Letter: Which Romney Do You Support?

By
Town-Crier Letters Editor
-

Last week’s Town-Crier illustrates, in letters to the editor, that there are still people out there who think so little of public intellect that they continue to try to pass “horse manure” for horse sense. [Frank Morelli’s letter] “Stop Obama Now” is admittedly a biased letter which seeks your support of global warming and its disastrous effects through the continued use of fossil fuels and dirty energy producers. The only reason for such support is obvious, and that is to increase the value of someone’s investment portfolio, and it mythologically asserts that such support will lead us to energy independence.

What such support really does is lead us, according to the best scientists in the world, to disastrous climatic changes and weather-related catastrophes linked to the continued use of fossil fuels that threaten our food and fresh water supply. Of course, while it is obvious which candidate Mr. Morelli prefers, it is difficult for readers to understand his position with respect to his choice.

Does he prefer Mitt Romney’s support of “Romneycare” before he was against “Obamacare?” Does he support equal pay for women before he became evasive on the issue? Does he favor writing off 47 percent of Americans who receive entitlements “who just won’t take responsibility for their lives” — people like Social Security recipients, Medicare beneficiaries, widows and orphans and veteran benefit programs? Does he favor Mr. Romney’s proposed tax changes in the tax code which would disproportionately benefit the wealthy 3 percent, while increasing the tax obligation of the middle class?

Tell us, Mr. Morelli, which Mitt Romney are you voting for?

Richard Nielsen
Royal Palm Beach

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

9 COMMENTS

  1. Mr. Rosen is a self proclaimed progressive, secular humanist, and atheist. He delights in personal attacks on those who do not agree with him. According to Mr. Rosen we simply do not understand. When I said that I do not support redefining marriage he called me a “gay basher”. When I said I pray on my knees every night for our country he called me a “religious fanatic”.

    If and when he lived in Europe and paid taxes in order to pay for the fabulous government healthcare system, these are the tax rates that he paid.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_rates_of_Europe
    UK 65.5%
    France 59.6%
    Greece 65%
    Sweden 80%
    Norway 79.3%
    Netherlands 71%
    Denmark 83%

    Obama has bankrupted our country and borrowed money from China and printed money from the FED to stimulate green companies that are now bankrupt.

    The bottom line is this. Four more years of big government, progressive/socialist policies will unalterably change America from the land of the free to the land of dependence upon foreign oil, and not have the wealth to protect its citizens.

    America has already turned against Israel. This President sat by and did nothing to protect Ambassador Stevens and sacrificed the lives of American SEAL members for political gain.

    I’m not a prude, but is it Presidential to run a political ad that equates the voting for Obama by young girls with losing their virginity?

    Without a change of leadership, why would the next four years be any different than the last four years?

    • Mr. Morelli,

      Yes, I am a Progressive (actually more moderate then very left-wing, but I am a devout Atheist), but rather that then Regressive. Mr. Morelli should be man of the year, unfortunately the year is 1512, not 2012. His ideas are mostly on the fringe of modern world and scientific views. Yes Mr. Morelli, I am a Secular Humanist. I do not believe in religion or the supernatural, but I do believe in the golden rule and being good to people because it is the right thing to do. The Secular Humanists I know seem to have an incredibly high moral standard and don’t seem to be hypocrites like a lot of religious people can be (let’s look at our history of televangelists and their downfalls recently, but it is a historical fact that many “religious” people did not practice what they preached).

      1) Global warming and Human involvement – He goes against what 97-98% of actively working Scientists in the field believe and have studied. The people Mr. Morelli listens to on this are not scientists and if he hears about a few scientists most have questionable backgrounds (one anti-global warming scientist has also allied himself with Philip Morris and is claiming second-hand smoke is not harmful).
      In the Global Warming Controversy (Climategate) he has disavowed 9 investigations clearing one group of scientists from any wrong-doing by basically saying that he has looked into them but found they don’t show anything (the investigations were conducted by Penn State University, The University of East Anglia (UK), and a few each by the American Government and the British Government – would be quite a major conspiracy if they all worked together to clear these scientists).

      2) Evolution (Mr. Morelli is a Creationist) – 99% of scientists support and have proof of Evolution. Mr. Morelli still bases his idea on the 1802 statement by William Paley that the eye is so complicated that it must have been god created. There is no controversy among scientists on whether Evolution is a valid fact (the term “theory” in science is different then what lay people use and, in science a theory is stronger than facts as it is made up of facts)

      3) Austrian Economics – Most economists still consider this as a fringe idea. But people like Glenn Beck (not an economist) do not (again, that should say it all).

      4) Colonialism – Mr. Morelli has rebuked President Obama for being an anti-colonialist. Thus it must mean that he is for colonialism. Almost all historians agree that colonialism and imperialism have been bad for most of the areas that were colonized.

      5) Mr. Morelli does not seem to realize that not allowing Gay people to use the term Married is a form of gay-bashing. It is not giving them the same status as heterosexuals and therefore makes them second class citizens. He also doesn’t seem to realize that the meanings of words has changed down through history depending on the social context of the times. Mr. Morelli seems to be behind the times in every social event.

      6) Mr. Morelli is not a religious fanatic because he drops to his knees every night to pray for America, he is a religious fanatic because his is the only “right” religion, his ideas, based on that religion are the only “right” ones. That is why he is a religious fanatic. The hate in his heart for other religions (especially Muslims, when he does not know nor associate with them) is amazing. The hate in his heart for President Obama is also clearly visible. Mr. Morelli, who is not against personally attacking me will call me a Muslim apologist (as he has in the past), however the Muslims I have known and associated with (mainly scientsts, professionals, etc.) have been law-abiding, productive peaceful citizens. And I have met them in a number of countries. They are not the terrorists that some people seem to think all muslims are.

      The numbers for taxation in other countries Mr. Morelli points out might be true, but what he is not saying is that that is for only the very few who are in the minority, the mega-rich rock stars and people like that (and those people have lawyers and accountants who get around those high taxes). And I wasn’t talking about taxation, I responded to his statement that nobody has a higher quality of health care then the USA. Well, many other groups, groups who have done the research, disagree with him. Ask ordinary people in those countries that have universal health care and they will tell you that they would not want to go to an American private system. The only problem I have (and Mr. Morelli and I would agree on this I believe) is that can our government (any party) really keep costs in control? Can they ever be fiscally efficient? Can they ever stop most of the amazing amount of red tape? Not sure on this one and it worries me.

      Mr. Morelli calls my attacks personal, but when I show him scientific evidence of some of his errors he simply says, well, that doesn’t prove anything. When I say his research is poor on a number of levels he says “my research is second to none”. I have even shared some of his statements (from his letters and forums only, not our personal correspondence) with other scientists/academics who do/have done real research and basically they have laughed at his ideas, research methods and research. I have offered to explain valid research methods to Mr. Morelli, but he has never taken me up on it. The proper way (in a nutshell, although there is a lot more to it) is that one goes into research with a question to be answered and an unbiased opinion. They do the research and it either confirms or disagrees with their idea. They then keep their idea or change it. Mr. Morelli looks only for things that support his ideas, sound bites, ideas from people who are not experts in the field, etc. Thus – POOR RESEARCH!!

      Mr. Morelli, my offer to explain research methods to you still holds. I will also explain primary research and secondary research as I think these are things you should understand as well as looking even deeper in the numbers that are posted, how statistics work and can be used to show different things and also the importance of conflicts of interest of people producing certain “research”.

  2. “A Chronic Case of Obamaneisa” by Kimberly A. Strassel appeared in the Wall Street Journal, claimed that Obama is suffering from a “psychological malady that experts call ‘projection’.

    In 2003 Obama said “I happen to be a proponent of a Single-payer universal health care program” and in 2009 Obama said “I have no said that I was a single-payer supporter”.

    In 2006 Obama said he opposes the effort to increase America’s debt limit. Yet he has increased the debt by $5 trillion and justified it in 2011 by saying “It is not acceptable for us not to raise the debt ceiling and to allow the U.S. government to default”.

    In 1996 Obama’s position was “I favor legalizing same-sex marriage, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages”. In 2008 he said “I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage”. In 2012 Obama said “It is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married”.

    Obama was offended when he was called out for criticizing America. In fact this is what Obama said “there have been times when America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive” April 2009 in France.

    We have at time been disengaged, and at time we sought to dictate our terms” President Obama April 2009, in Trinidad and Tobago.

    During the debate when Romney quoted Obama’s statements Obama replied “Nothing Governor Romney just said is true”. Obama October 2012.

    “The problem with a spending freeze is you’re using a hatchet where you need a scalpel”. Obama September 2008. And then in January 2010 Obama said “Starting in 2011, we are prepared to freeze government spending for three years”.

  3. John and Mary are a low income family with children, but they are making too much to qualify for government benefits. John discovers that if he takes advantage of several taxpayer funded benefit programs, he can work less and increase his net income. Working less gives John more time to watch television during the day and talk on his Obamaphone that he got because now that he is earning less he gets 250 minutes a month and other taxpayers will pick up the bill. Life is great for John now.

    This story reminds me of Dragnet with Jack Webb, which was first aired on radio on June 3rd 1949 and began with the following introduction: “”Ladies and gentlemen: the story you are about to hear is true. Only the names have been changed to protect the innocent.” I am also reminded of one of my favorite radio personalities, Paul Harvey, but more on him later.

    What John and Mary perhaps do not know about countries that have universal, single-payer, or government healthcare, whichever you might prefer to call it, is that such governments do not provide the same high quality of healthcare as do private insurance companies here in America.

    I would like to ask John and Mary who should be in charge of their healthcare – you , or the government? There are currently 906 pages of regulations governing your rights. And they are not in the “plane language” that government requires of private insurance companies. Those 906 pages of regulations that govern your health will change and grow, and do so without your approval; and you will not be able to drop your insurance and pick another better private insurer. You will be stuck with whatever the government decides is best for the collective.

    Whether or not you are entitled to treatment will depend upon what a 12 person panel decides. People with no functional medical experience will decide what treatments you can and cannot receive. It has been called a “death panel”, but whatever name you give it these 12 people will hold your future medical care in their hands.

    I believe in the free market. Private enterprise competition has always been able to control costs and deliver a much better product than government ever has or could provide. “Private” insurance has always been subject to State regulatory control. How’s that worked out so far?

    John and Mary’s budget plan sounds great, but it has to be implemented by forcing taxpayers to borrow more money to fund John and Mary’s benefits. Someone should tell John that the national debt is $16 trillion dollars and it is already unsustainable. It is 100% of the Gross National Product.

    John and Mary may think that they are better off now. They may think that they are getting something for nothing. But someone should tell them that there are no free lunches. Obamacare is more than inefficient, it is a moral dilemma. John at some point we will all have to “pay the piper”.

    People who are not working with a divine moral compass will change their behavior because they will no longer be responsible for all or any of the costs of their actions. I am suggesting is that people will be more likely to participate in detrimental activities such as smoking and excessive drinking. They will not have to be concerned about increased premiums as a result. Taxpayers will pick up the bill.

    Preexisting conditions are covered by private insurance, but there is a 3 month waiting period in most cases. This is because the free market understands that without a waiting period, people will not purchase insurance until the day after they need it. Obamacare attempts to deal with this moral hazard by exacting a tax of $2000 on everyone who does not purchase health coverage. Whether or not $2000 is enough to offset the cost of providing insurance after the fact remains to be seen. My guess is the tax will be increased.

    Employers with 50 or more employees that do not provide healthcare will pay a tax of $2000. In most cases the tax will be less than the cost of providing healthcare through private insurance companies. This will create yet another moral hazard. Employers will drop private coverage because it will be less expensive to dump their employees onto government insurance. This will destroy private insurance companies and thousands of private sector jobs will disappear.

    To quote Paul Harvey: “And now you know the rest of the story”.

    • I would prefer not to get into another back and forth with Mr. Morelli – there is usually no point in it as his views on most things are so far into the fringe element that it gets to be silly. However, having lived in the UK and The Netherlands and having friends in the medical profession from Canada, I take exception with his comment that systems with governmental health care do not provide the same high quality care as the USA does. Groups like the World Health Organization also back up my claim (however, any person or group that does not agree with Mr. Morelli will soon be label a leftist, progressive, or simply told that they don’t understand the issues.).

      Mr. Morelli also does not understand the “death-panel” as he – and a lot of other republicans have called it, but I am not surprised at this. It’s hard to understand something when all you do is listen to sound bites provided by people like Glenn Beck. Mr. Morelli has said in previous posts on this forum that his research is “second to none”. He has shown in the past (the past month or two) how poor and biased and unscientific his “research” is (especially on CO2 and global warming, but on other things as well). “Death-panel” was a term coined by Sarah Palin (that should say enough right there), but has been debunked by rational people from academics to physicians to democrats to republicans (but not to the right wing fringe or to certain conservative radio talk show hosts). It refers to a section in a government bill (section 1233 HR 3200 that would pay physicians for providing voluntary counseling to Medicare patients on living wills, advance directives and end-of-life care. It was eventually removed from the Act however. Many academics and physicians were not happy with its removal. Yet shouldn’t we have panels of experts always on hand to help patients deal with these types of decisions? Many hospitals already have these boards set-up to advise all patients, especially those with terminal illnesses, and they also involve special counselors to the patient and their families. And don’t the insurance companies have panels set up to determine what procedures they will cover (of course they do). There should be an overall panel in the government set-up, with physicians among them, to determine which procedures are scientifically valid (chemotherapy) and which are not (Homeopathy) and which should be covered.

      Are there problems with governments running anything? To my thinking, of course there is, they seem to waste so much money that it’s crazy. And there seems to be a lot of red tape, always! That is the thing that has me worried about universal healthcare. Can we do it right? I am not sure on this one! I would love to live under a system where health and education were open to everyone, what we need is a healthy, better educated society. That is the way the USA will be able to get ahead in any field. We have the people, the resources, the ideas, let’s just make sure we have a healthy, educated population.

  4. Regarding healthcare: President Obama did not include Republicans in the crafting of Obamacare. Just 1 elected party did that. All parties should participate in such an important issue. Mitt Romney was the first governor to implement healthcare for his state. He worked with a legislature composed of 87% democrats to craft Romneycare. No one can say that Romney doesn’t care about people and it shows that Romney has a demonstrated ability to work with an ‘opposing’ political party.

    Medicare is struggling. Both political parties acknowledge that. Why take $716 billion from Medicare to start-up Obamacare? Why not save that $716 billion for future Medicare recipients? Medicare is struggling, don’t strangle it further by taking billions out of the Medicare program. It just doesn’t make sense.

    Our government needs to take a serious look at generational Entitlements. Those are the families who generation after generation after generation need the use of Entitlements. That cycle needs to be broken, interventions need to be undertaken to relieve this dependence.
    Romney was not talking about those who contributed to Social Security, Medicare, or Veterans who have served our country.

    Mitt Romney’s expertise is in trying to salvage already failing businesses.
    Can he save all businesses? No, that’s an impossibility, but Romney can work to put America on the correct business path.

    Romney is the right man at the right time for the presidency.

Comments are closed.