The Grownups

The kids have been on the playground long enough.

Colin Powell, a grownup who has more foreign policy and national security chops than any thousand neocons, recently endorsed President Obama.

I think he started a trend.

Now comes New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg, a champion of Wall Street who hasn’t had all that many kind things to say about O lately, in terms of O’s standing with Wall Street fat cats. (You see, fat cats don’t like to be called fat, and Obama did that three years ago, something they just can’t forgive, despite getting even fatter under the Obama presidency.)

Bloomberg has broken his silent neutrality in this year’s election and has endorsed Obama, partly for his stance on global warming. For Bloomberg, science trumps Trump, as that buffoonish New Yorker and Romney endorser is not only a birther freak, he is a global warming denier to boot. Who’s surprised those two things go hand in hand?

Bloomberg also touted the President’s education policy, his defense of gay rights, and a woman’s right to choose. Although Bloomberg spouted some nonsense about Obama’s need to listen “to people on both sides of the aisle” (something the President tried to do and, in fact, spent too much time trying to do, when it was clear the other side had nothing useful to say), his endorsement is a sign that the adults have seen enough of Kid Mittens.

Also, on the endorsement front, in comes The Economist, the highbrow magazine based in London, whose self-described goal is to,

take part in a severe contest between intelligence, which presses forward, and an unworthy, timid ignorance obstructing our progress.

Needless to say, for a magazine with such a lofty goal, endorsing Obama was the only choice—again.

Kenneth Rapoza at Forbes summarized the reasons The Economist said no to the vulture capitalist with a spray tan:

Foreign Policy:  On foreign policy matters, Romney seems too ready to bomb Iran and he has vowed to label China a currency manipulator, something the U.S. Treasury Department has said China is not.

Government Spending: Although he would slash red tape on the domestic front, Romney said he wants to start with huge tax cuts yet again and dramatically increase defense spending. With what revenues?  Magazine editors said, “He is still in the cloud-cuckoo-land of thinking that America’s finances can be dealt with entirely through spending cuts. Backing business is important, but getting the macroeconomics right matters far more.”

Economy:  Romney has an economic plan that works only if you don’t believe most of what he says.

I want all you Mittenites out there not to worry too much about all these grownups endorsing President Obama. Don’t forget: the Joplin Globe endorsed your guy.

About these ads
Leave a comment

4 Comments

  1. Here’s another endorsement from a memeber of G. W. Bush’s administration — http://schoolsofthought.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/24/my-view-why-i-will-vote-for-president-obama/

    Also, here are some interesting economic stats under each president going back to 1900 — http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2012/10/24/the-best-presidents-for-the-economy.aspx

    Like

    Reply
    • Herb,

      Thanks for mentioning Diane Favitch’s detailed endorsement. By the way, I agree with some of her criticisms of Obama’s education policy, which has been one of his most popular initiatives (popular among Republicans, especially), but one with which a lot of liberals disagree.

      As far as the stock market and corporate profits comparison, you’ve gotta love that comparison between Obama (+15.2%) and W. Bush (-5.5%) in S&P performance.

      But what was eye-popping was the increase in corporate profits under Obama, a whopping 77.9%, with second place coming in only at 17.7%. Wow. What a difference. No wonder the corporate types hate the guy. They’re drowning in dough!

      (Due to the recession, profit growth under Bush, Jr., was, uh -17.4%. Yikes.)

      And while Obama’s GDP per capita growth rate is nothing to brag about, it was still three times higher than W’s.

      All in all, given O’s performance, I’d say there must be something else about him that is holding back the moneyed class from supporting him. Hmm. Wonder what that is?

      Duane

      Like

      Reply
  2. Stewart Alexander is the presidential candidate for the Socialist Party USA, so the real socialists are being represented. I’m not sure if there is anyone running on the Anti-Christ or Muslim-Marxist ticket.

    The good folks at Mother Jones have compiled a rather lengthy list of colorful alternatives to describe Obama’s exotic departure from mainstream American politics.

    http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/10/chart-obama-conspiracy-theories

    Like

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 639 other followers

%d bloggers like this: