The Five Reasons Why Romney/Ryan Must be Defeated in 2012, and Why Conservatives Should Hope They Are
Today, for Republicans, up is down and front is back. Lying has become so ingrained into the conservatives’ national dialogue that they are now dangerously demagogic or, worse, severely unhinged. Blind rage at the election of Barack Obama has wrecked a once great political party. Its leaders have made so many deals with the devil in their almost pathological obsession with unseating Obama that they have pushed the GOP into its own version of political hell – unable to speak truths to their now-rabid and conspiracy-addled base and unable to right the party back onto a path of responsibility.
At a $1.7 million fundraiser in Jackson, Mississippi this week, Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney declared that the GOP is not “the party of the rich,” insisting instead that “we’re the party of people who want to get rich.”
Sadly for Romney, there are two small problems with his assessment. For starters, Mitt’s proposals (like those from GOP wunderkind Paul Ryan) would deliver another massive tax cut windfall for the wealthy and shred the social safety net while putting the economic recovery at risk. Just as damning for Mitt and his cheerleaders like David Brooks and Robert Samuelson, the historical record shows that from economic growth and job creation to household incomes, stock market performance and just about every other indicator of the health of the U.S. capitalism, the modern U.S. economy has almost always done better under Democratic presidents.
Imagine if, in the midst of the longest U.S. war in American history, a Democratic presidential nominee delivered a 4,000-word speech at his convention, and neglected to mention the war altogether. Imagine if that candidate didn’t bother to say a single word about the conflict, the troops serving abroad, or when they might come home.
Imagine if that same Democratic candidate ignored the war despite not having any military background of his own, and even managed to skip visiting the troops during a recent tour abroad.
I think we know what would happen under such a scenario. McCain, Kristol, Krauthammer, Limbaugh, Cheney, et al, would reach an unavoidable conclusion: there’s simply no way this Democrat has a credible claim to be Commander in Chief during a time of war.
And yet, Mitt Romney, who never wore a uniform, delivered his 4,000-word speech, which failed to even acknowledge the war in passing. The word “Afghanistan” was not uttered. There were no references to “veterans” or “troops,” either.
This comes a month after Romney launched a week-long overseas tour, but skipped past Afghanistan.
[…] Steve Benen - more at the link
At a campaign event on Monday, a Republican voter asked Mitt Romney about falsehoods pushed by “leftists” and what he intended to do about it. The candidate replied, “It seems that the first victim of an Obama campaign is the truth.”
As it turns out, the first victim is actually irony.
Michael Tomasky had a good piece this week, explaining what many have been reluctant to acknowledge: “The distinguishing fact of the Romney-Ryan campaign thus far is the extent to which it is built on outright lies in a desperate attempt to avoid honest debate at all costs.” The GOP ticket, Tomasky argued, “lies as much as possible.”
The age group that Obama has the lowest support in DISAPPROVES strongly of the Ryan plan, to the tune of 74%. And Conservative Elderly DISAPPROVE at the level of 54%.
Could you imagine the Republicans losing the elderly vote?
You touch the third rail, you get shocked.
So in summary, the Ryan Plan will privatize anything and everything, raise your taxes if you make over $50,000 per year, cut them if you make over $200,000 per year, and end Medicare and Medicaid as we know it.