romney has pledged to cut costs where necessary so that it can free up money to be made in areas most necessary. President Obama has 21 tax increases (initiated in time released phases) embedded within Obamacare (some of which have been already implemented), and if Obamacare is not repealed, or at the very least, quarantined, it will be detrimental to everyone. He wants to also raise the tax rates back to Clinton era levels which will affect everyone across the board (because that is how the “Bush era tax cuts” were actually designed. -- Poor people pay no income tax, lower income people pay little, middle class pay close to 30, and the wealthiest pay close to 35) and will ultimately hammer an already weak economy in the weakest recovery since the Great Depression. Governor Romney wants to cut taxes deeper than Bush, but reign in spending. President Obama has apologized for this country, and has been very hesitant to call a terrorist a terrorist. Governor Romney will not apologize for this country, and will call a terrorist a terrorist.
The point is, one candidate offers constructive results, and the other candidate offers nothing more than what we have had. Mitt Romney has dealt with problems very much like the ones we face today, but in smaller ways. America is in a very tough spot, and making it far tougher will not allow for growth and successful results. And yet, it is not only successful results that we need. We need a leader with character, who will be responsible and regard our liberties and grievances with care and a sense of reverence. When I look beyond the facade, I see a president working desperately hard to stay in power to serve himself and his own political coalitions. On the flip side, I see a true leader working hard to convince you to hire him to fix problems he already has experience fixing, much of which continues to endure in times of hardship and tremendous difficulty. He’s not running because he needs the money. He would be doing just fine if he was not running at all, and he retired. But he’s not doing that. He’s running to fix America, and in that take on the most tremendous challenge ever conducted in his career.
This is it, guys. It doesn’t get any simpler than this. The decision now is totally up to you. Have a good day, and happy voting.
Within the past 4 years, I have talked to people who once had jobs that paid them over $15 to $20 an hour, but were willing to settle for a minimum wage job just so that they can continue living independently. I remember this one man who worked for a local school as a janitor talked about how he had some 300 people apply for one job position as a janitor. That’s how bad things have been. Within the first 2 years of the Obama presidency, I have personally talked to many people who were on unemployment, but wanted to work again very badly. And when you talk to people, and see the reality of how these things affect them, you connect with them on a personal level. And once you establish that connection on a personal level, and then turn around and read about how much money is being wasted and abused for the benefit of special interests, it generates as spirit of outrage. I cannot even begin to tell you how many people are underemployed in that highly skilled, qualified people settle for menial jobs just to keep income flowing into the house. And for college students looking to get a career in the field that they studied for, you might as well forget it. Today over half of college graduates cannot find a job in the field that they studied for, so too many are stuck with a tremendous debt, having a menial job to pay for it, leaving (in many cases) the possibility of their newly acquired skills and talents to go dull and over time incompatible with the ever evolving advancements of technology and innovation.
The Mitt Romney Image:
After Mitt Romney sealed the deal in winning the nomination for the Republican Party, the Obama campaign came out with a false, conspiratorial image of Romney that suggested that he was an ultra-wealthy, out of touch elitist, who ran an “evil company”. Of course, with any Republican that enters the race; the Democrats always build a negative conspiratorial image of that candidate and from that image, try to incite tremendous fears and anxieties in those who simply do not know any better. Yet the truth of the matter is that Mitt Romney has a strong record of organizational leadership, restoring failed entities, and generating sustainable economic growth via sound economic policies.
A Case in Point:
In 2004, Mitt Romney wrote a leadership book called “Turnaround” in which he took a situation that was, weighed down by corruption and scandal, addressed the problems, set priorities, and applied a detailed strategy to fix those problems. Out of it came a successful Salt Lake City Olympics. The purpose of the book, if read today, serves as a sort of “guidepost” for how a President Romney would address the problems America is facing today. The book provides insight into his skills of fixing problems.
Bain Capital:
Mitt Romney has an incredibly large record of accomplishment leading up to his tenure at Bain Capital. He was an effective management consultant and worked his way to becoming vice president of Bain & Company, a company that would involve itself in a client's business and aide that company until constructive changes were implemented. Several years later, Romney would leave Bain & Company only to co-found a sort of “spinoff” company called Bain Capital, in which the company would purchase startup companies or failing companies that they thought had potential. With the right kind of skill, leadership, organization, and adjustments, Bain Capital would manage those companies, and then put them on the market for a corporation to buy from there and invest in themselves. Out of that firm came AMC Entertainment, Burger King, Dominoes Pizza, Staples, Sealy Corporation, Sports Authority, and many other businesses that not only have continued name recognition today, but have largely endured this extremely tough economy considering how many businesses with prominent name recognition went under within these past 4 years.
Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts Governorship:
In 2002, the Governor of Massachusetts was weighed down heavily by personal scandals and bad political decisions. In that, the Jane Swift administration became ineffective at governing, and she saw the “handwriting on the wall” in terms of her prospects for re-election and announced that she was not going to run for a second term. In that, Mitt Romney decided to run for governor. What’s so interesting about that is that Massachusetts is a deeply liberal Democrat state. So, how did a Republican get elected in such a state? He pierced through all of the projected stereotypes hurled against him, and brought the voters of Massachusetts to a point where they could think sensibly about the issues facing the state, and got elected on that merit. Even though he might not have always agreed with them, He simply respected the state’s positions on social issues. And when the people of Massachusetts wanted a health care reform bill (which they wanted for years and years), Romney simply gave them what they asked for. In terms of job creation, Massachusetts was ranked as the last in job creation (#51 if you count the District of Columbia) to 30th by the time his term ended. What makes that such an accomplishment is that Massachusetts is a state dominated stronly by public sector unions and government funded entitlements. And if the legislature was 85% Democrat (who relied on those influences to retain their dominance), one could only imagine what level he could have brought that state had he not had those constraints. In some areas, Romney had to cut wasteful government spending to allow for growth. The problem is, is that wasteful government spending has special interests (and thus political influences connected to them) that want taxpayer money to continue to flow to keep the status quo going. However, when you cut wasteful government spending, you free up some room to allow for growth to take place. Just like in life, when you cut certain areas of spending (like a magazine subscription, or change your cable/satellite provider), you will have more income to allocate to more necessary areas. When money is managed responsibly, the burden on businesses (and thus job creators) can be relaxed, which will allow for more advancement and more employment. If taxes are cut, and spending is under control, then people will not only have more money to spend, but their spending money will create in that community a demand for businesses to hire more workers to attend to the increasing demand. And to add another element to the situation, Mitt Romney also was able to organize with a Democrat Congress a balanced budget.
This election is a critically important one. We have two candidates with two fundamentally different records. Contrasting both records, President Obama costs money, Governor Romney makes money. President Obama will not compromise and work with Republicans. Governor Romney is pledging to work with Democrats (as he already did in his state). President Obama will not cut wasteful spending because he has too many special interests connected to it. Governor Romney has pledged to cut costs where necessary so that it can free up money to be made in areas most necessary. President Obama has 21 tax increases (initiated in time released phases) embedded within Obamacare (some of which have been already implemented), and if Obamacare is not repealed, or at the very least, quarantined, it will be detrimental to everyone. He wants to also raise the tax rates back to Clinton era levels which will affect everyone across the board (because that is how the “Bush era tax cuts” were actually designed. -- Poor people pay no income tax, lower income people pay little, middle class pay close to 30, and the wealthiest pay close to 35) and will ultimately hammer an already weak economy in the weakest recovery since the Great Depression. Governor Romney wants to cut taxes deeper than Bush, but reign in spending. President Obama has apologized for this country, and has been very hesitant to call a terrorist a terrorist. Governor Romney will not apologize for this country, and will call a terrorist a terrorist.
The point is, one candidate offers constructive results, and the other candidate offers nothing more than what we have had. Mitt Romney has dealt with problems very much like the ones we face today, but in smaller ways. America is in a very tough spot, and making it far tougher will not allow for growth and successful results. And yet, it is not only successful results that we need. We need a leader with character, who will be responsible and regard our liberties and grievances with care and a sense of reverence. When I look beyond the facade, I see a president working desperately hard to stay in power to serve himself and his own political coalitions. On the flip side, I see a true leader working hard to convince you to hire him to fix problems he already has experience fixing, much of which continues to endure in times of hardship and tremendous difficulty. He’s not running because he needs the money. He would be doing just fine if he was not running at all, and he retired. But he’s not doing that. He’s running to fix America, and in that take on the most tremendous challenge ever conducted in his career.
This is it, guys. It doesn’t get any simpler than this. The decision now is totally up to you. Have a good day, and happy voting.
