A Critical Decision in Electing the President of the United States, 2013 – 2017

Below are words I posted October 17, 2012 on a journalist’s blog from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Whom Americans elect as the President of the United States from 2013 -2017 will be a critical decision which will effect millions of Americans, directly, into their futures.

See my thoughts, below, for my reasons for stating this.


October 17th, 2012 3:53 pm

In my opinion, Obama won the debate, handily, although I was annoyed that the moderator cut Obama short through time constraints that were not organic to the moment, when Obama was about to explain the reasons for the deficit increases during his administration – after Romney’s accusations of Obama’s administration’s policies, in this regard.

As one commentator astutely stated later, the deficit increased under Obama, not because of his extravagant spending policies, but because the Recession had created severe job losses that effected government income/revenue, in addition to essential spending necessary for stimulus funds that kept the U.S. from falling into a Depression. Moreover, had government jobs not sustained such large cuts (many of which were cut because of ideology, imo), the unemployment rate would have been even lower today than 7.8%.

As I have stated before, from Paul Krugman’s pen, if the Republicans had passed Obama’s Jobs’ Bill, the unemployment rate would now be under 7%. Whether you believe Krugman’s assessment or not, simply having passed the Jobs’ Bill would certainly have lowered the unemployment rate, and thus the deficit, because more income/revenue would have been forthcoming, in circulation, had more jobs been forthcoming. But, Republicans simply wanted Obama to fail. That is obvious and sinful, imo, in what their intent has done to the American people.

I am going to restate Krugman’s words from his 2/22/10 post. I hope many will read Krugman’s words and will allow them to penetrate as to WHY this nation has had a decade of grief, financially. Malicious intent that is unsavory MUST be exposed because that malicious intent has effected millions adversely, and people who are not aware of this will vote – again – for Republicans and will vote, unknowingly, for their devious financial agenda to privatize as much of public institutions as possible, instead of sustaining a balance between the public and the private sectors, working in harmony. Moreover, Republican “trickle down” policies have proven to have been ineffective over decades to most Americans, but these policies have benefitted the very wealthy. Republican out-of-balance, almost rabid, ideology has been a catastrophe for ordinary Americans. We MUST not return to policies that have hurt our nation economically, in the past, through electing Mitt Romney as President of the U.S. in November.

Excerpt from Paul Krugman’s 2/22/10 NY Times column, entitled “The Bankruptcy Boys.” (I believed Krugman’s courageous assertions, below, to be truth exposed in 2010 – even before he penned this column – and I still believe, today, that his perceptions and assertions were true.) Please read his below comments. You have been affected by what has occurred.


Paul Krugman: “Voters may say that they oppose big government, but the programs that actually dominate federal spending — Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security — are very popular. So how can the public be persuaded to accept large spending cuts?

The conservative answer, which evolved in the late 1970s, would be dubbed ’starving the beast’ during the Reagan years.

The idea — propounded by many members of the conservative intelligentsia, from Alan Greenspan to Irving Kristol — was basically that sympathetic politicians should engage in a game of bait and switch. Rather than proposing unpopular spending cuts, Republicans would push through popular TAX CUTS, WITH THE DELIBERATE INTENTION OF WORSENING THE GOVERNMENT’S FISCAL POSITION. Spending cuts could then be sold as a necessity rather than a choice, the only way to eliminate an unsustainable budget deficit.”

(Caps are mine to highlight Krugman’s message.)


Btw, I predict an on-target, razor-sharp Obama to show up for Monday’s final debate with details and vision at hand. I have never believed that Mitt Romney was in Obama’s league. Romney has tunnel vision only as a CEO, in my opinion. He misses so very much, as a result.

This entry was posted in 2012, 2013 - 2017, Krugman: "Deliberate increase in Deficit", Obama vs. Romney. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to A Critical Decision in Electing the President of the United States, 2013 – 2017

  1. Tommy says:

    Great article – I picked up on most of that whilst watching; I was madly tweeting to friends about Romney’s #bindersfullofwomen before briefly wondering what Bill Clinton’s binder would look like..

    I think that really it was a make-or-break moment for Obama; he had to prove that he had the fight left in him to go toe-to-toe with Romney on the issues. In style and substance, Obama put Romney firmly in his place and has probably succeeded in re-energising both his base and independent voters to turn out in November to return him to the White House.

    Check out my thoughts on the debate at http://goo.gl/ypqNe

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s