President Obama: The Danger of Changing a Winning Formula

Undoing the Damage of the First Debate! 

"Taking a stand for President Barack Obama's re-election is a stand for what is right, just, and equitable, because he wants the very best for every American family judging by what he has done so far and attempted to do.  I stand for the President because it is the right thing to do. Above all, a stand for President Barack Obama is a stand for the truth, audacity, creativity, and innovation. Republicans want him to fail, not necessarily on account of what he is doing wrong, but because of resentment rooted in hatred and unwillingness to embrace the likelihood of American history recording the first of his kind as a "Great President". Now that the political system is overwhelmed with corporate money, Americans should brace for surprises, lies, and misinformation from Karl Rove and his plethora of Super PACs." An excerpt from "OBAMA: Citizen United, Invisible Resistance, and the Hacking Of American Democracy", posted June 08, 2012.

Dear Mr. President, if you have forgotten, the above quote was the introduction to the article that changes the dynamics of the 2012 Presidential campaign towards the end of June 2012. Prior to its publication, most Democrats were tepid and lackadaisical identifying with their accomplishments in the past three years. In addition, the wisdom in town then was that Democrats and your campaign should not talk about Big Business, Wall Street, and Bain Capital. 

We disagreed vehemently, and made a compelling case for their adoption as campaign headlines in the article, titled "OBAMA: Citizen United, Invisible Resistance, and the Hacking of American Democracy." To our greatest joy, your honorable self and your campaign listened and did the right thing. And then, there was a surge. As expected, a bandwagon effect developed and the pundits follow suit. That was the beginning of the definition of Governor Mitt Romney.

What saddened me (though, I'm still very confident that you will make a good come-back in the next few days) during and after the debate was your seeming unwillingness to use one single punch line in that article throughout the duration of the debate. In spite of everything, what saddened me the most is that Republicans and the Romney campaign team are presently regular visitors to this blog and have been flipping and using the information here to their advantage, especially Mr. Romney during the debate.

For instance, you did not talk about trickle-down economics, but Governor Romney did, using it indirectly to castigate the government. He opined that government did not trickle down - a fabrication and outright misrepresentation of quality fact. The Auto industry has resurrected and General Motors is once again, on top of the Auto World. 

Also, there is a boom in the ancillary sectors, resulting in improved job growth in and around the State of Ohio. There is improved healthcare coverage, and a repeal of don't ask don't tell. Indeed, the government did trickle down. It was the tax break for those who do not need it that did not trickle down – they did not create jobs as expected. That, no doubt, was the underlying factor for the tax break initiative in the first case.

On the issue of healthcare Insurance, it is not just enough to say that Paul Ryan and Governor Romney want to transfer it to a voucher program, and tell the American people what is at stake. In other words, let the American people know that there is a price tag or price limit on the voucher, and once the patient's healthcare cost exceeds the amount on the voucher, she is on her own. In a nutshell, that is not health insurance.

Finally, Mr. Romney wants to balloon Defense Budget, but he wants to cut federal spending and services simultaneously. How he is going to do he can not explain. He wants to grow the economy, but he doesn't consider it conscientious to tax the Millionaires and the Billionaires who have no need for the tax break. 

Good Luck, Mr. President in the next two debates.