There have been a lot of accusations directed at Mitt Romney lately complaining that he has not released nine hundred and seventy-two years of tax records. Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts. Does anyone actually believe that if he had done something illegal as far as taxes are concerned it would have gone unnoticed? I absolutely agree that Governor Romney should release anything asked for as soon as President Obama releases his college transcripts. Governor Romney has released the required forms, anything else is not necessary. President Obama has hidden all records of his past, why is no one challenging him?
Yesterday PJMedia posted an article stating the obvious:
Mark Levin is defending Mitt Romney’s refusal to release his tax returns, and he’s right for a couple of reasons. First, if Obama had been entirely transparent (read: college transcripts and Fast and Furious, to name two), then Romney should play by the same rules. But Obama’s murky academic past remains murky, and his administration’s lack of transparency has been astounding.
Second, if Romney releases his tax records, they will be descended upon by a pack of hyenas disguised as CPAs and a mischief of rats disguised as political consultants. The benign will be presented as malignant by liars. The cost of enabling liars is higher than the cost of the status quo.
This is simply another attempt by the Obama campaign to turn the talk away from the current state of the economy.
Logo of General Motors Corporation. Source: 2007_business_choice_bro_en.pdf (on GM website). (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
John Lott posted an article at National Review today about what has happened to the money used to bail out General Motors.
The article reports:
Three years ago his administration invested more than $100 billion in taxpayer money to bail out General Motors. On Tuesday, the entire company, not just what the government owns, was worth less than $34 billion. By anyone’s definition, that investment is a glaring failure. Yet over the last few days the Obama campaign, in a $25 million marketing blitz, has flooded the airwaves with ads in battleground states, claiming the bailout should be counted a rousing success.
The contrast between the facts and the campaign ads is amazing.
Another thing conveniently not mentioned in the campaign ad is the number of automobile dealerships that were put out of business in the General Motors and Chrysler bailouts.
The article reminds us:
The only real winners from the GM bailout were unions, which were protected from pay cuts, from losing their right to overtime pay after less than 40 hours a week, and from cuts to their extremely generous benefits. They faced only minor tweaks in their inefficient union work rules.
As for “hundreds of thousands of new workers,” the truth is closer to a tenth of that.
Having just $34 billion to show after a $100 billion-plus investment would get a chief executive of any private company fired. Unfortunately, Obama does not seem to understand how this money has been wasted.
Would you let these people administer your 401K account?
On Thursday the Wall Street Journal posted an article about some of President Obama’s campaign tactics.
The article sited a post of one of the President’s campaign websites:
Save Mr. Obama, who acknowledges no rules. This past week, one of his campaign websites posted an item entitled “Behind the curtain: A brief history of Romney’s donors.” In the post, the Obama campaign named and shamed eight private citizens who had donated to his opponent. Describing the givers as all having “less-than-reputable records,” the post went on to make the extraordinary accusations that “quite a few” have also been “on the wrong side of the law” and profiting at “the expense of so many Americans.”
This is simply unacceptable. All Americans are free to donate to any candidate of their choosing.
The article concludes:
The Obama campaign has justified any action on the grounds that it has a right to “hold the eventual Republican nominee accountable,” but this is a dodge. Politics is rough, but a president has obligations that transcend those of a candidate. He swore an oath to protect and defend a Constitution that gives every American the right to partake in democracy, free of fear of government intimidation or disfavored treatment. If Mr. Obama isn’t going to act like a president, he bolsters the argument that he doesn’t deserve to be one.
We need to remember these actions in November. We have a choice–do we want a President who supports the Constitution or do we want someone whose roots in Chicago politics have clouded thier judgement on abuse of power.
Yesterday Investors.com posted an article about a campaign ad the Obama campaign has created. The ad is total fiction, and the article explains why.
One of the claims in the ad is that the Obama Administration has decreased America’s dependence on foreign oil. The ad fails to mention that during a recession American oil consumption decreases and thus the amount of oil we import decreases. The article also fails to mention that gasoline consumption is down because the price of a gallon of gas has almost doubled under President Obama. The article includes a chart:
The article also deals with some of the other claims in the ad. President Obama claims that according to the Brookings Institution his administration has created 2.7 million clean energy jobs and is expanding rapidly. Again, that doesn’t line up with the facts. The article reports:
“Overall, today’s clean economy establishments added half a million jobs between 2003 and 2010, expanding at an annual rate of 3.4 %” — a half-million over eight years being a tiny gain. And that “this performance lagged the growth in the national economy, which grew by 4.2% annually over the period.”
We need to remember that Spain ended its government sponsored green energy program because for every job they created, two jobs were lost. We need to learn from the Spanish experience.
Overall the ad is a very nice-sounding group of lies. I am sure it is the first of many such ads. As voters, we need to learn to fact check all political ads from all candidates. Statistics can be twisted to say anything the person citing them wants them to say. Polls can be skewed according to who is polled. As voters, we really need to pay attention to what is said during the campaign and how much of what is said is actually true.
We all know that the news is not always correct and that campaign ads sometimes say things that are exaggerated or leave out facts. That is part of a system that requires Americans to do their own research and draw their own conclusions. That is why I am very upset about a new website paid for by Obama for America. The website asks people to report ‘attacks’ on President Obama so that they can counter those attacks with facts. I hate to admit that I am something of a cynic, but somehow I am not sure the attacks will be met with facts. What the website is asking is for Americans to ‘tell’ on other Americans who are saying negative things about President Obama. This smacks of asking children to report their parents as enemies of the state.