Presidential Politics 2012--A Discourse

The following post is a political discussion which began in response to a letter to the editor contributed by J.J. to the Dallas Morning News. I do not have copy of that letter. It makes more sense to begin reading #2’s response, the last one, which was written first. (Scroll down & find in caps BEGIN HERE.) The last response,  just below, is contributed by #7. There are responses by J.J. in French between each exposé which I am too lazy to translate. 

I've promised a young relation to publish this political exposé without delay & only a minimum editing. Be advised that: #2 lives and works in Passau, Germany & so he has a European perspective, #5 has his tongue permanently lodged in his cheek, & #7 is heavily influenced by Aristotelean dialectics. 

#5’s candor and generalizations are always entertaining. Maybe those younger journalistic impulses were real all along. 

However, it seems like the discourse is devolving into personality-politics. Perhaps that's just the way elections go, but we don't have to parrot the same airy arguments of "electability" that the uninspired pundits do. To say that Obama, who somehow embodies all backgrounds, actually represents any of those backgrounds simply validates the media's fabricated narrative. He's a demagogue with little to say, except what he has to say. So far, Romney doesn't seem that much better, except that he really won't do anything he says and things will at least not worsen. The 47 percent, the 99 percent, and all the other groups are mere numbers. Just some haves and have-nots, all coveting the more. 'Tis the American Way, after all.

#5’s assessment is pretty accurate. Obama hasn't really done much except wish the people well while they slowly fall into decay. Somehow this costs trillions of dollars and results in bewildering health bills and stimulus plans that have stimulated the economy into a record slow recovery. Iraq and Afghanistan are for the most part abandoned. The rest of the Arab world is on fire with radicalism. Europe and China are slowing down despite their furious can kicking. In the U.S., well, Sandra Fluke may just have her wish to have her birth control covered at a Catholic institution. Victory!

We really shouldn't fall for the myth that presidents can do much for the economy. They can severely hamper it through taxation and creating distortions in the market to temporarily stimulate consumption--check, and check--but they can't turn some magical dial from "Poor" to "Prosperous" despite what they may say. They can initiate reform in the national budget, which Obama still hasn't really tried; they can support their allies and punish their foes on the foreign front, which Obama somehow avoids; they can try to enact bills for unresolved problems affecting the country, which Obama only did in his first year with mixed results. Notice how we never hear anything about these issues though. We hear about gaffes ("you didn't build that!" "47 percent"). We hear platitudes ("fairness" "I can fix this!"). And we do our part by unrolling our wishlists at each candidates' feet and choosing the one who promises us the most items that we've written down.

Truly, there's nothing new under the sun. I don't begrudge Romney for his wealth or his Mormonism. That he runs on this image of a successful businessman bothers me a bit. It's a played-out image. The government is not a business. Ditto to Obama the community leader. Governments aren't non-profit institutions either. Ryan was a neat choice; I don't think he's a younger Gen X version of the establishment. He has an eye on the future and had the audacity to say something about it. Unfortunately, the VP position might just be a muzzle for him, like the Secretary of State position was a muzzle for Hillary. 

We're in for a whole lot of blandness. If you thought the convention speeches were vague and boring, just wait for the debates. It'll be the riveting rivalry, pitting two opponents who try to best the other at saying absolutely nothing.

I'm not sure cronyism and trickle-down economics will be much better for my livelihood or the economy in general, but some of the problems snowballing right now might be deterred by a change in personnel. So far, it's looking like another term for the chosen one, but never say never. I'll do my part and vote, keeping Texas red and proud.

#7

J.J. comments:

Notre clan est toujours aussi intéressé par la politique, même si nous n'en sommes que des acteurs passifs! Il semble que nous nous rejoignons tous pour penser que le GOP aurait du présenter un candidat issu de la classe moyenne plutôt qu'un autre patricien. Cette erreur lui coutera une èlection pourtant facile à gagner!

Papa

#5’s response to #2: 

Good points #2. Nice to see you still care about American politics. 

This election is GOP's to lose. No matter how you spin it, Obama's term has been lousy. He can't create jobs, he can't stimulate an economy, and he still hasn't given me my entitlement (but it may come around in the next 4 years). On one hand it's hard to believe the guy's going to get reelected...

But then again the establishment of country club members still hasn't learned anything from 2008, "99 v. 1% rancor," and the passage of Obamacare. The Middle Class has gotten nothing during the Bush years except shouldering the astronomical costs of stupid wars, bad bets on Wall Street, foreclosures, and higher health insurance premiums. 

Four years later, these elitist creeps come back in the face of a more refined, intelligent rich guy from the East Coast who'll do the same thing as the folksy, dumb rich guy from Texas: let his rich friends help their rich friends, and beyond that, the middle class will have to fight more dumb wars and muddle along somehow.

So where is this reincarnation of Ronald Reagan? The GOP's leadership is so rancid and exclusive that they can't think beyond their 1%. While they mean well, the Tea Party are a sorry lot of bible thumpers, isolationist, and back to the gold-standard nutballs. Paul Ryan was to give a younger and more sober appeal to the GOP, but he's still one of them, just younger and more handsome. 

Romney can probably do a more competent job than Obama. That's not very hard. With Romney the 1% will probably get even richer, but at least there's some elasticity in moving up in the world. Obama is a go nowhere man for a go nowhere society plagued with stagnation and entitlements. Obama says not to worry, green energy is gonna be the way to a boon.....doggle. 

The only reason I will vote Romney is for this reason alone. Sure, I'll more than likely remain a middle class chump under a Romney administration, but at least there's a chance of moving up as a result of some trickle down economics. With Obama, I don't think my entitlement is coming anytime soon. Obama's got a whole lot of others to take care of before he reduces my student loans, gives Christine extended Maternity, and gives a total day-care tax break. But if it was coming my way soon, I'd be lock-step with the 47%. 

So maybe, I'll go Obama this time, so that after 2016 my little piece of cake will really come true. And by that time, all this stuff about creativity, free enterprise, and fiscal responsibility will be for the birds (or tea party whackos).

Yours truly,

#5

J.J. comments on #2’s response:

#2,

Ton analyse rejoint la mienne! La classe moyenne qui votait pour les republicains a beaucoup souffert de la crise de 2008, provoquée une fois de plus par la rapacité des grands brasseurs d'affaires qui avaient mis dans leurs poches le gouvernement de Bush. En conséquence, comme beaucoup de republicains non-fortunés, nous souhaitions que le Parti choisisse un candidat capable de nous répresenter. En imposant Romney, les Gros Bonnets du Parti ont pris le risque d'une défaite aux urnes. Ainsi, après avoir fait la preuve de sa totale incapacité  gouverner, Obama va sans doute être réelu! Quel désastre!

En attendant de recoller les morceaux apres l'élection de Novembre, nous ferons notre devoir d'électeur mais sans illusion sur l'issue du combat! Avec Obama pour 4 ans de plus, nous continuerons notre marche vers un socialisme à la française et un problême d'emploi pour toujours! Vive la democratie!

Papa 

BEGIN HERE: #2’s response:

The party has not figured out that the vast majority of their voting base has changed personalities -- that is:  since the 2008-2009 Crash, the average Republican saw how the elite Republican have weathered the storm much better than their average counterpart.  The middle Class voting republican has had to deal with job uncertainty, rising cost of education, and unsecured healthcare.  What have the fat party bosses been doing the whole time -- Nothing.  The core values that once made the Republican party strong were moved over to the Tea Party group.  Republican Bosses paid no attention and decided to keep their tradition of promoting the Elite.  I think Elitism in the Republican Party is killing it.  They put Ryan in there to balance out Romney, but he still had more advantages than your average middle-classer.  I predicted early on that Obama would get his second term -- because of Elitism on the Republican side, because the average middle class is still struggling, and also because Romney's a Mormon.  I don't care how much $$ one throws in a campaign, at least the American voting public is quietly registering their dislike of Elites.

When most of the wealth in America is stuck in the upper 1%, and the 99% are feeling the pressure, 1% doesn't make a whole lot of votes for the Republican party -- Hence the reason throwing so much money into a campaign is not going to change the minds of the struggling middleclass.  I don't like Obama, but think of the comparison.  He definitely was not born with a silver spoon in his mouth.  He was recognized as a potential leader when he got into law school -- yeah affirmative action worked for him.  His wealth is mostly made from his book deals.  Romney comes from a legacy, so it's guaranteed that he would be successful.  His money was maRepude on Wall street.  The average American can grasp that making money off a book deal is OK because you wrote it.  But right now everyone at the bottom hates Wall street, particularly the voting middle class that has their retirement funds, kid college funds stuck in it, and have seen the wealthier 1% shielded from the fall.

There are no surprises -- The only thing that would make this a Republican win is a candidate that appeals to the changed Republican base.  I'm affraid that if the Republicans don't reassess their core values, they will be loosing their voting base by the masses to the Democrats who are appealing to the neglected middle class by more secure government jobs and health benefits.  In the process, the US looses its creative entrepreneurial edge because one will no longer be able to dream and really create their own opportunity.  The stage is set for full blown Democrat flavored Socialism.  I'm not too hopeful...  Think also why socialism seems to work in Europe -- Everyone gets their "little" cake -- so no one really complains.  Do that for 60 years and the voting public forgets what adventure, risk, opportunity, motivation, and creativity means.  The Socialist Elite stay quietly on top of the pyramid protected by the Leftist media (who is getting their "little cake" too).  They invest overseas (China, US, Latin America, Russia), keep the proceeds in secret bank accounts (difficult these days) and amass an amazing wealth to be handed down to the future generations.  Seldom are the Rich in a socialist country entrepreneurs.  Most are party bosses, CEOs of National Champions, and most importantly the descendants of industrialists of the late 19th and early 20th century.  I challenge anyone to list over 50 true Western European entrepreneurs starting from the 60s to now that have made it to Elite status.  One example that comes to mind is the Austrian that went to India or Thailand on vacation and saw the Taxi drivers drinking some red juice to stay awake -- launching Red Bull energy drink in Europe and in the States.  The Austrian was a master at marketing, and a true entrepreneur.  No help from the government there.

I leave this email now, because I'm rambling on about the social stagnation of Europe.

#2