Subscribe: RSS Feed | Twitter | Facebook | Email
Home | Contact Us

UPDATE: Why Did Obama Win?

Posted by Larry Doyle on November 8, 2012 9:29 AM |

UPDATE: While I am traveling today I do want to thank everybody who has commented on this article. I fully appreciate I touch a third rail with this article. America needs to start touching third rails on these topics. The response has been strong and that was my hope. 

I want to specifically highlight an exchange I had with a reader named Dennis. Do people appreciate the fact that single parent birth rates have increased by 250% over the last few decades? Do people appreciate that there is an approximate 70% correlation between single parent births and the following: rates of incarceration, substance/alcohol abuse, assaults, high school dropouts, childhood obesity, teen pregnancy. What does that indicate to me? A spiraling and perpetuation of a cycle of poverty, especially in our cities.

I hope this commentary brings attention to the issue so it can become part of a widespread PUBLIC DEBATE/DISCUSSION. Dennis inquired as to what I might suggest as a solution to these issues.

I responded that first and foremost, we need to expose these realities so they are not conveniently kept under the rug. From there, let’s begin by garnishing the wages of those fathers who bring children into the world and do not take responsibility for them. I like that as a start. Do readers think that may begin to change behaviors? I do. Strikes me as “sense on cents’ in action. What do others think? 

LD

With the dust having settled on the election (and another storm here in the northeast having left its mark) the question begs, “why did President Obama win?”  Paid political pundits will proffer a whole host of reasons for Obama’s victory. Why? That is what they do and they need to keep their viewers and readers engaged so they can pay their bills.

Let me put forth the reason that I believe why Obama won. I am fairly certain that you will not hear my reason for Obama’s victory on many other outlets and certainly not the mainstream. Many may view my reason for Obama’s victory as politically incorrect. Well, too bad. Political correctness is not a measure by which I write. I simply care to find and promote THE TRUTH.  

The Obama campaign early on and consistently throughout the process targeted select demographic groups as being the keys to victory. Which groups? Single women and Hispanics. The support for Obama within the African American community was largely a given.

What is the common thread among these groups? Single parent families. With over 40% of newborns now entering our country to single parents, that is a LARGE demographic. Within the Hispanic population, 50+ per cent of newborns reside with a single parent. In excess of 70+ per cent of new born African Americans do not have the benefit of being raised in a two parent family.

How did this play in the polls? With all due respect to parents across EVERY ethic class who work so hard to raise their children, these demographic groups were the difference between victory and defeat this past Tuesday. Why did these groups support Obama so strongly? Uncle Sam —or dare I say, Uncle Barack — is taking the place of dear ol’ Dad.

Why are SO many throughout our country so concerned about that prospect? The redistribution of wealth to Uncle Barack for him to support his constituencies serves as an enormous drag on the economic engine that drives our nation forward.

The reason for concern, though, strikes me as far deeper than just that. What is the concern?

Uncle Barack can not possibly stand in for Dad when there is a problem with the math homework.

Uncle Barack can not possibly stand in for Dad when the young son or daughter has a question about history let alone about values and morals.

Uncle Barack can not possibly stand in when the young boy is enticed to join a gang or engage in premarital sex that inevitably perpetuates the cycle of single parent births.

Uncle Barack can not possibly stand in for Dad when the young boy or girl wants to learn how to properly throw a ball.

Many may care to deride my commentary. I hope they will know that I deeply care about every single child in this country. Uncle Barack may have won re-election with the support of these demographic groups but unless and until the fathers and mothers of these children begin to understand and accept the responsibilities of bringing a child into this world and the necessity to promote two parent families, the future of America will be severely challenged.

Our fearful political lightweights do not dare touch this issue. Nor does our gutless media.

I pray for the future of our nation everyday but I am not so blind and naive to know that families and parents in America are literally under perpetual assault.

Please do not give up the fight to defend families and the morals and values needed for them to thrive. I welcome being part of the solution for America’s future. That said, a solution can only be achieved if the problem is properly exposed and defined. I believe strongly my commentary today and prior commentaries referenced below define it.

Keep fighting for families. Yes, the very future of America depends on it. The future of the Republican Party also needs to figure out how to engage these demographic groups so Uncle Barack is not viewed as a savior.

Navigate accordingly.

Questions, comments, feedback encouraged and appreciated.

Related Sense on Cents Commentary/Single Parent Families

Larry Doyle

ISN’T IT TIME to subscribe to all my work via e-mail, an RSS feed, on Twitter or Facebook?

I have no affiliation or business interest with any entity referenced in this commentary. The opinions expressed are my own. I am a proponent of real transparency within our markets so that investor confidence and investor protection can be achieved.

 

  • Rick

    I believe our instant breakfast nation cannot get it’s arms around the fact that “Life is Hard”. Our society needs to suck it up and do what is needed. Educate our children, feed and house the poor, embrace again the free market system and STOP WHINING! As for the rest of the world, let them eat cake!

  • Peter Scannell

    LD, your commentary begs the question – where the hell is dad?

    I hope soon Sense on Cents will get back to its greatest service – informing investors of the frauds they face, trumpeting the voices of the victims of financial fraud, and indentifying those who dare steal the savings of the unwitting. I think both democrats and republicans will agree that is a most noble mission.

    The very reason I created the “What Are The Odds” document should be very clear to you LD. I took a single, insolated, and ignored event in a scandal proving beyond any reasonable doubt that it was a sinister betrayal. In doing so, I ensnared many who went on to do further harm and much to the detriment of the unsophisticated – all the while enriching themselves beyond most Americans wildest dreams.

    The event certainly plays into many of the issues and regulations being considered by congress and our regulators currently. One consideration being fought with tooth and nail (bags of cash) by the financial industry is the expansion of fiduciary duty.

    God forbid they have to tell you “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you…,” which helps us (victims) in a court of law!

    When people in my neighborhood steal, they have committed a crime. When the ordinary person is confronted by authorities regarding the act, they personally pay a fine, or may lose their freedom.

    When people in a Wall Street neighborhood steal, they have breached a fiduciary duty, or violated an ethical standard. When the executive is confronted, they neither admit nor deny the event occurred, have the stockholders of the company they work for to pay the fine, and slither off to do it again.

    Keep nailing the bums LD!

  • fred

    LD,

    I will take it to an even more controversial space, President Obama won because white women voted for him. Why? Their admiration for his “Oprah-like” J Crew wife and social issues like abortion and equal rights.

    News flash guys, black folks see the world in “black and white”, women see it in “male and female”; and yes, both groups see the world as being “unfair” and dominated by white males.

    Unless or until affirmative action, discrimination and quotas bring statistical averages to more closely reflect strict national population reality, the liberal adgenda will pursue diversification as a primary goal with no regard to qualification, ability, or (global) competitiveness.

    The sad irony faced by white women voters? They have children (they love equally) of both sexes and their boys will never get a minority preference.

    • Peter Scannell

      Fred your suggestion that only white men are qualified is stunning. Let me guess – you are not in a loving relationship with a woman and have no daughters.

      • fred

        Peter, I made no such suggestion, but certainly some white men are, no? Should they be denied the opportunity to compete on a level playing field?

        In answer to your “guess”, I am happily married, have two boys and one daughter (whom I love dearly).

    • Peter Scannell

      Fred your suggestion that only white men are born qualified and all others need a artificial advantage is stunning. Let me guess – you are not in a loving relationship with a woman and have no daughters.

      • fred

        Peter, we have to stop playing this game! Once again, I make no assumption about qualification, you do.

        Maybe a half-hearted attempt to sum up political ideology in a nutshell?

        • Peter Scannell

          Fred, I apologies for the assumption I made about your personal life. Quite often we make assumptions based on a fraction of a person’s beliefs, background, or predicament -only to be dead wrong.

          I’m a fact guy. I choose to rely on filing dates, testimony, first person knowledge, and timelines and such. And I am good to go.

          Fred, I sincerely wish you a joyous Thanksgiving with your family and friends, but I would suggest keeping the carving knife in you possession.

          • fred

            Peter,

            You insinuate that my wife would have an issue with my comments, she doesn’t, in fact, she is in full agreement. In honesty, I certainly don’t keep “hitting her over the head” with the topic because if I did, I would probably have to take your advice and hide the knives. Let me share a brief annecdote in my “defense”.

            We recently applied to a private middle school for our youngest son. The school has a very high placement rate at some of the best high schools which in turn have high placement rates at the better colleges and universities.

            Our son had good grades, scored well on the admittance test and had an impressive list of extra-curricular activities. We were openly told by the admissions dept that there were already too many boys continuing on from the elementary school and that recruiters were trying to use middle school admissions to more closely balance the number of boys to girls.

            We were also told that the school had an active minority recruitment process, but regrettably, our son did not qualify as a minority. Our son was then placed on the waiting list.

            After an extended period of time, I spoke to another parent who suggested that a donation to the annual fund might help our son’s cause. I was told by this parent that the annual fund was used to make up the difference between operating expenses (including minority tuition subsidies amounting to 18% of the operating budget) and revenues.

            My wife and I debated then decided to make a “reasonable” donation to the annual fund, fully aware that our donation might be used to subsidize the tuition of a student who might be taking the “seat” of our son at the school.

            Still no word from the school, so I followed up with a phone call to the Dean of Schools. I took a risk that the Dean might possess a good sense of humor, I asked her about our son’s admission status and told her that we were contemplating a sex change operation for our son and wondered if this medical proceedure might help our son/daughter get admitted to the school. I also made a subtle reference to our donation to the annual fund.

            Surely given our child’s academic accomplishments and pending sex change operation, the school could find one more desk for our child? The Dean told me she would look into the situation and get back to me.

            Long story short, our son was finally admitted. The Dean called to assure me that a sex change operation wouldn’t be necessary and that our son might be happy to know that he wouldn’t have to change his name. I laughed and thanked the Dean for the good news.

            To bring you up to date, my son is now considered one of the top students in his grade and will probably be placed in honors English, Math and Science in the spring.

            Peter, like you, I am also a “facts guy”, and to me the facts speak loud and clear. I will not debate the merits of a “preferenced” based society, public v. private education or who is ultimately the more qualified candidate, what I will say however, is that when diversity impacts you negatively on a personal basis, you do question it’s fairness.

            Regards.

    • Annie

      Hi Fred,
      You had some very good points. I have been thinking about some of them this evening.

      Oprah got pummeled by white women when she, after many years of not endorsing candidates, endorsed Obama rather than Hillary Clinton in the last election. Her ratings plummeted. This time on her network she was completely silent on Obama, she mentioned that she was supporting him, but didn’t really have the time for him. So, there is a bit more to it than white women liking Michelle Obama because she is like Oprah. (A lot of women that I know, really don’t like Michelle. They think she hates fat people, thinks mother’s can’t decide for themselves what to feed their children, they view her as a ruling class snob.)

      Black people gave their vote to Obama at around the same rate as they gave their vote to Gore. The black populace has issues that most of us do not have…..that of course being slavery. They do not have the fear of big government that the right and a lot of other Americans have, primarily because it was a government decision that ended slavery. It was a government decision that ended segregation and it was government that brought us the civil rights act. What they fear is not having any kind of safety net, they fear changing the social security program because of all the crashes and bank failures, etc. So, when a plan to reform it comes along they fear it….and the left exploits that fear. While the right just writes them off as being racist.

      There are so many issues that the right really needs to understand about people to make sure they are more inclusive.

      I realize this a blog and I probably talk too much, but I think these issues are vitally important if we going to beat the far left. That is what I fear for my grandchildren….that the far left, who has been on the wrong side of history for the past 100+ years, takes over, and can’t be unseated.

      Well, I don’t want the far right to take over either, but I, personally, have a bit less fear of them.

      • fred

        Hi Annie,

        I thought you brought up an interesting point about black people in America, they do not fear big government. If they do not fear big government then, by extension, they do not fear the high level of the national debt. But, if you are correct about black voter concern about a “safety net” then Rebublicans needed to make a connection between excessive federal debt and the threat it poses to “the safety net” beyond near term campaign promises.

        As to your Al Gore comparison, I don’t know the support percentages, but I feel comfortable in saying that the black voter committment to Obama runs much deeper and is much stronger than it was toward Al Gore.

        My comment about Michelle being Oprah-like did not reference Oprahs current popularity or campaign involvement, (although OW still has guru status among the forty and over female crowd). I was referencing Michelle’s broad trans-racial appeal to females under forty, both working and stay at home.

        For what it’s worth, I heard the reason Oprah pulled back from more involvement in Obama’s first term and the recent campaign was because Michelle does not like Oprah and feels threatened by her.

        To give you one more point to ponder, I don’t think this country can support three viable parties and I agree that the Rebuplican party must move away from pandering to the far right and expand their platform beyond less government, less taxes and abortion repeal.

        When the party feels the need to distance itself from it past, ie. Palin, Bush, McCain and currently popular leaders fail in their sincerity to endorsement their own parties presidential candidate, ie. Christie, Rubio, Paul, it’s time for dramatic change, it’s time to go after the independants and get them to publically and proudly profess a party allegiance.

        Ps. have you ever wondered why liberal causes such as gay rights, abortion, legalizing pot, blue law repeal, gambling, etc. always have revenue producing components that supports big government more public hiring and a socialist adgenda? Republicans, must successfully drive a wedge thru the alliance between public and private unions, however distasteful.

    • http://www.hellin-abasket.com Oh Hell

      Every time I see the breakdown that “women voted for Obama” I want to punch the screen. I am female and I wouldn’t vote for that ass if he was the only one running. I’m not that stupid.

  • Bill

    Have to wonder how much of a role in the nurricane played. Some exit poll said 42% of respondents said the storm was an important factor in their vote, and of that 42% 60% voted for Obama. Not to overstate, but it is absolutely mind-boggling that a freak storm at that time of the year might have decided the future of the country. Obama was never going to get the Bush style Katrina treatment.

  • Peter Scannell

    What do you get when political ideologies are summed up in a nutshell – nutshells.

  • Annie

    I guess a lesson was learned here…..People can interpret some things QUITE differently!

    I never saw what Fred said as saying that only white men are qualified.

    As a woman, at the end of the day, I want to feel like a did a good job in the things I have done. I don’t want to think that I did as good a job as “just a woman” can do, and that is how I would feel if I got a position as part of a quota.

  • Annie

    I think people of all sexes, colors, etc., would be greatly served if those in the know taught basic economics and investing to them. So many people really don’t see that in many ways “social” programs hurt them more than helping them. But if you don’t understand economics and investing you can quite easily be scared. Are there no safe investments for those who are at the bottom of the ladder, but want to work up???

    I recently had a blog discussion with a young black man that ended up quite lengthy because he didn’t understand what I was saying about programs like social security actually keeping certain populations down. When I said black men, most of whom die prior to being able to get their money back out, have nothing to leave their children. At first he was kind of snarky and told me to study up on survivors benefits. I told him his adult children were not eligible for those benefits, therefore keeping the black community another generation poorer….while the government kept all of his money to misspend. Taking the decision out of his hands as what to do with his own money.

    As long as there is no one, one on one, to teach some of these groups basic economics and investing, they will continue to depend on social programs.

  • Peter Watts

    Larry the point you make is an interesting one. However for those outside the land of the free, the view is that a choice between Obama and Romney is no choice. Your political system is totally corrupt. The spend on the election exceeded US$6 billion. The people who put up that money expect a pay back. History tells us that they will get one in terms of the influence which they will have on Presidential policy.
    If the Republicans want to get the Presidency back, in the future, they will not do so by going to the right (the Tea Party), but by moving to the
    centre (center) ground. Furthermore the current system which you have for nominating Presidential candidates is a joke. Surely the United States of America has better than Obama & Romney. If not then God save the free world!!

    • LD

      Peter,

      I totally concur. I have defined the payback within my realm as the Wall Street Washington incest.

      Your point about campaign finance is spot on. Power corrupts.

      I will keep writing and thank you for your insights. I still believe the points I make were a deciding factor in this election.

  • Rob Carter

    Clearly American desire to change every damned thing in every Nation causes it. Excusing single parenting and giving excess welfare to them is anbti-christian in a Bible Nation. But you emancipated women so husbands were unempoowered. They use sex to get a future free ride and the man ends up nagged till he runs off for his own freedom. Emancipate men and love can retyrn. Woman pulls skirt and even court Judges add weight to their testimony as Police word rightly has a weighted value, and assulting a cop or woman must remain an agrevated fact in penalty but not such truth weighting as currently prevails. He says he needs a ton of coroborative evidence, she says her word need very little backing. Reduce voting age Dems must win more also. Kids aren’t rich enough to consider they will be capoitalists tomorrow.

  • Small BD

    Perhaps Obama can not ‘stand in for dad’. However, the African-American community needs better role models than Al Sharpton & Chuck Rangle.

    Although I did not vote for President O, I can not help but feel that his election & re-election is uniquely historic and nationally cathartic. This to me is more important than his political affiliation.

    I did not vote for Romney, either. I can not buy into his back-to-1952 sales pitch. I also don’t believe that the Waltons had Swiss bank accounts and < or = 14% tax rates.

  • Annie

    I have some thoughts I would like to share with you Larry.

    Did Obama win the election or did the right lose it? Evangelicals didn’t show up because they couldn’t vote for a Mormon.

    Say we have 25% leftists, 25% right wingers, that leaves the rest of us 50% struggling to put together a cohesive message.

    Not all government aid programs are bad. Just the ones that leave people dependent on them.

    I think the republican party missed some opportunities to be more inclusive. What should have been being said, instead of “I want to save job creators”, is “I want to save the job creators AND save your job!” For those Hispanics that are Christian, value family, and many of whom work 2 or 3 jobs, this would have resonated better.

    The republican far right had a heyday with the “Obama phone”. Instead of standing up and speaking the truth, which is the “Lifeline” program was started under Reagan, sponsored by three republicans, they just laughed at the people who “wanted something for nothing”. Now put yourself in the shoes of someone like a young Navy wife who has a child and gets her phone through this program. She was getting laughed at, too, by the very party who once understood that it was hell to be a mother with small children and not even be able to call 911. And the right can marvel at the fact that 50% of our military voted for Obama. They forget that the military is not made up entirely of officers with higher pay. I know. I was a young Navy wife at one point that couldn’t afford a phone, though long before the Lifeline program. I had a child with asthma and spent many nights terrified.

    As long as the republican party appears to be the party of the rich only, then they will lose no matter who they nominate.

    I am a Christian. My family history in this country goes back to 1630. My ancestors were Quakers being persecuted by the Puritans. They stripped the Quaker women to the waste, tied them to the back of a wagon and REQUIRED that the towns people each give them a lash with a whip. The same people who were hanging “witches”. When I hear people on the right saying we are a Bible Nation, I would remind them that their telephones could garner them a conviction.

    I had an aunt who fell in love with a black man and they petitioned for a marriage license, which was denied, and when they had been living together anyway and had two small children, she was convicted of whor_dom and whipped. The Puritans escaped their own persecution to come here just to end up persecuting others. I have GREAT admiration for our Founders.

    Our Founders were much closer in time and education to the radical beliefs of the Puritans. Yes most believed in God, if I remember right there was only one atheist, but they concerned themselves with making sure that in America, we could no longer be persecuted for our beliefs.

    That is why, some of the social exclusiveness of the far right, who couldn’t vote for a Mormon, is part of the problem. ALL of our citizens need to be equal under the law, and Christians should go to the churches of our choice and live our own lives as we interpret the Bible, instead of blaming others for problems. We should not be required by law to be of all the same mind, nor were we required by Jesus Christ to push our beliefs on others. He told his disciples to go into the towns and if they accepted what they taught to stay there. If not they were to leave and brush the dust of that place from their shoes.

    My husband is not unempowered by my emancipation Rob. Consider Newtons third law, that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Blaming things today on women being emancipated will have an equal and opposite reaction. That in itself could drive more women back to the democrats.

    I think republicans need to focus on the 50% and not the 25%. Though I love many Evangelicals, I believe strongly in the Bible AND strongly in equality under the law.

    I would, of course like to see a fiscally conservative, inclusive Independent party that was able to win. Dream, dream, dream…..

    • Annie

      Correction:
      Our Founders were much closer in time and education to the radical beliefs of the Puritans

      Should read:
      Our Founders were much closer in time to the radical beliefs of the Puritans. (and were very well educated as to our early history)

  • TeakWoodKite

    Spoken well. Might I add a more basic instinct was at play?

    Fear. When more than half of a population is on some form of “government” welfare, BO appealing to fear\ (revenge) at a perceived slight…. considering he equated lossing your entitlements as being “ripped off”…

    I see many believing lies like an addict. It’s quite disturbing anyway one navigates the gutters of American politics.
    I thank you Larry for all the fine insights you share and hope you continue to. Best.

  • Shannon
  • MB

    u nailed it!

  • Jay

    I respectfully disagree
    Heard this on Fox

    Bush won with close to the same demographics and Repubs are very strong at the state and muni arena, probably never been stronger.

    The reason Obama won was the same as why Roosevelt won in 1936

    When times are tough the majority want govt involvement

    Why was it close ?
    This was the closest polling race since…. 1936.
    It was close because many Americans believe the financial crisis is over…. it’s not over, as many I think will find out next year ( google 1937 )

    Maybe the public in composite is not as dumb as it seems

    Like you I’m Non Partisan. Would prefer a vibrant 3rd party.

    It is what it is tho…

  • Donald

    Hello,

    Today your unreasoning anger has turned into Nonsense on Cents.

    Initial figures show the richest states with 0.1%-ers like myself, voted overwhelmingly for Obama; poor white southerners & rural folks & Fox News addicts & Lloyd Blankfein & Rupert Murdoch probably did not. When all the figures are in you may find that your disrespect may embarrass you. (For whatever it is worth, I am not Jewish either!)

    I respect your opinions and I hope you respect those of the majority, including not a few Republicans, who blame GWB for the collapse of the economy and all the misery that has followed. They haven’t forgotten. I lived thru the Depression and never thought that I will probably die during this one, Obama or no Obama.

    Best wishes,

    • Peter Scannell

      Nailed it!

  • Karen

    Dear Larry

    I wish I had an Uncle Barack. He makes more promisses than Santa Claus. I bet his family is glad to have a Daddy Barack. My father never took me on a private plane to foreign countries with all my friends and relatives. And best of all, these trips are presents from tax payers. That is what I call redistribution of wealth!!

    Good comments.

  • Larry Bailey

    We, as veterans, legatees, and supporters of the Special Operations communities of all the Armed Forces, have noted with dismay and deep alarm the recent stream of highly damaging leaks of information about various aspects of America’s shadow war in the overall War on Terror. Our principles are the same as when we were in active service — Duty, Honor, Country.

    Read Full Mission Statement at Special Operation Speaks

  • Joe

    BRAVO!!

    Love your stuff! To the point. Not pulling any punches.

  • Mario

    A friend shared this article with you from The Washington Post:

    Top Republican officials, stunned by the extent of their election losses, have begun an exhaustive review to figure out what went so wrong and how to fix it..

    http://wapo.st/RLE8n6

    Hi Larry
    I came across this article in the Washington post
    That appears to be non bias
    It looks like the election results
    have triggered action to the Republican Party top officials.
    Best regards

  • Newt

    Larry, If you want to continue to speak the “Truth” I think you should stick to what you do best. Your recent blog about voter ID was enough for me to stop reading Sense on Cents, I wouldn’t have read this one if it had not been forwarded to me by a friend.

  • Dennis

    Larry–

    Much as you seem to pine for it, we’re not going back to the “Leave It to Beaver” world. For better or (likely) worse, some women are actually choosing to be single mothers, while they probably hope for a 2-parent family. I personally know 2–white women, 30′s, teachers, with Masters Degrees–who have chosen that route.

    The GOP is not getting the vote of that demographic until it drops the anti-choice plank. Single women want to have children and want to have sex. Mistakes are made . . . and they want to be able to determine how many children they can handle.

    The GOP wants to undo affordable health care and wants the vote of women? . . . Crazy, much?

    It’s not about Uncle Barack being a “savior”–it’s about the Uncle Scrooge the conservatives want a President to be.

    As I wrote before, if the GOP is going to cater to the right-wingnuts, they are going to lose. The Romney who was the governor of Massachusetts could have won this election.

    So, Larry, you’ve identified that we’re not in a 2-parent world of “yesteryear” in this country. Now, really face that fact. Get down off the moral high horse. We’re not going back–unfortunate as that may be. So what do we do to move forward in this changed reality?

    Women recognize that taking away their right to choose an abortion and taking away health care are NOT part of a moving forward plan.

    Enjoy your day,

    • LD

      Dennis,

      Good to hear from you again.

      I am not directing my commentary at specific individual women who may choose to have a child on their own. I am directing my commentary at the aggregate. Are you aware of the correlations between single parent births and 1. rates of incarceration 2. substance/alcohol abuse 3. assaults 4. high school dropout rate 5. childhood obesity?

      I have written on those correlations and the fact that this situation is getting worse rapidly.

      I am not looking for Leave it to Beaver. I am looking for an understanding and acceptance of these correlations.

      I am traveling but you may care to read about these correlations in this commentary at my site. America’s Unspoken Crisis is a “War on America”

      • Dennis

        Larry–

        I don’t think many people are denying the correlations (causations?) But if you’re supporting the conservative GOP, you’re supporting policies (limiting access to abortion and health care) that will make the circumstances for single mothers and their children even more difficult.

        There seems to be an undercurrent with many (you?), that if we make circumstances difficult enough for single women that they will stop having sex and unwanted (and wanted) pregnancies.

        Not likely.

        I wonder if this is part of the cost of living in a free country. A society could put scarlet A’s on the women, put them in stocks in the public square, perform tubal ligations after the first out-of-wedlock child and also mandatory vasectomies so we don’t have guys like one I read about recently who’s fathered something like 19 children with 17 women, supporting none.

        So, Larry, say you reach your goal and that every member of Congress, the President, and the Supreme Court accepts not just the correlation but the causation.

        What would you have them do? Build jails for single mothers and for those impregnating them? Build institutions for the out-of-wedlock children staffed by professional child-rearers? (An idea illustrated in the utopian novel Walden Two)?

        Are you offering solutions, or just identifying problems?

        Hope traveling is not too arduous these days.

        • LD

          Dennis,
          In order to craft solutions there first needs to be an acknowledgment and acceptance of the reality. The fact that the pols and media do not dare touch these issues is a large part of the problem. My writing is intended to expose these realities in the hope that people are aware of the correlations and causations. From there we can draft solutions.

          I would suggest we start by publicly promoting the data. Then we can go from there to garnish the wages of the fathers who are bringing the kids into the world without taking responsibility.

          You think behaviors may start to change when that happens? I do.

          40% single parent birth rate. ~70% correlation with all those social issues.

          We good here?

          Thanks again for writing.

    • fred

      Dennis,

      Rights you have, wisdom must be learned.

      I’m not trying to pick a fight (my passion is exhausted for the day), but you may have missed the “most recent” stage coach out of Dodge as well. There has been some movement in the opinion among “wiser” more responsible and conservative women, on the abortion issue.

      The debate has subtly shifted from abortion in all cases to abortion in cases of rape (and incest).

      Me, I’m still stuck on the “abortion is murder” debate. I never could get over the fact that if an aborted fetus was left to live, it would probably go on to have a long life as a human being.

      Personally, my oldest son was conceived out of wedlock, thankfully, my (now) wife and I both agreed to take responsibility (although we both blame the other for the pregnancy) and formed a two parent household.

      I can honestly say that I have never once regretted or questioned my/our decision.

      Would I feel the same way if I was a young single women after some fun and a one night stand? I can’t say, but I do get angry at the irresponsible fathers for not giving these young women the same “supportive” choice I gave to the mother of my own children.

      I try to impress on all my children (sons and daughter), however niavely, that the pleasure of sex is a gift from God not to be “shared” indiscriminately, and that precautions must be taken when this gift is “given” to avoid unintended consequences.

      My wife asked a related question recently concerning my daughter, “What would I do if my daughter got pregnant”, my response, I would gladly help raise the child to allow my daughter to pursue her education, interestingly, my wife would not be as willingly supportive.

  • Pat

    Larry Doyle,

    You are another Tea party right winger.. your analysis is nothing new but mirroring fatso idiots like Rush Limbaugh.

    President Obama certainly has the last laugh! The neo-cons scorned, mocked and belittled him for never being a business owner or a
    business man and who started in politics as a Chicago community organizer. Well, it appears this former community organizer was smart
    enough to surround himself with very intelligent and skilled people (Plouffe, Axelrod and Messina…not “yes” men) to help plan and
    organize a focused re-election vision for a grassroots voter registration and organization campaign involving African Americans,
    Hispanics, Asians, women, young people, college students and seniors within 9 battleground states…and won them all sans one state.

    Meanwhile, back in the right-wing bubble, Romney was being told and presented with all the fluff, skewed data, skewed polls and huge sums of PAC money they thought could buy and then bully their way into the White House. Yet with all their big-money benefactors, their
    sycophants, Fox News churning out false data around the clock on Romney’s behalf and even the MSM predicting a neck-and-neck race with razor thin margins, the former community organizer once again outsmarted them all! The Romney people supposedly had the business acumen, the business experiences, the political and campaign experiences (Rove) plus hundreds of millions of Super PAC dollars from Adelson, the Koch brothers and many others. Collectively, the Romney campaign spent almost a billion dollars and have nothing to show for it. Folks, I have to ask you…was this the kind of business man some people wanted us to elect? If Romney and his cronies were careless in managing their own money, how can we expect them to be accountable and responsible with our tax dollars?

    Folks, remember your Sunday school and Bible school lessons. Jesus Christ was a also grassroots community organizer too. Food for
    thought!

    • LD

      Pat,

      Please see my response to Dennis.

      We good on garnishing wages? Strikes me as “sense on cents” in action. No?

      Thanks for writing.

    • Annie

      Thou shalt not Covet

      Jesus never got a group of people together to protest at banks to force those banks into providing them loans they could not afford to repay, which was a primary focus of Obama’s grass roots efforts.

      Thou shalt not steal.

      The Jesus of the left….Covet everything and it is fashionable, is not the same Jesus I learned about in my Sunday school classes.

      Jesus would never have taught his daughters that if they “made a mistake”, they could have an abortion.

      You know, I never believed the right wingers who said that Obama followers thought he was the Messiah until I read your comment. Now I see it is true.

  • Karen

    http://politicaloutcast.com/2012/11/i-dont-know-about-you-but-i-wont-back-down/

    Larry- please read the above link. It speaks volumns for how I feel, and I am sure you feel also.

  • Peter Scannell

    I get it…it’s not about Republicans vs. Democrats anymore -it’s about the “perfect” vs. “the “imperfect.”

  • fred

    Sorry Peter,

    I couldn’t resist. You still don’t get it, its not about Republican v. Democrat or Perfect v. Imperfect…

    Its about “HOW DO WE RAISE AND WHAT DO WE LEAVE OUR CHILDREN”.

    Think about it.

  • Small BD

    Good Afternoon LD,

    The correlations cited in your article is a potential starting point for further inquiry into an extremely complex problem.

    For starters, consider how social & other services (largely for the populations mentioned in your current and prior columns) are always withing arms reach of the budget chopping block. When shelters or group homes for the disabled (veterans, in some cases) are closed, many of those affected will go elsewhere; such as hospital emergency rooms- especially during incliment weather. This is an extremely under-reported phenomenon. There’s no need to illustrate the clear ripling effects on society, the health care system, etc. No one ever seems to report on the larger implications of budgetary actions. The surface will suffice. Those who proclaim that people should pick themselves up by the proverbial boot-straps are really just kicking themselves in the rump. It would be cheaper to put the homeless in 5-star hotels than to shut down the various programs. Cliches need to be outlawed. Their effect is to blind oneself from dealing with complex realities.

    Another area of neglect: under-supervised, under-funded child / adult protective services which lead to countless disasters. For instance: After I adopted a dog from the local shelter, I have recieved more follow-up (surprise visit, etc.) visits to check up on my dog than there have been investigations into abused foster kids in impoverished areas.

    Truth lies way beyond correlation and basic statistics.

    Another case study: Mitt Romney. He did not bother to prepare a concession speech; rather, he had planned an 8-minute fireworks display over Boston Harbor to celebrate his sure victory. His campaign made a great point of the fact that there was no victory speech prepared. Mitt’s concession ‘speech’ was the most insincere concession I have ever heard. What ever happened to the fabled Mormon modesty? What we observed was the behavior of a great egoist. Could the truth be that Mitt is not the epitomy of Mormon values? Fireworks display?!

  • Small BD

    Correction: Last paragraph- …no concession speech..

  • ed pefferman

    Larry,
    I find your commetary on why Obama won, offensive,
    and to picture the President in a red/white/blue clown
    hat at the top of the commentary when you have Mitt in
    previous, commentary on why you voted for him, in front
    of the flag in a confident pose should be beneath you.
    This time signing off…..for good.

    Ed

    • LD

      Ed,

      Clown hat?

      Ever see a picture of Uncle Sam?

      Come on.

    • Randee

      LD’s gonna discuss this tonight at a meeting with his closest advisers which is scheduled to take place in a clearing in the woods @ the stroke of midnight.

      • LD

        Why do I waste my time?

  • Huckleberry

    LD,

    With all respect, this post does not seem very well thought-out, and is tinged with racism.

    Substitute “patronage” for “wealth redistribution” and “Irish” for “Hispanic” and you’d have the GOP’s attack against the Democratic party c. 1890.

    Finance capitalism is no longer capable of papering over the fact that it’s been screwing hard-working Americans for 30 years. That the GOP would nominate someone like Mitt Romney in the midst of a finance-based economic slump is perhaps the best evidence yet for how totally out-of-touch the Republican party is with American Reality in the 21st century.

    But that does not explain why Romney lost. No one wants to talk about it, but I think Romney’s Mormonism cost him the election. I know that it hurt him in states like Virginia and Florida and Ohio. How much? I think the answer is ‘enough.’

    • Randee

      Spot on. I know many Republicans simply did not vote because Romney was Mormon. I’m guessing Larry was one of them.

  • LD

    Wow racism, really? Won’t even dignify that remark. Interesting that you throw that bomb out there without regard for the statistics referenced. What do you think about those stats and correlations? In regard to the Irish, I doubt they used political office to advance but please enlighten us as to the strength of the Irish family and how they advanced economically ?

    That primary process is pretty exhaustive, no?

    • Huckleberry

      Late getting back to this…

      “Tinged” is the correct word, and I stand by it. You don’t need to dignify the remark, but consider it in the spirit in which it was offered, which was respectfully.

      Your failure to understand how cherry-picked stats about race come across to the non-wealthy and non-white is symptomatic of the GOP’s larger problem with the electorate.

      Consider Rush’s post-election comments concerning Obama-as-Santa-Claus and a lack of “credit” for the GOP’s enlightened racial politics and Romney’s “gifts.”

      If you think these are fair and constructive, all I can say is you better start coming up with clever ways to disenfranchise voters, because without them in the GOP is doomed.

      • LD

        Not cherry picked at all. I still do not believe you have fully grasped or even entertained the breadth and depth of what I am addressing. So to that end, I will make it easy on you.

        Please read, review, and ponder the voluminous details offered in this analysis, Data on the Consequences of Father Absence.

        That link addresses the impact of a father’s absence on the following:

        Poverty
        Emotional and Behavioral Problems
        Maternal and Child Health
        Incarceration
        Crime
        Teen Pregnancy and Sexual Activity
        Child Abuse
        Drug and Alcohol Abuse
        Childhood Obesity
        Education

        So feel free to continue to focus on the pure politics of our mess, I will try to highlight the issues that are and will continue to kill our nation. Sorry if that statement is tinged with a whiff of cynicism.

        I welcome your response and thoughts to that comprehensive report.

        Thanks for writing.

  • LD

    Not doubt it should read “I know” the Irish used political power to advance.

  • Hart

    Larry, you have a good point that Uncle Barrack cant be there when those kids decide to “join a gang” as you say. Uncle Barrack is providing a model for fatherless children to embrace and “join a gang” of academicians that shape a sound civic and spiritual life. A life that allows them to make sound decisions that will benefit society and perhaps slow, if not stop the cycle of single parent-dom. It may even spur growth in the 2 parent unit with insight gathered thru such an education system. Right now–it is what it is and what the Republican party thought it would be—AINT. Short reason they lost is that they were too busy focusing on demographic instead of psychographic. Major fail.

    • Small BD

      A role model, or mentor, has an impact that can not be measured by statistics. As I mentioned above- this is an important moment in history. Hopefully the future will show that it transcends politics. Labeling Obama a socialist, stressing the president’s “Muslim” middle name, etc. is the reason for the far-right’s failure in the modern age.

      Pundits are pointing to the Obama campaigns’ targeting of women and minorities as the reason for success. Another interpretation might be “inclusion” and consideration of the needs of historically neglected populations.

      • LD

        I think many might like him to include business people and those whom have a real appreciation for property rights,the rule of law, real respect for faith. These fellow Americans constitute only about 49 percent of the electorate.

        • Small BD

          Respect for faith?? What about the Mormon practice of posthumous baptisms (i.e. without consent or regard for the deceased’s choice)?

          After years of pressure, the Mormons finally agreed to stop posthumously baptizing jewish victims of the Holocaust; people who died because of their jewish identity and faith! Romney admitted to performing such forms of baptisms, though I am not sure whether he personally traveled to Germany for such purposes. In your belief system, would Jesus accept forced / coerced / imposed conversions? Mitt may feel great about “saving” these poor souls, but these practices show a complete afront to the notion of religious freedom. What could be more disrespectful?!

          It would take too long to argue the other “inclusions.” But I will agree that ObamaCare represents the potential for economic disaster. That’s why I did not vote for him. But I could not vote for Romney either. I wish the republican party could come up with a less extreme candidate; someone other than Sarah Palin, who’s daughter belongs to the group of out-of-wedlock sex / single parenthood that you so rail against.

          • LD

            I am not railing against individuals but I am railing against the fact that the culture that is promoted and supported by a political establishment has eroded so much of what I would define as a set of moral values and enabled this crisis to spiral out of control.

            Please read the comment left by Mike.

  • Crusader82

    LD; Illigitemi non carborundum est….nunca. I know you never will. Ed

  • Mike

    Single mothers, by accident or planned, vote for the Democrat party, because it will provide – not a safety net – but simply, provide.

    I am a public school teacher, black or white, kids without dads have a difficult time in school, academically and socially. Boys lose out the most; once they reach 10 years of age, they seek out relationships with older boys – and usually, they’re not the “right” kind. The mom is tangentially involved and is an outsider; the boy, like some men, see the woman as someone who is just in the way of a good time.

    The Left will continue to subsidize those self-destructive behaviors of some women and the poor – not out of concern for them but to stave off a revolt by the same. Whether it’s abortion or an expanding welfare state, the elite liberal in her gated community is afraid of its own constituencies: help them abort to limit their numbers and offer them phones to keep them happy.

    Life will go on after President Obama…the stronger ones will regroup and build communities of like minded people despite him. The weak minded will obsequiously ask Obama for more and the elite liberals in power will use him to widen their moats. The president, of course, will oblige.

    • LD

      Mike,

      THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU for stating what I firmly believe and have tried to convey in my commentary. Meanwhile, some here would like to cast aspersions here that I am a right wing nut or a borderline racist.

      Unless and until we break this spiraling cycle of single parent births (and all the social issues that result from this) then I believe we an kiss America’s future . . . GOOD-BYE!! 40+% of newborns in the USA now entering the world to single parent births and people do not think this is an epidemic crisis of immense proportions?

      WAKE UP, PEOPLE!! WAKE UP!!

  • Small BD

    I don’t think you’re a racist, Larry. I just do not see the correlation between your values and those of Mitt Romney; a man who behaved with extreme arrogance (no concession speach / prepared fireworks display for his victory / stereotype, plastered-on ear-to-ear grin) and invests in gambling: Attributes that are at extreme odds with his professed faith.

    What is dragging down our country is a complete lack of accountability from the White House on down, through multiple administrations. And, as you know, the revolving door in Washington is integral.

    As recently as the 80s, large corporations did not want the reputation of being quick to fire employees. Now, if earnings are off by a penny, 5,000 employees are fired and wind up becoming single parents or part of Romney’s 47% leech factor. Some people correlate this, in part, to the loss of union influence. In some cases, as you know, it is due to regulatory failures (Bear Stearns, et. al.). Whatever the case, the social contract is dead.

    Perhaps it is your choice of woes that has confused some people about your standing (?). There are many ills and they can not always be conveniently seperated. Single-parent homes can cause problems, but so can job loss, abusive fathers, football coaches, etc… And many kids would be better off without their fathers (knowledge I have acquired through my acquaintance with social workers and psychiatrists).

    • Mike

      An exception to the rule (ie some kids are better off without fathers) is not an argument – it doesn’t discount the consequences of single motherhood just like the exceptions of great single moms doesn’t discount it either. I wouldn’t bet on a horse that won a race with the odds 100 to 1 against just because it won one time.

      As recently as the 80s, large corporations did not want the reputation of being quick to fire employees. Now, if earnings are off by a penny, 5,000 employees are fired and wind up becoming single parents or part of Romney’s 47% leech factor.
      Huh? Really?! Now, you just making stuff up!

      • Small BD

        Mike, the “exception” you refer to is but one of numerous examples. I don’t see how you could construe this as being the actual ‘argument’ itself.

        There were many more companies (banks among them) that used to re-asign people rather than fire them. Presently, this practice lives on in hospitals; I know of many incompetent employees who should have been fired (for reasons of patient safety!) but were instead re-asigned because of the powerful 1199 union. There are also good employees who would have been fired if not for the union. The point is: “Huh? Really?!” is not an argument. Nor does it replace knowledge.

        Do you really believe that great single moms is an exeption?

        The “Big Brother / Big Sister” program, non-profit outreach programs for developing and mentoring art and writing skills amongst those who typically don’t have the access, is preferable to a father who is in & out of jail. Such programs, in my view, would suffer under Romney, with his snide and shameless “Big Bird” mentality.

        I won’t go into planned Parenthood as being preferable to babies being born with HIV and drug addictions because it may offend some folks.

      • fred

        Mike,

        You bring up a good point.

        Why are corporations so quick and callous when downsizing? Should there be more of a disincentive for corporations to downsize? Maybe higher unemployment premiums or a corp tax penalty for habitual offenders? What about retraining, cross training, relocation options?

        To bring the point back to this post, certainly when a father loses his job it puts tremendous strain on a marriage often resulting in divorce? What ever happend to the sanctity of marriage vows?

        Is a father any less or worse of a man because he loses his job for reasons beyond his control? Many divorced or remarried women think so.

  • LD

    With the election now in the rear view mirror I really need to get back to writing about topics that encompass investor education , investor protection, and my personal favorite the Wall Street Washington Incest. The simple fact is both parties are complicit in allowing investors and consumers to be compromised and pols from both sides get paid handsomely in the process. My support for Romney was primarily due to the fact that I thought he would be much more effective in handling the economy.

    Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I mean that sincerely.

    • fred

      To help in the transition back to sense on CENTS, lets not forget that no less than the richest man in Conn and investor extraordinaire, Ray Dalio, believes that income redistribution is a necessary component to the ongoing multiyear “beautiful deleveraging”.

      However distasteful to those whose income will decline, you can’t refute the logic. I wonder how Ray voted in this presidential election?

  • Barry

    Thanks Larry,

    The President won re-election because:

    1)what you said and,

    2)the balance for the electorate is uninformed and refuse to question the integrity and truth of what is printed and broadcast.

  • Randee

    Obama won because America wants abortion to remain legal. Romney was clearly gaining, and had a slight edge and would’ve won the election. Then, a Republican candidate for Congress that Romney endorsed said that if a woman is raped and becomes pregnant it is “God’s will” that she have the child. Had Romney come out in the strongest terms and condemned this candidate, Romney would be president. He did not. And millions of frightened women voted for Obama.

    Until the Republicans recognize a woman’s right to choose, they have no chance of winning the presidency. Zero. nada. Ain’t happening. Also, this country now belongs to people of color. Deal with it, white America. It’s not your land no more. You took it from the Indians and now pepole of color took it from you. What goes round comes round.

    • LD

      Randee,

      Do you know what percentage of the American population are people of color?

      • Randee

        Yes. Do you?

    • Small BD

      Randee,

      In stating “Until the Republicans recognize a woman’s right to choose..,” are you suggesting that republicans might want to seperate Church & State in order to survive in this century?

      What Mr. Akin failed to consider prior to his “legitimate rape” hypothesis is that rape can create single mothers- which republicans seem to fear above all else!

      • LD

        Talk about missing the forest for the trees. Perhaps you might care to share with us what percentage of single mothers are a result of rape.

        Why is it that you focus on that issue while not making any meaningful comment on the host of very real issues (incarceration, substance abuse, high school dropouts, assault, obesity, teen pregnancy) highly correlated with single parent families?

        I would suggest that you scroll through these comments and read the remarks left by a public school teacher (Mike) and the impact on those students who come from single parent families.

        Perhaps after reading his remarks you can offer us your assessment of his thoughts.

        Thanks for writing.

        • Small BD

          Larry,

          If I am being impolite please say so. It is never my intention. Did my quip regarding Mr. Akin as well as prior observations offend in some way?

          The statistics you request of me are impractical to compile. How does one define or represent statistically a group that includes women with five children from three different fathers, two-parent families in which the parents take turns disappearing or going to jail, girls who travel cross-country to quietly have an abortion, and other under-reported incidents? We all know what Mark Twain had to say about statistics.

          I took your advice and re-read Mike’s comments. I agree with his observations, to an extent. But it is not possible to conclude, from what has been presented, that his observations constitute a statistically reliable sampling. I sort-of missed the point about staving off a “revolt.” And when Mike gets into the “stronger ones” and the “weak minded,” plus the revolt hypothesis, well, I am surprised that you feel comfortable with it all.

          I attended Teachers College prior to joining the family businesses. Teaching & psychology are very near and dear.

          I feel it’s an exaggeration to say that I dwell on the rape / ‘legitimate rape’ issue. But as my wife is a child and adolescent psychiatrist working in a major hospital, I have some inkling about the countless 14 year old parents and 30 year old grandparents, and the number of kids living in single-grandparent homes. It is also very clear that many kids suffer because their parents (both) are nuts.

          In many large cities, adolescent residential facilities are in short supply. Reported abuse is often not followed-up on simply due to a lack of resources or alternative environments. Social / outreach programs are underfunded and often fail to reach the intended population.

          I have an aunt who retired from public school teaching, and a recently deceased aunt who taught at a Catholic school. My sister is a school psychologist. Time and again, I hear about parents screaming about not wanting their kids to be categorized as special needs (denial of reality). And they usually get the administration to back them, after which the kids lose.

          It would take all week for me to type out my personal observations, experiences and thoughts on “solving” all of these tragedies. I will say one thing: the crimes being committed your revolt-prone, let’s say- the “week minded,” pale in comparison to the crooks who populate the executive suites and regulatory posts.

  • fred

    Why did Obama win?

    Because the true facts about Benghazi were covered up.

    This story is playing out as I text, it is turning into a game of political hardball that makes Watergate seem like a kid’s game of hide and seek.

    Basically, Obama’s relelection was worth more that the live’s of our fellow Americans. Rather than try to save the life’s of these Americans, the Obama administration, thru it’s conduit the Sec of Defense, told General Petraus and the CIA to stand down rather than mount an offensive against the terrorists that quite possibly might have saved the lives of these Americans heroes.

    How could Obama parade out in front of the American public and declare the war on terror over if terrorists attacked an American embasy in Lybia on 9/11?

    When Petraus threatened to reveal the truth about the real reason behind the Benghasi “lack of response”, he now finds himself involved in a sexting scandal designed to either 1) discredit his testmony, 2)blackmail him into not testify to avoid public ridicule, 3)charge him with treason for releasing of top secret military information in the sexts.

    This should not stand!

  • coe

    I’ve read your post and the chain of comments a few times LD, and it reinforces what I believe is a central point – namely that the popular vote crystallized several take-aways:
    o – in a country of 300MM people, it seems that the nearly 50/50 split confirms that there are ideological differences of substance that will never be bridged
    o – partisan politics is not the answer, it is a big part of the problem
    – it seems to polarize issues and people, and does not lead to civil discourse at all
    o – there are plenty of third rail issues that speak to the people, any one of which might be the catalyst to pull a lever down and vote for the candidate who most closely advocates one’s position
    o – the electoral college process provides candidates with a way to narrow their focus to battleground states…consider the many in the northeast who found it exceedingly difficult to vote given the aftermath of the storm – would it have mattered re the presidential race? – not at all; and, to be overly simplistic
    o – the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t know!

    Your commenters have spoken as well – Benghazi/labor troubles, family core values/abortion/racism/the economy/wealth redistribution/sociological statistics – taken together, isn’t it clear that they paint a broad picture of the American view of the world – and we could toss education/foreign policy/immigration into the melting pot as well – yet the voters were pretty much split between the candidates..it tells me that Romney wasn’t able to overcome inertia, that he bungled marketing his “image” in a way that would appeal to key voting blocs in battleground states, perhaps even scaring these same cohorts so much that they had to vote for Obama…

    I tend to find myself drawn to your thinking on many issues – and I applaud the courage of your convictions and your willingness to put them out there on this blog – you respond gracefully to those who tend to vilify your thinking
    as well – the people have spoken…4 more years of Obama – God bless us all – and back to the business of business – fiscal cliff/govt spending/tax hikes/ – regardless of presidential victor, given the polarization in the country, these are truly complex problems.

  • Randee

    Speaking of winning, not one Republican who votes for new taxes to solve the fiscal cliff will be reelected, Grover will see to that. This is Grover’s world, the rest of us only live in it. Bow to Grover, Republicans in Congress, or stand down for reelection cuz you got no chance.

    Let this great country go over the cliff. IN order to fix this country, you have to let it break.

    NO NEW TAXES ON WEALTHY AMERICANS. GROVER IS GOD.

    • fred

      Republican members of Congress were elected to uphold a no new tax pledge, Obama was elected to roll back the Bush tax cuts, lets get on with it.

      Then we can lower the rate and broaden the base. Whats next revisions to Obamacare?

      Mitt was ahead of his time.

  • Olivia

    Bottom line….Obama won.
    America has spoken.
    Shut the fuck up!

    • fred

      Olivia,

      Nice mouth, your parents must be real proud of you.

      So how much more are you willing to contribute to the cause? You do pay taxes don’t you? It’s real easy spending other peoples money, isn’t it?

      When the majority of taxpayers include their own tax situation, most believe raising tax rates should be the last option.

      A full review of all gov’t spending programs, subsidies, credits, deductions, entitlements, and generational transfers, etc., should come first.

      Let’s close all the loopholes that allow some Americans to pay less as a percentage of there income in taxes.

      Shouldn’t every American have “skin” in the game?

      After leveling the playing field, why not give all taxpayers more leverage in the political process, where would this country be without them?

      • fred

        With all the talk of the fiscal cliff, why are corporations getting a free ride. If corp America put all that cash to work that is now sitting on their balance sheets earning a zero return, most of our fiscal problems would be in the rear view mirror.

        It should be noted that most of this cash is sitting offshore, a result of doing business overseas; hiring, producing and selling OVERSEAS.

        As an analyst and capitalists, I understand all the arguments for and against taxing corporations, that’s why I would support a reduction in the corporate tax rate to zero and tax all undistributed profits in excess of working capital and capex. Tax all cash balances (as a percentage of revenues in excess of the the prior year’s cash balance or a 5-10 year average (wichever is lower).
        Stock repurchases and outside equity holdings in excess of employee stock options should also be considered cash and subject to tax.

        Currently, the corporate balance sheet is just a place where the upper tail 1% earners (execs, BOD’s, etc.) are stuffing cash and trying to ride out the storm.

        As part of a fiscal cliff agreement, why not just move the individual federal tax rate to 25% for everyone, phase out/eliminate deductions, credits, favorable tax treatment, etc. for annual income over $500K until we generate adequate federal revenue. (Let’s face it 250k gross isn’t all that much after factoring in a mortgage, 1-2 kids in college/private school, living expenses and energy costs).

        I haven’t done the number crunching, but I’d bet that with a little belt tightening, we get to Obama’s $1.4T revenue number without all the class warfare thats tearing this country apart.

        Message to President Obama: The election is over, this country needs to come together under your leaderships.
        Stop being devisive, set one tax rate for everyone and create a positive vision that all American’s can aspire to, it’s not only your job but your legacy.

        These past elections have created a nation of liberal socialists and conservative capitalists, what we need now are conservative socialists and liberal capitalists.

        Mitt (Sec of Commerce) Romney was ahead of his time.

        • fred

          Big bro, remember, if you means test entitlements, future life expectancies must be factored it.

          Bipartisan examples of conservative socialists, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton. Examples of liberal capitalists Steve Jobs, Jeff Bezos.

  • Pat
  • Mandie

    My mom says 2 thumbs up!

  • Pat
    • LD

      Pat,

      Thanks for sharing this story. Truly tragic.

      Do you have similar concern for those lives ended via this practice?

      What is a Partial-Birth Abortion?

      * The definition of partial-birth abortion in H.R. 1833 is “an abortion in which the person performing the abortion partially vaginally delivers a living fetus before killing the fetus and completing the delivery.” A number of physicians were involved in the drafting of this language to ensure that it is medically accurate and does not encompass any other form of abortion or legitimate medical procedure.

      * Registered nurse Brenda Pratt Shafer witnessed several partial-birth abortions while working for an Ohio abortionist. She described one of these abortions in a July 9, 1995, letter to Congressman Tony Hall:

      The baby’s body was moving. His little fingers were clasping together. He was kicking his feet. All the while his little head was still stuck inside. Dr. Haskell took a pair of scissors and inserted them into the back of the baby’s head. Then he opened the scissors up. Then he stuck the high-powered suction tube into the hole and sucked the baby’s brains out.

      How Many Partial-Birth Abortions Are Performed?

      * There is no way to know the exact number of partial-birth abortions that are performed yearly. The National Abortion Federation says that two doctors, McMahon and Haskell, perform about 450 between them each year. Both of these abortionists energetically advocate the method. Dr. Haskell presented a “how to” paper to National Abortion Federation members in 1992, and Dr. McMahon is the director of abortion training at a major teaching hospital.

      I would venture a guess that there are MANY thousands more lives lost via the practice which I highlight than the tragedy which you bring to our attention. I say that with all due respect to Ms. Savita and any other woman who tragically loses their lives in such a manner.

      I do not pretend to be a social ethicist but certainly situations such as those deserve serious public debate. I personally support protecting the life of the mother.

      Do you support protecting the life of the baby in the practice which I highlight?

  • LD

    Not that it changes anything at this point, but it is interesting to read why Mitt Romney believes he lost the election last week. Maybe Mitt has been reading Sense on Cents.

    Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney is telling top donors that President Barack Obama won re-election because of the “gifts” he had already provided to blacks, Hispanics and young voters and because of the president’s effort to paint Romney as anti-immigrant.

    “The president’s campaign, if you will, focused on giving targeted groups a big gift,” Romney said in a call to donors on Wednesday. “He made a big effort on small things.”

    Mitt Romney: Obama Won “Gifts” to Blacks, Hispanics, Young Voters

    • Small BD

      Let’s for a moment recall the time when S.C. republican Joe Wilson yelled “You Lie!” toward a siting president during a speech before Congress.

      My hypothesis is that such lack of decorum would never have occured if our president’s physical appearance were more similar to Romney’s rather than those recipients of ‘gifts’ mentioned above.

      The implication is not that of racism per se, but rather one of an inherited archtypal attitude that continues to grow like a weed on American soil. I would label this a ‘customary’ way of viewing the world. I am not applying this to your citation, Larry. But I suspect it applies to that famous Romney speech to wealthy donors (no one shouted “You Lie” during THAT speech…).

      This is a gut feeling, and perhaps unintentionally exaggerated. I stand ready to accept or consider any opposing argument.

      • LD

        Small BD,

        Wilson’s remark was blatantly disrespectful and out of line. He showed no respect to the office of the President in a public setting.

        Regrettably the relationship between the D’s and Rs was already headed in the wrong direction. Do you recall then chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel informing the President to “F&^%k ‘em”, menaing the R’s during the stimulus debate? Statements like that do not do much for relationships either.

        In regard to Romney, remarks made in private may not be respectful but do deserve a degree of latitude in my opinion. You may recall that BO during a reception in San Fran referenced people in Pennsylvania (I believe) as being bitter while clinging to their guns and religion.

        In my opinion, this all stems from the fact that we have a LOT of politicians but VERY FEW statesmen and true leaders. This goes for BOTH sides of the aisle.

        • Small BD

          Fair enough. But the real question is: Would Wilson have shouted “You Lie!” if B Clinton were up there?

          I do remember the whole guns & religion thing. Emotive statements such as that really brings politics down to the level of the Jerry Springer show.

          • LD

            Perhaps not but please be mindful that none other than Judge Alito was caught uttering under his breath “not true” during another of President Obama’s State of the Union speeches.

            The office needs to be respected but whether people like it or not, neither of our last two occupants of the Oval Office have gotten a whole lot of respect from the other side.

  • LD Recommended

    Ross Douthat echoes my sentiments expressed in my commentary via his own editorial in this past Sunday’s New York Times. He writes,

    Liberals look at the Obama majority and see a coalition bound together by enlightened values — reason rather than superstition, tolerance rather than bigotry, equality rather than hierarchy. But it’s just as easy to see a coalition created by social disintegration and unified by economic fear.

    Consider the Hispanic vote. Are Democrats winning Hispanics because they put forward a more welcoming face than Republicans do — one more in keeping with America’s tradition of assimilating migrants yearning to breathe free? Yes, up to a point. But they’re also winning recent immigrants because those immigrants often aren’t assimilating successfully — or worse, are assimilating downward, thanks to rising out-of-wedlock birthrates and high dropout rates. The Democratic edge among Hispanics depends heavily on these darker trends: the weaker that families and communities are, the more necessary government support inevitably seems.

    Likewise with the growing number of unmarried Americans, especially unmarried women. Yes, social issues like abortion help explain why these voters lean Democratic. But the more important explanation is that single life is generally more insecure and chaotic than married life, and single life with children — which is now commonplace for women under 30 — is almost impossible to navigate without the support the welfare state provides.

    The Liberal Gloat

  • http://www.lecturemaker.com Ron Fredericks

    I think the common republican response that Obama “out gifted” more segments of the US population to win re-election is wrong.

    Romney tried every way possible to give the voters the biggest gifts possible: lower taxes, more jobs, more spending for government/military complex. The average American simply knew this was a lie or a pipe dream:
    - current federal taxes have not been this low since 1929,
    - private sector jobs are not created by a US President,
    - we need to stop policing other countries and stop building up our military spending to do it.

    With these tenets in mind, it is no wonder that republicans try to fit Obama’s campaign success into a scheme of gift giving. Because that was Romney’s campaign message.

    But the fact remains, Obama told the truth at every turn, and won on simple common sense honesty along with a push to turn out the vote. While Romney, the GOP, and Fox News continued to remind the average white voter not to bother voting by constantly exaggerating the value of Romney’s ability to hand out so many free gifts.

    Had the GOP and its media representative FNC pointed out that Obama did as well as anyone could have done in these tough times and created an equal playing field based on values – then the white base of votes may have been motivated to stop looking for lazy income streams in job disrupting places like china to show up at the polls to vote.






Recent Posts


ECONOMIC ALL-STARS


Archives