Bravo, Mitt, But the Tail Now Wags the Dog

Let’s give Mitt Romney some deserved high-fives. On several levels, his selection of Congressman Paul Ryan to be his running mate showed some strategic maneuvering and has altered the presidential campaign.

First, by announcing Saturday morning, Romney avoided a hammering in many “liberal newspaper” Sunday Op-Ed sections. The New York Times, for example, contained no commentary, not even an editorial, on the choice of Ryan in its Sunday Review section. But for a stinging rebuke of Romney’s tax plan, and Ryan’s pre-selection budget plan, read David Firestone’s analysis: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/12/opinion/sunday/romneys-tax-plan-defies-the-rules-of-math.html?_r=1&ref=opinion 

Like Romney, Ryan is a numbers man. There’s little empathy Joe Six-Pack will be able to take away from either man. They supposedly are economic policy wonks, but there’s little little agreement they understand the anguish their plans would have on Americans who earn less than $200,000 a year. Moreover, media reports paint Ryan as a no compromise kind of guy, hardly the type Romney can say will help him instill a new working atmosphere in Congress. 

Romney-Ryan are the closest thing to “buddies on the campaign trail” since Clinton-Gore.  

I wonder, in vetting Ryan, how many years of tax returns did Romney’s team peruse? According to The Times the other day, when he was under veep consideration in 2008, Romney provided 23 years’ worth of returns to John McCain. I wonder, when running for Congress, how many years of tax returns has Ryan made available to the public? Will Romney now feel pressure to unseal more tax filings (keep in mind, he has yet to submit his full 2011 return).

Until now, Romney has chosen to run a “trust me” candidacy. Trust me I’ll be better than Obama. Trust me I’ll reduce the deficit. Trust me I’ll lower taxes without increasing the deficit. Trust me I’ll spend more on the military. Trust me I’ll improve the economy. Trust me health care will be reformed, just not under Obamacare. Trust me. Trust me. Trust me. Just don’t ask for details on how all this will be done, what programs would be cut to balance the budget.  

By selecting Ryan, Romney has put some meat on his bare-boned promises. Ryan’s budget has specifics, though not everything spelled out. Basically, by choosing Ryan, the tail now wags the Romney dog. Romney will have little leeway in being seen as a strict advocate of Ryan’s plan to cut support programs for the underclass and middle class, change Medicare, reduce education grants and food stamps. Romney has officially embraced class warfare, for as he’s stripping support programs away he is advocating lower taxes for the rich.

The net effect—the debate no longer is on Obama’s stewardship of the economy. The debate has shifted to the budget and how Romney-Ryan’s plan will disproportionally hurt minorities, blacks, Hispanics, the middle class, the working class, seniors, students, and anyone else who doesn’t earn at least $200,000 a year ($250,000 for married joint filers). Now both sides have vulnerabilities.

The net net effect is that conservatives will be energized to support Romney (something they already have done in their antipathy toward Obama). But at the same time Ryan’s nomination will energize progressives and independents who now have a darker blueprint of what a Romney victory would mean. If they were holding back from Obama before, hoping Romney would revert to his Massachusetts ways, they now have been disabused of that possibility. 

On a personal note, I’m happy Romney chose Ryan. I can say I almost met him. Our paths crossed during my trip last May to the Capitol with a group of Israeli trauma care providers brought to the States by Shalom Yisrael. The tall, lanky Ryan, with his widow’s beak hairdo reminiscent of Eddie Munster, walked right past our group. I reacted too slowly to stop him to introduce the group. Probably for the better. I might have expressed myself in a less than respectful manner. 

  

Public Relations and Omens

Three of a Kind: What do Planned Parenthood, Barack Obama and Israel have in common?

Ineffective public relations.

A mere 3% of its services are abortion-related, yet Planned Parenthood has allowed its foes to tar the organization as a baby-killer rather than a provider of health care and family services that has saved millions of lives.

In the recent Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation brouhaha over funding for Planned Parenthood, it struck me as ironic that an organization (Komen) dedicated to saving lives affected by breast cancer would suggest one of the main conduits of breast cancer testing for the needy would be denied funding. It’s sad that Planned Parenthood’s overall mission could be darkened by its abortion services which comprise such a small percentage of its practice. I have no problem with Komen disagreeing with Planned Parenthood’s abortion services. But it would have been misguided to cut off support for a group that benefits so many who would otherwise not be able to obtain affordable breast cancer screening.

The reality of Barack Obama’s presidency is a far cry from public perception. He has failed to paint his own narrative, allowing Republicans to depict health care reform as a disaster, the bailout of the auto industry as a travesty of capitalism, the wind-down of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as a foreign relations tragedy, the killing of Osama bin Laden and other al Qaeda terrorists as inconsequential, his support of Israel as non-existent, his championing of higher taxes on the wealthiest as class warfare, and on and on. Three years of constant bombardment by the GOP will be hard to overcome, no matter how many hundreds of millions the Obama campaign spends on advertising in the coming months.

Perhaps that’s a lesson Andrew Cuomo learned and is the reason the first-term New York governor already has broadcast commercials touting his successes almost three years before his re-election comes up.

Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East, but it has permitted itself to be labeled an oppressor state.

Ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) cults have degraded Israel’s dedication to equality and religious tolerance. Their mean-spirited interpretation of religious law and customs threatens to cleave the country in two. Religious extremists (non Haredi) in the West Bank also threaten to undermine any hope of a peaceful resolution to the Palestinian-Israeli two-state option.

For sure, I am not absolving the extremists within the Palestinian community. But I hold the Israeli government and its more Westernized citizenry to a higher standard, a standard that respects the rule of law and also imbues its own tragic history into treatment of Palestinians under its control.

The narrative and legitimacy of Israel’s existence have been attacked on college campuses throughout America and Europe.

Israel has a powerful story to tell in many fields—the arts, science, health care, education, technology, agriculture, philanthropy, commerce. Sadly, too many, Jews among them, define Israel by its treatment of Palestinians, and by its internecine religious warfare. From time to time Israel embarks on an advertising campaign to stimulate more visits to the country. It’s time it paid more attention to traditional public relations positioning and less time promoting tourism.


Which omen to believe? A day before tonight’s Super Bowl, a bus containing members of the New York Giants broke down on its way to the squad’s final pre-game practice. Does it portend a Giants loss to the New England Patriots, or just signify the team will get off to a slow start in the game?

Or, does an inadvertent and embarrassing posting Saturday of a National Football League screen shot on the Giants’ Web site proclaiming “The Giants are Super Bowl CHAMPIONS” suggest the final outcome?

Ninety more minutes before we begin to know the answer.

Solving the Mid-East Problem

Abused Again: In his Thursday night send-up of the Israeli-Palestinian statehood debate, labeled “West Bank Story” by the Emmy-award winning writers of The Daily Show, host Jon Stewart suggested Israelis might find the idea of a State of Palestine more palatable if the name were changed to “Palestein.”

Creative. Funny. Out of the box thinking. But in case some Jews still need more convincing, Stewart offered a more reassuring name change—"Dr. Murray Palestein.”

There it was, another Murray joke. Add that one to the list chronicled in this blog entry: http://nosocksneededanymore.blogspot.com/2009/11/whats-in-name.html. At least this time Murray wasn’t used as the name of a dog or an incompetent cop. A doctor. My parents always wanted me to be a doctor. A dentist, actually. Whatever. It wasn’t happening.

On a “serious” note, The Daily Show proffered a solution to the decades-old land dispute. See for yourself: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-september-22-2011/west-bank-story---challahfax-vs--halalifax

I Was Wrong: Who knew the Boston Red Sox were more interested in proving me wrong than winning the American League East division title? How could the BoSox turn on my prediction they would win the division? It’s shameful how Boston squandered a lead and allowed a NY Yankees team with almost no starting pitching to clinch first place with one week left in the regular season.

Now that I have the option of choosing if I want the Bean Town boys to make the playoffs, I have to reveal my true feelings. No, I do not. I would relish their not making the post-season, not just because I really dislike them but also because no matter how terrible they play against everyone else, they crush Yankee pitching, such that it is, while out of nowhere hurling BB's that stymie Yankee bats. I’m fearful if Boston makes the playoffs they’ll advance to the second round against the Yankees (I’m assuming the pinstripers make it there) and wind up breaking my heart in interminably long games that are high on emotion but short on Bronx Bomber scoring.

If Boston doesn’t make it, the choice is between the Tampa Bay Rays or the Los Angeles Angels. I prefer the Rays. I think Angels manager Mike Scioscia is a wizard. No, not a genius (ok, he’s probably a baseball genius). I think he’s a Dumbledore who manages to cast a spell on the Yankees.


The Company You Keep: My economics degree notwithstanding, I’m no Nobel Prize laureate when it comes to the fiscal science. But Paul Krugman is, so it’s comforting to see his column in today’s NY Times mirrors what I wrote four days ago about class warfare.

Here’s a sample: “Republicans like Representative Paul Ryan responded (to President Obama’s plan to raise taxes on the rich) with shrieks of ‘class warfare.’

“It was, of course, nothing of the sort. On the contrary, it’s people like Mr. Ryan, who want to exempt the very rich from bearing any of the burden of making our finances sustainable, who are waging class war.”

Here’s a link to the full article: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/23/opinion/krugman-the-social-contract.html?_r=1&hpw

Class Warfare

Republicans are right. President Obama’s proposal to raise the taxes of rich people is class warfare. They’re damn right it is, and it’s about time.

It’s about time the president stepped forward and led a revolt against Republican insensitivity to the plight of the middle class and the working class.

Let’s be clear about one thing, however. Obama’s not the aggressor in this war. Republicans have been waging class warfare for decades, decades, at least as far back as FDR’s successful implementation of the Social Security Act, the setting of a national minimum wage and the formation of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The GOP has fought almost all attempts to protect and enhance the lives of working people and the middle class.

It’s class warfare when fat-cat Republicans carry the water for corporate America and the wealthy. It’s class warfare when they resist efforts to provide affordable health care to every citizen, regardless of their income. It’s class warfare when they try to dismantle social security, when they fail to provide adequate benefits to active and retired military personnel, when they work to overturn workplace and environmental protections, when they endeavor to cut back entitlement programs such as Medicaid, Medicare, Aid to Dependent Children, and school lunch programs.

Now, it could be argued Democrats started class warfare by passing all that progressive legislation. Guilty. With an explanation. Government has an obligation to care for and protect its citizens, not just in times of actual war but also when natural and man-made disasters jeopardize safety and even our existence. The Depression, poverty and discrimination fostered the need for corrective actions. Industry and private wealth have shown no continuous commitment to care for our countrymen, leaving it to government to hold the safety net for tens of millions of our citizens.

Obama’s problem is one of his own making. Instead of taking advantage of the strategic high ground his 2008 election provided, he has squandered his resources and allowed the GOP to outflank him and redraw the battle lines. Let’s face it—they have a much more effective PR campaign. They have defined Obama as the enemy of the common folk. Only now is he showing a determination to use his veto to exact the quid pro quo tax increase he has asked for in return for cuts in entitlement spending.

In this latest tussle over taxing millionaires, it’s hard to visualize a Republican-controlled Congress acquiescing, not when most members are millionaires themselves. They may be patriotic (well, maybe), but it’s doubtful they’re like billionaire Warren Buffett, willing to pay their fair share.