He’s not interested in people who need help


Mitt Romney isn’t going for the votes of people who need help paying their bills, buying food, getting health care or keeping a roof over their heads in the face of falling wages and high unemployment.

Mitt cares only about the wealthy who are hoarding America’s financial resources and contributing to the needs of the rest of us rather than helping to solve the problem.

That 47 percent of America that pays no income taxes still pays sales taxes, gasoline taxes, school taxes and more. And the reason they don’t pay income taxes is because their wages are being held artificially low.

The 1 percent has gotten wealthier and wealthier, and none of what they’re hoarding is trickling down to help that 47 percent who can’t even meet their most basic needs without help.

Should such things as health care, nutritious food and a roof over one’s head be considered basic human rights? Well, here’s where I differ with Mitt and his cronies — I believe these things should be seen as rights.

There is enough to go around. In fact, there’s plenty for everyone; it’s just that the 1 percent won’t be satisfied until the rest of us are their indentured servants.

Somehow, the oligarchs have convinced millions of Americans to vote against their own best interests. Just look at the map. You’ll notice that the places that pay the least taxes are also the places where the schools are the worst and critical-thinking skills the lowest.

Thirty years ago, the salaries and bonuses CEOs are paying themselves today would have been unconscionable. There was a moral aversion to such theft and greed. Somehow, though, they’ve convinced Americans that they’re worth it, even though they led us to the brink of worldwide financial disaster.

Mitt’s lack of compassion for fellow human beings is appalling. The people I work with, most of whom can’t work because of illness or disability, are deserving of the dignity of having their needs met. Perhaps Mitt and cronies believe people who can’t “contribute” should be put to death. I suppose that would leave more money for them.

Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz details the economic inequality in our country in his latest book, The Price of Inequality. And while conservatives think the economists on the Right who espouse “trickle-down” economics know what they’re talking about, I’ll go with the Nobel Prize winner.

I’d say he knows more than I do, and apparently, a whole lot more than Mitt Romney and his advisors.


Ryan? Really?

It’s a gift from the Right — Paul Ryan, the author of Kill Medicaid/Medicare/Social Security, as VP pick for Mitt Romney.

OK, first off, the Protestants aren’t going to be happy, especially those furthest to the right think neither Mormons nor Catholics are “real” Christians. There are some over there who don’t even think Methodists are real Christians.

Then there are the few moderates in the party who will bail out at the thought of a Tea Partier as VP.

And those on the far right likely are unhappy already because Mitt distanced himself from the Medicaid debacle.

We on the left are pretty pleased, of course, because the Ryan budget hasn’t been very popular and we can (and will) exploit what it would do to seniors, to people with disabilities and to people who happen to be both poor and sick.

And just as the Affordable Care Act is gaining some popularity among the millions of people it has helped already:

  • 2.5 million young adults who are on their parents’ insurance policies,
  • 5 million children with pre-existing conditions like asthma or a birth defect,
  • 14 million seniors who received help with prescription drug costs or other aspects of the new law,
  • 50,000 people with pre-existing conditions such as a history of heart disease or cancer,
  • women who no longer have to pay out-of-pocket for cancer screenings or contraception.

I’ve actually heard the word, “Obamacare” spoken with some affection, and these two are smiling, waving and promising to repeal the whole thing.

Then there’s the Ryan tax plan what gives even more money to the wealthiest while increasing taxes on the working class. This “deficit hawk” has a budget that would increase the deficit while robbing the poorest Americans of everything.

While Romney and Ryan have been trying to paint everyone who’s poor as lazy or evil, many of us know people and families who would be devastated by cuts — people like Rebecca Demmer, whose two sons both have autism and need state services. Cuts in Medicaid would affect this innocent family by taking housing and work support away from them.

Medicaid rates are so low already that many service providers refuse to work in the system, making it difficult to find care for people who depend on Medicaid.

But those people don’t matter to someone who idolizes Ayn Rand, an author with a survival-of-the-fittest philosophy. Rand’s philosophy says that people who can’t “contribute” will not survive. Tell that to Rebecca Demmer, who loves her sons and will argue that they contribute greatly to the lives of the people around them.

Some of my Republican friends are worried about this choice. They see how it looks to moderates and progressives, and they know most unaffiliated voters are pretty middle-of-the-road, and those are the voters who will decide this election.

Thanks, Mitt.



“I’m not sure about these cookies”

OK, I know “cookie-gate” isn’t a real issue, but there’s something here that bothers me and nobody else seems to have mentioned it.

When Mitt Romney said they didn’t look home-baked, he turned to the woman next to him and asked whether she had baked the cookies. Not any of the men, the woman, as though that should be her function.

He is totally tone deaf to the issues that affect women and families because his family has never had to struggle. Of course, I don’t know if Ann Romney bakes cookies, but she was able to choose to be a stay-at-home mom.

Not that there’s anything wrong with baking cookies — I did it the whole time my kids were growing up (in addition to holding down a full-time job), and I still love to bake. I know what’s in the cookies if I baked them and that’s important to me.

But these Romney supporters bought the best cookies in town from a local bakery that they’re very proud of, and he dissed them. He never took a single bite of any of the food they provided.

If my child had acted that way, I would have pulled him aside to tell him he was being offensive and needed to apologize. It’s about manners and it’s about at least pretending to be interested when people do something nice for you.

Anthony Bourdain eats cookies when they're offered to him, why can't Mitt?

So, what does one do when offered food like that? You look at it and say, “Oh, wow. Where did this come from?” And sound like you’re enthusiastic. And choke a little down, a la Anthony Bourdain, who eats whatever his hosts offer him rather than risk offending them. I’ve watched him eat raw seal eyeballs and pig anus without flinching.

That’s just one reason I like Anthony Bourdain a lot more than I like Mitt Romney.

You know, maybe I should bake ol’ Mittens some chocolate cookies — perhaps laced with a little laxative to loosen him up a bit.

a world of progress site | woven by WEBterranean