Last month, Mitt Romney accepted the Republican nomination for the Presidency. If you want to watch his full acceptance speech, the video was published by the Washington Post
and can currently be found here with a transcript
and on YouTube
There is no doubt that Romney's speech was impressive in places, and he was careful not to attack Obama personally. There is likewise no doubt that the so-called candidate of change has been disappointing in many ways, but the big question is, would Romney be an improvement? In at least two ways he would take America from the frying pan into the fire, those ways are jobs and foreign policy. Let us concentrate on these two points.
Romney blamed Obama for what he said was a trillion dollar cut to the military which would not only eliminate thousands of jobs but put America's security at risk. The first point that should be noted is that he is confusing job creation with wealth creation. The biggest job creation scheme in America in recent times began on September 11, 2001
when Mohamed Atta crashed American Airlines Flight 11 into the North Tower of the World Trade Center.
By the end of that day there were 343 vacancies in the New York fire department alone. There was a massive rebuilding project, expensive government inquiries, numerous official documents including reports, invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, increased monitoring of the American population, TV programmes and books galore, the TSA, and many, many other things.
Does any right thinking human being anywhere believe the world is a better place because of this?
Now marry that to Romney's claim that Obama will cut back the American military. Does the military produce wealth? Like police officers they are a necessary evil. We need police officers to protect life, liberty and property, usually by deterrence, so to the extent that they and the military prevent the appropriation of property and defend us from our enemies, they can be said to contribute to the wealth of the community, but why does America need a massive military? What is it defending? Hasn't Romney heard of the Monroe Doctrine
Ron Paul pledged that if he became President he too would cut back on military spending, and that in future America would mind its own business instead of acting as the world's policeman. If Obama were to cut a trillion dollars from America's military budget, this money could be spent elsewhere including investing in real jobs, and would the country be any less safe? Hint, if American troops and ships were to leave the Middle East, they wouldn't be sitting targets for Islamist fanatics, indeed America would be a lot safer because there would be less incentive for those with sick minds to kill Americans at home as well as abroad.
Mitt Romney made two pledges which if carried out would be beneficial indeed to the American people. He promised that by 2020 America would be energy independent, including renewable energy, and that there would be job training available, especially for the young.
The first pledge is contingent on his being re-elected, which is rather jumping the gun. Training the young for the high technology jobs of the future is admirable, but are the jobs really there?
Romney said too that he would ensure there would be a job for everyone who wanted one. Really? Most people who work do so because they need to earn a living; the reality is that in America, Britain and many other advanced nations the jobs are not there that enable them to do this. Not for those without degrees and/or some sort of professional qualification; not for those with mental health issues, poor academic records, almost any sort of criminal record, or problems that may not be any fault of their own, ie growing up in poverty. If the reader is inclined not to believe this, let him answer this question: would William Shakespeare be employable today
? The reality is that many people are unemployable
today, and will remain so until our masters take notice of the fact that those at the bottom can no longer earn a living wage, and that essential reforms to the system are necessary. Clearly, Mitt Romney does not recognise this simple fact.
He said he would cut the deficit, and he proposes to do this how, by expanding the military? One way is by reducing the regulation of businesses, especially small businesses; this is to be welcomed, as is reducing taxes, but again although the rhetoric is impressive, the substance will be less so.
"A future where everyone who wants a job can find one. Where no senior fears for the security of their retirement. An America where every parent knows that their child will get an education that leads them to a good job and a bright horizon."
Again, the jobs are not there, not for the people at the bottom.
Obama has no experience running a business, he said, for him, jobs meant and means government. So what is his own business record? Among other things, Romney is one of the founders of Bain Capital. It was reported only this week that this private equity company has donated over $4 million to the Democrats
! Maybe the people running it know something about Mitt that we don't.
Finally, what should alarm Americans most is Romney's bellicose noises against both Iran and Russia, Mr Putin in particular. Disappointing though Obama has been, he has been his own man on foreign policy. When Israel shouts "Jump!" he doesn't ask "How high?" Romney has made it clear that as far as the Middle East is concerned, Israel will come first. What if Netanyahu decides to attack Iran?
Does America really need to get involved in yet another conflict, one that could make 9/11, Afghanistan and Iraq look like a picnic? America doesn't need another war; the world doesn't need another war. Neither does America need 12 million new jobs; and least of all does it need Mitt Romney.