Economist magazine endorses Obama

I concur exactly with the fiscally conservative news magazine out of the U.K.

America could do better than Barack Obama; sadly, Mitt Romney does not fit the bill

… A man who once personified hope and centrism set a new low by unleashing attacks on Mitt Romney even before the first Republican primary. Yet elections are about choosing somebody to run a country. And this choice turns on two questions: how good a president has Mr Obama been, especially on the main issues of the economy and foreign policy? And can America really trust the ever-changing Mitt Romney to do a better job? On that basis, the Democrat narrowly deserves to be re-elected.

… The other qualified achievement is health reform. Even to a newspaper with no love for big government, the fact that over 40m people had no health coverage in a country as rich as America was a scandal. “Obamacare” will correct that, but Mr Obama did very little to deal with the system’s other flaw—its huge and unaffordable costs.

Above all, Mr Obama has shown no readiness to tackle the main domestic issue confronting the next president: America cannot continue to tax like a small government but spend like a big one. …

far from being the voice of fiscal prudence, Mr Romney wants to start with huge tax cuts (which will disproportionately favour the wealthy), while dramatically increasing defence spending. Together those measures would add $7 trillion to the ten-year deficit. He would balance the books through eliminating loopholes (a good idea, but he will not specify which ones) and through savage cuts to programmes that help America’s poor (a bad idea, which will increase inequality still further). …

… the extremism of his party is Mr Romney’s greatest handicap

The devil we know

We very much hope that whichever of these men wins office will prove our pessimism wrong. …

Many of The Economist’s readers, especially those who run businesses in America, may well conclude that nothing could be worse than another four years of Mr Obama. We beg to differ. …

Our American endorsement
Which one?

It’s well worth reading every word of that article. They nailed it.

It may not matter which is President. The next 4yrs will be far worse than the last 4yrs.

Both parties are unwilling to raise revenue, very reluctant to reduce spending. The children of this generation are the ones left in the rubble.


how’s that WAR on Drugs working?

Looks like at least $1.5 trillion mostly wasted, so far.

I HATE right wing politicians who trot out this dead horse as a diversion from bigger issues.

The War on Drugs (December 14, 1914 – present) is a campaign of prohibition and foreign military aid and military intervention undertaken by the United States government, with the assistance of participating countries, and the stated aim to define and reduce the illegal drug trade. …

… In 1971, President Richard Nixon declared that “drug abuse is public enemy number one” …

On May 13, 2009, Gil Kerlikowske, the current Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), signaled that although it did not plan to significantly alter drug enforcement policy, the Obama administration would not use the term “War on Drugs,” as he claims it is “counter-productive” …

In June 2011, the Global Commission on Drug Policy released a critical report on the War on Drugs, declaring “The global war on drugs has failed, with devastating consequences for individuals and societies around the world. …

Obviously, governments have to look at alternatives.

(via Boing Boing)

on child brides …

Gandhi and his wife, from affluent families in India, were married at age-12. That was the tradition in the 1800s.

People died young in that era. They wanted to have children as quickly as possible.

In his autobiography, The Story of My Experiments With Truth (Kindle $.99), Gandhi is eloquent on what a mistake that was for him and his wife.

Of many problems in the developing world, the FIRST solution is education of girls & women.

Girls should be in school, not becoming brides & mothers too soon.

Click PLAY or watch it on YouTube.

who will fix broken immigration policy?

During the Democratic National Convention, Benita Veliz made history during her prime time appearance by being the first undocumented immigrant, or DREAMer, to speak before a national party convention. …

With Benita’s appearance, both parties must confront the issue of what each would do to modernize the nation’s broken immigration system. …

Recognizing their weakness, Republicans in Tampa deliberately ignored the issue of immigration and advisors to Mitt Romney have urged the candidate to avoid it on the campaign trail.

… nominee Mitt Romney has endorsed SB 1070, Arizona’s anti-immigrant law, to become a model for the nation, put forth a “self-deportation” policy, and promised to veto the DREAM Act. …

The Hill

Mexico’s economy is strong. Canada’s is strong. The problem is diminishing over time, the American Dream increasingly less appealing.

But there’s no doubt in my mind that Romney and the Republicans are wrong on this. There’s no way their BS “tough on crime” rhetoric will work.

… Obama’s record on immigration reform, until now, has been far from stellar.

Amnesty should be granted to the best and most productive “illegal” Americans. Over a long time frame.

72,000 so far have applied for “temporary reprieve” under the Obama initiative. A good start.

Unproductive illegals and criminals should be deported. You must earn Amnesty.

Nobody has yet endorsed MY PLAN — That all new citizens of any country be required to take on monthly repayment of their share of the National debt.

For example, if the Canadian debt / person was $33,000 … new Canadians would start paying off that amount as an immigration fee. At, for example, a minimum of 5% of their annual salary / year.

When the $33k is paid off, they are given the right to vote.

If Canada is a desirable country, there should be a cost to become a Canadian.

Sicko – the movie

I enjoy Michael Moore‘s movies, even if he is “left of Lenin”.

Recently I saw Capitalism: A Love Story (2009). His weakest. Completely barking up the wrong tree.

His best, I feel, was Sicko.

Sicko is a 2007 documentary film by American filmmaker Michael Moore. The film investigates health care in the United States, focusing on its health insurance and the pharmaceutical industry. The movie compares the for-profit, non-universal U.S. system with the non-profit universal health care systems of Canada, the United Kingdom, France and Cuba. …

I love this concept in the film. Taking 9-11 rescue workers to Guantanamo Bay to request the only “Universal Health Care” in America.

Click PLAY or watch the clip on YouTube.

Permission to enter.
I have three 9-11 rescue workers.

They need some medical attention.

These are 9/11 rescue workers!
They just want some medical attention!

The same kind that al-Qaida is getting.

They don’t want any more than
you’re giving the evildoers, just the same!

Obama should have kept his promise to close Guantanamo, regardless of consequences. It’s WRONG WRONG WRONG in dozens of wildly conflicting ways.

Any system that treats victims worse than criminals is doomed to fail.

Prisons should be work camps. The quality of life must be worse in prison than for a law abider on the outside working for minimum wage.

Bill Clinton for Obama

Bill kills.

Doing what he does best. The man could sell snake oil to a snake. 🙂

Click PLAY or watch it on YouTube.

“We’re all in this together.”

I was less impressed with his actual oratory than expected, after all the positive reviews I’d heard.

What I like best is the numbers. Specifics. Not the endless rhetoric we heard from most other speakers at both Conventions.

Right now I think Bill Clinton could get elected more easily than Obama.

The Romney billionaires are going to be blaming slick Willy — and the Clintastrophy — for the sudden Democratic lead in the polls.

This is worth watching, too — A VIDEO talking about all the GOOD Republican Presidents have done in the past.