Linda Loftin

Thoughts on the 9/07/11 Republican debate

In Uncategorized on September 8, 2011 at 3:15 pm

The only candidates that the pundits want to discuss are Romney and Perry but I believe that if the Republicans want to win the 2012 election, they need to nominate John Huntsman.  In watching the debates last night, I observed how reasonable and presidential Mr. Huntsman appeared. He is a conservative, but compared to the views of the rest of the candidates, he seems moderate. I believe he would get the independent votes, as well as the more conservative and moderate Democrats. I believe he would be elected. As governor of Utah, his state was number one in job creation, not 47th as in Massachusetts under Romney. Huntsman has vast experience internationally. He speaks fluent Mandarin Chinese, has been an ambassador three times, and has lived overseas on four occasions. He bushes off Bachmann’s silly assertion that the president can order up 2$ a gallon gasoline, by stating that this is not something under presidential control. He is a man who believes in science and in the facts of evolution and climate change. He is conservative but reasonable. He would be elected.

Fortunately, for the liberal Democrats, the Republicans will not use their common sense this year. They will nominate a candidate who can not win the support of the nation. They will nominate a fringe candidate who’s views will send the centrist majority in this country scurrying back to Mr. Obama.  Do they really believe that Perry, with his “Ponzi scheme” view of Social Security will win over the nation? Do they believe the nation will
cheer on a man who, as the long time governor of Texas, managed to oversee a state that has over 26% of it’s population without health insurance? Do they believe the nation will accept a man as president who has managed a state with one of the lowest high school graduation rates in the country and yet, has responded by cutting the education budget? 
Will the nation accept a man who has overseen the execution of more prisoners than any other state and is proud of the fact, despite the speculation that some of those killed were innocent of their crimes? This “trigger-happy cowboy” as he has been called, will not resonate with the country as a whole. He doesn’t believe in climate change and his solution to the arid conditions in his state is to pray for rain, an action, unfortunately, which does not solve the problem. Mr. Perry  will ride his horse back to the drought stricken, uninsured, and under-educated state where he came from and Mr. Obama will  be president for another term. 

Mr. Romney claims he is not a career politician like Mr. Perry. He has, however, spent the past 20 years trying hard to be a career politician. He had one term as a governor, but other than that has failed in his many attempts to secure a political office. His business experience consists to buying out companies and then getting rid of the workers. Is that the kind of president we want? Do we want a man who
sits around for a photo op with the unemployed and callously makes jokes about also being unemployed while he sits on his assets of 250 million dollars? Do we want a president who created the individual health insurance mandate and then refuses to endorse it for the nation? 

The rest of the candidates from last night’s debate also looked unelectable. Mr. Cain has a 9-9-9 plan for federal taxes, sales taxes, and corporate taxes, but that looks to me to be plan that benefits the rich and puts a big burden on the poor and working classes. Mr. Santorum tried to emphasize that he is the candidate of moral issues as well as economic issues and he doesn’t want corporations to pay
any taxes. I don’t believe the majority of Americans want their morality legislated, nor do we want to see corporations pull in billions of dollars and pay no taxes on their loot. He also believes we should get rid of aid to the less fortunate by eliminating food stamps and housing subsidies. He is the kind of Republician who would just like to eliminate any assistance to the poor. I wonder if he would also just like to have hospitals turn away the uninsured. Maybe the poor can just live under bridges until they starve to death or die from untreated disease.  Well, I’m sure Mr. Santorunm would pray for them and that will be a great comfort. 

Ms. Bachmann rambled on about her distaste for socialized medicine but what does she think it’s called when the huge numbers of people who can’t afford health insurance end up in hospitals who are obligated to treat them and send us taxpayers the bill? How can these people not see that if we are all required to pay something towards a national health insurance program, that it would be fairer for all of us? Do Americans really enjoy having the uninsured pay nothing while the rest of us pay for their hospital treatment? The conservatives like to try to scare us with the words “socialized medicine” but we must face the fact that we will be paying for the uninsured unless they are also required to pay something, unless we just want to deny care for anyone who can’t pay and let them die untreated. 

As for Ron Paul, he has some good ideas but Americans will never accept the idea of no federal regulations, no rules about safe cars or car seats or required vaccinations to guard again deadly outbreaks of disease, no free school
lunches for children in poverty, no minimum wage, and no federal disaster relief. We have these things because Americans demanded them and we aren’t about to do away with them. 

Mr. Gingerich didn’t add much to the discussion last night. He is fading fast. He made some noises about how great charter schools are, dispute the fact that research has shown that the majority of students in these schools score no better than their public school counterparts. He also made a statement that claimed that Mr. Obama conducts “class warfare” but the last time I looked, it’s the Republicans who are looking to amass wealth at the expense of the middle and working classes as well as at the expense of the poor. 

The bottom line is that these candidates are too radical for the majority of the American public. The one electable candidate, Mr. Huntsman, will not be the nominee and all the others are too far right for our centrist countrymen. Mr. Obama will be re-elected. 

Advertisements
  1. What a great post. You have summed up everything, perfectly. John Huntsman was the only one who spoke with common sense. Time will tell if the Republican’s will come to their senses or give the election to Obomma.

  2. Thanks Ed!
    It’s so nice to see a comment. I appreciate it so much when I get comments and yours are always so interesting.

  3. I thought this was wonderful. Very good summary from a reasonable viewpoint. I would like to hear more about the “let them die in the street” approach

    • Thanks for the comment! If the far right fringe had their way, we would eliminate Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, the health care overhaul, and hospital care for undocumented workers; therefore, it follows that the next step is to refuse any health care for those who lack insurance and can’t pay. We would look just like a third world country with people dying on the streets and the wealthy holed up in gated mansions surrounded by armed guards.

  4. We could create jobs though by having people go around in little horse drawn wagons and picking up the dead people. Another job would be for a bulldozer to dig a pit for the bodies and then just cover it up after we throuh them in

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: