Author: Jack
I retired in 2008 and so I have more time now to devote to several of my interests The blog here is mainly for my interests in some current events but may have the occasional rant on other subjects. I have also decided to keep my genealogy posts and book reviews here instead of 2 additional blogs (and so simplify my life a little).

The Romney-Ryan anti-choice team

The Romney-Ryan anti-choice team

Posted on by Jack

I thought I would look back on a previous post and repeat much of what I said but emphasize the anti-choice aspects of it.

This is a quote from the Vice Presidential Debate last month. The link to the entire transcript is the my original post.

Representative Ryan:

“That’s why — those are the reasons why I’m pro-life.

Now, I understand this is a difficult issue. And I respect people who don’t agree with me on this. But the policy of a Romney administration will be to oppose abortion with the exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother.”

Rep. Ryan is saying that he respects people who disagree with his belief but the favors a law that would force them to comply with his belief.

Or more accurately, they must comply with Gov. Romney’s belief because Rep. Ryan doesn’t believe in those exceptions but does defer to the top of the ticket.

So I guess if you are anti-choice and favor the repeal of Roe v Wade, the Romney-Ryan team is for you. If you are pro-choice, the issue is also pretty clear.

Listen carefully to Mitt Romney

Listen carefully to Mitt Romney

Posted on by Jack

Listen carefully to Mitt Romney. Although he does seem exceedingly vague at times and often mathematically challenged. Some of what he says may give you an idea about his plans. But you must listen carefully and think about it.

Governor Romney is no doubt a very smart man. He has made a fortune in business so I doubt his grasp of math is as weak as his statements might suggest. He has been very successful in business, in running the Salt Lake Olympics and as Governor. So I don’t think his thinking is vague. But as a successful politician, he must be vague to mask his ideas that some or maybe even most voters would not agree with.

What got me thinking about this was an article in the Christian Science Monitor. The article explained how his statement about the rich paying the same percentage of income tax as now really has nothing to do with the rich and not-so-rich getting similar benfits from the tax plan or the tax system maintaining its progressive nature.

Then there are other tax issues such as inheritance and payroll taxes. Listen carefully of what he says and read this article

More disingenuous crap from Mitt Romney on medicare this time

More disingenuous crap from Mitt Romney on medicare this time

Posted on by Jack

I do like the term “disingenuous crap” to describe many of Mitt’s apparent positions. This time he is talking about Medicare.

I suppose it is meant to scare seniors who don’t think it through. Be Scared, very scared. Not so much about Obama’s cuts to Medicare as Mitt would like. But just think about the Medicare cuts in the Ryan/Romney budget.

Read the NPR story on his latest dubious and baffling claim. Is he really that that confused or is he trying to confuse us?

Who Do You Trust? Obama or Romney

Who Do You Trust? Obama or Romney

Posted on by Jack

When I was a kid there was a game show called Who Do You Trust?. I don’t remember ever watching but I remember seeing the promos on my TV. I think elections come down to that question.

Politicians are not known for their forthrightness. I liked that last word and it seemed to fit but I had to look it up to make sure. Forthrightness is defined as “Direct and without evasion” or “straightforward” by the Free Dictionary.

Politicians are good at telling you what you want to hear, not what you should know about them or their plans. We select our leaders with imperfect and incomplete information.

I’ve complained about Mitt Romney’s lack of specifics many times in the past months but to be fair I should note that Barack Obama is not always very specific about what he would do in a second term. But as I see it, the President has spent almost 4 years being very specific, even sending specific plans to Congress with proposals of what he would like to do.

Think about our real needs to rebuild our decaying infrastructure or educate workers or help veterans re-enter the job market. The president has proposed plans. Congress rejects these plans. It always seems to be Republicans blocking these plans. (To be fair I note that Democrats often reject Republican plans.)

Now I am not saying that each of Obama’s plans is perfect or that Congress could not work with the administration to improve these plans. But in many cases, Congress did not suggest improvements but just rejected these plans on a partisan basis. My point is that you have a pretty good idea about the type of things he would like to do.

Governor Romney has no such track record. All we have are his vague statements, a track record as governor of Massachusetts but he has pretty much denied everything he has done there (except for being a bipartisan guy which is somewhat in dispute), and his business record. It is unclear to me how this would translate into success in running the federal government.

I think all elected leaders run on a platform of “trust me”. But in this race, Romney requires a lot more trust.

New generation Chromebook

New generation Chromebook

Posted on by Jack

I have previously talked about using my Chromebook for genealogy (Pros and Cons of Chromebook and Cons and Chromebook for genealogy).

I was pleased to see a TV ad the other day for the new generation of Chromebook. (I usually would not use “pleased” and “ad” together but it was a nice break from the political ads which are dominating the airwaves these days.) I do not plan on getting a new Chromebook but hope this new generation will spur interest and app development.

Dick Eastman’s Online Genealogy Newsletter has a nice article about the new $249 Samsung chromebook.

President Obama and Governor Christie

President Obama and Governor Christie

Posted on by Jack

I see President Obama and Governor Christie working together for the good the people of New Jersey impacted by the storm. Wouldn’t it be nice if more of our politicians were able to put political differences aside long enough to work for the good of the people?

Podcast: misleading politicians

Podcast: misleading politicians

Posted on by Jack

Politicians tell voters what they want to hear, even when it makes no sense.

I mentioned before that I like to walk and when I don’t have company, I usually listen to podcasts. Today I was listening to the Freakonomics podcast “We the Sheeple”.

The guest was Bryan Caplan, Professor of Economics at George Mason University, who is not a big fan of our political system and politicians. In his words,

You know, if you’re a successful politician, you know you don’t succeed by figuring out what’s really going on in the world and trying to explain it to people. You need to find out what people what to hear and then tell it to them. That’s what you see in debates. That’s what you see voters, successful politicians instinctively are trying to read people, trying to read their faces, what does this person want me to say to him, and that’s how they win.

It was a very interesting discussion for those of us who are a bit skeptical about what politicians tell us. It would be a bit of an eye-opener for those who believe everything they say, even if it doesn’t seem to pass the common sense test.

Mitt Romney is now the candidate of big change or big flip-flop

Mitt Romney is now the candidate of big change or big flip-flop

Posted on by Jack

So Mitt Romney is now the candidate of big change. Sounds very 2008 when President Obama was a candidate of hope and change.

I guess the difference is that I liked some of President Obama’s changes. I think it is good that health insurers can’t turn down people with pre-existing medical conditions. And it is good that insurers cannot cap your coverage if you have some really big claims. It seems good that insurers cannot find a reason to deny coverage if you are sick. There will be problems with health care reform and we need to elect people who will modify the reform to get it right.

I like that the economy is not falling apart and we are not losing hundreds of thousands of jobs each month as we did in the year before Obama took office. It seems the Presidents Bush and Obama (and Congress) took the right steps in late 2008 and 2009 to reverse the trend. Certainly things could be much better and I think they probably would be if Republicans in congress did not block many of President Obama’s efforts. But I see nothing to indicate Governor Romney would do any better.

I like that Obama seems to have a thoughtful foreign policy.

But Governor Romney is also known for his changes or flip-flops. I am surprised he wants to remind voters about that.

More RINOs and DINOs needed

More RINOs and DINOs needed

Posted on by Jack

One of my pet peeves is the excessive partisanship in our political life. It would be nice if our Congress was composed of men and women who could think and act independently and govern the country in what they believe is the best interest of the people they represent. Sadly, there is excessive loyalty to political parties and a lack of ability of compromise for the good of the country.

Political parties have become too powerful. I have previously written many times about this “cancer at the heart of our democracy” (follow my partisanship tag for more).

There is a type of politician called RINO for Republican In Name Only. I suppose there is another group called DINO for Democrat In Name Only. If so, I have certainly heard that term less often.

Usually such a term is used to indicate a lack of party loyalty. And party loyalists consider it a bad thing. But I think it is a good thing. It shows that the politician in question can think independently and is willing to stand-up to the party for the good of constituents or the good of the country.

Think of how good it would be to have a Congress full of people who are willing to act for the good of the country and govern. Support your local RINO, DINO, or independent.

Science Debate

Science Debate

Posted on by Jack

No doubt science is important. Very important. It help us understand our world and beyond. It guides us in many ways as we find our way to live in the world. It is the basis of industrial advances. It is an important part of a healthy economy. Scientific advances are also important to our health. The ways in which science impacts our lives are almost too numerous to count.

Yet science does not seem to play a large part in political debates. The presidential candidates barely mention science and certainly not in any way that approaches its importance to our society. I’m not aware of any elected political office where the candidates discuss science.

But the presidential candidates (President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney) participated in an online science forum ( http://www.sciencedebate.org/ ) in which they answered a series of science questions.

The questions were submitted to and answered by the candidates. So it wasn’t really a debate but it is the start of a discussion and the hope is that candidates might be moved to address these important scientific questions in a debate.

So if you would like to know what the candidates are thinking about science, be sure to check out http://www.sciencedebate.org/.

Romney’s 12 million job promise

Romney’s 12 million job promise

Posted on by Jack

Mitt Romney has mentioned many times that his policies will add 12 million jobs. In the recent debate ( transcript here ) he specified this would happen in 4 years and is a result of his five-point plan.

That’s why I put out a five-point plan that gets America 12 million new jobs in four years and rising take-home pay.

Or at least that is what he seems to be saying.

Dana Milbank of the Washington Post has written an article called Romney’s facts are curious things. A great article that examines this 12 million jobs claim. Turns out there is no strong tie to his 5 point plan and the 4 years thing is a bit fuzzy too. But read the article. You’ll be glad you did.

What are Mitt Romney’s education policies?

What are Mitt Romney’s education policies?

Posted on by Jack

I was trying to find out a bit more about Mitt Romney’s education policies since in both debates he seemed to come across as very pro-education. What I’ve found didn’t seem very consistent with his statements in the debates.

In both debates he indicated that he thought education was important and would not cut education funding. In the first debate, he mentions Massachusetts schools being #1 in the country and seemed to be talking about K-12 education. In the second debate, his answer to the college student promised a growth in Pell grants and a loan program. It was unclear whether he was promising a new program or continuation or the existing program. But he seemed to support higher education.

According to Valerie Strauss an education writer for the Washington Post, Massachusetts schools may have been #1 in some ranking but not the one usually used. Furthermore, while Massachusetts schools were once excellent, they declined while Romney was governor (but are still very good). And Romney supports the budget of his running mate which included big cuts for education.

Will the real Mitt Romney please stand up?

I also noticed that his website includes a group called Educators for Romney. That section seems to be a blog with 2 entries. A general comment on the debate by an advisor. And an entry on education by Rod Paige a former Secretary of Education. They may want to beef-up this section of the website.

Those of us who remember the George W. Bush years, remember Rod Paige as Bush’s secretary of education. We were told he was the Houston School Superintendent who greatly reduced the dropout rate. It turned out out that this outstanding feat was the result of cooking the books. But perhaps his greatest claim to fame is calling National Education Association a “terrorist organization” . He later claimed it was a bad joke, but clearly this is not a man who would get on well with the millions of teachers in the NEA.

This got me curious about his other education advisors. Turns out that many were advisors to President George W. Bush .

Mitt Romney, Mad Men, and the search for qualified women

Mitt Romney, Mad Men, and the search for qualified women

Posted on by Jack

By now you are probably tired of hearing about Mitt Romney’s “binders full of women” comment. It was in answer to a question about equal pay for women, which he never answered.

The entire transcript of the second presidential debate is on the ABC news website if you want to look for the whole context. A search for ‘binders’ will find the part of the transcript with that question and related answers.

I don’t find the phrase itself that damaging. After all it is probably just that he left out a few words that would have made it sound a bit more reasonable. I’m pretty sure he meant something like ‘binders of women’s applications’ or “folders with resumes of qualified women” but that is not what came out of his mouth.

It is a rather uncomfortable image, “binders of women”. Brings me back to my school days of over 40 years ago. We had loose leaf binders, usually with metal rings for 2 or 3 hole paper. I won’t complete my thought but it does seem rather painful.

There is an interesting column in the Patch called Is Mitt Romney a Real Life Don Draper?. I don’t totally agree but the Mad Men image is a good one. I don’t think his attitude is that the workplace should be like on Mad Men but he certainly has an out of date attitude about women.

But one thing that did stick me as a throwback to the Mad Men days was that Governor Romney could not find any qualified women working for the state. Mitt Romney was elected Governor of Massachusetts in 2002, not 1962. I would have thought there should have been qualified women working for the state. Of course it would make sense to reach out to expand the pool of qualified women. But his staff could find no qualified women among the state employees. Seems odd to me.

A false savings by repeal of Obamacare

A false savings by repeal of Obamacare

Posted on by Jack

I have many disagreements with Mitt Romney’s tax and budget plans and here is one that may surprise a few people who think his promises are all about saving money. On his website, he lists several savings. Among them-

Repeal Obamacare, which would save $95 billion in 2016

The House recently passed a bill that did just that. Or at least it would do so if it also passed the Senate and was not vetoed. Seems a bit unlikely now but there next year there is sure to be a different Congress and maybe a new President. But my point was that the House did pass this bill, HR 6079, which would repeal Obamacare and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) looked at the fiscal consequences.

In a “Letter to the Honorable John Boehner providing an estimate for H.R. 6079, the Repeal of Obamacare Act”, the CBO did a 10 year estimate of spending and revenue which would result if that legislation became law.

Sure enough there were big saving there but the government was forgoing even more revenue. The bottom line is a net loss to the government of 109 billion dollars. Since this is just an estimate a reasonable guess is that the average cost is about 10 or 11 billion dollars per year. This could just be added to the deficit or we could just add this to Mitt Romney’s tax plan.

I’m sure this figure does vary from year to year as different parts of Obamacare are implemented but since the average appears to actually be net loss to the government Governor Romney should explain why he thinks this action will save 95 billion dollars in 2016. And he might want to mention what he thinks will happen in all those other years.