Law & Legal & Attorney Politics

What Mitt Romney Should Have Said During the Debates

When learning self-defense, one of the key principles is to defensively use the energy and momentum of your attacker against them.
This requires far less strength and energy than blocking or attacking them.
Governor Mitt Romney and Congressman Paul Ryan as the team vying to become the next President and Vice President of the United States, should have used that same principles in the debates and in their campaigning.
It certainly could improve their chances of winning an election which might be the 19th for the Electoral College to select a president who does not have the popular majority vote There were a number of topics in the presidential debates that this simple principle could have significantly impacted viewers' opinions of the two candidates.
When President Obama or VP Biden stated they inherited a very bad economy: Gov.
Romney or Rep.
Paul Ryan should have agreed with their statement and then shared a few key statistics about the economic scenario in January of 2009.
The prior year deficit was $460 billion, the national debt was $10 trillion, there were 31.
5 million people on food stamps, 2.
7 million people were unemployment more than 6 months, and fortunately the US had an Triple-A credit rating.
Now imagine what I (Gov.
Romney) will inherit when I take office.
The deficit will exceed $1,090 billion, the national debt will exceed $16.
4 trillion, there will be more than 46.
7 million people on food stamps, and more than 5 million are unemployment more than 6 months, and the US will have been downgraded to an AA credit rating.
President you are very proud of the fact that the unemployment rate is at the same level as when you took office.
So after incurring more than $6 trillion of additional debt, and the Federal Reserve implementing three extremely expensive quantitative easing (QE) programs that added trillions of dollars to their balance sheet, unemployment is back to where it was four years ago.
Were you to have another four years in office, I can imagine how much more your administration would need to spend to bring unemployment back to 4 or 5%! 2.
On going back to old failed policies.
President, in many regards I do want to go back, rather than going forward on the current path.
I would like to go back to the US having low unemployment, a strong work ethic, a time when families were an important aspect of American life, when neighbors helped each other, when we could be proud to be Americans, and most foreigners dreamed of the possibility of living in America.
If moving forward means ever bigger deficits, and fewer American jobs, and moving forward means more drugs, crime and urban decay, and moving forward means the decline of the standard of living in America, and it means increasing moral hazard by rewarding those who default on their debts and obligations, rather than helping those who lived up the contracts they signed, and moving forward means that more people in more countries despise the US, and it means government keeps growing, and fewer people trust the government, then I am not in favor of moving forward down that path.
Question from a 20-year-old college student: "all I hear from professors, neighbors and others is that when I graduate, I will have little chance to get employment.
What can you say to reassure me, but more importantly my parents, that I will be able to sufficiently support myself after I graduate?" First I'd like to congratulate you on your path to receiving a higher education.
So many young people have given up hope because of the dismal prospects for college graduates today.
More than 50% are either unemployed, underemployed or employed in a job they took for income, not for a career.
This is a record number, at a record that the administration should not be proud of.
Secondly, I'd like to clarify something that you probably know, but not all Americans do.
With the exception of essential services like the military, teachers, police, fire protection, and infrastructure hired by the state and local governments - government should not be creating jobs.
The government is already too large, too complex, and the more people hired into government jobs the more difficult it is for the private sector to create jobs.
I was in your shoes about 40 years ago as I struggled to complete my education while feeding a young family.
I don't know about you, I wore a size 10.
5 shoe! I worked hard to get that good education, and to find a good job.
Fortunately at that time the government policies, regulation, and tax policy had not yet steered the US toward becoming a socialist state, and it was possible for me to find work and realize the American dream.
The company I later founded helped many prominent companies prosper.
Those companies today would be willing to hire people like you if the government does not get in the way.
High deficits, growing national debt, uncertainty of tax policy, increasing regulatory burden, a potential fiscal cliff, the highest corporate tax rates in the world, and the prospects of increasing taxes on the people who make those hiring decisions, are not the right policies.
As President I will be bringing with me a background in job creation, regulatory reform, decreasing bureaucracy, and tax policy.
These are the essential components to help you and millions of young people in America to not only survive, but to thrive and become the leaders of this great nation.
On the Romney-Ryan proposed tax plan and budget.
President, when you discuss reducing the deficit you seem to think there are only two levers.
All we hear from the administration is that the deficit can only be reduced by either raising taxes, by lowering government spending, or some combination of the two.
The discussion is always on increasing taxes on upper income families or the middle class.
In reality there are many more levers at our disposal - such as creating jobs, increasing the motivation for companies to expand, reducing deductions and loopholes, eliminating bureaucracy, eliminating counter-productive regulation, and even the line-item veto to eliminate Washington DC pork-barrel politics.
Abortion, gay marriage, and other emotional issues.
Fellow Americans, I realize these issues are very emotional ones, and affect a number of you very personally.
The President of the United States has to focus on the most important national and international priorities first.
I believe the top four issues on my agenda during my first term has to be expanding the economy, job creation, national security and safety of our citizens, as well as working with our international allies and partners to achieve peace in our global village.
These are all equally important issues, and probably national security and the safety of Americans citizens is more equal than the others.
Given the number of challenges to appropriately address each of these top priorities, I believe we need to defer making major changes to existing policies on topics such as abortion, gay marriage, and many social issues.
I have deeply rooted religious and moral beliefs, which I need to balance with the needs and wishes of my fellow Americans.
This will require some time and patience to craft the right policies.
Do not misunderstand me, these are indeed important issues, and we do need to address them and many other social issues.
I'd like to quote Pres.
Ronald Reagan who I believe summed it very well "I think the best possible social program is a job".
And millions of our fellow Americans are suffering due to the lack of jobs.
Until we have sufficient jobs in the US, and the world is at peace, I cannot rest or divert my focus.
When accused of personally investing in China.
President, as investors each of us and our financial advisors pursue high returns with limited risk, by properly diversifying our portfolio.
With the current administration's policies toward China, clearly my financial advisors felt that investing in China would be lucrative.
When US companies face the highest tax rate in the world, it is difficult for them to compete with foreign companies.
With these high tax rates in the US, companies find it more attractive to invest in other countries, and thus investing in foreign companies provides a high return.
You may have noticed that as my poll ratings have increased, the Chinese currency has strengthened versus the US dollar.
This strengthening is what your administration has been requesting from China for four years, and apparently they have decided to gradually strengthen their currency as the prospects increase for my being the next President of the United States.
When accusations were made that the companies Gov.
Romney's company invested in created jobs in China.
President, business does not operate on a win-lose principal.
If great American companies like Staples, Experian, DoubleClick, LinkedIn, or many others we invested in grow, those companies create many jobs in the US.
As they continue to grow they look toward international expansion.
When companies like these create 1,000 jobs in the US, and then create another 100 jobs in China, that is a good thing.
Both the US gains and China gains.
In business we strive for win-win solutions, not win-lose, nor even compromise.
I believe we need to adopt that this same principle in government.
The more these companies grow, the more the US gains.
If at the same time China and or other partners and allies gain, that's even better! 8.
The attack on the Embassy in Benghazi, Libya.
President, both you and Vice President Biden stated that you did not know the details of the terrorist attack on the Embassy.
This statement is very hard for me to understand, given that you were briefed by your top national security aides about the preparations being made in the US and abroad.
So evidently the Romney-Ryan team has intelligence sources that gave them better information within hours of the attack than the sources the current administration uses.
Within two hours of the attack Ansar al-Sharia a Libyan militant group claimed "credit" for the attack.
Furthermore the nearby CIA Annex was under attack for many hours, and not a single defense unit was dispatched to support them.
One of our elite teams could have been there within two hours.
Despite the information that I had available to me, your administration continued to state that the attacks were a result of protests against an obscure video.
The facts show that there were no protests at the time of the attack.
More importantly Mr.
President you said that the death of Ambassador Stevens and three other individuals "was not optimal".
I certainly do not feel that response is very satisfactory to the families of four victims of this terrorist attack, nor to the American people.
As President, I would have made sure that the State Department would have heeded the ambassador's warnings and provided the additional security measures the ambassador requested, especially on the 11th anniversary of the biggest terrorist attack on US soil.
If this attack did occur on my watch, I would want to assure these families that my administration would be doing everything possible to investigate the events that led to their loved ones' tragic death.
Furthermore, I would want these families and all of the people working at that embassy to know that we will do everything possible to bring the guilty parties to justice and to avoid such a tragedy in the future.
On foreign-policy - when Pres.
Obama said on several occasions: "what you described Governor is exactly what we are doing.
" Mr.
President, I am very encouraged that you are starting to implement the programs that I have been advocating.
On the other hand, the results to date clearly show that your prior policies and actions were not successful.
Intentions and actions are far less important than results.
On Israel.
President, you say that you have reiterated your support for Israel, and yet during the Democratic convention, when it was very clear that Israel was pushing for a definitive red line and deadline, you evidently did not want a potential attack to interfere with the convention.
At that time you stated that "you don't want to be complicit" if Israel chooses to conduct a military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities.
Additionally, the joint US Israeli military exercises were delayed and later scaled back dramatically.
To me, this does not sound like solid support for an ally.
So again, I am encouraged that you are now supportive of Israel, as I have been advocating.
Al Qaeda's leadership has been crippled.
Prior to 2008 al Qaeda was present in two countries.
Today al Qaeda and other Jihadist groups are present and strengthening in 70 countries! In addition to Afghanistan and Pakistan, we now know they are in Libya, Yemen, Somalia, Sinai, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iraq and many other countries.
In all of these places, al Qaeda and associated groups are a growing presence, not crippled.
In Iraq they doubled in size in just one year after U.
troops left the country.
These terrorists have already killed Americans, and they have planned and executed several attacks on our U.
homeland that have failed only thanks to technical problems or outstanding police work.
On the deficit and national debt.
It appears I made a tactical error in publicly stating that I would replace the Chairman of the Federal Reserve.
Since that time it appears that the Federal Reserve's actions are supporting the current administration by trying to boost the economy and lower the deficit.
The Fed is supposed to act independently of the government, although they seem to be acting in lock step with the current administration.
They are helping to reduce the "official" deficit two ways: a.
By keeping interest rates low, the government's borrowing costs are lower today than four years ago, despite the fact that the national debt is $6 trillion higher.
By implementing QE-3 and buying back unlimited amounts of mortgage-backed securities, the Fed is effectively subsidizing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which otherwise would be a larger burden on the deficit.
The Sarbanes-Oxley bill was passed to avoid companies masking their true debts by placing them in off-balance-sheet corporations.
The Fed is in essence taking debts off the government's balance sheet.
I can only assume the administration and the Fed feel the US government is exempt from Sarbanes-Oxley.
With the Federal Reserve's help, the administration is able to print an additional $60 billion each month to stimulate the economy without increasing the deficit.
Economists have clearly stated that all of that money being printed will devalue the US dollar, which in turn will increase the price of all imported goods, and the price of commodities that our manufacturers buy, thus creating high inflation.
The Fed's primary role should be to keep inflation in check, and instead they are actually planting the seeds for future inflation.
On Mr.
Romney's specific plans to expand the economy.
There are many aspects, but let me address one given the limited time.
Despite over $6 trillion added to our national debt, and the Fed implementing three very extensive QE programs to date, the economy is barely growing.
Printing money while the banking system does not utilize those funds to loan to businesses will NOT improve the economy.
For every $1 printed less than $1 is invested in the economy.
And certainly despite the more than $6 trillion additional spending over the last four years, the economy has grown far less than $6 trillion.
As President, one of my priorities will be to focus on the factors that are hindering bank lending.
We would look at initiatives from the private sector such as the "TACT Program" for banks to convert the toxic assets they accumulated during the housing crisis into performing loans.
When the banking sector is working as it should, then every $1 loaned can create as much as $8 of additional growth in the economy.
The TACT Program requires NO government funding, and can quickly improve the banking system.
Unfortunately, there are currently some regulatory issues that are hindering banks from moving ahead with programs like these, and we need to address them with the FDIC.
In closing: Fellow Americans, you have a choice this November.
This is not a decision based on which political party you are affiliated.
This is a decision that affects the future of this great nation, your family's future, and our children's future.
Do you want the US to return to its status as the best place to live, work, and to start a business? Or do you want our standard of living to continue to decline, our influence throughout the world to decline, as well as the respect from our partners and allies? Do you want a President who understands business, banking, and job creation, with a vision to reduce the deficit without resorting to raising taxes, and whose past is known and none of his records sealed? If so, you should vote for the Romney-Ryan team.
You know where I was born, who my wonderful parents were and what they accomplished for this country.
You know where I went to school, and my transcripts are available for public access.
You know my track record of building a small company into a major company.
My partners and I did that without government handouts, and without government guarantees.
You know my track record of leading the great State of Massachusetts, and managing the 2002 Olympics in Utah.
You know my record off investing in and growing companies, my wonderful wife, my religious convictions and affiliation.
You have seen some of my kids and grandkids who I'm so proud of.
My tax records, income sources, and charitable contributions are divulged to an extent that most people would certainly not want to divulge have to divulge.
May God bless you and guide you in making the right decisions in November.
May God bless your families, friends and this great country - the United States of America.
Together we can make it an even greater nation.

Leave a reply