Tuesday, October 16, 2012

Mitt, Thanks for the Reminder

For the record, I am eagerly looking forward to voting very soon in two important elections.

For one, I will be voting for Sen. Scott Brown.

In the other major election, I will be writing in the name of a Yankee Republican who I greatly respect: "Clifford R. Krieger."

I am certainly not voting for the anti-business President, but I'm ALSO not voting for Mitt Romney.  As I write my Marketing report due tomorrow, I've got the debate going in the background.  I just had the pleasure of hearing Mitt Romney interrupt and talk over the moderator twice, to include a smarty-pants explanation of "the rules" during which he completely overrode her guidance and then spun into a long spiel as she was trying to regain control of the debate.

If he's got an image problem as a smug jerk, maybe 50 million Elvis fans aren't wrong this time.  Every time the President can stay quiet and let his opponent slam the ball into the net, he just looks better and better.  

6 comments:

kad barma said...

Mr. Krieger lost my vote with his post today celebrating indefinite detention as government policy. I would suggest you consider pulling the lever for Gary Johnson instead.

Renee said...

I've voted blank/third party before. I didn't regret it.

I like decorum, so the whole debate was a turn off.

When I'm in a meeting, I can't make a determination on the issue unless I get to hear everyone and no one is bickering talking over each other. How could a true undecided think about what happened last night?

Progressive Veterans said...

And by "anti-business" you mean that he didn't restore a January 2009 economy to a Bill Clinton Era economy in, what, one year? Two?

Does the auto industry figure POTUS as "anti-business" or, maybe those willing to engage abroad based on the several "free trade" agreements sign into law.

Please flesh out a response.

- Jack

The New Englander said...

How 'bout the Buffett Rule?

Companies want to grow, so they offer shares publicly. When investors come to them, they can expand and hire more. As a way to incentivize future shareholders and reward current ones, your company offers dividends.

When you change the tax structure to take many of the benefits of dividends and other capital gains away, those investors (whose incomes have ALREADY been taxed, btw) will look elsewhere for places to put their money.

And the economy will contract.

Last night, POTUS hit on the idea that people like Mitt Romney, who pay 14% of their overall incomes in federal taxes, are somehow responsible for our current fiscal woes. Taking more money out of Romney's pocket won't get us out of this jam.

Progressive Veterans said...

I thought capital gains only applied when you liquidate, not when you transfer equity to an amother investment vehicle?

Further, the investment cycle is now global, so "Romney" takes his money out of America and puts it in Indonesia.

Ross Perot described a "giant sucking sound." That sound is music to Mitt Romney's ears.

-Jack

C R Krieger said...

I didn't say indefinite, I said for the duration and noted the Soviet Union went beyond that after WWII, the big one.  If I was too subte, I think they were wrong.

Given the recidivism rate for thse who have been released from Gitmo, for the duration seems reasonable to me.  Sure, release people on parole, but if that comes a cropper, too bad for the rest.  Apply the Geneva Conventions.

And thank you to all who write in my name.  If elected, I would serve, and I would definitely appoint Kad to be chief "No Man".  Everyone needs one.

Reards  —  Cliff