Jim,
I don't know if money talks louder than performanance, but Barack Obama is hoping that it does, because his performance has been abysmal. I haven't seen the country in more of a funk than it has been in the last few years. Pessimism is everywhere you turn. Mitt Romney may not be the cool, charasmatic figure that Obama is, but I'd sacrifice some "cool" for someone who has a history of creating jobs and understanding economics. The news today that Romney has picked Paul Ryan for his running mate has me full of hope for the furure of America. Paul Ryan is a brilliant, salt-of-the-earth American, who I believe will be the boost Mitt needs to get elected in November. Good-bye Obama/Biden; hello Romney/Ryan!

Oddly enough, the banner ad on this page is a contest for 'Dinner with Barack" a contest which you can enter by making a contribution or entering and not making a contribution. Your airfare is included if you are a winner, but you will have to pay the taxes on the $4800 opportunity to have dinner with the President.

Americans are waking up to the extreme left wing agenda of Barack Obama. He is like no Democrat president we have known. His ideology is dangerous for the future of our country. Moderate Democrats are leaving his camp. There is no reaching across the aisle with Obama a la Clinton/Gingrich. We are starting to see Democrats breaking away from the Obama agenda in the Brown/Warren race. Democrats, such as Ray Flynn and Konnie Lukes, are supporting Scott Brown. We want bipartisanship, not left wing radicalism.

Sorry for spelling errors first post. Should read -- performance*, charismatic*, and future*

Jim, I'm not sure yet who I will vote for. I'm a Republican, but I will vote for the best person. We always say Massachusetts is a Democratic state, and that's because we always vote by how we are registered....mostly. So how can "We the People" complain when the people we send to Congress do the same damn thing.
Campaign spending is a mess! But who's going to fix it? It's all about PAC's and special interest groups. I honestly believe that most politicians start out on the straight and narrow. But when they realize the incredible amount of money it takes to get elected, they feel they have no choice but to take the money and deal with the consequences later. Of course then the people that gave them the money come calling after they are elected....and we all know the rest of the story!

Maybe so Jim, but I won't do it just because he is a Republican. I like Romney...I know little of Ryan. I don't hate the President or any politician. I'm just not a fan of politics.
As to your idea about 1 month for Campaigning...I like it! It'll never happen though. And who do we turn to to propose Campaign reform? Seems silly to bring it to a politician whose livelihood depends on being re-elected!
Thanks Jim!

Let's get something straight here. Lets stop this Americana BS. The USA is in deep do do. Our foreign policies are completely out of step with what our Founders wanted Jim, sorry but prove me wrong here.

We should NOT be involved in Europe's wars and in particular being the big brother to Israel in her apartheid defense of insanity.

ANY candidate, be it Obama or Romney, Democratic or Republican, that supports the indiscriminate insane bombing of Iran because they THINK Iran has nuclear weapons is beyond INSANE. NO WARS, yes, I am screaming this, NO WARS should be started because you THINK a nation has nuclear weapons. Romney and the Democratic party are INSANE for thinking these people in Iran are just nothing people. They are people like you or me, have kids, go to school, have their own problems in life and are just people. The Boston Globe today had an article about Israels wanting to bomb Iran, COMPLETE INSANITY. Dave Nolta where are you on that one? Or are you another warmonger hypocrite fighting the the rights of illegal immigrants but when it comes to others around the world who are innocent you hide.

SHAME on all of you for being brain dead as to our foreign policy. Don't give me the Founders crap because the FOUNDERS condemned any foreign wars...PERIOD......These wars will bankrupt our country, not illegal immigration, not welfare, not anything else. The war machine as backed up by the warmongers in Washington are out of control.

Joe Rizoli

Joe, You already know where I am on that one. Like President Obama, I was against the war in Iraq--perpetrated by the Republican administration which lied to the American people and which cost us the lives of American soldiers and innocent Iraqi people (including children--by the thousands), and STAINED the honor of our great nation. I take it you agree?

And Joe, if you don't stop saying that I am pro-illegal, I am going to start spreading the rumor, which may or may not be true, for all I know, that your girlfriend is a skunk--a real skunk, an ACTUAL skunk, with a white stripe down her back. And it's the skunk who has all my sympathy.

Joe, you sound like Ron Paul which is not a bad thing. Frankly, we have been carrying Europe and Korea's baggage for far too long. And, fighting in the mid East is a losing proposition as well in my view. But I bring you back to my blog. America is depending on you to do the right thing. So, what are you going to do>

Sounding like Ron Paul is sometimes a bad thing. For example, he and his cronies misrepresented the effects of nationalized health care, making outrageous, fear-mongering claims about the disaster that would occur if everybody were insured. That was dishonest, and a bad thing, and please don't say it's off-topic--you just mentioned him.

David, good to see you again ... thanks for your comment. And c'mon, saying he sounded like Ron Paul was a compliment because Paul had some good ideas, He also had some bad ones ... they all do. We know this. But I wrote this blog before the announcement of Paul Ryan, which only crystalizes the point of the blog even further. From a prior response you are apparently voting for Obama. Does that mean that you see America as the land of the fee stuff and not the land of the free? Does this mean that you see freedom and liberty as derivatives of the government, which can take them away, as opposed to inalienable rights? Are you oppposed to fee enterprise? Do you buy into the concept that small business people do not build their own businesses,; that intelligent people don't earn their own grades; that skilled people do not develop their own skills? Doi you really believe that equal opportunity includes equal results? If you do, there is no need to debate the issues.

Joe, this is not really on the topic, but what makes you think this is so contraversial? I think that we need to go back to the basics of insurance. It is not to pay for first dollar coverage, it's supposed to be catastrophe coverage. To that end, policies should have high deductibles, meaning that when you go to the doctor you actually have to ask what the treatments cost, and why you need them. Unless you are paying for your treatment, you don't care that they cost and care even less - this needs to change.

The concept of the illegals is way off track here, but to me it is pretty basic, "what part of illegal alien" is confusing?

But you might want to try - at least once - to post in on the blog that I spent a lot of time putting together. If nothing else it would make me feel good.

Jim, I like your temperament. But I don't like this either-or framework. I think President Obama does represent us in a way that Mr. Romney never can--and I don't think Romney has any intention of trying to see things from any but the most privileged perspective. I myself see the world as so much more complicated than "Democrat=free stuff, compassion and public programs" versus "Republican=hard work, inherited money and private sector." I would even go so far as to say that President Obama is uniquely qualified to understand what a majority of Americans are up against in these difficult times--and NOBODY can convince me that he didn't take on a nearly impossible and (to be perfectly partisan, as your interesting blog is partisan) Republican-created economic mess of gargantuan and UNPRECEDENTED proportions, nor that he hasn't worked hard to improve things for working Americans and for the world. I think the terms of the discourse must always be questioned--that traditions we love harbor a lot of terrible prejudices and questionable practices. Do you ever wonder, Jim, what it would be like if you had not been born as you were? Or if certain opportunities had not been available to you? Quite a few people on The Patch repeat that irritating adage, "Life is not fair". But isn't it the very purpose of life to help to make it, even if only in little ways, fairer? Isn't that really what America has always stood for? A fair shot, with the resources and responsibilities we all share?

Jim, one comment on insurance - individuals do need to question what treatment is, what it cost and why but disagree with high deductables. Individuals shouldn't be penalized because of cost for routine care. Governance needs to be applied to the Providers who are really whats driving costs. I have excellent insurance, can't tell you how many ridiculous tests I have had in the past year because 'my insurance will cover it'. Providers are now like any service industriy and encouraged to keep their billable hours up. Nobody is asking the provider why they order tests,. The patient shouldn't be the only governance.

David....You would think by your comments about "fairness" you were on our side.
Is it fair that people drive on roads they didn't pay for? Is it fair that people eat food they didn't work for? Is it fair that people drink water from a well they didn't pay for? Fair is people paying for the things they have with money they worked hard or. As it is now, the only thing we are getting is the bill.
The only "fair" shot we Americans want is not to be taken advantage of.
Jim@cciile.com

Where did your money come from? Where do your rights come from? The community. And it's my money, too, as you say. A lot of people work harder than, by your own admission on this very site, you work, and yet, they will never have enough. And they are just as American as you are. "We" and "They"--that seems to be all you know. So misguided, and dangerous even to yourself.

David, very interesting. We have a different view of the world. I am tired of being made to feel guilty for what i have accomplished, especially given from where I began. Government is not the answer, it is the problem. It strips people of their dignity, makes them dependent on government, and ultimately creates an unaffordable welfare state. It's time to demand more of people, not because we are mean spirited but because people can deliver much more than government expects or is willing to accept.

Every decent person tries to help others who need a hand, and American society has many good programs through government, religious organizations, and charities, which aid people in their time of need. The problem occurs when people remain on these programs longer than they require them and become lazy. They lose their work ethic and start to feel entitled to things they haven't earned. I'm not referring to people who are disabled or mentally ill and may always need government assistance through no fault of their own. In fact, I believe that these people get short-changed, because health care dollars are spread so thin and often go to groups who don't deserve them.
I read President Obama's book, "Dreams of my Father." His mother was very eccentric and not always a responsible parent. His father was a womanizer who fathered many children with different women and failed to support them. Despite that, President Obama was loved by his maternal grandparents and well educated while living in Hawaii. He attended two of the finest colleges in our nation. He has been given much by this country. I disagree that he represents us in a way that Governor Romney never can as David states above. I find it interesting that David knows Governor Romney's innermost thoughts and perspectives. Mitt Romney is a fine decent man who cares deeply about "all" the people of this country, and he will be a much better president than Barack Obama has been.

Mitt Romney actually knows how to create jobs and put the middle class back to work. And Mitt Romney knows the self-worth gained from earning a paycheck every week.

Jim Hatherly, please make known to Mr Goodenow, whether that is his real name, that nobody on this list appreciates being called a "hate monger" .I would ask that his comment be seriously looked at as a character assassination of myself and not flowing the policy of Patch to be civil to respectful to each other. Saying someone is a hate monger because their opinion differs than yours is not the noble way to go here. I make a post about my daughter getting her teeth fixed and this guy hits me with being a "hate monger"? Please enforce the rules here for your own blog Jim.

Joe Rizoli

David needs to learn that even though he seems to be so concerned about people to the point that he gets offended when they are called "they" that he forgets that sometimes even Jesus Christ refereed to PEOPLE as "dogs".
Mat_15:26 But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.
Mat_15:27 And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table.

My point, we would never think that in the overall look at things Jesus felt people were "dogs" but that society sometimes allows people in life to get to points of living that make the word acceptable to prove a point. So basically David we certainly can use the words "THEY" in our conversations about those you talk about.
I personally won't go that far as Jesus but they feels OK with me. You are going have to get over it David.

Now as to this great sin of a comment David N said:
>>Where do your rights come from? The community>>

Last time I looked David those rights are inalienable rights. . Do you know what that means David? It means IN ALIENABLE coming from GOD. You comments are certainly out of step with our Founders Documents, Our Founders themselves and a high School diploma.

http://www.inalienable-rights.org/
The US Declaration of Independence states that God Himself bestowed our rights and liberties upon us. The entire American political experiment is based on that unique premise>>

Joe Rizoli

I cannot help but feel disappointed. My goal is always to put out thought provoking essays that expand the public conversation about the important political issues of the day. Instead too many comments have devolved into personal attacks that ultimately shut it down.

So, let me try to re-load the thought process. I have put you in the position of a shareholder deciding whether the interin CEO meets the leadership, vision, and achievement skills to take the organization forward, or if a new CEO with more different experience and talents is needed.

America is demanding that you step up and do the right thing. So, what are you going to do? Hopefully I will begion hearing from new people who are willing to weigh in without fear of being verbally assaulted for their opinion.

Folks, please stay on topic. This topic is "Does Money Talk Louder Than Performance?" Please limit comments to this topic.

Concerned Citizen...How does Mitt Romney "create" jobs when all the jobs have gone oversees?
If ANY politician wants to create jobs they have to close down free trade and we as a country have to start manufacturing all the products we use here.
It's not that complicated. Right now our country does not produce much anymore but we sure give away free a lot of things. So please explain how we can survive when we can't even balance our budget, and the only thing we really produce is welfare rolls, and unemployment.
Jim@ccfiile.com

Jim, thanks for this and let me take a shot at this. First of all, am I correct in assuming - getting back to my blog - that you are not for giving Obama a second term because he has not produced jobs, despite an enormous cost, or are you happy with his performance because he has told you log enough and loud enough that you believe it enough to give hinm another term?

You are hearing Romney's pitch now that Ryan is campaigning with him. The plan is to reduce taxes to ALL Americans, reduce the Corporate tax rate to 25%, eliminate Obamacare etc. The sum of his propositions will bring a level of certainty back into the market and the companies who are holding cash on the sidelines will begin hiring. Lower taxes will stimulate domestic production. An "all of the above" energy program will lower the cost of foreign oil immediately, then lower cost grossly as new energy sources begin to produce. All of these are stimulative, not to mention the positive impact they will have on the stock market which is likely to rise significantly - a major win for all Americans with 401K plans.

I hope this helps.

But Jim - will Romney cut the tax breaks to corporations for the previously mentioned outsourced workers to return to work here in the US? Because no amount of tax lowering, unless you address those specific breaks, are going to put my friend Pete back in his IT job here in Framingham. Appurv now has that job, and he's a continent away.

Jim - people run to the emergency room because you can't get in to a local doctor. Providers have engineered this by manipulating doctor's insurance costs high enough to where they can't afford individual practice. People may increase utilization when out of pocket is less or zero, but that's hardly the driver. An uninsured person pays more out of pocket an an insured person because of negotiated rates, however the number or tests, procedures, services, doctors that the insured person will experience is much greater because an insured individual is viewed as a blank checkbook by the provider. Individuals need greater accountability for the reasons they visit, but providers need to stop taking advantage of insurance companies. I've had conversations directly with doctors, asked why they were ordering tests and what was the concern 'because your insurance will cover it and it could rule other things out.' Do you have any idea what UMASS Medical bills annually? I'd love to see a comparison between patient symptoms and services delivered. I looked at one hospital group in another state, the average per patient billing in a single year was greater than $275,000 per patient.. You can't find enough people checking into emergency rooms with ridculous concerns to justify that amount of billing.

I think far too many people in this country simply don't put in the effort to find facts. I blame this largely on the two-party system. It creates a culture of "red vs blue" or "us vs them". When people identify so strongly with one side and learn to have so much antipathy for the other, it reduces their willingness to look at each side in an honest way. Look at any political forum or Facebook page dedicated to politics. Here's what you'll find:

- People on the right complaining about the welfare leeches, people who want everything for free, President Obama's fake birth certificate, President Obama's socialist/communist ways,etc.

- People on the left complaining about Romney not paying taxes for 10 years, Paul Ryan's plan to destroy Medicare, Romney's past with Bain capital...again, you get the idea.

Many of these "facts" that people accept so easily are spin or outright lies. Both the President and Governor Romney are guilty of lies and absurd distortions. Yet people on both the far right and far left continually criticize the mote in the other side's eye while ignoring the log in the their own. It doesn't help that it's so hard to find genuinely nonpartisan sources of information. I can't take a "source" very seriously when it's The National Review, The Heritage Foundation, the Huffington Post, or Rolling Stone.

It's difficult to elect someone on individual merits when all we see is a label and automatically assign a set of values to that person.

Myd your comment about the "reputation" is total nonsense. It's like saying to a woman that just got raped "it was your fault honey you've sustained a reputation"

Smarting up Myd. You obviously have no intention to agree with ANYTHING the Rizoli's say period because you have a disdain and deep hatered that will never go away from your brain. I have always taken the side of people here even if I don't particularly like them. You would have been great at the Salem Witch trials, you above others, because of your predisposed mindset, you would have found the witches tit on everybody you disliked. Shame on you. Your comment about the "reputation" was callous, cold and uncaring to make about any human being,
I would never even come close to saying that about an illegal alien as much as I disagree with them.

Joe Rizoli

Jim - Although I disagree you I applaud the tone you take in your blog. My big question on it all would what happens if the Republicans don't win the Senate back and we are stuck with the same gridlock as we have now. You have to admit that for the last two years not much has been implemented that Obama has pushed for, especially on the economic side of things. With compromise now a four letter word in DC I find it curious how we can blame Obama for all the economic issues we currently face. Congress is as much to blame since any bipartisan efforts are quickly squashed by the elements of both parties that are far from the middle of the political spectrum.

In the end I support some tax relief combined with cuts in federal spending, but I don't believe in supply-side or the trickle down economics that they are putting out there. Ryan's plan will not reduce taxes for all Americans and the cost to the middle class is well documented elsewhere. I just fail to see how see how they can accomplish all of this tax relief for a limited group and also cut all the programs. It would help if Romney provided some more details on where the cuts would be instead of just these core principles. He needs to step out and give us all some clarity on what his budget would be. I'd be curious to know what is on his tax returns as well. Hard to believe that after his father enacted the practice of releasing all the returns he is the first to stray from it.

And to get to the point of the article, fundraising and spending is ridiculous. The SuperPac spending is the worst of it since they have no limits to what they can do. Compressing the time for campaigning would cure much of this as well as limiting the ability of these superpacs. I think most of us are fed up with it all at this point. And pro-Romney groups showed pretty clearly in the primary that enough money can overwhelm an opponent.

Jim, I see you are pushing your republican views (FYI, I'm neither Dem or Rep). I believe that reducing income taxes is going to put a bigger burden on the deficit. I do agree on the Corp tax because more manufacturing jobs need to be brought back. Keep in mind that we like to buy stuff for cheap, so in a way it's our fault as well that lots of jobs were sent overseas. I was at Old Navy over the weekend and I was curious, I checked over 30 labels and in any of them did it say Made in the USA. As for the stock market, please kind sir, what happens in Europe or Asia affects the markets here as well, so I'm not sold on that. As for Energy programs, be realistic, the oil companies have their hands on Congress and no president can change a thing. The Bush family, Cheney and friends got richer with 2 wars for oil. So forgive me for not trusting any politicians.

Talk,talk, talk....here is what the problem is....see if you can fix this.
The fella who did this knows his business, I think we should give him some credit for showing us what the real issue is.
http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/EW5IdwltaAc?rel=0
Jim@ccfiile.com

Jim:

I didn't see your blog a couple of weeks ago, so forgive me if I'm asking a question that's already been dealt with: does unenrolled = moderate? Personally, I registered as an Independent so I could vote in either party's primary, but my sense is that a lot of unenrolled/independent voters still have leanings to one side or the other and still tend to fall into the us/them trap.

Further, I don't think there's a consistent answer to be had about the track the country is on. It can be a subjective question. And in times like these, when I'd agree that a lot of people would say the country is not on a good path, then the cause of the problem becomes an issue of which party can spin better and paint the other side as being at fault.

As to your question about hiring a CEO, my response about the two party system was an attempt to answer it indirectly. The analogy doesn't really work because in the business world, people are (hopefully) hired for their experience and abilities - not whether they are, say, a Patriots or Giants fan. Bottom line: if you want to know the individual, you have to look past the label.

So basically from that video link we are in deep poop no matter who is on office.
My opiion of the debt also includes the fact that compound interest is killing us and we need to apply the usury laws in America again as was practiced back in the colonial days .
USURY is the big reason why we are in debt. The whole money system needs to be abolished, compound interest done away with, fractional banking ended.
All this discussion is just rearranging the furniture on the Titanic.

Joe Rizoli

Joe, that is an interesting piece, which I have seen before. The task is clearly a formidable one, but it is clear that Obama and the Democrats have the Country on an accelerating crash course. At the very least the appointment of Paul Ryan to the Republican ticket refocuses the discussion to the budget, debt and deficit, but even his plan takes a 30 year trajectory to a balanced budget. However, as the Chinese say, the talk of a thousand miles begins with the first step. I hope all the shareholders reading along take the few moments to view that video - it may help them decide what they are going to do... what they really must do if they care about the futures for their children and grandchildren.

Jim, "30 years!!! "....what they really must do if they care about the futures for their children and grandchildren..." In 30 years, I'll be dead, my children will be dead, and my youngest grandchild will be 40. The only people getting ahead will be the executives in the Fortune 150 TODAY!... buying a second Cadillac before they die.
Seriously... my daughter will be 70 in 30 years and Romney wants to cut Medicare, do you REALLY think Romney cares about an old woman after he himself will probably be dead?

Jim:

I went back and read those blog posts and the responses. I think the reason that MA continues to be dominated by the Dems despite the majority of voters being independent is social issues. Social issues resonate with many people in a way that fiscal issues do not, and there are people who vote based solely on those issues. (And I would guess that this holds true in states where the Repubs have the same stranglehold on political power).

To answer your other points: I agree that people sense that the nation is headed down the wrong track fiscally. But the spin and finger-pointing plays into their sense of why this is happening. Some blame Reagan, some blame Bush, some blame Obama. Personally, I feel that the economy is too complex to point to one specific cause for things happening. Look at the housing bubble: the spin is either that it happened because irresponsible people borrowed too much money, because of predatory banks with little government oversight, or because of government demands on the initial lending institutions. But the problem was really a combination of all three of those issues; each side just cherry-picked the cause that supported its own agenda. I will repeat that it is hard to find objective sources of information out there.

What am I going to do? Continue to be as informed as possible and to be as objective and dispassionate as possible when looking at candidates.

Rob Penzke, thanks for posting back. No we're talking! Let me put you back in your shareholder's seat. You are looking over the organizational balance sheet and measuring the interim CEO's impact on it. Has his performance measured up to what they organization needs? More important, what are the chances that the balance sheet will improve and the organization get stronger if you vote to reappoint him?

So Rob - and everyone - what are you going to do?

When a country is pretty much bankrupt and they continue
to print money to cover it up there is not we can do except go down with the ship.
But before we go completely under I'm going to expose those who put us in this boat. Sadly most people are more concerned with the music playing on the top deck and not the big hole in the hull. They are more concerned which leader is going to calm our nerves while we sink yet saying don't worry I'll fix everything.
Jim@ccfiile.com

Stephen Pohl – Why can’t your daughter plan and save now for the expenses for her own health insurance for when she is 70? You put your confidence in the govt, but you see how anything and everything in which the govt is involved becomes political. You put your confidence in D’s and Pres Obama, but they have already taken ½ Trillions dollars from Medicare to help pay for Obamacare, and that comes from people who are on Medicare now and have already paid into that system. By the time your daughter is 70, there is a great chance that there will be just Universal Healthcare (insurance) provided by the govt, and bureaucrats will be deciding who can get what medical procedure; if you read Dr. Ezekiel Emmanuel (yup, Rahm Emmanuel’s brother, and involved in Obama’s administration), he has written that the govt should not “invest” in people’s health care after a certain age and medical condition, because they are past their ability to contribute to society. Would you put your trust in govt if your daughter fell into that category?
I also disagree that the only Fortune 150 execs will be getting ahead – if it is up to the govt, it will be them and those connected to them who will prosper (we are already seeing it with special benefits for govt employees, the latest of which is an exemption from Obamacare). If it is up to the market, everyone has an opportunity to get ahead – it would be their choice to take the opportunity or not.

Jim,

Either you don't know that this is as a direct result of the disastarous and terrifying "Citizens United" SCOTUS decision, or you just plain don't care.

COrporations - who prefer GOP leadership because they get less regulation and can wildly profiteer under their "oversight as they did leading up to the 2008 meltdown of the economy - can now donate virtually unlimited funds to the GOP to ensure their lackeys get elected.

To counter this unprecedented and horribly, horribly corrupt influence, President Obama and the Democratic National Committee must raise more money.

Pretending that this is not the case is simply more GOP smokescreening, and not even the tiniest bit grounded in reality.

Ben – I disagree with your assertion that [spending enormous amounts of money on campaigns] is a result of the “Citizens United” decision. Big money has been spent in politics forever, and whenever it can be raised. What is disastrous is that unions can forcibly collect dues, then use those dues to donate virtually unlimited funds to the Dems to ensure their lackeys get elected (does this argument sound familiar?). What’s worse is that the politicians to whom the unions contribute are not supported by all the union members. And let’s not forget the symbiosis between union and Dem politicians – unions spend big money getting Dem politician elected, and Dem politician make rules that benefit unions (at the expense of the rest of us who are not or cannot be - for any reason - a member of a union).
To counter this unprecedented and horribly, horribly corrupt influence, corporations are now able to catch up to the Democratic National Committee spending, supported by union contributions.
[I personally would like to see all this money taken out of the political campaigning process.]

RE the economic meltdown in 2008: remember, that was caused by the Dems - lead by Barney Frank - pressuring banks to give too many loans to people who could not afford to pay back them back, then backing them up with Fannie/Freddie (you know, taxpayer money). Wall Street had their part in the meltdown, but not because of lack of oversight by GOP leadership – in fact, the House Finance Committee has that oversight responsibility, of which Barney Frank was chair for the 4 years leading up to the meltdown! So if you want to blame lack of oversight on anyone…
BTW, the Dems – lead this time by Pres Obama – still support lending with the same lax qualifications as before, and no rules or regs have been made to prevent Wall Street from doing what they did pre-2008 (not even Frank-Dodd). So much for the Dems trying to prevent this from happening again.
Geez - talk about not being even the tiniest bit grounded in reality…

Citizens United what a joke!
The Dems are upset because they are being outspent by the Repubs.
If it was the opposite they wouldn't have made peep.
Jim@ccfiile.com

Jim:

You're right, the term "social issues" can be vague. Setting aside your loaded descriptions (*great* example of spin, by the way), I would define social issues as: abortion, the environment, gun rights/restrictions, gay rights/marriage, separation of church and state, education, the death penalty, illicit drug abuse, and civil liberties issues related to race and gender. I recognize that there is a financial element to nearly all of those issues. But I think most people consider them mostly as social issues, not financial ones. Politics in America is (sadly) mostly about making people afraid of what the other side will do if elected, and so they vote to protect what they care about.

I don't know why corruption in government doesn't get on people's radar screens. It certainly ought to. The state government in MA often disgusts me, but I suppose it's not unrealistic that someone might say, "Yeah, the corruption is bad but I vote Democrat because I want to protect a woman's right to choose." (Or conversely, in a deep red state, they might say, "Yeah, the corruption is bad but I vote Republican so they won't take my guns away.") This is where I think the spin and the two-party system really hurts us as a state and a nation.

I don't think Romney *or* Obama are good for America. I voted for Ron Paul in the primary; his stance on social issues appalls me, but at least he is committed to taking our government back from the plutocracy.

Rich, thanks for this but forgive me when I ask if you have been guilty of voter malpractice? If social issues are the key; if you voted for Ron Paul even though you are appalled by his stance on social issues, what's the deal? Using words like "plutocracy", which I believe is about the wealthy having too much influence in government, is just too vague for my readers.

I am sorry to say that you cannot say that neither Romney nor Obama is good for America. This is what we've got. As a shareholder empowered to select the interim CEO or choose a different CEO with different skills and perspective, you have to may a definitive choice. Are you confident that Obama can lead you and your children and the Nation into the future, or is it time to make a change? What do you want to do?

People vote for the one that will help them out and the hell with the rest of ya.
Obama gets all the votes of the people that he keeps employed, which when it comes to our bloated Govt. it's a lot of people.
Can't speak for Ronmey because he isn't in there yet.
So if the person is cutting your job then I would think you're not voting for him.
If you promise everyone that you going to spend money wisely and they will keep their jobs then you a good liar, and will do very well.
Jim@ccfiile.com

Aron....there is n logic to politics
Jim@ccfiile.com

Jim:

I voted for Ron Paul because I don't believe the federal government has that much impact on the social issues I mentioned; they seem to be dealt with more at the state level (except for the environment, which is dealt with indirectly at the federal level because there's a huge financial/economic aspect to it).

I know that the choice for President is Obama or Romney - but doesn't that highlight the problem with the two-party system? Going back to your CEO analogy, what corporation would help itself if it only had two choices for a new CEO? I really don't know what I'm going to do in November. Obama signed off on the NDAA and backs the TPP, and to me Romney will simply become a rubber stamp for ALEC's legislative "suggestions". I don't believe that trickle-down economics works, and that's clearly the intent of the Romney/Ryan budget plan.

My concerns about the candidates comes back full circle to the point of this blog post: yeah, money does talk louder than performance. There's so much money going into these campaigns, from corporations, unions, special interest groups, and superPACs, that I feel like the government is no longer for, by, or of us, the American people, and we're continuously offered the lesser of two evils.

Electing a President should be an easy choice, especially when looking at the incumbent. You have been the job for more than 3 years, what shape is our "business" in. Debt is even worse, unemployment is out of control, housing market has collapsed even more, GM is run by the taxpayers(or should I say PAID for by the taxpayers) and their is no hope on the horizon.

If I am a "stock Holder" in a company where the CEO has doubled our debt to 15 trillion and estimates to increase another 5 trillion next year, I fire him and bring a new CEO. No politics here, no Republican versus Democrat, no conservative versus Liberal, just plain facts.

Is it all his fault? Of course not but we elected him to stop the bleeding and he has made it worse. Sorry Mr. President but just like President Bush, you havent done the job. As far as I am concerned, you're fired and I will cast my vote to give someone else the job. Of that person can't do the job, I will fire them too! REGARDLESS OF PARTY AFFILIATION!

I am often offended by the partisan rhetoric that recipients of public assistance are lazy or scamming the system. Granted, there will always be a few bad eggs-- but based upon actual investigations by the GAO, welfare fraud actually runs around one tenth of one percent, or one in one thousand recipients. Your accusations at the nine hundred and ninety nine for the actions of the one is both ridiculous and an intentional attempt at misrepresentation for the purpose of your own political gain. Also, please back up your claim of 200 junkets... see, being dishonest about the purpose of trips and publishing that "information" is going to backfire on those that choose to lie to try to deceive folks into believing partisan nonsense.

Numbers and facts, please... links to actual research-- not RNC propaganda.

Paul, thank you very much for responding, and I am sorry that you feel offended by my partisan rhetoric. Please note, however, that I have fully identified myself as a Republican Town Chair..

The fund raising issue is public record and I am pasting an article published this week showing that Obama's total is now up to 203 events. Why is it taking so much time, energy and money trying to convince people that he is doing a good job? It's probably because he has a record he must defend, or obfuscate.

As to the references to "free stuff" that you cite, just look at the increases in food stamps and welfare during Obama's term. And, more people are actually being placed on social security disability than finding jobs. The point I and other are making is that resources are finite and when there are too many people in the wagon, and too few pulling it, you've got big problems.

Here's a reference for you. All the best.

Obama Has Attended, On Average, One Fundraiser Every 60 Hours While Running for Reelection
—By Andy Kroll| Mon Aug. 13, 2012 11:57 AM PDT
32

President Obama. White House/Flickr
This weekend, President Obama attended the 200th fundraiser of his reelection campaign. By the end of Sunday, the president had reached 203 fundraisers since officially launching his re-election bid in April 2011. That's more fundraisers than any presidential candidate in history.

Put another way, that's an average of one fundraiser roughly every 60 hours for Obama.

Aron, thanks, and I am going to agree with you - as I said in the piece - that fund-raising has become an arms race we cannot afford. However, let's not re-make history. It was Obama who declared that he was going to raise $1B for his re-election fund as a way of a) stifling the prospect of Hillary Clinton challenging him within the Party; and b) discouraging Republicans from even trying to challenge him.

Why should an incumbent need $1B when they have a record and the people either appreciate what he did, or want him out? This is what the blog is about ... and Obama is making too much noise trying to convince people he has done a good job. As Shakespeare might say, "I believe he doest protest too much."

And, we cannot forget that the Unions have been confiscating workers' money and donating their dues back to the Democrats for years, in exchange for benefits that have made American workers unaffordable.

But here's the thing. Obama is fund-raising so much because the funds have not been rolling in as they had hoped or projected. There is an enthusiasm gap that is not as much about money as it is about performance. Don't you think?

Rob Penzke, I am sorry this is so out of order, but thanks for your comment. I understand your skepticism about the Presidency, and you are actually reviewing my next blog which will be posted this weekend, so please look for it.

Bottom line - I agree with you that the people are to blame for accepting/tolerating the pathetic performance we have been getting for too long. I do not agree with you, however, that it does not matter who wins. It matters very much because the President owns an emotional connection with the people (or not) that supersedes the blockage that Congress might provide.

Let me give you two examples - compare the leadership/connectivity/governing skills of Reagan and George W. Bush. On the other side, compare Clinton and Obama. it does matter, and it is obviously not a Republicans are good and democrats are bad kind of thing. We must find that next leader who can connect us, not divide us.

FindBalance

George Soros is attempting to 'bring down capitalism in this country?'

Would you care to elaborate on that rather ridiculous accusation?

(I say this as a registered Social Democrat. I know a Socialist when I see one. And George Soros, the hedge fund manager ain't no Socialist.)

Paul Bishop, thanks again for your note, although I must confess that I am not accustomed to being called dishonest. The issue of social security disability isn't that it exists or that it has a formula, but that it is being exercised to a degree that is well beyond normal. it does not speak well for the state of the economy or how people figure out how to work around a system, legitimately and illegitimately.

This is not RNC propaganda, these are my personal opinions which I am willing to put my name on, and upon which I am willing to accept and respond to comments.

That's it!

As to the number of campaign stops, I hardly make up that number, just as i do not count the numbers of rounds of golf, or the hours of taxpayer money required to fly Air Force One to his events. These things are what they are as reported by the media.

I get it that you are a Democrat and Obama supporter. We are in Massachusetts after all, so I think you probably have more company than me.

But dishonest? C'mon, you can do better than that.

Paul Bishop – Jim wrote, “more people are actually being placed on social security disability than finding jobs.” I think you misunderstood what he wrote, because I don’t see the relevance between anything you wrote RE the SSDI system and Jim’s statement.
And can you please explain to what you are referring when you said, “like the president visiting Massachusetts after the flooding as "Campaign" “? To what visit are you referring, and after which flood? And what do you mean by “Campaign” – a fundraiser?
If by the above you mean that Obama recently visited flooded areas in Western MA, then attended a fundraiser in Boston, but that shouldn’t be counted as part of the 200 fundraisers he has attended during his campaign, then I disagree with that being dishonesty by omission. The bottom line, and the point that Jim and the article he quoted are making, is that Pres Obama has attended 200 fundraisers during his campaign; visiting a flooded area certainly does not disqualify attending a subsequent fundraiser from being counted as such!

Aron – I fail to see the connection between Unions being responsible for weekends and that (and through other unstated Union work) is what made this country the great power that it is. No doubt Unions did some good things – that even everyone may have benefited by – but the good things they did were to prevent against extremes. Working 80 hour weeks is extreme, child labor is extreme, shooting at striking workers is plain against the law; though I am not a big govt person, I believe preventing extremes and upholding the law are roles of the govt. In the absence of that, Unions made some noise and did some good work to prevent these extremes. But…
1. I have a different view on what made this country the great (economic) power it is – free enterprise (with the prevention of extremes), education for all that allows individuals to be in charge and control of their own destiny, the right to keep the fruits of your labor
2. Unions now negotiate and ACT ruthlessly to get the most for their members (do you remember Jimmy Hoffa’s speech last year?). They state this openly as their goal. It serves to create a closed market that only benefits the members, at the expense of anyone using their service; that is hardly free enterprise
3. I don’t think Unions are responsible for Healthcare benefits. I believe they were spawned from companies wanting to attract the best people, and it has extended from there.

Aron, RE Fox, et al - My take is that for decades the main stream media gave only one, left (more than just) leaning point of view to the American public. It is about time that there is a news outlet that gives a different perspective, and puts it in the context of the history of America. And the response of the American people is to flock to it because it is so much more attractive to them, hence the better viewership.

But to think that MSNBC is not as "partisan" as Fox - who is more partisan than Chris Matthews? Well, actually Rachel Maddow is.

And to think MSNBC, CNBC, CNN are not (more than left-leaning) powerhouses. Then add the Boston Globe, the NY Time, the LA Times, Newsweek, Time Magazine, ABC, NBC, CBS - please don't pretend that the left does not have any allies in the media. They have many, and have had them for a lot longer period of time than Fox has been around.

Aron, I was reading the exchange between you and Find Balance. I would have provided a similar response - and actually did but my post is somewhere in cyberspace.

Thank you for putting your political view into the context of your comments. Suffice it to say that there is little chance that we will agree. You've got the President you want and therefore I can understand why you are defending him. After all, my blog asked that you consider the candidates for CEO and make a choice. That didn't mean you had to choose Romney, just look at the facts and make your call. You did this - good job, and thanks.

FindBalance,
You forgot NPR and 99% of Hollywood, who feel compelled to tell us how to lead our lives according to their left-wing agendas. Aron's assertion that the media leans center-right is ludicrous.

Aron - To your response about unions ruthlessly negotiating (don't forget ACTing, too) Yes it’s a bad thing – it creates a fake, closed market. It creates a monopoly of sorts. By its very definition, it breeds collusion. It stymies competition. And it artificially drives prices up. Wouldn’t consumers want to get the best product for the absolute best price? Who is doing collective bargaining for the consumer?
In a free market, workers don’t have to “lose”, if that’s what they feel is happening – they have options if they don’t like the way things are with their employer – they can get a job somewhere else. They can start a company to compete with the old company, and attract workers by offering more attractive compensation, work conditions, etc., than the old company. They can go into a different field. All it takes is effort in a different direction. There are many more opportunities in a free market.

RE Kock bros – I said I fear Soros’ model of benevolent despot more than I feared any goal of the Koch bros. – how is that benighting them. Please don’t exaggerate my words – I don’t think I did that to you.

And I give you credit for identifying yourself as a Social Democrat. You can probably guess we won’t agree on political issues…

Also Aron - wrt regulation on economic and financial issues, my belief is that more is not better, the right regulation is necessary, and the right regulation prevents extremes (like monopolies) , makes sure the playing field is level everyone has an opportunity to compete, and no one cheats. The opposite side to your assertion about how greed ends (with which I disagree, of course), is that when the govt has too much power to regulate, you eventually get too much govt that is all-powerful, and we know how that ends, too.

RE Soros - I don't think he is Socialist, either - he believes he knows best and that he (or a small # of people) should make economic decisions for everyone - hence the "benevolent despot" model to which Ii previously referred.

Yes, because I only know of Clint Eastwood and Dennis Miller who lean right.

YIKES!

Let's agree that Aron has reasons for voting for Obama and has listed them. Let's also agree that Find Balance has equal reason to vote for Romney.

... and let's move on. I want to hear from others before launching the next blog.

Next blog please!
Jim@ccfiile.com

Unfortunately, most of the Hollywood actors who lean "right" on that website are dead or very old...Bob Hope, Walter Brennan, Frank Sinatra, Jane Russell, Charlton Heston -- all dead. Aron, your argument is not convincing. It is 2012.

Wow, you can turn on any political talk radio station or Fox News and hear the same message.

First, the United States of America is not a business, so the analogy doesn't even have one leg to stand on. Second, If people really believe the country is "bankrupt", they should turn off the radio, unplug the tv. and take a long deep breath. The only thing bankrupt is the mind who believes such nonsense.
Finally, the links between money, politics and corruption aren't news. Those links do however underscore the need for better regulation within government and business. Unfortunately for America, one politcal party is as anti-deregulation as they are anti-tax and so little sunlight gets shed on political spending, especially since the now infamous Citizens United decision was ruled on by the conservative majority currently on the U.S. Supreme Court. Begrudging President Obama for trying to keep pace with opposition fundraising, hugely influenced this year by private, billionaire money being sent Mitt Romney's way is nonsensical.
To answer the three questions posed, "Did the President keep his promises? Have his policies helped and made us stronger? and "Do I have confidence in him as our leader?" Yes, Yes and Yes.
Obama/Biden 2012

I thought we were going to drop the subject, but if we are still talking about it…
“Wow, you can turn on any political talk radio station or Fox News and hear the same message.”
Not the point of the discussion, Will; let me summarize:
Aron: We don’t have any heavy hitters realying left-wing talking points like the right has Fox
Me: Yes you do – here are a whole bunch, and they have been around a whole lot longer than Fox [and other right-wing media].
Hope that clears it up for you, Will.
RE the country is not bankrupt – we are $15 Trillion dollars in debt, Pres Obama’s plan is to put us $5Trillion more in debt next year, we are printing money to keep up with expenses, etc. The country is not bankrupt like Greece, Span, Portugal, California,... are not bankrupt.
“The only thing bankrupt is the mind who believes such nonsense.” Please don’t resort to insulting rhetoric, especially when it is so easily debunked.
“Those links do however underscore the need for better regulation within government and business.” Who will make those regulations – the govt? Kind of a conflict of interest…
Too much govt regulation and power leads to an all-powerfull govt.

Jim H. - Stop stealing my thunder! And stop being nicer than me about it!

@Paula Leva 8:28 Thanks for your response. I get that you are an Obama supporter and you have plenty of Company. However, may i remind you that Obama did not "reach across the aisle" at all when he was elected. Instead, he used Pelosi and Reed to slam the doors on Republicans and passed Obamacare, Billion dollar stimulus bill, bailed out GM, invested $90B into solar energy etc. Is this anything but radical? I have been around for many yeas and have never seen this before ... ever.

Now, if you are an Obama supporter, I understand the context, but I believe even moderate Democrats would say his jumping ugly on the Cambridge Cop, and not so ugly on the Ft. Hood terrorist were despicable behaviors.

As to Brown, Cynth has provided the details you need to at least appear to sound fair minded. Compare that with Pelosi - "You have to pass the bill if you want to know what's in it " tactics. So, please ... and thanks for commenting.

Thank you, Cynth and Jim, for supporting my statements with facts.

Everyone is worried about money - budgets, taxes, economy etc - and the news this morning reported that more than $500 Million Dollars has been spent so far... by the two parties. What does that tell you about how concerned about you? Will this be the first Billion Dollar race? It's not a campaign, it's a business.