By Dr. Leonard Yang
I don't understand your thinking in endorsing Mitt Romney as a "crystal clear" choice. Are you giving him a bye on his Janus impersonations under the assumption that once elected he will actually create 12 million jobs in four years, cut taxes, strengthen our military, firm up Medicare and Social Security equitably and balance the budget?
Have you been sleeping during the last three decades of progressively unfettered free trade and the creation of a country of haves who now increasingly control the media and cynically distort facts to promote their interests vs. the have-nots? All great empires collapse when disunity is sown by selfish interests of the few and assets are thrown into the military in order to maintain power.
Your endorsement of Romney reads like a recitation of his talking points. It takes work, but careful study of the facts behind the rhetoric leads me to conclude that Romney will say anything to get elected. He is married to Big Money and it would be foolish to think that these donors do not expect to be paid back.
When Obama was elected I had a sinking feeling that the Right now had a single target to assail. My fears were confirmed when the GOP leadership stated that their only goal was to make Obama a one-term president - not job creation or digging us out of the deepest hole since the Great Depression. They stuck together and managed to create a Congress that passed fewer legislative initiatives than previous Congressional sessions.
Spiraling health care costs are diverting assets that presidents want to spend on other needs. I recall that at least since Nixon every president since has tried to address this issue as it hampers our competitiveness world wide. Obamacare is imperfect because the powerful moneyed interests who depend on the status quo blunted the cost-saving provisions. It remains a valuable starting point that we can modify to improve.
I am a physician. I will be paid less under any effective health care reform, but I didn't sign up for this job to be rich. I want people to be cared for - properly and cost-effectively. Remuneration should be commensurate with the education and effort necessary to achieve and continue in this field.
Can we stand another outrageous Citizens United decision? Do we really need any more right-wing Supreme Court justices who would ignore over a half century of precedence and support corporate rights over personal rights and freedoms?
In our country, climate change has become a political third rail, mainly due the indoctrination sponsored by the fossil fuel industry and their buddies on Fox News. Fox did not respond to a request for verification that a directive came from the top that instructed the Fox News analysts and reporters to always speak disparagingly of global warming whenever the topic came up. No wonder we are the only country that believes global warming does not exist or is not due to man-made activities.
As for coal: we can have cheap coal or clean coal, but we cannot have clean AND cheap coal. If we would subsidize renewable, clean energy sources of the future to the extent that we support the fossil fuel industry, these sources would lessen our dependence on foreign sources and decrease greenhouse gas production.
By the way, why doesn't anyone point out the president cannot control the price of gas in a free economy except maybe by releasing the Strategic Oil Reserve?
Obama does not plan to weaken our military, rather, just the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned would ultimately weaken us financially and morally. We spend more on defense than the next 10 countries combined.
How can you conclude that we would be safer under Romney? He was a paragon of ineptitude on his embarrassing foray abroad this summer. Obama has been Bush 2.0 on firm handling of terrorists, yet has strengthened our ties with our allies and has proscribed torture. It remains totally unclear how Romney would do.
In your view, you even used that tired, out-of-context "You didn't build this" slogan to maintain that Obama disparages the American worker in your concluding argument. I expected a stronger, more convincing argument from a consensus editorial. The American worker, the most productive in the world, used to have income commensurate with their productivity. Disparity started in the mid-70s, mushroomed in the 80s, flattened a bit in the 90s and took off again in in the 2000s only to flatten since 2008. Guess who were the presidents during these periods?
Whoever authored this "view" clearly has not studied the candidates or the data supporting current issues thoroughly and objectively.
Dr. Leonard Yang is a resident of Winchester.