Romney's acceptance speech disappointing, needed different focus
Mitt Romney’s acceptance speech as the Republican Party’s nominee for Presidency announced no new policies on creating jobs or on anything else, but focused on how President Barack Obama should not be re-elected.
Carlos Osorio | The Associated Press
Romney claimed that four years ago, as Obama was elected President of the US, the Republican Party was behind the President. This is a lie. The Republican Party essentially was an obstruction party in the last four years, fiercely against Obama in all major initiatives, especially in health care as well as restoring tax to the rich.
Romney asked whether we are better off than 4 years ago. Clearly we are.
Four years ago, the Dow was about half of the historic high and our retirement savings were evaporating, and now the market essentially has restored to its historic high and our retirement savings are worth something again.
Four years ago, the employment rate was high and rapidly rising. Now the rising unemployment rate has been curbed, though it has not dropped as rapidly as we hoped.
Four years ago, many Americans did not have health care coverage. Now more Americans have health insurance. In fact, if the Republican Party didn’t obstruct the Health Care law, more people would have health care coverage today.
I do hope that in the second term, Obama will be able to turn deficits into surpluses (as Clinton did), reduce unemployment rate, and bridge the rich-poor gap.
Youxue Zhang Ann Arbor
Comments
NoSUVforMe
Sun, Sep 16, 2012 : 4:31 p.m.
All ou need to know about Romney- anti-women, anti-working people, anti-black, anti-Hispanic, anti-gay, anti-Medicare, anti-Social Security, anti-Earth, anti-peace. And he loves the Patriots and was rooting for Masachusetts yesterday.
Mike
Tue, Sep 11, 2012 : 11:35 p.m.
Nothing like an English-as-a-second-language op-ed author endorsing a non-native-born President to tickle my funny bone.
NoSUVforMe
Sun, Sep 16, 2012 : 2:04 a.m.
Mike, Hate is your thing. Go hate your family. I'm sure they hate you.
Tex Treeder
Wed, Sep 12, 2012 : 11:58 a.m.
John McCain was born in Panama, by the way. Does that make him a Panamanian? Of course not. His parents were US citizens and therefore so is he.
Tex Treeder
Wed, Sep 12, 2012 : 11:56 a.m.
I guess I just don't understand birthers. Even if you accept the unlikely idea that there's some worldwide conspiracy hatched in 1961 in Hawaii to plant evidence in a local newspaper, no one has ever questioned that Obama's mother was a US citizen, and therefore he is a natural born citizen according to 8 USC ยง 1401, regardless of where he was born. Which was Hawaii, as far as I can tell.
walker101
Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 4:04 p.m.
Zhang, all of your statements are partially factual but mot are questionable or can be disputed, here's just one factual article just on why you're paying $4.00 a gallon for gas. http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2011/05/27/obamas-bad-policy-harmful-regulations-add-to-gas-prices
Mike
Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 1:34 p.m.
The republican party was in a total minority. If there is swomething Obama could not achieve he missed his opportunity................The dems also controlled congress the last two years of Bush's term, nobody ever talks about that. That's when Bush went of the rails and became a big spending republican.
NoSUVforMe
Tue, Sep 11, 2012 : 10:47 p.m.
Oh, Democrats caused the sub-prime crisis? No wonder we are losing ground against developed countries- terminal stupidity.
Tex Treeder
Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 12:38 p.m.
Mitt Romney, the story of two men trapped in one body. http://www.mittvmitt.com/
Dog Guy
Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 3:46 a.m.
Lamentably, Bill Clinton is not running for president at this time. Only a rockhead or a public parasite (I also am both.) could possibly consider himself better off than 4 years ago. I am not going to disillusion any youngster as to Santa Claus' ontological verity or politicians' veracity. Innocent belief against all evidence is such a beautiful thing.
Superior Twp voter
Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 1:46 a.m.
You must reside in a different country, or need to. Every thought you have expressed is wrong. ABO. Anyone but Obama.
quetzalcoatl
Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 1:27 a.m.
I have never seen a byline on a letter to the editor before. It confuses me. Is there really a Youxue Zhang in Ann Arbor, or is that just Cole Bertos playing one on the Internet?
nickcarraweigh
Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 1:25 a.m.
It doesn't matter how much lipstick you put on a pig, nor would it matter if Romney's policy speeches carried the rhetorical majesty, the measured, paced, brilliant wordplay of Winston Churchill in May, 1940. Romney has no policies.
NoSUVforMe
Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 10:15 p.m.
All you need to know about Romney: 1) he doesn't care about you. He doesn't know your struggles. 2) he can't be trusted. Flip flop on abortion, flip flop on global warming, hiding tax returns, evading taxes in the Caymans, Ann "he irons his own shirts"... 3) he supports the extreme Republican agenda, anti-women, anti-worker, anti-black, anti-Hispanic, anti-Earth, anti-gay, anti-democracy (GOP anti-voter, pro-SuperPac) Plain and simple. No good for America unless you are a white rich man.
Mike
Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 1:38 p.m.
If the economy does not become the number one issue and the debt brought under control all of your other pet concerns will mean nothiong when the country is broke. Don't give me the line that we are the richest country in the world and can afford all of these side issues. Would the richest country in the world have to borrow 40% of every dollar it spends? The rich can't fix this, this is an issue every american needs to take a hit on and that will include cuts to entitlement programs...........
Tom Todd
Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 9:57 p.m.
He wants to be president to gain more money, i.e. Cheney.
vivian
Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 11:37 a.m.
I'm not taking a side on the other issues that may have given rise to your comment, but I have to say that this claim sounds pretty silly to me. When you're as rich as he is (or as Obama is, and most of the biggies in Congress are, for that matter), making more money isn't likely to be one's primary motivation. And if acquisition of more wealth IS Romney's motivation, he could almost certainly make a lot more money doing what he's been doing in the private sector. No, whatever you think of his politics, he seems to me to have demonstrated that his motivation is the desire to affect the direction of the country by serving as president. Is there ego involved? Yes, I think so--but on both sides. Any person who makes it to the presidential contest pretty much has to be driven by belief in his own (or her own) vision, don't you agree?