Why Mitt's unfit for presidency

There are plenty of reasons why Mitt Romney should NOT be the next president of the United States.

Below is a partial list. It'll need updating anytime the Mitt-wit speaks.

No. 13: Mitt has been running for president for about 5 years now and most Americans have no idea who he really is. It's not sure even Mitt knows.

No. 12: He's completely out of touch with the average American. Putting a car elevator in your massively upsized home in tony La Jolla, Calif., during this Great Recession is a perverse way of saying, "I feel your pain."

No. 11: Mitt wants to shut down Planned Parenthood. Really? Why close a health clinic that doesn't rely on the federal government? And this from a guy who was pro-choice.

No. 10: Mitt changes his positions so often, from immigration to student loans, that his followers have been treated for whiplash. You've heard the joke: A liberal, a conservative and an independent walk into a bar. The bartender says, "Hi, Mitt."

No. 9: Mitt wants to kill the Affordable Care Act even though it is patterned after a health care plan that Mitt championed while governor of liberal Massachusetts. In fact, the individual mandate that everyone buy health insurance is a Republican brainstorm that emanated from conservative "think" tanks.

No. 8: Evidently a fan of Etch-A-Sketch, Mitt is now shaking the mechanical drawing toy so hard that all his ridiculously reactionary positions he adopted during the GOP primaries can be redrawn as centrist doodles. Extra credit: Etch-A-Sketch was invented by a Frenchman.

No. 7: Mitt 's background at Bain Capital is representative of all those swindlers who destroyed the worldwide economy and stole our retirement money. Then they laughed all the way to the Federal Reserve's vaults as they stuffed their pockets with our bailouts.

No. 6: He likes to "fire people." What he means is that he likes to fire American workers, who he thinks make too much money, and replace them with low-wage Chinese and Mexican workers.

No. 5: The Mitt-wit believes $370,000 is chump change, even though it is seven times the national median household income, because it's all he made in speaking fees in 2010 when his overall income was $42 million.

No. 4: "Corporations are people, my friend." In fact, Mitt is merely a walking, talking corporation, which makes him unlike other people. Unfortunately, he's not a job creator.

No. 3: "I'm not concerned about the very poor," Romney said in a Feb. 1 interview. "We have a safety net there." Of course, that safety net was stolen by the wizards of Wall Street. Mitt says so many stupid things that his loose lips could actually sink ships if he were commander in chief.


No. 2: "Let Detroit go bankrupt," was the headline of Mitt's op-ed piece in the New York Times.
Evidently, bailing out the auto companies and saving an estimated 1.4 million jobs was a bad idea. Who knew?

No. 1: Mitt doesn't really believe in America. His financial worth is estimated at $250 million, yet the artful tax dodger stashes money around the world, including the Cayman Islands, in order to avoid paying his fair share of taxes to pay for our military that protects the Mitt-wit's ability to make millions while most Americans struggle. "I pay all the taxes that are legally required and not a dollar more,” Mitt said during a GOP debate. It's one thing for the garden-variety multi-millionaire to conceal his wealth in off-shore tax havens, but it's disgusting when a would-be president essentially says, "I hide my money and so can you." That is not a leader, that is a sleaze-bag.

Vote Telfer, Bagley in primary

It's hard to recommend any Republican for a government job because they don't believe in government.

That being said, it's important for Bend that Republican Chris Telfer be re-elected to the state Senate.

She knows that compromise is not a four-letter word. It's actually 10 letters, but wing-nut Republicans still see it as the dirtiest four-letter word in government, after taxes, of course.

Telfer worked with Democrats to fashion a reasonable redistricting plan, which drew the ire of her primary opponent, and one-time state House representative, Tim Knopp.

Of course, the real issues in the GOP primary, as always, are social issues, essentially abortion and gay rights.

Telfer is not opposed to them, but Knopp is stridently against them.

Knopp will likely win the nomination because of his stances on these social issues.

It was instructive that the local daily came out today and endorsed Knopp, who works for the local builders' association/union, and it also endorsed for county commissioner Tom Greene, a Realtor who once ran the local Realtor's association/union.

The daily paper knows how it's bread is buttered: through ads from Realtors and developers.

Those two entities, as speculators, are responsible for the housing crash that devastated Central Oregon worse than any other region in the state. It even bankrupt Greene, who desperately needs a high-paying government job with health benefits even though he's opposed to government in general.

We don't need Knopp and Greene, and the groups that support them, anywhere near government.

The local Circuit Court Judge race is interesting because four lawyers are vying for the spot.

I don't know any of them, but Beth Bagley gets the nod because, she's smart, young, energetic and is the only woman in the race. She also has a diverse cross-section of the community endorsing her.

We simply need more women in government, particularly in the court system. No, not the Sarah Palin-type who considers ignorance an attribute.

Bagley, a Deschutes County prosecutor, earned her Phi Beta Kappa key and appears more than capable of being a good judge.

Most of the other races in the May 15 primary are uncontested or nominally contested.

Three judges, though, are vying for the same position on the state Supreme Court. Again, don't know them but am partial to the only woman in the race, Nena Cook.

Until women are fully represented in the courts, according to their percentage of the population, we will never be a truly fair and democratic society.

Comparing apples to oranges

Or Republicans to Democrats.

Don't they both say and do outrageous things?

Aren't they just opposite sides of the same coin?

It's common for TV talking heads to claim, and for TV news shows to air, that whenever there is an outrageous statement or action done by a Republican there is an equivalent outrage committed by a Democrat.

But, it's a false equivalency because oftentimes, there is no sense of proportionality to the actions.

Bill Maher took note of the logical fallacy of comparing his trash talk of Sarah Palin with Rush Limbaugh's offensive remarks about a law student.

Everything is equal, according to TV, even when it's most obviously not.

The power of unions equals the power of corporations, TV blares, even though less than 12 percent of the workforce is unionized. Uh, they can't be equal, but journalists are notoriously bad at math.

The "war on women," the GOP tried to assert, is being waged by Democrats because one pundit said, "Ann Romney hasn't worked a day in her life."

But, from March 2011 to March 2012, Republican legislators around the country introduced, and oftentimes enacted, 916 measures that limit women's reproductive freedoms, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

Republicans believe that this can't possibly be called a "war on women" until they get to at least 1,000 bills.

The late Sen. Daniel Moynihan said it best: "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."

But, conservatives have vast troves of their own facts stored at their "think tanks."

Republicans call it "class warfare" when Democrats want to raise taxes on the 1 percent, but they claim fiscal responsibility when they want to raise taxes on the the rest of us.

Republicans have long complained that the media is biased against conservatives.

Mitt-wit Romney recently said "There will be an effort by the, quote, vast left-wing conspiracy to work together to put out their message and attack me."

Of course, he said this on the Breibart News website, which is one of the top right-wing pit-bulls chomping at liberals and Democrats, and is one the more popular sites on the web.

Naturally, facts debunk this "vast left-wing conspiracy."

A recent study notes that the guests on Sunday morning TV political talk shows favor Republicans, almost always white and male, by 70 percent.

To conservatives, this proves a media bias because 70 percent is not 100 percent and to them it should be 100 percent Republicans because they are the only true Americans.

This whole left-wing media claim is bogus.

The top 13 news shows on cable TV in 2011 were all on Fox News, which is a mouthpiece for the GOP. Last year, Fox News was the overall No. 1 cable "news" network for the 10th consecutive.

The top radio talk show host is the GOP's Godfather, Rush Limbaugh, with or without advertisers.

The newspaper with the largest daily circulation in the country is the Wall Street Journal, whose infamous arch-conservative editorial pages now taint regular news coverage since Rupert Murdoch took control of the paper.

Yes, there is left-wing MSNBC, which has limited viewership, and the New York Times, easily the most informative newspaper in the world. The New York Times' weekday circulation is less than half of the Wall Street Journal's.

Again, conservatives point to the fact that there is one left-wing "major" cable TV outlet as proof that the media is biased. You can't mention the New York Times around Republicans because they might stand their ground.

Republicans bark the loudest about bias because they are usually the ones demonstrating it.

Conservatives dominate the message because, by and large, they control the media.

How to read the presidential polls

National polls either show President Obama slightly ahead, or behind, Mitt Romney.

Yes, pollsters like it that way so they can say they were half right.

In fairness, some pollsters, like Rasmussen, lean right and some, like PPP, lean left.

Actually, national polls, particularly this early in the election cycle, are essentially meaningless.

In fact, they'll be mostly meaningless all the way up to election day.

The only polls that matter are for these states, all in the Eastern time zone: Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, Virginia and North Carolina.

They are the battleground swing states because Obama and Mitt will focus most of their attention, and withering assaults through TV ads, on those five states.

It'll be 5 p.m. PST on Nov. 6 when those polls close in the five battleground states.

By 6 p.m. PST, the presidential race will be decided. No need to wait for the TV talking heads to tell you.

At seven months out, though, here's what we know so far: Mitt will lose his "home" states of Michigan, Massachusetts, California and, perhaps, New Hampshire. It's safe to say he'll carry his onetime "home" state of Mormon Utah and its six Electoral votes.

Check out this Electoral map for some insight. Right now, it's estimated that Obama has 227 likely Electoral votes, while Mitt has 170. There are 140 Electoral votes up for grabs and only 270 needed to be elected president.

As we learned from the 2000 election, the popular vote means nothing. It's all dependent on the undemocratic Electoral College.

If Obama were to carry Florida (29 EV) and Pennsylvania (20 EV), then he'll be re-elected. Should he lose those two states, but carry Ohio (18 EV), Virginia (13 EV) and North Carolina (15 EV), he'll still win.

If he wins all five of those states, it will be another emphatic victory for Obama.

The average of the polls right now for the battleground states looks like this:

Florida: Obama, +5.0
Ohio: Obama, +8.6
Virginia: Obama, +4.0
North Carolina: Mitt, +2.0
Florida: Obama, +4.2

Of course, much can change in seven months. Mitt could Twitter his way to a lead in those states, but it's more likely that he'll be the Mitt-wit and lose most of them.

Still, voter-suppressing efforts by Republicans could be a factor in the swing states, which could lead to some disturbances at the polls. Whenever Republicans see African-Americans or Hispanics in a voting line they see "voter fraud," which is a non-existent problem ginned up by the GOP.

If you want to follow the most reliable poll guru out there you can read Nate Silver's blog on the New York Times website. Nate was so accurate in 2008 that the Times gobbled up his blog.

You can also check out what the gamblers think at Intrade. Right now, that market is showing a 60 percent chance that Obama will win a second term. Mitt is trading at 38.1 percent.

Buffett rule is new 'trickle-down' theory

While it is true that taxing millionaires at a higher rate will have a minuscule effect on our federal deficit, critics of the so-called Warren "Buffett Rule" miss the most important element of the rule.

It is this: Once the 99 percenters see that the 1 percenters are paying their fair share, commensurate with their wealth, then the rest of us become less resistant to paying our fair share.

It's called leadership.

If you want everyone to pay taxes for the greater good then those with the most should pay more than those who have far less.

And most Americans believe this to be true.

One of the great travesties of the "Reagan Doctrine" is that it promoted the idea that the collective good is someone else's problem, not mine.

We've had more than 30 years of this paradigm, which promotes the fallacy that we can have it all and not have to pay for it.

The "Buffett Rule" is a way to smash that fallacy and to force the filthy rich to invest, through higher taxes, in the country that protected them, through military might and legal means, while they achieved those riches.

American corporations and the uber-rich, such as Mitt Romney, have an estimated 1 trillion in off-shore accounts because they don't want to pay more taxes to their country, for whom young men and women die everyday to protect these elites.

Even former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan said that the Bush tax cuts, which he supported, should expire.


"I am in favor, for the first time in my memory, of raising taxes," Greenspan told an audience last week at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York.

Communities are coming apart across the country because shared interests are not supported by shared sacrifice.

The poor and the middle class are asked to subsidize the rich when it should be the other way around.


Consequently, the income gap is so wide that not even Donald Trump's hairpiece can cover it.


No one said that being rich meant you were somehow an automatic leader.

But being wealthy demands that 1 percent show more leadership by investing in the country that made those riches possible. That attitude will "trickle down" far more than their charity ever would.

The 1 percent need to step up to the plate and drive home, by example, the idea that we're all in this together.

One nation. Rich and poor.

Work more, earn less!

The guy on the couch in the cartoon could be anyone, but more than likely he is a reporter.

Not that journalists have the worst job in the country.

Out of a list of 200 occupations, the job of a reporter came in at No. 196.

The rankings, from CareerCast.com, were based on five criteria: physical demands, work environment, income, stress and hiring outlook. The supporting data came from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and other government agencies.

What's worse than being a reporter?

Well, they are:

197: Oil rig worker
198: Enlisted military soldier
199: Dairy farmer
200: Lumberjack

The role of a janitor came in at 151.

As you can imagine, software engineer came in No. 1, considering that Apple, Google and Facebook make "casual Friday" look horribly restrictive and punitive.

The hiring outlook for journalists, though, couldn't be worse.

There are stories daily about the cutbacks at media outlets.

Here's hoping that the journalism school at the University of Oregon takes note.

Studying to be a journalist is as relevant to today's job market as being a blacksmith was 50 years ago.

Better fields for would-be journalists include public relations or marketing. The pay is better and there will always be some company out there willing to pay money for someone to buff their public image.

Besides, much of what passes for journalism is really just P.R. for some company or entity. Might as well get a better paying job with real benefits than settle for less with a struggling newspaper.

Or, you can dream on.

A question of priorities

According to Politifact, Oregon spends more on tax breaks for businesses and individuals than on public safety, health and education -- combined.

Even with all the tax breaks we dole out, our unemployment is still higher than the national average. Our business climate is tepid, at best.

These facts became more pertinent this week when Prineville and Crook County approved the 15-year exemption from property taxes for a new Apple data center there.

In exchange, Apple may create --- drum roll please --- 35 jobs in the coming years.

In the meantime, Apple's first data building will employ no one.

As Apple maintains, the iPhone/iPad company has no obligation to create any jobs in America.

And they're right.

Conversely, no American has to buy an Apple product.

Facebook has a large data center up and running near the future Apple project.

Two of the richest companies in the world needed tax breaks from one of the poorest counties in Oregon in order to build there.

Meanwhile, cuts to government services such as education, health care and public safety across the state continue apace.

There is always this whining from the tax-cut crowd in Oregon that we desperately need to invest more in higher education.

Obviously, these folks didn't get much of an education.

When you subtract money from higher education, not to mention all other government services, then you have less money to spend on those "vital" services.

Or, maybe those services aren't vital afterall.

What really matters to Oregonians, anyway?

Is there an app for that?