ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel


Updated on August 25, 2012

Something the candidates must live up to.

Mitt Romney has said that it was President Barack Obama, who was bringing all kinds of distractions to the campaign trail to divide the American people, instead of the real issues that were needed to be discussed; but the opposite of that was turning out to be the truth.

It was Romney that has insidiously introduced the "birther" issue into the campaign; and now people were wondering whether that was not divisive and confusing, as many of his own party membership insisted that Obama was not a native born United State citizen; even though a full length birth certificate (of Obama) has been released and published, and it has officially been accepted that he was born in the state of Hawaii, U.S.A..

"I have always believed that the president (Obama) was born in the United States," Romney had said; however, if so, why be sarcastic about the subject and to tell a crowd where both he and his wife were born?

"Ann was born at Henry Ford hospital, I was born at Harper hospital. No one has ever asked to see my birth certificate." said Romney in Commerce Township, Michigan; yet, what was the reason for him to mention the names of the Hospitals where they have been born. "They know that this is the place that we were born and raised," he emphasized.

The play on words proved that Romney has ran out of ideas, and he has to make extravagant statements to impress his audiences as well as the country.

For example, his assertion that he would make "North America energy independent" in his energy plan was just an exaggeration to go beyond what Obama would say about the energy needs of the country in his campaign and how he (Obama) would handle them.

The question was, would he, Romney, set the energy policies for Canada and Mexico as well, if he should become president; and if so, how? Yet, he has to throw that in the political dialogue to place him ahead of his rival.

How he would handle the economy was questionable, as he would "unchain Wall Street" and put the nation back in chains.

Rather than the White House monitoring its (economy's) operations and making periodical corrections to get it to grow, he, Romney, would let loose the free-market of the regulations that should be put in place to manage and control it; but that would drag the world into a continuous financial crisis.

In other words, it would be the "old system", in which the big banks and corporations were pulling the strings. Thus keeping the awful situation in which the nation now found itself.

Obama would break from that, and would streamline the U.S. economy to fit the needs of the country in modern times. The essential of the tax code to be overhauled for all Americans to pay their fair share in taxes would be paramount.

Also, for America to be militarily strong to meet the challenges ahead in a volatile world; and its people to continue to enjoy the freedom they so cherished.

Those were the issues that the nation should be talking about, for people to make informed and educated decisions on voting for the candidate, who would move the country in the right direction, politically, economically and socially in the coming years.

In a nutshell, that was what the 2012 presidential election meant and stood for.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No comments yet.