Finally, Some More Political Thoughts

You might have noticed (my ego hopes you have), lately new blog postings have not been showing up as frequently as in the past. There’s a simple explanation, having nothing to do with running out of topics to write about or opinions to discourse. Rather, it’s because five days a week I’m involved in educational pursuits that have eaten into my free time. I’m even finding it difficult to watch the recorded Daily Show with Jon Stewart and The Colbert Report, causing me to make a conscious decision as to which source of news and commentary is more beneficial—the two Comedy Central shows or reading the NY Times.

Anyway, here are some thoughts that have been rolling around my brain the last few days...

How could anyone call her a “Democratic strategist”? I’m referring, of course, to Hilary Rosen, who made the asinine comment on Wednesday that Ann Romney, wife of presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, was somehow unfit to comment on women’s economic issues because she never worked for pay outside the home.

Did she honestly believe stay-at-home moms provide no value to the household, that they don’t understand, in very real terms, economics, when the cost of peanut butter skyrockets, when the tab for filling up the car with gas for the soccer/Little League/ice skating/cheerleading practice isn’t gushing forever skyward, when home heating bills force her to swaddle the baby in extra blankets to keep fuels bills from exceeding monthly mortgage payments?

It doesn’t matter that Ann Romney might be rich enough to not worry about those problems. But anyone who has risen to the status of “strategist” should understand basic political talk, and that every comment made, no matter how innocent, might well be turned against them and used by their adversaries.

Rosen has apologized for her “poorly chosen” words, which have been repudiated by President Obama and his re-election staff. That’s not enough. Rosen should be summarily dismissed from any aspect of the Democratic campaign for not only poor judgment but also for giving Republicans an opportunity to carve into the substantial lead Obama has over Romney among women.

Let’s be clear: Even if she didn’t put her foot in her mouth, and by extension, give the impression she was voicing Obama/Democratic thinking, there would be many women who did not support four more years of an Obama presidency. What she did was rile up the opposition, giving it another talking point no matter how many times she (or Obama) apologizes or retracts her statement. An already difficult re-election has been made more difficult. Instead of focusing on other issues, Obama must now spend time cementing his appeal to Independent women (and any Republican woman who thinks for herself).


Don’t Get Sick: Only the most optimistic supporters of the Affordable Care Act believe the Supreme Court will uphold the law. Which means millions of Americans might find themselves without insurance coverage by mid-summer. Which begs the question, what will Republicans do to preserve some of the more well-received features of the so-called Obamacare, such as the provision that denies insurance companies the right to withhold coverage based on a pre-existing condition, and the ability to insure children until age 26 if they don’t have their own insurance?

If Congressional Republicans don’t pass immediate remedial bills in these areas when they return from their summer recess (under the assumption the Supreme Court will void the entire law and not just the mandate part), health care once again will become a core issue in the campaign. Romney should not be allowed to ask voters to wait until he’s elected to secure a new health care law. House Speaker John Boehner should have his staff working on a bill right now, given his stern belief Obamacare is unconstitutional.

I wouldn’t count on it, however. Just don’t get sick after June.


Speaking of Health Care ... Here’s a dilemma Romney will face at the GOP nominating convention in Tampa: To shore up his conservative credentials, how much face time will he give to his rivals? Actually, I don’t see that as too much of a big deal. No, the real dilemma will be, should he allow former vice president and new heart recipient Dick Cheney a turn in the spotlight?

So far, Romney has not embraced former president George W. Bush. He wants no link to the man who sent the country off to two God-forsaken wars after his staff ignored warnings about an Al-Qaeda attack, and who saddled the country in more mounting debt with a Medicare prescription drug plan. But Cheney is a neocon hero, a talk-tough pol who would cause applause to cascade down from the rafters of the convention hall. Could Romney withstand the comparisons to Cheney? More to the point, could he afford to remind voters that Cheney in great part bequeethed to the country a legacy of vitriol, war and debt? A Cheney speech would rouse the convention delegates and inspire the faithful at home, but most assuredly be so partisan it would turn off Independent voters.


Speaking of Vice President: To me, it’s almost a no-brainer—Romney will pick Marco Rubio, the first-term U.S. senator from Florida, as his running mate. The son of Cuban refugees will secure Florida in the Republican column, as well as help Romney close the gap with Obama among Hispanic voters in other states. He’s also more conservative than Romney, so the hard-core will feel better about voting for him for president.

Obama’s only chance of winning Florida again is if Sarah Silverman and her Jewish cohorts descend on the Sunshine State on election day and hold their collective breaths until grandma and grandpa (and maybe some mothers and fathers) vote for a man they repeatedly have been told is Israel’s worst enemy ever in the White House.

Instead of a Florida election, perhaps we should have a competition between ethnics. Let’s see, Dominoes? Pinochle? Mah-Jong? At least it would be a lot more entertaining than picking a president by counting hanging chads.