Archive for Friday, October 5, 2012

Column: Romney completes a trifecta

October 5, 2012


WASHINGTON — The presidential campaign, hitherto a plod through a torrent of words tedious beyond words, began to dance in Denver. There a masterfully prepared Mitt Romney completed a trifecta of tasks and unveiled an issue that, because it illustrates contemporary liberalism’s repellent essence, can constitute his campaign’s closing argument.

Barack Obama, knight of the peevish countenance, illustrated William F. Buckley’s axiom that liberals who celebrate tolerance of other views always seem amazed that there are other views. Obama, who is not known as a martyr to the work ethic and who might use a teleprompter when ordering lunch, seemed uncomfortable with a format that allowed fluidity of discourse.

His vanity — remember, he gave Queen Elizabeth an iPod whose menu included two of his speeches — perhaps blinds him to the need to prepare. And to the fact that it is not lese-majeste to require him to defend his campaign ads’ dubious assertions with explanations longer than the ads. And to the ample evidence, such as his futile advocacy for Democratic candidates and Obamacare, that his supposed rhetorical gifts are figments of acolytes’ imaginations.

Luck is not always the residue of design, and Romney was lucky that the first debate concerned the economy, a subject that to him is a hanging curve ball and to Obama is a dancing knuckleball. The topic helped Romney accomplish three things.

First, recent polls showing him losing were on the verge of becoming self-fulfilling prophesies by discouraging his supporters and inspiriting Obama’s. Romney, unleashing his inner wonk about economic matters, probably stabilized public opinion and prevented a rush to judgment as early voting accelerates.

Second, Romney needed to be seen tutoring Obama on such elementary distinctions as that between reducing tax rates (while simultaneously reducing, by means testing, the value of deductions) and reducing revenues, revenues being a function of economic growth, which the rate reductions could stimulate. Third, Romney needed to rivet the attention of the electorate, in which self-identified conservatives outnumber self-identified liberals two-to-one, on this choice:

America can be the society it was when it had a spring in its step, a society in which markets — the voluntary collaboration of creative individuals — allocate opportunity. Or America can remain today’s depressed and anxious society of unprecedented stagnation in the fourth year of a faux recovery — a bleak society in which government incompetently allocates resources in pursuit of its perishable certitudes and on behalf of the politically connected.

Late in the debate, when Romney for a third time referred to Obamacare’s creation of “an unelected board, appointed board, who are going to decide what kind of [medical] treatment you ought to have,” Obama said, “No, it isn’t.” Oh?

The Independent Payment Advisory Board perfectly illustrates liberalism’s itch to remove choices from individuals, and from their elected representatives, and to repose the power to choose in supposed experts liberated from democratic accountability. Beginning in 2014, IPAB would consist of 15 unelected technocrats whose recommendations for reducing Medicare costs must be enacted by Congress by Aug. 15 of each year. If Congress does not enact them, or other measures achieving the same level of cost containment, IPAB’s proposals automatically are transformed from recommendations into law. Without being approved by Congress. Without being signed by the president.

These facts refute Obama’s Denver assurance that IPAB “can’t make decisions about what treatments are given.” It can and will by controlling payments to doctors and hospitals. Hence the emptiness of Obamacare’s language that IPAB’s proposals “shall not include any recommendation to ration health care.”

By Obamacare’s terms, Congress can repeal IPAB only during a seven-month window in 2017, and then only by three-fifths majorities in both chambers. After that, the law precludes Congress from ever altering IPAB proposals.

Because IPAB effectively makes law, thereby traducing the separation of powers, and entrenches IPAB in a manner that derogates the powers of future Congresses, it has been well described by a Cato Institute study as “the most anti-constitutional measure ever to pass Congress.” But unless and until the Supreme Court — an unreliable guardian — overturns it, IPAB is a harbinger of the “shock and awe statism” (Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels’ phrase) that is liberalism’s prescription for curing the problems supposedly caused by insufficient statism.

Before Denver, Obama’s campaign was a protracted exercise in excuse abuse, and the promise that he will stay on the statist course he doggedly defends despite evidence of its futility. After Denver, Romney’s campaign should advertise that promise.

— George Will is a writer for the Washington Post Writers Group.


Carol Bowen 1 year, 6 months ago

George Will wrote a very good column before the debate. I guess that was a special treat. He's back to his usual tirades.


Carol Bowen 1 year, 6 months ago

Check out this "trifecta":

Protect your money from stupidity


Cait McKnelly 1 year, 6 months ago

Video has been released and authenticated showing that Romney, at the debate, reached in his pocket at the lectern and withdrew a sheet of paper. Placing it on the lectern, he unfolds it. Romney has attempted to say that it was a handkerchief, however, not only is it the wrong pocket for a hanky, frame by frame analysis has shown that it was, indeed, paper. Debate rules clearly state that no notes or audiovisual materials are to be used and the only thing allowed on the lectern is blank paper (of the debater's choice) and a pen so that they may make notes when the other person is speaking of points for rebuttal. Romney is seen removing it from the lectern after the Obamas leave.
So, in other words, ROMNEY NOT ONLY LIES, HE CHEATS!
And this is the man you people SO admire.


beatrice 1 year, 6 months ago

Obama Trifecta = Iraq, bin Laden and Ghadafi

Romney Trifecta = Big Bird, Bert and Ernie


Fred Whitehead Jr. 1 year, 6 months ago

"Romney Trifecta"....Rpmney.......Ryan.....Akin

There you have it!

The true agenda of the Republican Party (aka "Three if by Tea")


fiddleback 1 year, 6 months ago

I must say I'm enjoying the spring that this debate put in ol' George's step, and also watching all the GOP partisans swoon as their candidate finally starts acting the part.

All this rejoicing at the revived horse race, deliciously oblivious to history repeating itself. Nevermind that other Massachusetts flip-flopper who nailed his first debate only to become a historical footnote a month later...

Maybe they should just start looking forward to Rubio beating Hilary in 2016?


Constitutional_Malfeasance 1 year, 6 months ago

May I add, no small wonder military ballots were fiddled with giving veteran unemployment is double the national average. Are they going to vote for Obama?


fiddleback 1 year, 6 months ago

"First, recent polls showing him losing were on the verge of becoming self-fulfilling prophesies by discouraging his supporters and inspiriting Obama’s. Romney, unleashing his inner wonk about economic matters, probably stabilized public opinion and prevented a rush to judgment as early voting accelerates."

Entirely backwards. GOP voters may have previously felt pessimistic but are a dedicated voting bloc. Before the debate, both Obama and his supporters were more likely to become complacent than "inspirited"...

"unleashing his inner wonk" LOL. George must be kidding--Mitt a wonk? The guy who glibly side-stepped any calculations of what his plans would actually entail or cost? Saying "I'd drop all the bad parts and keep the good parts" is the absolute opposite of being a wonk...

As for the IPAB, some reality checks for Grandpa Will:


Constitutional_Malfeasance 1 year, 6 months ago

This new UE # doesn't pass the smell test. Weve well learned how devious this president and his surrogates can be. Too bad that October numbers wont come out until 3 days after the election.


deec 1 year, 6 months ago

He's also decided he wants to be president of everybody after all. "Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has said his remark that 47% of Americans are government-dependent victims was "completely wrong"."

when will the mea culpas from the con. posters on this forum start? :)


deec 1 year, 6 months ago

Did Romney bring a cheat sheet? If he did, at least he used a piece of paper instead of his hand.


atiopatioo 1 year, 6 months ago

Unemployment is down to 7.8%!!!!! Lowest in 4 long years of recovery from Bush.

I am changing my vote to Obama!!!!!


tbaker 1 year, 6 months ago

It doesn't really matter who wins. Niether candidate really understands and promotes the true role of government in a free society. One to protect the liberty of every individual, not to police the world, not to run a welfare state, impose mandates, transfer wealth, or subsidize certain industries over others, not to run-up massive debt and debase the currency to pay for it, leaving all of us with dollars that won't buy what they used to.

They go to great lengths to make us think they are different becuase they have to keep us poor saps at each others throats fussing over trivia. They know that if we ever came together as a people and united on a subject we would have the power and they would not. That prospect terrifies the ruling elite, which is why I'm not voting for either one of these clowns.


tange 1 year, 6 months ago



/ defecta


Richard Heckler 1 year, 6 months ago

The Big Guys Work For The Carlyle Group What exactly does it do?

To find out, we peeked down the rabbit hole.

FORTUNE Monday, March 18, 2002

By Melanie Warner

Are you the sort of person who believes in conspiracies--the Trilateral Commission secretly runs the world, that sort of thing? Well, then, here's a company for you. The Carlyle Group, a Washington, D.C., buyout firm, is one of the nation's largest defense contractors. It has billions of dollars at its disposal and employs a few important people.

Maybe you've heard of them: former Secretary of State Jim Baker, former Secretary of Defense Frank Carlucci, and former White House budget director Dick Darman. Wait, we're just getting warmed up. William Kennard, who recently headed the FCC, and Arthur Levitt, who just left the SEC, also work for Carlyle.

As do former British Prime Minister John Major and former Philippines President Fidel Ramos. Let's see, are we forgetting anyone? Oh, right, former President George Herbert Walker Bush is on the payroll too.

The firm also has about a dozen investors from Saudi Arabia, including, until recently, the bin Laden family. Yes, those bin Ladens.


Richard Heckler 1 year, 6 months ago

Can Republicans or democrats afford this reckless republican party of the last 32 years?

I cannot afford the reckless repub behaviors the past 32 years represent.

WE must all think about what republicans have left behind for democratic administrations to clean up which BTW is no mean feat

Think about the magnitude of these events which have cost millions upon millions their homes, jobs,retirement programs and medical insurance!

In fact it appears to be policy of republican administrations.

AND they are still trying to steal OUR Social Security Insurance dollars and Medicare Insurance $$$ to pass on to greedy Wall Street investors and campaign contributors. That is simply unacceptable.

It's YOUR money! A few cases in point to be considered :

  1. The Reagan/Bush Savings and Home Loan Heist(Cost taxpayers $1.4 trillion)

Move Your Money

  1. Wall Street Home Loan Bank Fraud on Consumers under Bush/Cheney sent the economy out the window costing taxpayers many many more trillions.

Move Your Money

  1. Only 3 financial institutions were at risk in spite of what Americans were told yet cost taxpayers another trillion $$$ or two.

Move Your Money

  1. Social Security Insurance AT Risk for no reason( This would cost taxpayers $4 trillion, add $300 billion to the debt each of the next 20 years, place taxpayers insurance money at risk and wreck the economy)

Commenting has been disabled for this item.