And To Add To The Debates

October 5, 2012

I have to admit, I didn’t watch the debate live on television. I listened to it live, then I watched the debate, then I heard the commentators. I was blown away by Mitt Romney. I heard exactly what I wanted to hear. In fact, I heard exactly what I wanted to hear from both candidates.

One of the most amazing things occurred during the Presidential debate that has gone almost completely unnoticed. In fact, I’m haven’t heard anybody point this out. While listening to President Barack Obama, I heard him describe in detail how supply side economics works, says his administration did it, and more over, it helped stimulate the economy. For a guy who claimed that “Supply Side Economics has never worked“, it’s funny listening to him say it worked.

21:14:22: OBAMA: Well, I think — let’s talk about taxes, because I think it’s instructive. Now, four years ago, when I stood on this stage, I said that I would cut taxes for middle-class families. And that’s exactly what I did. We cut taxes for middle-class families by about $3,600.

And the reason is, because I believe that we do best when the middle class is doing well. And by giving them those tax cuts, they had a little more money in their pocket, and so maybe they can buy a new car. They are certainly in a better position to weather the extraordinary recession that we went through. They can buy a computer for their kid who’s going off to college, which means they’re spending more money, businesses have more customers, businesses make more profits, and then hire more workers.

In fairness,that was just a short clip and he did spend the rest of the night stumbling and bumbling. I thought we had the professor here, instead it turned out what we have is Gilligan. I can’t wait to see Paul Ryan debate Joe Biden the Skipper.

When Mitt Romney talked about what he wanted to do, my jaw dropped. I mean, as a conservative, I’ve been dying to hear a Republican candidate talk about his ideas in a frank and honest way. Mitt Romney spoke exactly how conservatives think.

And the reason is because small business pays that individual rate; 54 percent of America’s workers work in businesses that are taxed not at the corporate tax rate, but at the individual tax rate. And if we lower that rate, they will be able to hire more people. For me, this is about jobs. This is about getting jobs for the American people

Absolutely correct. This isn’t about tax cuts for the wealthy. Sure, we can give wealthy people tax breaks and they would have more money in their pockets. That is obviously true, but what is also true is that by giving the middle class people tax cuts, more products will be purchased, increasing the demand, thereby creating an opportunity for wealthy people to capitalize (that means make more money for you Liberals out there). In order for them to capitalize, they will hire more people to do the work, which means more jobs. More jobs means more people with jobs, which means more people who actually will pay taxes, thereby increasing tax revenues and oh, that means less people on welfare. Less people dependent on the re-election of the Democrat party… and that means less power for the Democrats. Who is for economic growth again?

While we are on the subject of the economy, the Professor turned Gilligan might have been talking about tax cuts during the debate, but the Skipper corrected his little buddy the next day.

“You know that phrase they always use? ‘Obama and Biden want to raise taxes by a trillion dollars.’ Guess what? Yes, we do,”

We’ve heard a great deal about Why the Professor looked more like Gilligan, but before the commentators had my ears, Obama had my eyes. I watched the debate immediately after and was captivated by Obama’s indifference. I mean, the smirks by Obama almost seemed to me that he was holding back pride. When Mitt Romney was talking about how bad things have gotten under Obama’s leadership, Obama smirked. Not once, several times.

There were two things that stood out in my mind as I got away from the debate. The first is that Mitt Romney clearly looked more Presidential. He had a command of the environment. He seemed more competent, and he didn’t win just because he sounded like he knew what he was talking about, he won the debate because he seemed like he was in his element and Barack wasn’t. Think move on.

21:22:58: OBAMA: Jim, I — you may want to move onto another topic, but I — I would just say this to the American people.

Yes Jim, let’s move on from the single most important issue this election. Unless of course you think fighting for Big Bird is more important than fighting for American jobs.

The other thing that stuck out was that Romney seemed to be on the offensive and Obama seemed to be playing prevent defense. Normally I would be inclined to believe that the candidate on the offensive is the losing candidate, but I’m not so sure. In a close election, both candidates try to remain mistake free and wait until their opponent errors to capitalize. I am also reminded that Mitt Romney had John McCain beat in the 2008 primary and opted not to attack him anymore. Well, John McCain made a comeback. It could be the internal polls show Barack with a wide margin, but Obama is on the offensive too. Either way, it seems to me that regardless of the reason, this race in my opinion is breaking open for one of the candidates, and my guess is that it’s in Romney’s favor. Otherwise, Obama wouldn’t be pulling out all the stops.

Speaking of economics, Part II of Atlas Shrugged this coming week and The Rave Theater on O’Neal Lane will be showing it. If you would like a free T-shirt, RSVP to the Atlas Shrugged showing via Facebook. Click Here for more details.


0 comments

Please help Louisiana Conservative Dot Com. Please donate $5, $10, or whatever you can afford to help our cause today!

Like Box