Nothing can dignify Romney's ideology

Opinion: Columns

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Print

Gregg Mumm

We centrist liberals in this centrist/liberal country might be tempted to conclude from recent pronouncements from the Republican presidential ticket that the public policy accomplishments and goals we hold dear are not nearly in the dire jeopardy we previously thought.

You independents and wavering Democrats and Republican out there, did you hear? Why, Romney/Ryan will strengthen Social Security and Medicare. If the social safety net programs generally are not doing the job, Romney will "fix that." He will offer a health care policy that features elements of ObamaCare. He'll surely govern in conformity with the anecdotal stories of his private generosity. He even believes in regulations on business. Why, the GOP is concerned about poverty and middle-class wealth loss and wage stagnation, and a Romney administration will maintain progressivity in the tax code and not lower the tax burden of the super-rich. And the GOP nominees will pursue these ends in a bi-partisan fashion, reaching out to Democrats, as Romney did, as a "severely conservative" governor in liberal Massachusetts.

Yes, and the jackal is a herbivore.

The push-back from Democrats (and Romney's primary opponents earlier) has been primarily to question whether Romney has any true, steadfast political convictions or, shorthand, whether he has a "core." Thus, recorded on tape, Republican Jon Huntsman called Romney a "lubricated weather vane" and Newt Gingrich called Romney a "liar." However, for Democrats, undecided voters, and wavering Republicans, it is not enough to simply catalog the distortions and wildly erratic position swings, taken, each time apparently, with such earnest conviction (however short-lived, now a matter of hours and even minutes), and then just attribute this to unsteadiness or hollowness of character, however easy that might be.

No, in this election the more instructive angle to view these developments is to keep foremost in mind the GOP's stealth ideology and, more specifically, the peculiar strand of conservatism that underlies their vision.

An ideological perspective provides advantages to voters in at least two senses: It makes the policy choices, on the merits, more manageable for us to evaluate and, relatedly, leaves us less vulnerable to deception and manipulation.

Except in "quiet rooms," for the most part, the GOP is not bringing to the discussion the frankness that Ayn Rand (Atlas Shrugged) brought in the exposition of her "objectivist " theory of selfish, hyper-individualism and self-reliance (certainly, Romney's odious and Randian "47%" comment was not intended for general consumption). Political parties are about winning elections and, for the GOP, Ayn Rand is too candid and, ideologically, too pure for that: no assistance for the poor, but also no assistance or bailouts for the rich either; no religious and cultural agenda for the GOP to attract bigots and evangelical theocrats; and no foreign adventurism (all of which leaves Ron Paul an outcast in his own party).

The Democratic ticket is centrist/liberal in its ideology and its goals, having occupied the middle ground between the theoretically pure altruism and egalitarianism of socialism on the extreme left and the rapacious, winner-take-all, individualism of laissez-faire capitalism on the extreme right. Capitalism without casualties, if you will. In opposition, the establishment Republican's agenda is for the lucky few: the "freedom" and "liberty" to maximize private wealth for those already deep in their riches and far better off than they were four years ago. This affirmative-action-for-the-affluent reinforces the conservative's historical and recurring impulse — traceable in our original constitutional design — to restrain the majoritarian principle of democracy itself (now, most prominently, through voter suppression and filibuster abuse) and to disguise its reactionary goals to win elections.

To state it succinctly: harnessing government to accentuate inequality while selling it to the wider electorate as "trickle down."

There is no philosophical tradition or theory of justice — not libertarianism, nor classical, Edmund Burkean (preservative and incremental) conservatism — that dignifies this vulgar ideology.

Love the Journal?

Become our partner in independent community journalism

Thanks for turning to Wednesday Journal and OakPark.com. We love our thousands of digital-only readers. Now though we're asking you to partner up in paying for our reporters and photographers who report this news. It had to happen, right?

On the plus side, we're giving you a simple way, and a better reason, to join in. We're now a non-profit -- Growing Community Media -- so your donation is tax deductible. And signing up for a monthly donation, or making a one-time donation, is fast and easy.

No threats from us. The news will be here. No paywalls or article countdowns. We're counting on an exquisite mix of civic enlightenment and mild shaming. Sort of like public radio.

Claim your bragging rights. Become a digital member.

Donate Now

Reader Comments

86 Comments - Add Your Comment

Note: This page requires you to login with Facebook to comment.

Comment Policy

Ray Simpson from Oak Park  

Posted: November 10th, 2012 1:26 PM

@ JBM If you bothered to check back over the posts you might discover that the plagiarism was Jackie's - not mine. I was responding to her less than courteous post - as she was trying to skin me alive. Either way the statement is redundant and exposes a "look up big words" person who cares not one hoot what they mean.

John Butch Murtagh from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: November 10th, 2012 12:55 PM

Ray, while on the subject of quotes. The source of your statement to Jackie re duplicitous and hypocrisy came from ex- member of congress Allen West. The headline for one of his ads was Allen West calls out the "duplicitous hypocrisy" of the left in new boxing attack ad. Duplicitous and hypocrisy in the statement is totally redundant. You would have more credibility if you wrote from the head and heart, and skipped the plagiarisms.

John Butch Murtagh from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: November 10th, 2012 12:43 PM

Ray,Your wrrote He (Obama) has stated his principal objective is to "Break the back of the Republican party". That sounds like a Fox pundit quote, not an Obama quote, or maybe a Simpson quote. As you put the comment in quotation marks, please let us know who made the quote.

Ray Simpson from Oak Park  

Posted: November 10th, 2012 7:31 AM

@ Jackie- Did you present your proof against me while I was sleeping or are you still thinking? BTW 'Duplicity' is a synonym for hypocrisy! does that make the charge twice as serious? This all makes me sadly unhappy.

rj  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 9:24 PM

3 days into it-we learn the deluded outside McCormack Place hail Karl Marx-socialism. Hundreds of companies announcing lay-offs/closures. Petraeus blackmailed & resigns. Louisiana wants to secede. It's going to be quite a long, bumpy, horrific ride.

Ray Simpson from Oak Park  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 8:11 PM

@ Jackie - This has tired me out! You cannot support nor defend your guys actions. He ran on a platform of destroying his opponent personally. Right here you try the same tactic with anyone who you see as one who expresses a contrary view. I have been very straight forward in my arguments and duplicitous just doesn't seem correct, How have I been a hypocrite? You made the charge now prove your case or back off. Specific examples of hypocrisy not just school yard taunts toward someone who holds an opposing view.

Jackie  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 7:42 PM

Ray, you are truly the most duplicitous hypocrite on these pages. No one cares what you think, just tired of your whiny sobs and dire warnings. You and your ilk are what is endangers our country. Tool.

Ray Simpson from Oak Park  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 6:09 PM

@PF - Why do you give hoot what I think? Could it be that there a couple exposed nerves out there that will expose the Obama administration to public criticism - or worse! Remember the Obama campaign sloan was FORWARD, yet you guys must be marching backwards. You keep looking back at things I said days, weeks and months ago as well as things GWB did 4 to 8 years ago. Stand up and defend Obama. Stand up and support Obama. Stand up and work for Obama success. Quit sniping about things that no one can change.

People First  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 5:27 PM

Going strong in the wrong direction, Ray. The Benghazi investigation is ongoing and Daniel Petraius meets with the committee on Monday. While you wait for a final report, read "Where Men Win Glory" It details how Bush deceived Pat Tillman's family.

Ray Simpson from Oak Park  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 3:40 PM

People - How can you claim Bengahzi is settled? No testimony yet but I am 100% wrong. Get real! Now General Pertaius has resigned and will not testify - IT STINKS!!

People First  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 3:08 PM

Stop making bets, Ray. Have you forgotten how you tried to take action on the presidential debate regarding foreign policy? You were 100% wrong then and continue to be completely misinformed. Typical Fox parrot act.

Ray Simpson from Oak Park  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 1:58 PM

@ Jackie - You are a lousy winner. You are rude and uncouth you have no feelings for your fellow man. Destruction is your aim. I bet you feel good when you have made everyone around you more miserable than you are.- problem is you are the high water mark for depressing people.

rj  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 1:56 PM

Another bipartisan solution- clear after this election. We definitely should re-think advantages of the G sponsored BC issue. Whatever it takes to slow down the expansion of future deluded liberals in this society. Elections do shed a new light.

Jackie  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 1:22 PM

Oooh, rj, still stinging from that overwhelming rebuke of your guy by 70% of Latinos. Sounds like you should worry about Latinos who voted, not the ones who can't.

steve  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 1:18 PM

start early. www.cafepress.com/marcorubio2016

Ray Simpson from Oak Park  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 12:48 PM

@Jackie - you refuse to defend Obmas first four years by informing us of all of the wonderful initiatives he accomplished. My political bent is not important here - the survival of the country is. You still parrot the unsubstantiated lies told about Romney as some justification of the blame Bush/Romney crap you still believe. The election is over Romney is gone and your guy has to grow up and lead the country. The blame game will not cut any more and you are going to have to tout the Obama plan and execution. Nailing the filth rich will only throw this country further into recession or worse depression and there will be no one to blame this time around.

rj  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 12:44 PM

He sure inherited another mess didn't he? He owns it now! The new, soon to be fundamentally transformed Amerika. Here's a bipartisan immigration solution-amnesty for all-just can't vote for 25 yrs. It's all about benevolence not votes, right?

Jackie  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 11:37 AM

Ray-you have proven to be the jackel fo the GOP. Fox talking points aside, do you remember that your party made the destruction of our president and the Dem party its #1 priority. And you accuse the President of treason. Shameful.

Jackie  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 11:34 AM

Ray and rj remain delusional. Let's see. Your guy came out against immigration reform, a budget compromise, women's reproductive rights, and saving our manufacturing sector. Looks like there were sound reasons for Romney's loss.

Ray Simpson from Oak Park  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 10:44 AM

The election is over - now lets see how well President Obama solves the nations problems. His track record is sorely wanting, so lets see if he learned anything from his first term. He has stated his principal objective is to "Break the back of the Republican party" I hope that isn't what you all voted for! The pesky house will not buckle under to him, his idea of bi-partisan is to just give him what he wants and sit down. It is going to be a LONG four years.

Forward  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 10:36 AM

I hope we get another round of cash for clunkers; I'm ready for a new car after 3 years.

People First  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 10:22 AM

Ray conveniently or deliberately forgets the GOP primaries where Mitt Romney significantly outspent his opponents and launched meanspirited and personal attacks ads against Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich and the other also rans. Typical Fox parrot act

MichaelO from Oak Park  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 9:32 AM

Ray, Ray, Ray....(sigh).

rj  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 9:31 AM

Jackie-Your thinking is flawed-not my premise. You're right about one thing-O policies are inclusive to all-100%. Everyone will be negatively affected & set back economically for years. Everyone gets a fair shot.. of misery. The New Amerika!

Ray Simpson from Oak Park  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 9:08 AM

@Jackie - the only thing worse than being a sore loser is to be a vile, vindictive destructive winner. You seem to qualify! I have asked what you voted for and you answer what you voted against. You are a prime example of how the campaign of total destruction of another human being worked, and only cost your party $100 million. Bush is gone, Romney is gone - you get your four more years! I still don't understand how destroying Mitt Romney solves the fiscal cliff, foreign relations nightmares, d

Jackie  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 7:29 AM

Ray-a decent man is what you think. Condescending to 47% of Americans, including veterans, widows and pensioners shows he is not decent, maybe just dumb. Now take the loss like an adult. You and D. Trump are beginning to sound alike.

Jackie  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 7:25 AM

rj-your premise is false and flawed, as it has been throughout. Your guy lost because his policies, if he had any to begin with, were not accepted by the voters. You, Ray and your ilk are sore losers for sure, but mostly just losers.

rj  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 1:59 AM

John-O's socialist policies are bad for this country. All our differences stem from this basic premise. Two world views-over dependency on gov vs independence w/limited gov. Sovereignty & freedom of the individual replaced by freebies = socialism. NO

John Butch Murtagh from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 12:41 AM

Ray, Romney lost because he thought victory was solely about jobs, debt, and growth. All good issues but not sufficient to attract enough voters. Romney's team also badly underestimated the turnout. They bet that the African American and Hispanic vote would have a big drop from 2008. It didn't. The White Team lost to the Brown Team because they ignored a major part of the country's population. Politics is not about emotions, it is about strategy. Romney got a C- on campaign strategy.

John Butch Murtagh from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: November 9th, 2012 12:34 AM

RJ - I know the Foxes are real sad this week, but your saying that Obama's campaign was dirty is the whining of a loser. Fact is what Obama's team did was identify Romney as a person (his business background, his flip flopping, his charismatic deficiency, etc). early in the campaign when Romney's could not legally use his campaign money from the primary. That's not dirty. That's smart politics. Romney did not have the money to respond to Obama.

Ray Simpson from Oak Park  

Posted: November 8th, 2012 11:04 PM

@Jackie - Please tell us what accomplishments won this election for Pres Obama? Your side spent $100,000,000 to destroy the reputation and accomplishments of a decent, moral man. I am sure that doesn't bother you, since winning the game is more important than the sportsmanship. We now have a chief executive who loves the office and title but hates the job. It will be interesting to see how he tries to resolve the messes he created in his first term. Blame bush won't work this time.

rj  

Posted: November 8th, 2012 9:11 PM

Jackie-Let's talk about the bully in the pulpit. O has conducted the most abusive campaign of personal destruction w/his bully brigade. He may have won this battle taking the low road but it will not win the war.

Jackie  

Posted: November 8th, 2012 4:40 PM

rj-you have just revealed yourself as the schoolyard bully who just had his a** handed to him. Now go home to your mother.

rj  

Posted: November 7th, 2012 9:48 PM

The Republic is now on a gossamer thread thanks to automatons like Jackie who chose to vote for tyranny over liberty. You will own this failure. And even you will recognize it as it starts to unfold. You'll need that Kleenex when OCare fully kicks in next year.

Jackie  

Posted: November 7th, 2012 8:31 PM

rj/nope/ray--all you fools need a box of kleenex and nosewipes. in typical fashion, you can't own up to your failures. Good riddance.

Violet Aura  

Posted: November 7th, 2012 6:49 PM

@Harriet: Right for whom? And it's a "trickle ON" philosophy...

Violet Aura  

Posted: November 7th, 2012 6:47 PM

Gregg, help me with this: how is it that the Democratic party is fine and dandy with innocent people (including scores of children) being maimed and killed in drone attacks in coutries overseas with whom we are not officially at war? Is the moral compass on the fritz or what? Your entire little rant revolves around money and as the saying goes: it does not make the world go 'round. We must be able to look in the mirror and justify our actions. NDAA, Gitmo still open and drones are immoral. USA!

MichaelO from Oak Park  

Posted: November 7th, 2012 4:21 PM

You sound bitter to me.

rj  

Posted: November 7th, 2012 3:14 PM

PF - Not bitter - just a realist - not a hopeless statist with Utopian fantasies. Regressive policies can not move any country forward as history has proven - teacher is it? Have you not learned anything from history? Good intentions don't count when the policies prove disastrous. It's time to grow up.

Mr. Middle  

Posted: November 7th, 2012 2:36 PM

Its of no surprise to me that Obama won yet the factors that gave him a victory did surprise me. Exit polls show clearly a huge single women and Latino advantage by more than 40 points. I am not and never will be a Republican due to their stance on abortion, gay marriage and immigration. Maybe they will wake up; id doubt it. However, as a small business person I worry very much about our collective economic future. I hope and pray it will improve and that the President is proven correct

People First  

Posted: November 7th, 2012 1:59 PM

Roll out the barrel and stick all the haters in it. Tea Party members do not want to participate in the process or work together to solve the problems our country and world face, so it's no suprise that the character using the "rj" screen name is so bitter. We'll still be subjected to that Fox News parrot now and then but will just have to keep tuning out the godawful babble and focus on bringing fairness and equality to the workplace, protecting the environment and supporting our vets. FORWARD!

Govt Union Boss from River Forest  

Posted: November 7th, 2012 1:02 PM

Harriet, you're correct, & 1 million of them are public union bosses like me & the Dem politicians that I buy!! The gravy train continues! Yipee for me!!

Harriet  

Posted: November 7th, 2012 12:57 PM

1.1 million millionaires created under Obama. Something must be right.

rj  

Posted: November 7th, 2012 12:24 PM

I'm going to sit back and watch that venom you voted for explode in your face as your life starts to unravel Jackie, in due time. Revenge works both ways. You will come to rue the day. But then you deserve what is in store for you. This country does not. There are real personal consequences to your vote.

NOPE 2012 from Oak Park  

Posted: November 7th, 2012 12:10 PM

Hi, Jackie. No, still here, though this is the last post using my now outdated moniker. 1st, what venom have I spewed? Disagreement, yes. Venom, no. My fellow OPRFers got what they wanted. They voted for Santa Claus instead of the adult. They voted to take the fruits of others labor instead of growing their own fruits. They've voted to spend their grandkids into oblivion instead of growing up. I'll be OK, but one day you'll regret what you've foisted on a soon to be once-great country. Peace,out

Jackie  

Posted: November 7th, 2012 11:23 AM

Hey Ray, Nope and Tick Tock--your silence is deafening. With all the venom you all have been spewing, just wondering if we should send the OPPD over for a wellness check.

Bruce Samuels from Oak park  

Posted: November 2nd, 2012 9:04 AM

Brian, thanks for the "vote" of confidence. If the Green Party gets 5% of the vote in IL then it is much easier to run for office in 2014, because then you just need the same amount of signatures to get on the ballot as the other parties instead of several times more.

Brian from Oak Park  

Posted: November 1st, 2012 4:49 PM

Bruce - wish you or your wife would have run for Illinois Senate. Instead I had no one to vote for today since Don Harmon was unopposed with no write-in option. Harmon's January surprise is sure to disappoint, while he refuses to come clean on the downside to OP taxpayers when Madigan tells him to vote to clean up IL State's balance sheet - sending unfunded pension liabilities to school district taxpayers, without support from Chicago's massive commercial tax base. Shameful.

Bruce Samuels from Oak Park  

Posted: November 1st, 2012 12:12 PM

In 2002 and 2004 my wife (Green Party) ran against Calvin Giles and a Republican, for state rep. She was endorsed by the Chicago and local papers, IVI-IPO, got 30% of the vote in Oak Park, and the D party dropped Giles, the incumbent, and now we have a far superior La Shawn Ford. So that's another way to do it. I agree that the broadcast media is costly, but we got Larry King to moderate a recent debate and CSPAN and Al Jazeera covered it.

Bruce Samuels from Oak Park  

Posted: November 1st, 2012 12:03 PM

Ray, thank you for responding and for using your name. In 2008 Obama got 1.3 million more votes in IL than he needed to win, so giving Jill Stein 300,000 votes, ~5%, won't hurt his chances and will establish the Green Party as an official party in IL. In fact Gary Johnson, will divert Romney votes. Most, yes most, of the candidates for state offices go unopposed, just like here in Oak Park, so it would be nice to give voters a choice in 2014.

Ray Simpson from Oak Park  

Posted: November 1st, 2012 9:20 AM

@ Bruce Third party support, while noble in principal, usually results in the election of your least desirable candidate. Do the right thing and figure out which of the major candidates is least repugnant to you and give them your vote. Then get involved at the grass roots level to influence your parties top people. That is what the TEA party has done, supporting candidates at the local and state levels. Those people become the foundation for future elections and candidates. Broadcast media costs have exploded the cost of becoming a candidate and there isn't much that can be done to outlaw that.

Bruce Samuels from Oak Park  

Posted: November 1st, 2012 9:06 AM

Both these candidates are so beholden to the billions of dollars contributed by corporations and the rich that they do not serve the poor or the middle class. Our civil liberties are being destroyed. FDR put 4 million to work in his first year(CCC, WPA and NRA). We need a Green New Deal. Vote for Jill Stein of the Green Party (jillstein.org).

Realitysux  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 10:24 PM

Ray was more right than RFTom, who keeps blaming Fox news and Rush for his ignorance On Aug. 2, President Obama signed into law the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA). Sequestration is a mechanism through which automatic, across-the-board spending cuts are made. The BCA will initiate a sequestration if Congress approves spending higher than caps set forth in the law or if a plan from the Super Committee fails to become law. http://www.ombwatch.org/files/budget/debtceilingfaq.pdf

OPRFDad  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 10:08 PM

Lacking any semblance of a successful record or a plan for the future, Obama and his minions continue to attack Romney. The only people who continue to support Obama are single issue voters and people who watch a lot of TV. Anyone who works for a living or who hopes to work or have a kid work for a living long since moved into the Romney camp.

Realitysux  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 10:06 PM

Tom from RF is a typical liberal who claims anyone who doesn't agree with him must get their info from Fox news, and then posts inaccurate claims. Ryan could not have voted for a sequestration bill since none ever existed. Sequestration was a deficit reduction mechanism contained in the BCA which was signed by OBAMA on 8/2/11. Tom forgets to mention that Ryan voted for a bill SIGNED BY OBAMA, since it also discredits the GOP as the party of no obstructionists talking points

muriel schnierow from oak park  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 7:29 PM

to Ken Trainor: Thank you for your reasoned column on Common Sense. The comments of praise for this rogue GOP are hard to fathom but you Ken nailed it!

Mr. Middle  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 4:04 PM

Cont...Any complete reading of Ryan is that he supports laws that force caps so that congress will act. He supported Paygo in the 1990s. An intelligent and non-political reading shows that you can support caps but do not have to support arbitrary cuts. That worked very well under Clinton with Graham/Rudman. In fact, Ryan is blasted for presenting a budget with caps/targets first and details second. Tom, right on proving Ray wrong but misleading on Ryan.

Brian from Oak Park  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 4:00 PM

Tom from River Forest. Please, tempting as it is to blame the right, sequestration is Mr. Obama's doing. He had an opportunity - please read Bob Woodward's book - to close the deal. But, doesn't know how to move toward the right, period. Ray's correct, it was a penalty for not doing his job and providing one reasonable budget in 4 years (no votes from even democrats), breaking the deal with John Boehner, and never pushing Simpson-Bowles (co-president Clinton agrees). Your dog doesn't hunt, son

Mr Middle  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 3:59 PM

@TomRF..I suppose when you become RF Pres you will also mislead with incomplete facts. Here is a Ryan Quote from May "Both parties agree that the across-the-board sequester set to take effect this coming January is bad policy, would devastate our military, and should be replaced with more sensible savings. But only one party has put forward a specific proposal to do just that. Today, I am proud to join my colleagues on the House Budget Committee in advancing legislation to replace..."

Prediction  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 3:22 PM

@ OP Resident #545. That makes sense. It wil make it a lot easier for him to get his pot from his pot growing, pot smoking Choom Gang buddies.

OP Resident # 545 from Oak Park  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 2:49 PM

Prediction...The Obama's have already purchased a multi-million dollar estate in Hawaii. They won't set foot in Chicago after Romney is inaugurated in January.

NOPE 2012 from Oak Park  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 2:46 PM

Tom, you again prove my point...the standard reply from the liberal playbook. Denegrate your opponent when facts don't support your point of view. You have no clue about the scope of my information sources, but they are substantial & quite diverse. I am also very confident that Ray can outsmart you with "half his brain tied behind his back" (Limbaugh's line, which I know will drive you nuts), regardless of whatever education credentials you present. I've enjoyed the banter. Peace, out for good!

Prediction  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 2:37 PM

correction "tying up"

Prediction  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 2:35 PM

After the false messiah loses next week, all the same lap dogs that worship him will be spewing how the election was stolen, votes were suppressed, Hurricane Sandy is to blame, etc..... What will suck is the false messiah tieing up traffic on a daily basis in Chicago upon his return. I suggest he move back to Kenya.

Tom from River Forest  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 1:42 PM

And Ray, you are wrong again. Sequestering is a bill (in fact now a law). It is the Budget Control Act of 2011 (Pub.L. 112-25, S. 365). Really Ray, this is like 5th grade social studies stuff.

Tom from River Forest  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 1:38 PM

Oh and Ray, you might want to start making an outline for this year's letter of congratulations. Here is the new address: Obama for America P.O. Box 803638 Chicago, IL, 60680

Tom from River Forest  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 1:33 PM

See Nope Ray only seems smart to someone who limits his universe of information sources to Fox News and Rush.

Tom from River Forest  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 1:32 PM

Nope Here is what Paul Ryan said in 2011: ""What conservatives like me have been fighting for, for years, are statutory caps on spending, legal caps in law that says government agencies cannot spend over a set amount of money," Ryan told FOX News's Sean Hannity shortly after the agreement was reached last August. "And if they breach that amount across the board, sequester comes in to cut that spending, and you can't turn that off without a super-majority vote. We go

Ray Simpson from Oak Park  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 12:37 PM

@ Michael - How do you believe you speak for everyone- isn't that a bit presumptuous? On tuesday we will find out what percent of the populous you speak for. I hope you have one of the most disappointing days of your life. Four years ago I sent a letter to the editor congratulating President Obama for a campaign well run and wishing him well. Will your side be as courteous if things go against the current president? I bet not!

MichaelO from Oak Park  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 11:29 AM

Ray, I'm sure I speak for everyone everywhere when I say thank you for your generous sharing of your forum. May I suggest that from here on in you actually research some of the stuff you throw out here? For example the BCA and sequestration. Facts are easily available. You seemed to have missed them.

Ray Simpson from Oak Park  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 10:34 AM

@Nope - Thanks for the kind words! This is supposed to be an open forum where we can all vent our spleens. All too often the heartfelt opinions get personal and we sound like a bar brawl after a Bears loss. I have taken my lumps and yet still jump in when I see things from a different perspective. It is obvious that my opinions are mine alone and are probably slanted toward my political bent. Everyone here is entitled to their own opinion except Ken Trainor since he gets paid to write his drivel.

NOPE 2012 from Oak Park  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 9:48 AM

Tom from RF...I feel for you. You try hard, but you're really not the smartest guy in the room. Ray Simpson has here, & always succeeds on these pages in running rings around you intellectually. No, I'm not related to Ray, have never met him, & wouldn't know him if I ran into him on the street. Just making an obvious oberservation. I bid you peace.

Tom Broderick from oak park  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 9:37 AM

Thanks to Tom from River Forest for his clarification on the sequestration. Ray Simpson, if you are advocating that the Congressional sequestration is something we should stop, period, I'm in complete agreement with you. The across the board 10% cuts in the discretionary spending will most likely end any economic growth our fragile economy has seen and very possibly change the "great recession" into an economic depression with disastrous consequences for people around the world.

Ray Simpson from Oak Park  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 9:32 AM

@ Tom - Sequestration was a mandate that the White House demanded to sign the raising the debt ceiling. After the congress failed to reduce spending per the agreement, sequestration was supposed to be a poison pill that could never happen. Sequestration is not a law in it's self but a penalty for failure to do the agreed mandates of the law. President Obama understands less about the constitution than we do since he stated without qualification that he would not allow sequestration to happen. Perhaps you should explain constitutional law to our chief executive.

RobB from Elko  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 9:13 AM

"Capitalism without casualties". Hmm. I just retook my annual training on the illegality of price fixing, collusion etc. The author clearly has only a tentative grasp of capitalism - that competition breeds strength, not weakness. Time to actually visit communist and former communist countries to see the flip side and what happens when capitalism is embraced? Educational...

Tom from River Forest  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 9:06 AM

Ray, are you really that unfamiliar with our constitution? Here is a quick primer. Congress enacts laws, not the president. Thus, sequester is a "mandate" that was approved by the House, where VP nominee Paul Ryan voted in favor of it. Maybe you should stay quiet on national issues until you bone up on the basics.

Ray Simpson from Oak Park  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 8:06 AM

@Tom also reported, but not by you, is that the White House mandated sequestration removed half a billion from that same agency. That is now a real possibility since it is a law signed by President Obama.

tom broderick from oak park  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 7:59 AM

Watched last night's news coverage about the massive damage done to the NY/NJ area by the deadly storm. Was glad to hear reporters repeatedly ask candidate Romney to re-state his opinion on FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) which is the agency tasked to provide assistance to those suffering the aftermath. Candidate Romney is on record stating he thinks the work that FEMA does should be the responsibility of individual states and/or private agencies. Craven Romney chose not to answer.

omdb from philadelphia  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 12:38 AM

Lying is not an ideology it is a pathology. Romney owns that.

jonathan fraser from richmond  

Posted: October 31st, 2012 12:36 AM

Difficult to write an article about Romney's ideology ... if there is such a thing. Mitt Romney does not have An Ideology but appears to work in compartmentalized realities ... home / family / religion ... private work ... public service - aspirations to POTUS. What Mitt Romney has said and done and what his body language tells us - with out using any words to describe this - tells us that we are confronted with a man, who says and does what is expedient at any moment. Ideology ?

Bore me more from Phx  

Posted: October 30th, 2012 11:44 PM

Yawn, that's it? Are you really done greg? Is this a rough draft or are you actually satisfied with how stupid your reasoning sounds as is?

NOPE 2012 from Oak Park  

Posted: October 30th, 2012 11:26 PM

Wow...Mr Mumm, come out of the bunker and into the light of the real world. The real "jackal" in the room is the "trickle up" poverty being foisted upon this nation by the Mr Obama & his cronies. The only vulgar ideology out here is the very visible hand of big, intrusive government, which we'll have more of with another 4 years of the current occupant. The only stealth ideology is that of Mr Obama pretending to be almost centrist. Thankfully, it will be over soon. Your black helicopter awaits.

Mike from Portland  

Posted: October 30th, 2012 11:04 PM

Where to start with this propaganda? All objective polls describe the US as a conservative country. Basic values of family, personal responsibility and small government. The author's claim is just not true. Obama, not Romney, is the radical seeks to impose Federal control over more and more of American life. Who had Bill Ayers, a self proclaimed revolutionary, launch his first political campaign in his home? Obama. This guy is an operative, spreading the party line.

One Week Until The National Nightmare Is Over  

Posted: October 30th, 2012 11:00 PM

Tick Tock .........

ugh  

Posted: October 30th, 2012 10:56 PM

Sour grapes.

Rob B from Elko  

Posted: October 30th, 2012 10:55 PM

Two false statements right out of the gate tainted the entire article. They were both in your first phrase. You're no centrist/liberal and neither is this country. Own the first and live with the second. Thanks!

Facebook Connect

Answer Book 2019

To view the full print edition of the Wednesday Journal 2019 Answer Book, please click here.

Quick Links

Sign-up to get the latest news updates for Oak Park and River Forest.


            
SubscribeClassified
MultimediaContact us
Submit Letter To The Editor
Place a Classified Ad

Classified Ad

Latest Comments