This blog is now sugar FREE, fat FREE, gluten FREE, all ORGANIC and all NATURAL!!

Thursday, July 19, 2012




I try to keep politics out of this blog because it just tends to divide people.  In this day and age most people are polarized by political affiliations and they are apt to either agree with or get angry about political comments.

I don’t wish to foster agreement or anger in my readers.  I also feel I am old enough to let the young people duke it out over their future leaders.  The window for politics affecting my life is fairly narrow.  For those that care, I have made my positions clear; I am fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

I do feel the need however to question the current race for our President and the qualifications for this office. 

It seems that Mr. Romney is being put down as a Presidential candidate because he has apparently been a successful businessman. He is out of touch with the American people.  He is greedy. 

Apparently the argument goes that rich out of touch greedy people want to become President so they can become even wealthier, advance the wealth of their good friends and choose to do so by stomping on the necks of the poor. 

Can Mr. Romney really get any wealthier?  Do his friends really need any more money?  I sincerely doubt that his run for the Presidency is to become wealthier than he currently is.

One of the biggest issues in any Presidential campaign is the economy.  Former President Clinton summed it up the best when he said, “It’s the economy stupid!”  Why is being a successful businessman a negative for someone who would have so much to say about our economy?  Should we elect a business failure to run the economy?  When professional sports executives choose their team, they tend to pick from successful athletes, not ordinary slubs who are in touch with uncoordinated athletes who suck.

President Obama has been portrayed as an economic neophyte out of touch with what makes our financial markets run and is out to dismantle and ruin our capitalist system.  As Theresa of RHWONJ* would say (oops there goes all my credibility) “Are you kidding me?”

I don’t think successful Presidential candidates run for office to enrich themselves or their friends.  Anyone capable of becoming President is already rich or is capable of amassing a huge fortune by taking a much easier road to success.  I very much doubt that many people seek this high office in order to gleefully watch less successful people suffer and starve.

I truly believe that those who seek the Presidency, including our current President and Mr. Romney, desire to run this country because they believe they can improve the lot of all our citizens along with enhancing and defending this wonderful country.

One of our candidates is the most qualified and has the best ideas to accomplish the above noble goals.  It is up to the voters to decide which candidate that is. 

I am not sure who I will be voting for, but when I do decide I will be making the following assumptions:

President Obama does not want to turn our political system into communism where he is the supreme ruler who will confiscate all property and distribute it however he chooses. 

He would like disadvantaged citizens to have the opportunity to become advantaged citizens.  He wants our country to be safe.  He wants our laws to treat everyone as equals.  He wants to be liked and respected by the world.  He wants history to remember him as a successful, fair and great president.

Mr. Romney does not want to become a murderous power hungry dictator who will suspend our laws as we know them to enhance his personal wealth. 

He would like disadvantaged citizens to have the opportunity to become advantaged citizens.  He wants our country to be safe.  He wants our laws to treat everyone as equals.  He wants to be liked and respected by the world.  He wants history to remember him as a successful, fair and great president.

Please cast your vote based on whose philosophy and ideas you believe can best accomplish their admirable goals.

*Nitwit on Real Housewives OF New Jersey.


  1. Excellent post. I agree neither are evil people, although each party thinks their opponent is. That's how bitter and partisan things are these days. I just don't like the corrupting influence special interest money has brought to the table.

  2. Nicely done.

    You are kinder than I am -- I DO think that many politicians run just to ensure that they and their friends have an "in" on all the good deals...


  3. I love everything you've written and only question the part about Mitt Romney wanting our laws to treat everyone as equals. You can't be referring to tax laws. Mitt has proven time and time again that he's just fine with different sectors of society paying differently. This is why he's hesitating to show his tax returns. He pays no taxes on much of his wealth and he isn't willing to admit it.

  4. Personally, as a complete outsider, imho the American election system is a devilish device that only an American could devise! I fully support "The Westminster System" as a more satisfying electoral system.

    1. The local electorate takes responsibility for the candidate of their choice which they elect on a preferential voting distribution system.

    2. The party with the most "bums on seats" after the election takes over and runs the country.

    3. The party with the most "bums on seats" elects their parliamentary leader from within their own number.

    4. If you want to retain the leadership then you must "Do a good job"!

    5. If you want your party to stay in power you must keep the numerical superiority on the parliamentary floor.

  5. ps - Joe, I agree, discussing politics can only be divisive amongst an already divided group opinion.

  6. Joe, my dear.....I generally love everything you write....not so today.

    I totally disagree with every positive thing you have said about Romney.....he may not want more money (though I suspect that he does....the rich always do and I cn say that because I consider myself rich) but he certainly wants power and like any CEO of a large company, the welfare of his stockholders ise far from the top of his priorities.
    I could go on interminably, but I won't except to are wrong.
    Still love ya though.

  7. I don't think much of Mr. Romney -- but I will say that there are far worse candidates the Republicans could have chosen. And I do appreciate the point you are trying to make...

  8. What a shame the US presidential election system makes it impossible for intelligent AND honest candidates to run. (See Richard Dawkins at TED). Since both candidates appear intelligent then that brings into question their honesty. So which of them is the least dishonest?