Mountain Views News     Logo: MVNews     Saturday, September 1, 2012

MVNews this week:  Page 16



 Mountain Views News Saturday, September 1, 2012 


HOWARD Hays As I See It

As we await Romney’s acceptance speech at 
the Republican National Convention, the 
accepted wisdom is that Mr. Romney needs 
to demonstrate that he sympathizes with the 
economic pain Americans are feeling. Regardless 
of anything else, the wise ones say, Romney must 
“connect” with Americans. He supposedly has to 
reintroduce himself to the electorate as someone 
who can feel their pain. Because he trails Obama 
by 20 points on polls of “likability”, if he can 
connect emotionally, he wins; if he can’t, he loses. 
That’s the line, that’s the perceived wisdom, but 
I’m not buying it for a second. Americans aren’t 
that shallow.

I have to respectfully disagree with this poll-
driven political truism. Polls often mislead us 
because they sometimes only measure what the 
respondents want us to think about them at the 
time they answer the question. I believe most 
Americans realize that the last thing we need is 
another president who simply feels their pain. 
Americans realize now more than ever that we 
need a president who can heal the pain, who can 
fix the problems which are causing our pain.

This isn’t meant to diminish the economic pain. 
It’s because there is so much pain that I believe 
Americans are ready to believe in the hope for 
real change. Consider the economic facts under 
President Obama. Since the recession began, 
there are 4 million fewer Americans working. 
Real per capita GDP has decreased by $803. 
Real household income fell by $1,500 from the 
beginning of the recession through the end of 
the recession, and it’s fallen by another $2,600 
during this anemic recovery. During the last 
three months through July, 246,000 people have 
fallen off the unemployment rolls because they 
moved onto the disability rolls. That’s a pretty 
manipulative way for this administration to 
drive down the unemployment numbers. The 
number of food-stamp recipients has increased 
by an astounding 71%. Temporary assistance to 
needy families has increased by 12%. Medicaid 
enrollment has increased by 11 million, or 10%. 

Everywhere we look, the situation is the same and 
a clear pattern develops. Under this president, 
we are unquestionably worse economically, but 
more harmful for the long-term is the fact that we 
are creating a dependence culture – a potentially 
permanent underclass of Americans who will 
rely on government, rather than their own work 
effort and abilities to meet their basic needs. It 
belittles them, demeans them and demoralizes 
them. It’s not victory over our problems, it’s 
surrender to our problems.

So, tonight I expect we will be presented with 
the clear choice that this election represents. It 
won’t be a choice between nice guy Obama and 
dull Mitt, let alone a choice between nice guy and 
the murderous, felon caricature of Mitt Romney 
which has been put forward by the Democratic 
Party and media elites. The choice will be 
between someone who has caused our problems 
and someone who can 
fix our problems. While 
I expect Mitt Romney 
will himself clarify 
the contrast, he can’t 
possibly do it better than 
Anne Romney did. 

With soul-bearing 
honesty and heart-felt 
sincerity, Anne looked 
into the cameras and 
told America, “[Mitt] is the man who will wake 
up every day with the determination to solve the 
problems that others say cannot be solved, to fix 
what others say is beyond repair. This is the man 
who will work harder than anyone so that we can 
work a little less hard.” And she concluded with 
“this solemn commitment. This man will not 

That is the choice which Mitt Romney, Republican 
Candidate for the Presidency, will make clear 
tonight. I have no idea whether he will “connect” 
in some personal way that convinces us he feels 
our pain. If he does, great; if he doesn’t, no 
big deal. Some of the most accomplished and 
successful leaders I know lack a perfect bedside 
manner. And most of the crooks I know are 
charmers who can make you believe they want 
nothing more than your success even as they 
steal your wallet.

Mitt Romney will tell us that the choice is between 
a nation of dependents who spend their time 
arguing over how to split a shrinking economic 
pie vs. a nation of confident self-starters who 
are building a bigger, better, stronger and 
richer economy where anyone, despite their 
background, nationality, religion, race or sex, 
can work hard and achieve their dreams. As 
Susan Martinez, Republican Governor of New 
Mexico stated, “en America, todo es possiblé.” 
In America, everything is possible. 

In 2008, Americans voted for hope and change. 
They knew in their hearts that they were voting 
for larger government and higher taxes, but 
they also believed that accepting those things 
would give them a growing economy and better 
employment opportunities. They now know that 
the bargain they struck with candidate Obama 
hasn’t been honored by President Obama. 
President Obama offers nothing different than 
what has already failed, even as he presents it in a 
sympathetic way. Mitt Romney may not connect, 
and may not inspire awe; but he will certainly 
inspire confidence that he will be successful in 
returning us to the full measure of our potential. 
Mitt Romney will heal our pain.

About the author: Gregory J. Welborn is a freelance 
writer and has spoken to several civic and religious 
organizations on cultural and moral issues. He lives 
in the Los Angeles area with his wife and 3 children 
and is active in the community. He can be reached at

“Next week in Tampa the Republicans 
must admit that the 
difference between a GOP convention 
and Comic-Con is that 
the people at Comic-Con have a 
much firmer grasp of reality.” - 
Bill Maher

"We're not going to let our campaign 
be dictated by fact-checkers." 
- Neil Newhouse, pollster for the Romney 

Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich wrote on 
an ironic confluence of events; the convention 
intended to persuade Americans to entrust their 
future to Republicans, and the onslaught of Hurricane 
Isaac, evoking memories of how the greed, 
incompetence and detachment from reality under 
the previous administration were encapsulated 
in its response to Hurricane Katrina.

That detachment from reality was evident in 
remarks from the president’s mother, Barbara 
Bush, when at the refugee center in Houston 
she observed that victims “were underprivileged 
anyway, so this is working very well for them.” 
Incompetence was personified by FEMA Director 
Michael Brown, former official of the Arabian 
Horse Federation, whose e-mails revealed an obsession 
with stylish attire for press conferences.

There was overriding concern not for the plight 
of fellow Americans, but for how to make a buck 
off the tragedy. Rumors (since discredited) of 
widespread looting were pushed as a rationale for 
mercenaries from Blackwater. Thousands of uninhabitable 
trailers sat empty, provided through 
a politically connected middle-man. Truckloads 
of donated supplies were stopped at the border, 
so as not to violate agreements with no-bid government 

The concern was not how to return families to 
their homes, but how to leverage the tragedy into 
an opportunity for seizing land, razing whatever’s 
left and developing mega-malls and casinos.

Republicans in Tampa would rather we not remember 
Katrina, and there won’t be mention of 
our former president. As Reich explains, “we’re 
still living with George W. Bush’s legacy . . . 
which is a truth Romney is desperate to put out 
of our minds.” (In contrast, Democrats will give 
a rousing welcome to Bill Clinton next week, and 
encourage memories of our booming economy 
in the 1990s.)

Republican strategy for this election is to hide 
their own record, and lie about their opponents’. 
They have a record of policy positions itemized in 
their official platform, but it’s a platform they’d 
rather hide in the general campaign:

A total ban on abortion, with no exception for 
rape, incest – or to save the life of the mother.

A rejection not only of gay marriage, but also 
civil unions – and refusal to recognize those already 
in place.

A required super-majority for tax increases and 
a balanced budget amendment (because it’s 
worked so well in Sacramento).

Loosening gun laws in the District of Columbia.

Condemning public schools, and eliminating the 
Department of Education.

Replacing Medicare with vouchers for seniors to 
shop with in the private market.

Protecting us from Sharia law.

Making it easier to supply unlimited, secret campaign 
cash, and harder to vote.

Increasing reliance on coal and other fossil fuels, 
and increasing profitability by gutting environmental 

While dismissing laws protecting our environment, 
“Current laws on all forms of pornography 
and obscenity need to be vigorously enforced.”

Along with hiding their own principles, they are 
lying about the opponent. There was the flap in 
early August about voter suppression efforts in 
Ohio, where Republicans sought to ban early voting 
for all but active-duty military. The Obama 
Administration sued to overturn the ban, and the 
Republican talking point twisted the reality to assert 
Obama wanted to “restrict military voting”.

According to, “Romney blatantly 
misrepresents the lawsuit’s clearly stated 
goal”, and as for voters hoping to be informed, 
“what they got from the Romney campaign is a 

A more current example involves the Obama 
Administration’s acceding to states’ requests 
they be given more flexibility in designing their 
own welfare-to-work programs, provided those 
programs achieve results exceeding employment 
goals set by 1996 Welfare Reform rules. 
For Romney and Republicans, this “guts welfare 

Ron Haskins, former House Republican aide 
who was instrumental in developing the 1996 reforms, 
commented to FactCheck, “Republicans 
are the ones who talk about giving the states more 
flexibility. Romney himself talks about giving the 
states more flexibility . . . Now all of a sudden the 
states shouldn’t get the flexibility because they 
are going to mess it up? It doesn’t make sense.”

Romney knows his campaign is based on fabrications, 
but the concern is not with “fact-checkers”, 
but with whether the lines work on the audience. 
Last week he took it up a notch when he coupled 
the lie about Obama’s “gutting” welfare-to-work 
with the explanation Obama’s hoping to “shore 
up his base”. Whoever it was that suggested this 
line, Romney could have rejected it saying, “It’s 
racist. It’s ugly. And I’m not going to repeat 
it.” Instead, he did repeat it – showing he’s some 
combination of naïve, unprincipled, or a liar.

I don’t think Romney’s naïve.

The Republicans are basing their convention 
theme itself on a long-since-discredited twisting 
of President Obama’s “You didn’t build that” remark 
(said referring to “this unbelievable American 

U.S. Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) 

“Tonight, Chris Christie and the Republicans 
told the American people that we're to blame for 
our broken economy. He told families to tighten 
their belts. He told seniors to live on less. He told 
teachers to stop fighting for fair pay.

He never, ever mentioned how much more the 
richest have taken, and he had no mention that 
those who broke our economy still haven't been 
held accountable. The Republicans believe in an 
America that is rigged for the big guys -- giant 
corporations that can hire an army of lobbyists, 
ship jobs overseas, and take their profits to the 
Cayman Islands.

That's not who we are as a people -- and that's not 
the kind of country we want to be.

We built America together, and that's what 
makes America great.”

As I see it, Ms. Warren is the one showing a true 
“grasp of reality”.

TINA Dupay 


A few years ago, I had a friend who didn’t want anyone 
to know she was going to therapy. Instead, she would 
announce at her place of business she was leaving to attend 
her Amway meeting. At one point I had to inform her, “You 
know that doesn’t make you look any less crazy, right?”

The classic multi-level marketing or pyramid scheme is 
where one guy at the top convinces people at the bottom to 
give the top money. The hope is the guys in the middle will 
recruit enough people under them to move from the middle 
to the top—hence the pyramid shape. The model is, clearly, 
and provably unsustainable. Only a couple of people (those at the top) do well. Everyone else 
gets ripped off.

In fairness, Amway, has massaged its methods enough to not qualify as the illegal type of 
pyramid scheme. It’s now the more legal type of pyramid scheme.

But the model—the idea of those at the bottom sacrificing their retirement benefits 
(pensions, social security, Medicare etc.) so that the top tier can pay even less in taxes is 
what Romney/Ryan are peddling. Mitt Romney wants to cut taxes for the wealthy. Paul 
Ryan’s budget would shrink benefits to give the savings in the form of a tax cut to the highest 
brackets. What didn’t work in the Bush years to strengthen the middle-class (evident by 
their Lost Decade), they tell us will work this time! Or as veep-pick also-ran, Senator (R-FL) 
Marco Rubio put it, “We have never been a nation of haves and have-nots. We are a nation 
of haves and soon-to-haves.”

No, actually, we are a nation of haves and have-nots. We have the worst wealth inequality 
of all industrialized nations. Our poverty rate is the highest in more than 50 years at 15.7 
percent. Contrast that with the top 1 percent of Americans who own nearly half—42 percent 
of the nations wealth. Also that same top 1 percent only has 5 percent of the nation’s debt. 
So 99 percent of Americans own 58 percent of the pie and have 95 percent of the debt. 
We’re fatter, sicker, further in debt and using the most illegal drugs in the world—all signs 
Americans have become overspent from bad economic policies.

But the haves—these demigods of capitalism—won’t trickle their wealth down to us because 
of “uncertainty in the market” according to Republicans. Therefore we bribe them with an 
even lower tax rate!

Instead of calling it “trickle down” which has been largely panned for decades—the new 
term is “not punishing success.”

“If your priority in this country is to punish success vote for President Obama,” said the 
offshore account holder, Mitt Romeny.

If the rich get richer—we’re not getting thinner, healthier, solvent and off the crack needle. If 
the rich get richer, the middle-class doesn’t get more stable. If the rich get richer, the working 
poor don’t get pulled out of poverty. If the rich get richer—they just get richer and park their 
money in Luxembourg (where at least their money will be near universal health care).

We’re actually not a nation of haves at all. Not if you go by a simple majority—or even a super 
majority—we’re a nation of have-nots. Have-nots being sold on a fantasy of wealth trickling 
down if we’re nice enough to the haves.

Trickle down economics is a pyramid scheme: It’s the rich telling us if we just recruit others 
to believe in the con then we will become the rich too.

It’s a lie.

Tina Dupuy is an award-winning writer and the editor-in-chief of Tina 
can be reached at