Las Vegas Sun

May 4, 2015

Currently: 76° — Complete forecast | Log in | Create an account

Letter to the editor:

The problem with Republican logic

Another view?

View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:

Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.

Columnists - local and syndicated writers.

Letters to the editor - readers' views.

Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.

For some time, Republican leaders have been wanting me to replace the word “fact” with the word “excuse.”

I can get tired of hearing an excuse, but that doesn’t mean that I will just push everything out of my mind when I need to make a decision. Today, Republicans think that they are being generous when they attack President Barack Obama by starting with the words “Yes, President Obama inherited a problem, but ...” Problem? Really? Should I forget the words they used when Washington was pushing to bail out Wall Street? I remember words like “Our economy is on the verge of a total collapse” or “We are heading toward another Great Depression.” I heard adjectives like “dire” and “disastrous.” Those were the words that described the situation that existed when Obama was handed a checkbook with a negative balance and told to pay our bills while cleaning up our mess.

Since the Bush era, our businesses have been paying the lowest tax rate in more than 40 years. Also, it seems that at the end of every quarter, I hear about one company or another recording record profits. Everything has been in place for the Republican ideology to work. The only thing that is missing is that darn “trickle down” part. Think back to when the Bush tax cuts were due to expire and the Republicans’ main argument against letting them expire was that it would hurt the job creators. The cuts were extended. What happened? Where are the jobs?

Join the Discussion:

Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.

Full comments policy

Previous Discussion: 22 comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

  1. Despite what Obama and Romney say, there is no way to make all the employment we lost just 'pop' into place. Consumer spending isn't what it was and neither is business investment and expansion. People and businesses that still have money are worried so they are spending less. People without money cannot spend.

    Obama argues that the government should take more from the wealthy and distribute it to the rest of us so we can spent it. Romney argues that the government should take less from most of us in the hope that we will spend more.

    Either might be partially effective in the short term. However, as long as Congress doesn't deal with the spending side, the problem remains.

    I hope that after the election is over, Americans demand Congress enact something along the lines of Simpson Bowles. That plan wasn't perfect but it had the two required elements, additional revenue and spending reductions.

    If you're honest, you see that both Obama and Romney speak of only additional revenue and do not address spending cuts.

    If I am already in debt and I get a raise of a dollar an hour, but my spending increases two dollars an hour, what happens? I go deeper in debt.

    Government spending, which Congress controls, MUST be addressed. If it isn't, We will go deeper into debt.

    A debt ridden country is not a confident country. A country that isn't confident cannot have a vibrant economy.


  2. Michael,

    "If you're honest, you see that both Obama and Romney speak of only additional revenue and do not address spending cuts."

    Both have plans to cut spending.

    Obama's plan is here:

  3. Michael, Obama's plan may not satisfy your desire for more speed, and other things, but at least he has a long term plan, which I think is wise. I just thought I would share it here.

    Congress is another problem and I have we have even less control over them, just by the sheer numbers and not being constituents of all the members. You know that you have to be a constituent for most to have them pay any attention to you.

  4. Letter writer buys into the liberal mainstream media of forgiving the president all his transgressions when he blamess Bush2 and the GOP for the sky falling.

    Truth is Presidents [Bush2 and Obama], Congress and the American people are all responsible for the financial and foreign affairs messes we're in now.

    What we need is a leader who can turn it around and get the US back on its traditional course. We can try another 4 years of doubling down left wing extremism under President Obama who locked out Congress from the legislative agenda. Or a moderate like Governor Romney who will forge alliances and build bridges with opponents to move the country forward not barackward. 7 more days to decide and make up your minds which one it will be.


  5. Peacelily,

    Unlike many others I have actually read the plans of both men. You brought up Obama's plan so let's really look at it. The word 'eliminate' is rarely used. Instead, the words 'reform', 'reduce', 'change' are used. This what every administration does and the results are always the same... bigger government, bigger programs...more spending. And this is why these things are rarely mentioned by either candidate when speaking to the public.

    I'm not going to defend Romney on this either. It is telling that when asked bout spending cuts, the only thing he mentioned was PBS. WHAT YOU SEE IN THE PLANS ISN'T SERIOUS. Congress isn't going to cut any of these programs. It isn't going to 'reform' or 'reduce' or even 'change' them either unless the 'change' means make bigger.

    Mitt Romney knows this. President Obama knows this. Until we either start kicking the butts of Congress or we elect a President who does speak about 'specific' cuts, and then makes the case to Americans for the cuts and uses his or her influence and that of most Americans to force cuts through Congress, spending WILL NOT be controlled.

    As I have said, people should vote for who they wish to, but believing in the 'fantasy' of reducing government spending, when the candidates don't 'talk' about that part of any plan and then don't fight for any part of it once in office is foolish.


  6. Reform, reduce, and change against cut, cut, cut. Those are the choices we are given.

    There is too much waste in government operations, thus the necessity of reform. We must reduce or change the way we operate. This is however, very difficult to implement because of too many special interests and the sheer inefficiency in implementing the vision for which government programs were instituted. Each individual must do his job. Sadly, many do not - from the Senate, the congress, and each individual worker. Why not? Greed. It's like cancer metastasized.

    Cut, cut, cut - then you eliminate the safety nets created for those who are truly down and out. Safety nets are created to sustain an evolved humane society. We cannot, as Christians, truly push people who are down trodden off a cliff.

    Republicans may not like Obama's approach and Romney's proposals are attractive to some because of its promise of financial prosperity, but for whom? Many of us do not aspire to own our own business or be rich. We simply want to live in a society where there is equal chance for everybody. A democratic way of life where if you want to be financially successful, go right ahead and work hard. If you wish to be a bum, go ahead and be one.

    Yes. There are people who are lazy and would rather be on government dole, but cutting those safety nets also hurts those who truly need it. We cannot legislate personal responsibility, much less legislate who cannot have babies or not, or whom to love or not. Those decisions took a lifelong to form influenced by one's culture and experiences.

    I believe that reform, reduce, and change is the more sensible approach, but they need our support - everyone of us - what the Republicans called personal responsibility, yet the want to take away through legislation.

  7. I'd like Mitt Romney to answer two questions.

    1. What caused the Great Recession?

    2. What, if anything should the Federal Government or anyone else do to prevent it from happening again?

    That should be a real test of Republican logic.

  8. 'We're not in Kansas anymore' should be our motto. In the past, Congress never cut spending. All it did, and that was rarely, was reduce the rate of increase in spending. This was acceptable, although foolish, when our debt was manageable and our economy was operating well and growing briskly.

    Now we are 16 trillion dollars in debt, spending over 1 trillion dollars more than comes in every year... and our economy is not operating well and is not growing briskly.

    We cannot and should not take a sledge hammer to social programs, entitlements or defense, but we also can no longer allow Congress to keep increasing spending and calling a reduction in the rate of increase a 'cut'. If we do we are going to go bankrupt.

    Whether it's Romney or Obama, we need to tell them to throw their 'fake' spending reductions in the trash can, and really work to determine where we can 'cut' spending. It isn't going to be easy. It isn't going to be fair. People are going to get hurt. Congress is going to resist. The lobbyists will be at the gates..... BUT IT MUST BE DONE. We can't tax ourselves out of the mess. We can't grow ourselves out of the mess.



  9. Couldn't agree with you more, Mr. Reitz.

    You just pointed out that we are STILL living under a lot of Bush the Lesser policies. And they only benefit three types of people:

    (1) The rich,

    (2) The filthy rich, and

    (3) The obscenely filthy rich.

    Time to turn this around, people. The middle class needs to be paid more attention to.

    And I damn sure will vote that way on November 6th.

    I'm voting straight Democratic Party. Because I'm tired of the predatory Tea/Republican policies that only are aimed at destroying the middle class of this great nation.

    Back when I was a teenager, there was a saying, "Power to the people."

    Not corporations.


    Not money.


    President Obama back in for four more years. Get rid of the Former President George W. Bush Jr. Tax Cuts For The Rich, The Filthy Rich, And The Obscenely Filthy Rich. That is the first thing that is gone. Then start regulating Wall Street from their out of control moneymongering fiscal madness they participate in right now. And get us out of Afghanistan. Protect the rights of women by selection of sane and rational Supreme Court Justices. And get rid of the stupid Citizens United ruling so that the people can control the Government, not self-serving greedy idiots like the Koch Brothers, Adelson and Wynn.

    Obama/Biden 2012! AND a Democratic Party majority in both the House and the Senate!

    We don't turn this around right here and right now, America will continue with policies we don't want to have any more part of. We gotta go forward and fix America. Not backwards with junk that only serves a small number of wealthy Americans. They exist because of democracy. Not the other way around. Our votes need to make sure they understand this. WE control the Government. Not them.

  10. The problem with Republican logic? It's very simple, and let me start by saying not all Republicans are unreasonable. Those that were willing to compromise are being chased out of the party for being RINO. For example John Sununu's response to Colin Powell's endorsement of Obama. Only an idiot would negate the service of Colin Powell and his chief of staff Lawrence Wilkerson, both who are life long Republicans. These men actually do put "country first" unlike other members of their party. The true problem is they catered to the far right crazies and are now responsible for creating their own Tea Party Frankenstein Beast. Those people live in a "bubble" reading, searching, listening and watching only right wing extremism bull crap. Any other point of view is brushed aside deeming it irrelevant, regardless how factual it is.

  11. I just watched the best campaign ad of this whole season.

    Tea/Republicans! Do NOT make senior citizens angry! They WILL get even.

    Obama/Biden 2012!

    Romney/Ryan 1040s please! Cough 'em up....

  12. 60 CEO's apply their logic saying:

    "Bottom line, the CEOs' responsible call for a balanced bipartisan plan to reduce the U.S. deficit and the debt does not remotely look like what Romney has proposed to do as president.

    It does look a lot like the plans put forward by the Bowles-Simpson Commission, the Gang of Six, and outlines of the Grand Bargain, which Obama has said he would put forward again.

    It may sound counterintuitive, but according to the outlines established by the CEOs, Obama's reelection would actually be better for achieving long-term deficit reduction -- because he is the only candidate who has put forward a balanced bipartisan plan."

  13. Vernos,

    John Sununu is a person that says stuff that has the potential to hurt Romney's campaign. The same is true for Biden in Obama's campaign. I'd hide them both in a closet until the election is over.

    Colin Powell is a fine man, from all indications. I have no problem with his endorsement of Obama and he doesn't deserve the scorn he has received.

    I still don't buy your opinion that most of the R party is radical like some of the Tea Party views.

    I don't support many of the social stances of the Tea Party but they do recognize what a problem out of control government spending is.

    On the D side, I could never support Nancy Pelosi and I find it amazing that she gets elected over and over again. In her own way, she and many that support her are as radical as some in the Tea Party.

    I don't tar the entire D party with Nancy Pelosi and I wouldn't agree with tarring the whole R party with John Sununu.


  14. wtplv - "I still don't buy your opinion that most of the R party is radical like some of the Tea Party views."

    I didn't say the party is radical. What I said is rational people are being ousted by the party because the crazies are running the ayslum. Arguing over government spending is an issue completely different than elected officials accusing congressional members of being communists and anti American. You, I and every intelligent person knows the GOP has shrunken because of social issues, xenophobia and the pull from the religious right. When Jeb Bush and others warned the party of their behavior they was ignored. The GOP has damaged itself and it will last far longer than some believe.

  15. Republicans and logic do not mix. They cannot be mentioned in the same breadth. You are giving the word logic a bad name by placing it next to the word republican. Quite simply.

    Much like the word moderate, which their candidate is now trying to portray himself as, since he already got the right extremists and the rich. Crafty, shifty, and brilliant, but definitely not suited for the Presidency.

  16. Vernos,

    I have often said R's should go light on social issues, but they don't listen to me. That said, the Tea Party is willing to face down and act against the peril we face if we don't stop the wild spending. In my opinion, the moderate part of the R party won't face that down; the moderate part of the D party won't face it and the Progressive wing of the D Party certainly won't face it down.

    Abortion, Dream Act, Energy, Pollution, SS, Medicare, Health Care and all the rest won't matter a bit if the country fails financially. You may not like some of the Tea Party members views on social issues and neither do I, but the main reason they formed and were elected is because our government has and continues to fail us and the country as we destroy ourselves financially.


  17. "And in Ohio, Chrysler is hiring over 1000

    Yes, indeed Mr. Teamster and moving production of Jeeps to China.


  18. Here's a link Teamster.

    You're sleeping on the job. Not to worry. The union will protect your job.


  19. To Carmine. Chrysler is not only hiring in Toledo for Jeep, they are hiring over 1100 new people for their Detroit Jefferson assembly. Chrysler is trying to expand back to China. Chrysler is also beginning to build and update the plants in Toledo to the tune of $500,000,000.(if you can't read the numbers that's five hundred million dollars). I live dead center between Detroit and Toledo, I see the building going on daily, I read the reports in the papers(The Toledo Blade and the Detroit Free Press). Before commenting, Carmine, do your homework, or keep unsubstantiated facts(lies) to youself.

  20. Spin it any way you want. Chrysler, bailed out by taxpayers, is expanding in China and adding production of Jeeps and jobs there IN CHINA not here. Those ARE the facts and the truth. Take off your rose colored glasses and accept it.


  21. Just of offer another point of view on safety nets and helping others.

    We pay as we go to avoid debt, even sacrificing at times. So, we have no debt.

    That said, we have been in debt in the past and we still paid it off even helping others. It just took a bit longer in those times. We always met our normal bills.

    We have helped our neighbors, friends, and even strangers when they needed it because it was the right thing to do according to our moral values. No debt incurred.

    Our neighbors and friends have helped us when we needed it, because that was the kind of people they are. No debt incurred.

    This would be considered right in Obama's and Romney's POV. It is a moral value of different parties, different religions, different cultures, and different social groups.

    There are three main ways of doing this. Either through charities for people who one doesn't know.

    The other way is to be friends with other people. Recognize their need and help.

    The third way is to be alert to strangers in real need. No debt incurred.

    It can be done without going into debt, by giving money or service.

    Safety nets, are there when needs become irreversible, and life sustaining. They are not a big wealth grower. Most people live at minimum standards or worse on safety nets.

    Romney's idea that private charity can handle all of what is currently a set of safety nets is to be living in a surreal dimension. There are just too many people who cannot, or who will not help their neighbor or anyone else.

    It is true that good returns good. Generosity returns generosity. It just might not always come in the way we think. However, we can see it in truth when we let our consciousness go beyond desires & expectations.

  22. Carmine,

    Fiat is the majority owner and controller of Chrysler (61.8%), now a subsidiary of Fiat. It is an Italian company.

    Fiat paid off the debt to the US Treasury (taxpayers).

    There is a little impediment, the 38.2% ownership by UAW VEBA, which Fiat would like to separate from and gain 100% ownership.

    They have manufacturing all over the world, including Brazil, Argentina, Poland, Italy, France, Turkey, Serbia, India, China, and the US.

    They manufacture more than just automobiles.

    As long as Americans are buying Jeep SUV's, it will be made here. Perhaps small cars will be made here when Americans start buying more of them.