Follow by Email

Saturday, August 18, 2012

Charles Blow, "Dark Road to the White House": Hypocrite!

In his latest New York Times op-ed entitled "Dark Road to the White House" (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/18/opinion/blow-dark-road-to-the-white-house.html?_r=1), Charles Blow tells us that the "road map for a Mitt Romney/Paul Ryan win in November" consists of "Shady money, voter suppression, shifting positions, murky details and widespread apathy." Telling us of Paul Ryan's "letters to Obama’s secretary of energy asking that millions of dollars from the program [Obama's stimulus package] be granted to a pair of Wisconsin conservation groups," Blow concludes:

"Paint a scarlet 'H' on that man’s chest for hypocrisy."

In fact, the real hypocrite here is Blow.

Blow begins his opinion piece by quoting at length from yesterday's sleazy New York Times editorial "In Thrall to Sheldon Adelson" (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2012/08/new-york-times-in-thrall-to-sheldon.html), which parroted language from the Obama campaign, and to which the Times's public editors office responded by declaring, "The Times's editorial page has a wide latitude to express its views" (http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2012/08/new-york-times-public-editors-office-re.html).

If I understand both Blow and the Times's editorial board correctly, Romney is forbidden to take money from Adelson, but Obama can take money from Soros (convicted of insider trading), Goldman Sachs and Hollywood. Obama can also cut a stinky real estate deal with Tony Rezko (today also a convicted felon). Hypocritical? You bet.

Ryan opposed Obama's stimulus plan, but after it was approved, Blow observes that Ryan sought part of the money for his constituents. But once the plan was passed, why shouldn't he have done this for his constituents, who would ultimately also have to pay its price?

Blows accuses Romney of "shifting positions" and "murky details," however, even The Washington Post is telling us today in an editorial entitled "A presidential campaign that’s not serving the country" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-presidential-campaign-thats-not-serving-the-country/2012/08/17/502fbbee-e314-11e1-a25e-15067bb31849_story.html?hpid=z3):

"For his part, President Obama has offered only the gauziest outlines of a second-term agenda. Instead, his argument for reelection is focused on the damage he argues Mr. Romney and fellow Republicans would do. This may be enough for Mr. Obama to cobble together the necessary electoral votes, but it hardly lays the groundwork for the difficult choices, particularly on the fiscal front, that will confront the next president — and that Mr. Obama ducked during his current term."

In that same editorial, the liberal Washington Post had the integrity to reference Vice President Biden's recent inflammatory remarks (Republicans will "put y'all back in chains") and obscene attempts by the Obama campaign to link Romney to the death from cancer of the wife of a steelworker. But does Blow attempt to strike this balance? No way.

There is a much I don't like about the positions, or absence of positions, of Romney, but Charles Blow has now also done his part to further sully a 2012 presidential election, which has found its way into the gutter owing to the demeaning level of the Obama campaign - to which Obama once pledged he would never descend.

A "dark road to the White House"? Indeed, it is route upon which Obama has cast "Hope" and "Change," if they ever existed, by the wayside.

5 comments:

  1. I don't read him or anyone else there. I did read his columns at the beginning - some were OK, some were below any acceptable level.
    I have one huge problem with his idol (Obama) - a tiny, little problem, namely, I am convinced that he is INCOMPETENT and that there is a problem with an incompetent person in the White House, particularly when the world seems to be eager to disintegrate.
    I despise this narcissistic opportunist with his permanent smile and constant demagoguery. I resent the fact that brain dead population functions on the level of "Hope, unity, change."
    Now, I am a progressive and I never thought I would say it, but I think I am ready to ask: "Bring Reagan back." I would vote for him (yes, with close nose, eyes and ears).
    Now, there is a huge problem with the Republican side now and I do see a problem when illiterate, primitive and arrogant billionaires think that they know better who should run the country than me and they have a say and not me.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Jeff, it would be interesting to hear you state what you actually like about Romney, having regard to the fact that he refuses to acknowledge his accomplishments as governor because to do so would supposedly alienate his base. If you are able to discern any core principles that Romney has it would be helpful if you could enlighten your readers in that regard.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks, John. Excellent question, but perhaps better addressed in its entirety by a blog entry.

    I would begin by observing that I am pro-choice and support gay marriage - which place me at loggerheads with the Romney campaign.

    On the other hand, I have been a persistent advocate of developing American oil shale, which I believe can result in hundreds of thousands of new jobs in the US, balance the trade deficit, help reduce America's mountain of debt, and free the US from dependence upon oil imported from tyrannical foreign regimes. I also believe that this can be done in a responsible manner with minimal damage to the environment. As you know, this is the first principle of Romney's 5-point plan for remedying the econony, i.e. aggressively promote domestic energy production.

    Like Joe Nocera, I would not have hesitated to approve the XL Pipeline.

    Foreign policy? Obama has been a disaster, as I have repeatedly elucidated. This does not mean that should he become president, Romney will actually behave any better, yet I am very apprehensive re Obama's plans should he be reelected.

    I have always regarded Obama as a leftist in moderate's clothing, and once free of the fear of facing reelection, Obama is capable of anything. Note his "open microphone" message to Putin regarding his plans to make concessions after November. Obama has done too little to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons, which ultimately will be able to hit both Europe and the US.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Several things.
    I have a problem with the term "leftist." Probably because there is a problem with the word "leftist." I am probably a leftist (unions, dignity in the workplace, vacations, etc.) and Hitler was to a degree? at certain time? a "leftist." So, who is or isn't "leftist?"
    Speaking of Obama. I totally agree that he is an absolute and perfect foreign policy disaster. Predictably so. When a President places his first (?) international call to a guy whose dissertation "denying" the Holocaust was "defended" at Patrick Lumumba University in Moscow (yes, that university in that Moscow - profoundly Soviet) and first (not sure, too lazy to check) international speech appealed to Muslem Brotherhood to established ITS democracy, one can't be surprised when he promises PUTIN "flexibility." Frankly, I don't know how people can vote for him after this promise.
    Pipeline is not in the area of my expertise, but I was unhappy with people who protested. I actually mentioned my unhappiness in my departing letter to an ex-friend:
    "No ..., the Flotilla jet set which flew last month in jets and was driven in limousines to Washington to ... protect the rights of Arab nations to oil monopoly is not for me either and not only because I don't have millions of air miles, millions of car miles, millions in banks and millions in heating bills ..."
    Now, I dislike both Republicans and I am not voting. I was ready to vote for the first time for a Republican.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous,
    Interesting thoughts. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete