The Harry Reid Style of Politics — Born of Las Vegas — That’s the Way We Roll

NOTE: This opinion piece is the author’s only. It does not reflect the opinions of any other author of MRC or any person in the Romney campaign. Mitt Romney Central has no affiliation whatsoever with the Mitt Romney campaign.

Senator Harry Mislead Reid

Harry Reid crossed the line this week! I have followed American politics closely since about 1968 and I can think of few people that have stooped as low as Reid in the execution of their job in the Senate. Forget the fact that any bill promoted to the Senate from the House dies in the Senate at his hands. Or the fact he completely disobeys the law to not submit an annual budget. Now this! (See Luke’s post just below.)

The opening segment of the Hannity Show last night is classic. His guest was Ann Coulter and she tells it like it is. Good for Governor Romney for calling Reid out. In my opinion, Governor Romney should not let up until he is able to flush Harry Reid out from the rock under which he loves to hide. Governor Romney comes right out and states Reid’s source is probably the White House — good for him for calling him out! It is completely appropriate that he used the word “dishonest” to describe Harry Reid’s assertion.

In this video clip, Ann Coulter describes seven people that Mr. Obama maligned in his political career in his no holds barred, take no prisoners approach to politics. His ambition for power knows no bounds. Truth has not been an important requirement for Mr. Obama.

What we are seeing this week from Reid is the kind of politics in which he feels most comfortable: “Wrong…Untrue…Dishonest…Inaccurate” as stated by Governor Romney (I think we need to do an investigative report on David Axelrod; what do you think?):


Lest you have forgotten, take a look at this excerpt from Harry Reid’s current Wikipedia web page:

Reid apologized on January 9, 2010, for racially tinged comments he had made when Obama was campaigning for president. In private conversations, Reid had remarked that Obama could win the Presidency because the country was ready to embrace a black presidential candidate, especially one such as Obama—to whom he referred as being “light-skinned” and “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one”. These comments had been recently revealed by journalists Mark Halperin and John Heilemann in Game Change, their book about the 2008 election.

If you have not listened to liberal talk shows lately, their drumbeat now is that conservatives are trying to run Obama out of office because of racism. Please!

Is there any rhetoric beneath Harry Reid? Obviously there is not.

Let’s use a little logic here for a moment. Remember that Gov. Romney ran for president in 2007-08 and would have publicly released his tax returns as the GOP nominee had he beat McCain, correct? The probability that his 2006 and 2007 tax returns contain anything even remotely dishonest, illegal, or unpaid is so remote it is laughable! What would be discovered if we could see multiple years of tax returns? That Governor and Mrs. Romney paid a higher percentage of their income to charities than all the Democrats in the Senate combined? Also, let’s go with reputation. I would line Governor Romney up against the likes of Harry Reid any day of the week (and a year of Sundays) as to reputation. Harry Reid has never had a real job and he has been a politician in Las Vegas since 1968. 44 years in Vegas! Since 1968! Need I say more? If you had to take a wild guess, which of the two reputations is most trustworthy overall do you think? Think of what would fall out of Mr. Reid’s closet if he were ever attempt to run for POTUS! Seriously!

Obama is stooping to the lowest levels to use the likes of Harry Reid to do his bidding! What more is there to say? It was totally appropriate that Governor Romney used the words ‘wrong,’ ‘untrue,’ ‘dishonest,’ and ‘inaccurate’ to describe Mr. Reid’s false accusations. By the way, we have not seen the lowest levels of where the Democrats will take this election cycle. They are desperate and they are scared. Power is their goal and they see it slipping away.

It is all about distraction. Never forget the Democrat strategy. Consider the sources: Harry Reid of Las Vegas politics and Barack Obama of Chicago politics.

Next, we may see Obama take military action somewhere in the world just to stay in the saddle. I would never put it past this man.


American Values: “In God We Trust” — “Liberty” — “E Pluribus Unum”

Twitter Follow: @VicLundquist - Dedicated to all members of The United States military and their families

About Victor Lundquist:

Victor is a businessman working in the healthcare industry. He and his wife of 33 years have five children and four grandchildren. Vic has been blogging for Mitt Romney since 2007.
View Posts | View Profile

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn 

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

43 Responses to The Harry Reid Style of Politics — Born of Las Vegas — That’s the Way We Roll

  1. AfricansforRomney says:

    What was Obama doing when Gov Romney working hard, giving service to the public? Doping? True, this’s the reputation of Chicago dirty politics tricks. We shouldn’t let them continue. This’s only August and what they’ve for Oct surprise?
    The good people of Nevada must be so embarrassed represented by Harry Reid the notorious liar. This is exactly a Dan Rather moment for Harry Reid a US senator for false accusation. Harry Reid is a disgrace human being and SHOULD resign!
    It’s funny the sentiment i hear from Obama supporters friends/family members all the time is that they acknowledge Obama’s misreable failed leadership, however, they feel that he deserved another 4 more years chance just b/c he’s a historical “black” Prez figure. They rally think it is “racism” voting him out in one term. I beleive that’s exactly why his poll numbers still tie with Gov Romney.

    Obama with the help of Harry Reid and Demo party destroying the American economy! Let’s focus what matters to us.

  2. Medalrider says:

    We tried to throw the bum out two years ago but Obama’s corrupt SEIU got involved and played dirty politics and somehow Harry the Horrible won reelection. Talk to Las Vegan’s and 10 to 1 they can’t stand him and want him OUT. He is a complete embarrassment, and anthisis of what a LDS/Mormon stands for - yes, HARRY RIED is MORMON - JUST.LIKE.MITT!!!!!!!! (and why is THAT ok with America, but not ok for Mitt…oh, that’s right, because he’s a corrupt left wing liberal!! Not a man with morals, ethics, values, family man, humble, charitable, honorable!) Harry Reid’s a disgrace to the church. He does NOT represent US Las Vegans!!! He is a legend in his own mind and NEEDS TO GO!!! But SEIU is VERY powerful here - like a modern day mob, and they RULE here. :(

  3. Tom says:

    From Bloomberg News:

    “””Former U.S. Senator Byron Dorgan, a North Dakota Democrat who warned in 1999 that repealing Glass-Steagall could lead to “massive taxpayer bailouts” in 10 years, said in a telephone interview that the so-called firewalls that exist between regulated banks and affiliates are like “tissue paper.”
    “It’s just absurd for anybody now to make the case that having these entities under the same corporate umbrella doesn’t pose substantially greater risk,” said Dorgan, who retired from the Senate in 2011 and is a senior policy adviser at law firm Arent Fox LLP. “Phil is just wrong about this. He was wrong 13 years ago and he’s wrong now.”””

    The Bush administration and the congressional GOP from 1997-2007 have left one of the worst legacies in government in American history. We are left with the worst economic recession since 1930s and perhaps the worst fiscal crisis since the 1790s thanks to increased expenditures due to two mishandled wars and an insensible tax cut policy that carried over to the Obama presidency. Not to mention the GOP Congress was one of the most corrupt with the conviction of Tom Delay and others for graft and fraud. The Democrats are saints compared to the much more unscrupulous Republicans.

    We are still living with the Bush legacy more than we are living with Obama’s presidency. This mess is so great that it will take more than the next four years to clean up no matter whoever becomes president.

    Yes, it is fair for Obama to blame the Bush years for today’s problems and those of the immediate future. People can’t see this are very much unaware of the larger issues.

  4. Tom says:

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-26/breaking-up-banks-won-t-make-them-safer-ex-senator-says.html

    Phil Gramm is already recorded in history now by the best books about the credit crisis for his siding with the big banks in opposition to the interests of the average American citizen. For example: His 1999 “Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act largely repealed the Glass-Steagall separation of commercial and investment banking. Gramm was also the major force behind the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, which prohibited federal regulation of the over-the-counter derivatives market.” (See: 13 Bankers by Simon Johnson and James Kwak. 2010 Random House. Page 92, see also page 137) The latter bill, together with Summers, Greenspan, and Rubin’s unprecedented efforts to block Brooksley Born from investigating the unregulated derivatives market prevented Born’s efforts to expose the credit default swap and derivatives market while she was head of the CFTC. This has been well documented by the famous PBS Frontline video titled “The Warning” which can be seen here:

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/…. Gramm was head of the Senate Banking committee at the time, and he is recorded in videos on C-SPAN for trying to intimidate Brooksley Born in public hearings. If Born had been able to investigate the derivatives market at the time, Columbia University economist Joseph Stiglitz asserts that Born’s research of the derivatives market would have reduced the intensity of the credit crisis effects on stock markets and American pension funds. Gramm has a major responsibility for the collection of legislation that has made life much worse for most Americans, while enriching his banker friends.

  5. Tom says:

    Repeal’s Impact
    “To some extent what we saw in the 2007-2008 crash was the result of the throwing off of Glass-Steagall,” Parsons said in April at a Rockefeller Foundation event in Washington. “Have we gotten our arms around it yet? I don’t think so because the financial-services sector moves so fast.”
    Thomas J. Bliley Jr., a former Republican congressman from Virginia and another co-author of Gramm-Leach-Bliley, said that the financial industry had been lobbying ever since the 1930s to overturn Glass-Steagall.
    “All of a sudden in the late ’90s they all came together and agreed that we should get rid of it and of course we did,” said Bliley, 80, who now lives in Richmond, Virginia, and is a senior government affairs adviser for Steptoe & Johnson LLP. “I don’t know enough to really give you an answer” on whether it was a mistake.

    That is how much the GOP is in league with other interests compared to the Democrats.

  6. Tom says:

    So let me ask anybody? Is economy in bad shape due more to the current president or more due to his predecessors??

    Just because someone takes over doesn’t mean the problems are cleanly cut away from the previous government.

  7. Victor Lundquist says:

    Tom, you are missing one giant point in the midst of it all:

    The largest recessions always result in the most dramatic economic recoveries. There are many reasons for this, but this is always true. Except in this case managed by Barack Obama. Blame whomever you please for the financial mess. The recovery is owned entirely by Obama and is a much bigger mess now.

    Finally, every incumbent POTUS argues his predecessor caused the problems he inherited. That argument lasts for the first few months of his presidency. THAT IS ALWAYS THE CASE…NO EXCEPTIONS. Obama owns this recovery, lock, stock, and barrel and he has done everything possible to throw a wet blanket on any possible recovery. Hence, we have one of the worst economic recoveries in US history.

    That my friend is a direct result of Obama’s lack of leadership ability which is a result of his utter lack of any leadership experience before taking over the most critical leadership job in the world.

    Spin it as you like. Obama is no leader and has not even learned on the job.

  8. Adam R. says:

    If you have to post numerous times in row to prove that it’s never Obama’s fault, then you’re doing a bad job at defending him. It’s like the equivalent of talking non-stop and getting little breathing in between. By the way, your arguments look like pure copypasta.

  9. Robin from Indiana says:

    Thank you Victor for teaching Tom. What Tom and others like him to do not seem to know is that the deeper the recession the more robust the recovery. School is such a wonderful place to be. It is most important to go there. Thank you Victor, for schooling Tom.

  10. Yul says:

    I was hoping Harry Reid would honor brotherhood than politics, and leave Romney alone or support him in spite of political differences since eternity has more weight than personal and political ambitions… But I’m wrong of course.

  11. Annette S says:

    Tom…..The answer to your question is that the current economic mess is due to the current president. Barack Obama. If you spoke more philosophically supported with some facts, you would be more convincing. Your posts which are full of mumbo jumbo are nothing short of confusing. But let me respond on a couple of different fronts.

    “Insensible Tax Cut Policy”…..the left continually looks upon a tax cut as raising the deficit. When they want to lower the deficit they raise taxes. This is government spending and then sending the taxpayer the bill. The only way to lower the deficit is to CUT spending and Obama can’t seem to understand that. Because the left has no faith in the entrepreneur they can’t understand that lowering taxes creates more taxable revenue. It actually increases the amount of revenue the government receives and history proves this.

    The demonizing of entities instead of individuals……The left impart by the demagoguery of their politicians continually point to entities as being the root of their problems…..the rich, banks, cooperations, republicans and religious people to name a few. Banks are the cause from everything from the problems in Greece to the US economy. Barack Obama plays class warfare and turns his back on free enterprise. He turns his back on those that create the wealth and jobs for our country.

    Republicans break it down….we had a democratic congress for the last two years of the Bush Administration. The Democrats continually forget this. Chris Dodd and Barnie Frank both blocked Republicans attempts to bring Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae under regulatory control. However Dodd and Frank wanted risky loans to go unregulated for lower income families. It may have been well intended but it brought down the housing market.

    Barack Obama while demonizing our job creators has raised the deficit by 5 trillion in 3.5 years, unemployment just went up…8.3%. GM stocks have plummeted by 41%. His stimulus bill has not worked. The stimulus has only rewarded his friends and his donors. He has extended government contracts to unions and government worker increasing the size of our government and debt.

    How about Harry Reid?……your wonderful Senate majority leader. He needs to identify his sources. If he can’t…..then he needs to SHUT UP! Romney is not going to give in to Chicago style politics. Barack Obama while running for his senate positions eliminated his opponents by combing through their taxes and records. Who knows what he implied, twisted or took out of context. It will not work on Romney. “If truth is the standard, we will win” Romney 2012

  12. Tim Shaw Sr. says:

    No one has mentioned in this entire tax return non-issue raised by Obsma et al. is that the IRS is the FED agency charged with tax collection and enforcement. Do you really think the IRS will ignore the fact someone of Gov. Romney’s wealth suddenly stopped paying taxes? I am certain they would be on him like a swarm of killer bees with audits. A person like him could not just “stop” paying taxes. This Reid accusation doesn’t pass the smell test. Not to mention the fact he ran for POTUS in 2008, does Reid think we’re so stupid to think he would make that run and have not paid taxes in 2006 and 2007? Well, yes I think they do think the voters are that stupid. Anyone with two neurons would know handing 10 years of tax returns to the Chicago Mob to distort as they pleased would be an idiot. What worries me is Obama would illegally us his office to get to Romney’s tax returns. Obama has shown no concern for violating the law or the Constitution; who is going to stop him? Eric Holder? I have one more question. Does anyone know when Harry Reid stopped beating his wife?

  13. ccr says:

    Excellent points, Annette, particularly Frank/Dodd and Dems (with some Repubs on board, too) nixing OVERSIGHT of the risky loans leading to housing crisis and subsequent economic mess, the $5 Trillion debt in last 3.5 yrs., high unemployment, etc., etc. Tom……..and other Dems……WHEN do you accept any accountability?

  14. Cathy says:

    What burns the liberals and Obama gang up the most are the impeccably high values, morals and character of Mitt Romney. Since none of them can hold a candle to Mitts high standards they have to make up lies and character assassination because they have nothing they can find wrong with him. Mitt is a man with so much integrity, it frightens and astounds the libs, that anyone can be so pure and untainted. They are seething at the thought that an honest man actually exists and all they can do is spew venom like the snakes in the grass they are. Millions are wise to the lies and know Mitt will prevail because Mitt is good and decent and he has come forward at this time to save America.

  15. AfricansforRomney says:

    Tom,
    What is exactly your point? We know Obama inherited bad economy from Bush so,(under Bush unemployment rate was 4.7%), today under Obama 8.3%, the national debt (under Bush was $10.26 trillion) and under Obama Debt hitting $16.3 trillion in 2012, $17.5 trillion.
    This Prez has a nerve celebrating todays 8.3% unemployment. Let me tell you Tom, Obama not only destroying the economy, the moral decline of this country is much, much greater under Obama. Fake Obama was blaming Bush before he was elected for high national debt by saying “It’s unpatriotic”. Guess, what? it is Un-American flushing this country just to push his banana republic ideology. You know wha?, a real leader take responsibility and accountabiltiy. If Obama is a corporation CEO his ass could have been gone before he knows it. The border is open wide for his election push, this Prez creating a culture for the society to be dependent on Govt, basically what we’ve is a foodstamps generation, he’s taxing us to death for his fair, and distribution agenda, he’s still asking us to pay more, he’s demonizing success by saying you didn’t build that, the unjustify excessive drones, the lawless kill list….

    Obama is destroying this nation! We cannot afford Obama anymore! Time for him to go!

  16. Annette S says:

    ccr….thank you

    Tim Shaw….You would think that any reasonable person would understand that a wealthy man like Romney could not go 10 years without paying taxes without getting the attention of the IRS. However, Democrats are defending Harry’s attacks as though it all makes sense.

    I think the Obama Campaign is trying to force Romney into releasing 10 years of tax returns because it will be great material to distort and mislead the public with. It would serve as a distraction and take Romney off message.

    But Romney can play the same game. He should keep doing what he’s been doing. He should not only let people know that Reid is dishonest, but that he needs to reveal his sources. Romney should also let everyone know, as he has been, that at the end of day it will be revealed that the real source is the White House.

    This will create a stand off. The Obama Administration believes that Romney refusing to release more than 2 years of tax returns will create speculation that Romney is hiding something. But on the other hand, Reid refusing to reveal his sources is because he is hiding the fact that the real source is the White House. Political chess anyone?

  17. Tom says:

    I think you all are missing the bigger picture. The problems CREATED by the previous administrations don’t cut cleanly off when the new guy takes over as you people seem to be stating. The botched conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, the related fiscal crisis due to these wars and others while gradually cutting taxes leading to the perhaps the worst fiscal crisis in history since George Washington’s time is all what Obama inherited when he became president. The Bush tax cuts were extended into 3-4 years of the Obama administration, making sensible fiscal policies difficult to make. How can anyone in their right minds think that the problems from the Bush years doesn’t resonate even now? We are still living more with the Bush legacy than we are living with Obama and the problems from those years will continue well beyond the next four years of whoever becomes president.

  18. Tom says:

    Victor,

    >>The largest recessions always result in the most dramatic economic recoveries. There are many reasons for this, but this is always true. Except in this case managed by Barack Obama. Blame whomever you please for the financial mess. The recovery is owned entirely by Obama and is a much bigger mess now.<>Finally, every incumbent POTUS argues his predecessor caused the problems he inherited. That argument lasts for the first few months of his presidency. THAT IS ALWAYS THE CASE…NO EXCEPTIONS.<>Hence, we have one of the worst economic recoveries in US history.<>That my friend is a direct result of Obama’s lack of leadership ability which is a result of his utter lack of any leadership experience before taking over the most critical leadership job in the world. Spin it as you like. <<

    No it is result of being president in wake of one of the worst managed governments in history. And I stated facts in which I'm sorry you did very little.

  19. Tom says:

    Victor,

    >>The largest recessions always result in the most dramatic economic recoveries. There are many reasons for this, but this is always true. Except in this case managed by Barack Obama. Blame whomever you please for the financial mess. The recovery is owned entirely by Obama and is a much bigger mess now. Finally, every incumbent POTUS argues his predecessor caused the problems he inherited. That argument lasts for the first few months of his presidency.<>THAT IS ALWAYS THE CASE…NO EXCEPTIONS. Hence, we have one of the worst economic recoveries in US history<<

    Obama became POTUS in the wake of one of the worst legacies in U.S. history. In this case, he has a good reasons to blame Bush as most in the polls would agree, but at the same time believe he is the president and it is responsibility now. I don't many of those people realize that the Bush tax cuts extended 3-4 years into Obama's administration, making it harder to create a better fiscal policy. Not to mention the two mismanaged wars that continue to cost the United States today. Yes, Obama has good reasons.

  20. Tom says:

    How can anyone say that the mismanaged conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, the deficits, the gradual broken economy, all of which didn’t carry over to today???

  21. Tom says:

    The mess we are in now was carried over from the Bush years and it will take a long time to resolve these problems even beyond whoever becomes president for the next four years. But the problem is much more strategic than anyone thinks. What is causing this economic stagnation and will continue to cause it down the road is the shrinking supply of oil. Energy is the juice of the modern economy. Without a sufficient supply (which has been increasing less), it can’t run well. Modern civilization should have done it a long time ago. One of the biggest mistakes it ever made was not balancing the energy spectrum. We use too much energy by developing technological products from light bulbs to cars to to i-Pads over the last 150 years, but did relatively little to advance the supply side of the energy spectrum. So much so that it has been said that if Thomas Edison came back, he would recognize today’s power system. One reason why is that petroleum has been historically cheap with the exception of the 1970s and in the last 10 years or so. It is also very reliable and relatively easy to implement into an energy source like through the internal combustion engine. But we are running out of them. There has been little profit incentive for private industry to create alternatives.

    How did this current crisis come about and affected our economy today? In the 1950s, the U.S. government created incentives to expand energy usage. Title 1 made it easier for suburban communities to be built and middle class families rushed out into them. The new suburban homes used up more power and people started to drive more as the new suburbs were complemented by the construction of the National Highway System under the Eisenhower administration, perhaps the biggest man-made project in history. This led to the biggest economic expansion and the biggest expansion of the middle class in American history. But this all came at a price. Energy usage spiked like never before. Furthermore, growth in polymer-related industries like the wider usage of plastic and rubber in the 60s and 70s caused further demand for petroleum. In 10-15 short years, the United States hit its peak in the domestic production of oil in the 1970s. An energy crisis hit which was further exacerbated by the Arab oil embargo.

    In the late 1970s, an alternative energy program was created by the U.S. gov’t under the Carter administration that included renewable energy in respone to the energy crisis. That program was scraped in the 1980s in favor of importing more oil under the Reagan administration. The economic stagnation (or stagflation) of the 1970s and the subsequent Reagan’s years of the 1980s also changed the political culture of the United States which it become gradually institutionally conservative. Liberal economic policies of “taxing and spending” were discredited and blamed for the economic downturn of the 1970s by conservatives like Reagan. He and others misidentified or overlooked the real problem that caused the downturn: SHORTAGE OF ENERGY RELATIVE TO DEMAND. Namely, oil. Energy is the juice of the modern economy. It was no coincidence the stagflation in the 1970s happened during the time of the energy crisis when the U.S. hit its peak in domestic production in the the “black gold” and started to rely more on foreign oil during the time of heightened world tensions. Instead, conservatives MOSTLY wrongly blamed it on liberal policies of too much government. When it was clear that oil was not for the far future (like in the 21st century), Reagan scrapped the alternative energy programs in the 1980s and decided to rely more on imported oil.

    Admittedly, the problem with alternative energy like solar and wind is that the current technology is not capable of providing enough BASE POWER to supply society with energy 24/7. Speculatively, government wasn’t given much of a chance to develop better storage technology for alternatives after its program was scrapped in the 1980s. It could have been done. After all, this is the same government that built the Panama Canal, the Hoover Dam, the Alaska Pipeline, the National Highway System, and helped build the Erie Canal, Transcontinental Railroad, and the suburbs. Putting a man on the moon was a comparatively more difficult task which by the way helped lead to the development of solar power. So was the Manhattan Project that led to nuclear energy. However, because of the polarized political atmosphere in the United States in which conservatism has become gradually extreme since the 1980s and ignorant and dismissive of climate change and alternative energy and even what government has done in the past and can do presently as well as the current budgetary problems due to reckless government fiscal policies in the first decade of the 21st century, little as has been done. Ironically, the institutional conservative movement of the Reagan Revolution that started with conservatives mostly falsely blaming the economic crisis in the 1970s on liberal policies has culminated in the political polarization we have today that is hindering efforts to stem global warming and find alternative energy solutions. You can look at it for yourself. Every time the economy is showing growth, oil prices rises higher disproportiately in response to growing demand because of higher economic activity. It would knock down growth; continuing economic stagnation. It’s like the 1970s all over again, except it is more gradual, unlike the 70s when it was a sudden shock because the Arab oil embargo (remember the long gas lines?), but this time it much more perpetual because we can’t simply import our way out of high oil prices like we used to. The last 50 years witnessed much turbulence because of dependence on oil. Imagine what the next 50 years would be like if we continue this current course.

  22. Tom says:

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-26/breaking-up-banks-won-t-make-them-safer-ex-senator-says.html

    From the Bloomberg article

    >>Former U.S. Senator Byron Dorgan, a North Dakota Democrat who warned in 1999 that repealing Glass-Steagall could lead to “massive taxpayer bailouts” in 10 years, said in a telephone interview that the so-called firewalls that exist between regulated banks and affiliates are like “tissue paper.”
    “It’s just absurd for anybody now to make the case that having these entities under the same corporate umbrella doesn’t pose substantially greater risk,” said Dorgan, who retired from the Senate in 2011 and is a senior policy adviser at law firm Arent Fox LLP. “Phil is just wrong about this. He was wrong 13 years ago and he’s wrong now.”<<

    Do you still think the current economic problems is Obama's fault? This is one reason why the economy is so bad. Pretty much all the origins of why things are so wrong now came way before Obama became president. Even a U.S. senator who opposed a mostly-GOP law to repeal Glass-Steagall predicted disaster.

  23. Tom says:

    >>Sanford “Sandy” Weill, who created Citigroup and pushed for the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, said yesterday on CNBC that he would now support dismantling financial holding companies.
    “What we should probably do is go and split up investment banking from banking,” Weill, 79, said in the interview. “Have banks do something that’s not going to risk the taxpayer dollars, that’s not going to be too big to fail.”
    John Reed, who helped found Citigroup with Weill, and former Merrill Lynch & Co. CEO David Komansky have said they regretted fighting to overturn the Depression-era Glass-Steagall Act. Richard Parsons, speaking two days after ending his 16-year tenure on the board of Citigroup and one of its predecessors, said the repeal contributed to the financial crisis.

    Repeal’s Impact

    “To some extent what we saw in the 2007-2008 crash was the result of the throwing off of Glass-Steagall,” Parsons said in April at a Rockefeller Foundation event in Washington. “Have we gotten our arms around it yet? I don’t think so because the financial-services sector moves so fast.”
    Thomas J. Bliley Jr., a former Republican congressman from Virginia and another co-author of Gramm-Leach-Bliley, said that the FINANCIAL INDUSTRY HAS BEEN LOBBYING ever since the 1930s to overturn Glass-Steagall.
    “All of a sudden in the late ’90s they all came together and agreed that we should get rid of it and of course we did,” said Bliley, 80, who now lives in Richmond, Virginia, and is a senior government affairs adviser for Steptoe & Johnson LLP. “I don’t know enough to really give you an answer” on whether it was a mistake.<<<

    Like i said before, whoever becomes president for the next 4 years or more is going to have a tough time recovering from the Bush legacy. The question is will Romney have the same kind of attitude like Phil Gramm and continue the same bogus economic voodoo of the Bush years (which unfortunately Obama is carrying some of them on SOMETIMES by choice ) that got into trouble in the first place. Or will he be the closet centralist I think he is when showed that off when he was governor in which he created a health care plan for Massachusetts in which Obamacare is based much on.?

    However,"It's the oil, stupid".

  24. Tom says:

    AfricansforRomney

    >>What is exactly your point? We know Obama inherited bad economy from Bush so,(under Bush unemployment rate was 4.7%), today under Obama 8.3%, the national debt (under Bush was $10.26 trillion) and under Obama Debt hitting $16.3 trillion in 2012, $17.5 trillion.
    This Prez has a nerve celebrating todays 8.3% unemployment.<<

    I think my point is clear. So you're saying the Bush tax cuts that extended into 3-4 years of the Obama years and the costly wars inherited from Bush in which he created the mess by mismanaging them in which in Iraq he started under false pretenses (yes, that's right) in which Obama is forced to spend more money so the U.S. could get out as much as it can without getting its tail between its legs too much all have nothing to do with the debt going from $10.26 billion to $17.5 trillion today???

    OK!!!!

  25. Tom says:

    The fiscal crisis started with Bush which continues to resonate because of his extended tax cuts and leftover overseas conflicts.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USDebt.png

  26. Tom says:

    AfricansforRomney & Victor

    Do you remember TARP? Bush deficit in the last year of his administration spiked due to the financial bailouts in 2008 that could have sunk this country into a depression. And yes, Obama continued (what choice did he have). You can blame him and Bush for the inefficiency of how it was run, but the origins of crisis in 2008 that caused such economic misery and resulted in deficit-rising bailouts goes way back. Even though Clinton is one who signed the mostly-GOP Gramm-Billings-Leach Act that repealed Glass-Steagall, Bush definitely embraced it because of his similar “light-touch” attitude towards private financial industry.

  27. Tom says:

    This kind of polarizing politics is what is hurting our country. The institutional conservative ideology that was the Reagan Revolution which many people subscribed to today that was started by falsely blaming the stagflation of the 1970s on liberal “taxing and spending” when “it was the oil, stupid” in which this kind of spirit resulted in the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act that led was the main culprit behind the financial crisis in 2008 that we are living with now.

    Perhaps, worst of all, the gradual energy problems, which is the bigger picture, has been mainly neglected.

  28. AfricansforRomney says:

    Tom,
    I never been a big fan of these finanical institutions when they get bigger and bigger to the point where you can’t stop them. However, piling up more Govt regulation never been a solution. What’s the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act prevents? NONE. It is just another Obama FALSE sense of security on paper. We’ve so many bigger finacial industry losses under Obama , MF, Barclays, JP Morgan,PFG Best, …Jon Corzine (former NJ Gov, has no idea where the money is. Obama regulation is working? Are you kidding me?
    This is the guy who had zero experiance was elected just being anti Bush. Guess, what? Obama is repeating the same old garbages and he made it even worse. Gitmo is open for business, Afghanistan war, our liberty, freedom is in real danger under Obama.
    Just look up where the stimulus money gone without counting the bogus green energy companies, the 7 grade student cannot read properly, but Obama is supporting teachers unions. Obama doesn’t give a damn for anyone except his own 2nd term election. Obama is doubling, tripling the national debt, the size of the govt is exploding, regulations are piling up, he’s obsessed with green so, he’s not interested creating energy jobs. The sad part is that after he destroyed the economy the last 3+ years, Obama still beleives Govt is the answer.

    Obama is incomptent Prez=Carter
    Obama doesn’t understand the economy!
    Obama is not working!
    Tom, Support Gov Romney who’s a proven exprianced business leader, knows how to read balacesheet!
    Hey! Hey! HO! HO! Obami MUST go!!!

  29. Tom says:

    AfricansforRomney

    More gov’t regulations? How about just restoring the one which its repeal caused this problem in the first place: Glass Steagall Act of 1934? The repeal of the act in 1999 led to the dot.com bubble in 2001 and then later the bigger housing bubble collapse and the near collapse of the entire financial system in 2008. What Corzine did was bad, that was peanuts compared to what could have been prevented in 2008 if Glass-Steagall was in effect. The same thing happened in the 80s when Reagan relaxed regulations on savings banks, which collapsed and unlikely would not happened if he didn’t touch the regulations in the first place. It was smaller precursor to what happened 20 years later. And now we are still paying for through TARP that carried over from the Bush years to now the Obama presidency.

  30. Tom says:

    AfricansforRomney

    >>This is the guy who had zero experiance was elected just being anti Bush. <>Guess, what? Obama is repeating the same old garbages and he made it even worse. Gitmo is open for business, Afghanistan war, our liberty, freedom is in real danger under Obama.<>Just look up where the stimulus money gone without counting the bogus green energy companies, the 7 grade student cannot read properly, but Obama is supporting teachers unions. Obama doesn’t give a damn for anyone except his own 2nd term election. <>Obama is doubling, tripling the national debt, the size of the govt is exploding, regulations are piling up,<>he’s obsessed with green so, he’s not interested creating energy jobs.<>The sad part is that after he destroyed the economy the last 3+ years, Obama still beleives Govt is the answer.<<<

    No, this mess started with the 2007-2008 financial crisis when he was NOT in office, but inherited the mess and still resonates today. The fiscal crisis that started with Bush, in which Obama voted against

    You know anything about history, gov't can do some things.

  31. Tom says:

    AfricansforRomney

    >>This is the guy who had zero experiance was elected just being anti Bush. <>Guess, what? Obama is repeating the same old garbages and he made it even worse. Gitmo is open for business, Afghanistan war,<>our liberty, freedom is in real danger under Obama.<> the 7 grade student cannot read properly, but Obama is supporting teachers unions. <>Obama is doubling, tripling the national debt, the size of the govt is exploding, regulations are piling up<>he sad part is that after he destroyed the economy the last 3+ years, Obama still beleives Govt is the answer.<<

    No, the sad state of economy started with Bush with 2007-2008 financial crisis and before that with the bogus sub-prime lending and unregulated derivatives market and will continue to resonate for a long time.

    YOU HAVE NOT GIVEN ONE OUNCE OF FACT TO BACK UP WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. ALL YOU ARE DOING IS HARKING THE SAME BOGUS OLD LINES!!!!

  32. Tom says:

    AfricansforRomney

    >>This is the guy who had zero experiance was elected just being anti Bush. <>Guess, what? Obama is repeating the same old garbages and he made it even worse. Gitmo is open for business, Afghanistan war,<>our liberty, freedom is in real danger under Obama.<> the 7 grade student cannot read properly, but Obama is supporting teachers unions. <>Obama is doubling, tripling the national debt, the size of the govt is exploding, regulations are piling up<<

    Which started with the Bush years after he took office with a govt' surplus!!!!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USDebt.png

    And they all started with the Bush years. And much of that deficit piled up because of TARP, the two wars, the extended Bush tax cuts that continued 3-4 years into Obama's presidency, and a stubbornly ideological and / or corrupt Bush-era GOP Congress that won't give up its bogus ideas.

    Gas prices are very high and will likely stay there for good. We need alternative energy and should have started this two decades ago as I pointed out in a previous opinion.

    YOU HAVE NOT GIVEN ONE OUNCE OF FACT TO BACK UP WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. ALL YOU ARE DOING IS HARKING THE SAME BOGUS OLD LINES!!!!

  33. Tom says:

    AfricansforRomney

    >>he’s obsessed with green so, he’s not interested creating energy jobs. <<

    The conventional energy business is going under because the market for oil is too expensive. Get a clue.

    The mess we are in now was carried over from the Bush years and it will take a long time to resolve these problems even beyond whoever becomes president for the next four years. But the problem is much more strategic than anyone thinks. What is causing this economic stagnation and will continue to cause it down the road is the shrinking supply of oil. Energy is the juice of the modern economy. Without a sufficient supply (which has been increasing less), it can’t run well. Modern civilization should have done it a long time ago. One of the biggest mistakes it ever made was not balancing the energy spectrum. We use too much energy by developing technological products from light bulbs to cars to to i-Pads over the last 150 years, but did relatively little to advance the supply side of the energy spectrum. So much so that it has been said that if Thomas Edison came back, he would recognize today’s power system. One reason why is that petroleum has been historically cheap with the exception of the 1970s and in the last 10 years or so. It is also very reliable and relatively easy to implement into an energy source like through the internal combustion engine. But we are running out of them. There has been little profit incentive for private industry to create alternatives.

    How did this current crisis come about and affected our economy today? In the 1950s, the U.S. government created incentives to expand energy usage. Title 1 made it easier for suburban communities to be built and middle class families rushed out into them. The new suburban homes used up more power and people started to drive more as the new suburbs were complemented by the construction of the National Highway System under the Eisenhower administration, perhaps the biggest man-made project in history. This led to the biggest economic expansion and the biggest expansion of the middle class in American history. But this all came at a price. Energy usage spiked like never before. Furthermore, growth in polymer-related industries like the wider usage of plastic and rubber in the 60s and 70s caused further demand for petroleum. In 10-15 short years, the United States hit its peak in the domestic production of oil in the 1970s. An energy crisis hit which was further exacerbated by the Arab oil embargo.

    In the late 1970s, an alternative energy program was created by the U.S. gov’t under the Carter administration that included renewable energy in respone to the energy crisis. That program was scraped in the 1980s in favor of importing more oil under the Reagan administration. The economic stagnation (or stagflation) of the 1970s and the subsequent Reagan’s years of the 1980s also changed the political culture of the United States which it become gradually institutionally conservative. Liberal economic policies of “taxing and spending” were discredited and blamed for the economic downturn of the 1970s by conservatives like Reagan. He and others misidentified or overlooked the real problem that caused the downturn: SHORTAGE OF ENERGY RELATIVE TO DEMAND. Namely, oil. Energy is the juice of the modern economy. It was no coincidence the stagflation in the 1970s happened during the time of the energy crisis when the U.S. hit its peak in domestic production in the the “black gold” and started to rely more on foreign oil during the time of heightened world tensions. Instead, conservatives MOSTLY wrongly blamed it on liberal policies of too much government. When it was clear that oil was not for the far future (like in the 21st century), Reagan scrapped the alternative energy programs in the 1980s and decided to rely more on imported oil.

    Admittedly, the problem with alternative energy like solar and wind is that the current technology is not capable of providing enough BASE POWER to supply society with energy 24/7. Speculatively, government wasn’t given much of a chance to develop better storage technology for alternatives after its program was scrapped in the 1980s. It could have been done. After all, this is the same government that built the Panama Canal, the Hoover Dam, the Alaska Pipeline, the National Highway System, and helped build the Erie Canal, Transcontinental Railroad, and the suburbs. Putting a man on the moon was a comparatively more difficult task which by the way helped lead to the development of solar power. So was the Manhattan Project that led to nuclear energy. However, because of the polarized political atmosphere in the United States in which conservatism has become gradually extreme since the 1980s and ignorant and dismissive of climate change and alternative energy and even what government has done in the past and can do presently as well as the current budgetary problems due to reckless government fiscal policies in the first decade of the 21st century, little as has been done. Ironically, the institutional conservative movement of the Reagan Revolution that started with conservatives mostly falsely blaming the economic crisis in the 1970s on liberal policies has culminated in the political polarization we have today that is hindering efforts to stem global warming and find alternative energy solutions. You can look at it for yourself. Every time the economy is showing growth, oil prices rises higher disproportiately in response to growing demand because of higher economic activity. It would knock down growth; continuing economic stagnation. It’s like the 1970s all over again, except it is more gradual, unlike the 70s when it was a sudden shock because the Arab oil embargo (remember the long gas lines?), but this time it much more perpetual because we can’t simply import our way out of high oil prices like we used to. The last 50 years witnessed much turbulence because of dependence on oil. Imagine what the next 50 years would be like if we continue this current course.

  34. Tom says:

    AfricansforRomney

    >>The sad part is that after he destroyed the economy the last 3+ years, Obama still beleives Govt is the answer.<>the 7 grade student cannot read properly, but Obama is supporting teachers unions.<<

    No i think the problem with American education been around way before he was in office. In fact that problem has been around when he was student himself.

    I believe Reagan cut funding for education more than any president before him in 30 years.

  35. Tom says:

    AfricansforRomney

    >>Obama still beleives Govt is the answer<<

    If you know anything about history, you wouldn't think so.

  36. Tom says:

    >This is the guy who had zero experiance was elected just being anti Bush. <Guess, what? Obama is repeating the same old garbages and he made it even worse. Gitmo is open for business, Afghanistan war,<<

    …and they have been around since the Bush era.

  37. AfricansforRomney says:

    I know i’m wasting my time conversing with you here. Why Obama is in the WH then, Tom? To sit pretty? oh, may be once in a while he can pick up his pen and pass lawless acts? According to you, what we’re facing today under our FAILED Leadership Obama is fine,nothing is really new, the unemployment, bad economy, war, the disappearance of middle class, poor education performance, foodstamps generations, no invoation are out there somewhere in the world, some countries. You may think it is racsim blaming Obama for his failed leadership and denying him another 4 years term. I first thought you’ve a few legitimate argument I guess not.

    Derar, Tom. Grow up!

  38. Tom says:

    AfricansforRomney

    You’re wasting time with me?

    You have not stated one fact. NOT one. All ever do say Obama this and Obama that without backing any of it. Just bunch of erroneous opinions that were easy to correct

    On the other hand, I’ve given you a lot of facts that you have not responded to.

    And who said anything about racism???

    I think you need to grow up.

  39. Victor Lundquist says:

    Tom:

    One simple fact stands above all others:

    Barack Obama is not a leader. He is flailing around even today. He has no idea what to do.

    He never accomplished anything before becoming POTUS.

    He never even had a real job that involved leadership of any kind.

    As POTUS, he has not accomplished anything. He does not know how to lead and inspire people. As a result, the United States is adrift without a rudder and without a captain.

    All of the policy issues you cite are moot points without a rudder and a captain.

  40. Cathy says:

    Tom, Give it up! The more you argue the more desperate and delusional you sound. I invite you to study with the same passion you’ve shown here, the words, plans, and platforms that Mitt has presented. I’m sure you’ll find him compelling.

  41. Victor Lundquist says:

    Tom:

    You choose to completely deflect from the problem facing America right now:

    Barack Obama is never was a leader, is not currently a leader, and will never be a leader.

    Article after article, every day in most major newspapers state, “what is needed is leadership” or “The United States is not providing the leadership that is needed…”

    As much as you wish to live in the past where not one person can change, most thinking Americans are ready to go with someone that knows how to take a leadership role; with a proven track record of strong leadership; who has succeeded at every challenge presented him when he was expected to lead.

    Any person wanting to align themselves with Barack Obama tells more about that person than it does about Barack Obama.

  42. Tom says:

    Victor Lundquist & Cathy

    >>Barack Obama is never was a leader, is not currently a leader, and will never be a leader.<>You choose to completely deflect from the problem facing America right now:<<

    No, you are. You are deflecting on the real practical issue: ENERGY with your vain partisan politics.

    YOU DON'T SEEM TO GET IT. DO YOU?

    If Mitt is elected, the economy is not going anywhere if he does not have a solid energy plan!!!

    Let's say he does become President. The economy grows whether its his doing or not. What do think will happen to oil prices in this day and age of high oil prices at a permanently high plateau??

    It's going to up extremely. If the economy does grow substantially, prices will easily exceed $100. Even past $150. Do you the economy could sustain growth under those conditions? No, it can't.

    And what do you think is going to happen to Mitt's economic miracle? It's going to falter. Oil will yo-yo up and down. When the economy grows, higher oil prices these days will bat it down. You're going to have perpetual stagnation and if the shortage becomes more severe down the road, stagflation at worst!!!

    YOU GOT IT, you political hack!!!

    Personally, I think Obama doesn't have his priorities straight. Although health care reform is important, energy is THEEEE ISSUE.

    If neither Obama or Mitt have a viable a viable energy plan, the economy will continue in a rut.

    THAT IS THE TRUTH!!!

  43. Tom says:

    BUSH YEARS JUST ADDING FUEL TO THE FIRE

    Who Killed the Electric Car?

    While not overtly political, the film documents that the US federal government under the George W. Bush Administration joined the auto industry suit against California in 2002 - pushing California to finally abandon its ZEV mandate regulation. The film notes that Bush’s chief of staff Andrew Card had recently been head of the American Automobile Manufacturers Alliance in California and then joined the White House with Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, and other federal officials who were former executives or board members of oil and auto companies. By failing to increase mileage standards in a meaningful way since the 1970s and now interfering in California, the federal government had again served short term industry interests at the expense of long range leadership on issue of oil dependency and cleaner cars.