Pssst, Mitt! Read this before Wednesday's debate

While Mitt hunkers down with Rob Portman preparing for the Big Debate #1, the finest minds of the conservative blogosphere are explicating the themes that could win the debate for him, narratives that go to the heart of what is wrong with Obama's tenure in office.

Daniel P. Goldman, who also writes under the pen name Spengler, has explained in clear language the Obama sand in the gears that cripples our economy.  He uses an excellent rhetorical device to do so, positing three groups of Americans

From PJ Media:

Our first case is one of five million Americans unemployed for more than 27 weeks:

A second American is part owner of a $20 trillion investment fund.

A third American is terrified that her pension fund will go bust (as the Illinois teachers' fund will some time during the next ten years, among many others).

He explains that American #2 won't invest in companies that would hire #1.  The problem is that Americans are no longer investing in each other. It is the pension funds and other vehicles for retirement savings which dominate capital markets, and right now they only invest in safe instruments, low-yielding but less risky securities. The reasons are pretty clear:

We have the highest corporate tax rate in the world.

We have an administration that sandbagged one of the biggest contributions to energy independence to become available in decades, namely the Keystone project.

We have a regulatory environment that makes it next to impossible to build a nuclear power plant.

We have a health care program that puts the biggest weight of a new entitlement program right on the economy's weak spot - firms with fifty workers.

We have an administration that can't get its act together to steer the economy away from a fiscal cliff.

We have an out-of-control budget deficit as far as the spreadsheet can extend to the out-years, which means much higher taxes in the future.

Mitt needs to go on the attack in the debates, instead of defending Bain, point out that when Obama screws up the capital markets, he is screwing the beneficiaries of the pension funds. The people given custody of the pension funds have a duty to invest them carefully and profitably. Mitt can say that at Bain he invested money for many union pension funds, so he understands the grave fiduciary responsibilities. And he can point out that delivered for those pension funds, keeping the people he was responsible for secure in their retirements.

Mitt can explain that Obama has made it harder for ordinary Americans to invest in their fellow Americans. The real clincher that makes the case is that Americans #1, 2, and 3 could easily be the same person, an unemployed union member with pension benefits, for example. The system by which Am ericans invest in each other has been hobbled by Obama's policies.

Hat tip: Power Line

While Mitt hunkers down with Rob Portman preparing for the Big Debate #1, the finest minds of the conservative blogosphere are explicating the themes that could win the debate for him, narratives that go to the heart of what is wrong with Obama's tenure in office.

Daniel P. Goldman, who also writes under the pen name Spengler, has explained in clear language the Obama sand in the gears that cripples our economy.  He uses an excellent rhetorical device to do so, positing three groups of Americans

From PJ Media:

Our first case is one of five million Americans unemployed for more than 27 weeks:

A second American is part owner of a $20 trillion investment fund.

A third American is terrified that her pension fund will go bust (as the Illinois teachers' fund will some time during the next ten years, among many others).

He explains that American #2 won't invest in companies that would hire #1.  The problem is that Americans are no longer investing in each other. It is the pension funds and other vehicles for retirement savings which dominate capital markets, and right now they only invest in safe instruments, low-yielding but less risky securities. The reasons are pretty clear:

We have the highest corporate tax rate in the world.

We have an administration that sandbagged one of the biggest contributions to energy independence to become available in decades, namely the Keystone project.

We have a regulatory environment that makes it next to impossible to build a nuclear power plant.

We have a health care program that puts the biggest weight of a new entitlement program right on the economy's weak spot - firms with fifty workers.

We have an administration that can't get its act together to steer the economy away from a fiscal cliff.

We have an out-of-control budget deficit as far as the spreadsheet can extend to the out-years, which means much higher taxes in the future.

Mitt needs to go on the attack in the debates, instead of defending Bain, point out that when Obama screws up the capital markets, he is screwing the beneficiaries of the pension funds. The people given custody of the pension funds have a duty to invest them carefully and profitably. Mitt can say that at Bain he invested money for many union pension funds, so he understands the grave fiduciary responsibilities. And he can point out that delivered for those pension funds, keeping the people he was responsible for secure in their retirements.

Mitt can explain that Obama has made it harder for ordinary Americans to invest in their fellow Americans. The real clincher that makes the case is that Americans #1, 2, and 3 could easily be the same person, an unemployed union member with pension benefits, for example. The system by which Am ericans invest in each other has been hobbled by Obama's policies.

Hat tip: Power Line

RECENT VIDEOS