Obama complains about Romney not releasing details while not releasing details


Photo by Darren McCollester/Getty Images

“When a politician tells you he’s going to wait until after the election [to release details], it’s not because their plan is so good that they don’t want to spoil the secret,” Obama told New Hampshire voters on 10/18/2012{1}. 

The words Obama chose in this speech, may tell us more about Obama than it does Romney.  To quote an old adage: “You can tell a lot about your opponents in life by the charges they choose to direct at you.”

“Wait until after the election,” President Barack Obama whispered to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in a comment picked up by open mikes in March.  Obama wanted his message relayed to Russian President-Elect Vladimir Putin.  He wanted the Russian Presidents to wait until after the election before he released the details of his nuclear disarmament plan.  “This is my last election, and after my election I have more flexibility,” Obama said.  “Give me space,” Obama said, to deal with their objections to the U.S.’s missile-defense plan.{2}

Some have questioned the details of the “give me space” and “flexibility” comments that would reveal themselves after the election.  Some have wondered why Obama didn’t let Americans in on this secret before it was accidentally caught on an open mike.  One thing we can be assured of: “it’s not because (his) plan is so good that (he doesn’t) want to spoil the secret.”  Some have wondered if the details in this “hidden” agenda were revealed, if they would prove to be so unpopular with American voters that they might cost Obama the election.  In an attempt to recover from this perceived error, Obama said the public understands that he is committed to reducing nuclear stockpiles, which requires building trust and cooperation.  He explained that an election year wasn’t conducive to “thoughtful consultations” on a difficult issue.  Yet, if it was such a good “commitment” that we already understood about him, why didn’t he release the details of it to us, and why hasn’t he expounded on it since?

Another question those who understand Obama’s comittments is will a President Putin be as committed to reducing Russian nuclear stockpiles?  Will Putin be as committed to building a sense of trust that leads to cooperation in this regard?  We’ve seen Obama’s diplomacy through weakness, and apology, fall apart in the Middle East, and voters must ask themselves if they are willing to give Obama’s well-intentioned approach more space to see if his dealings with Putin will prove just as disastrous?

We are also being asked to wait until after the election for most of the roughly 1,400 waivers to the legislation “that we had to pass to find out what was in it” to expire.  The question we have to ask is if Obamacare is so great why were these waivers deemed necessary in the first place?  Why wasn’t Obamacare enacted immediately, so we could all reap the rewards of this benevolent plan?  “We don’t want to take away people’s health insurance before they have some realistic other choices,” said HHS secretary Kathleen Sibelius.  Fair enough, but what happens when you do take about people’s health insurance, which even the administration has now admitted that that previous promise made by the President on this matter is…void.

Jobs are currently being lost, as health care providers and insurers cut back on operations to prepare for the new law, the administration double counted the alleged cost savings of health care reform, and Medicare’s chief actuary warned that the fiscal estimates used to pass the legislation are essentially fraudulent. {3}  How bad will it get if Obama is re-elected, and all the waivers expire, and the full force of Obamacare is brought to fruition? We’ll have to wait until after the election to find out, and we’ll have to trust that it will all work out once the results reveal themselves after the election.

The final example of “wait until after the election,” Obama politics has occurred with defense department contractor layoffs.  Obama’s labor department is, in effect, bribing defense contractors to wait until after the election to announce the certain layoffs that will occur as a result of Obama’s sequestration.

The Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act generally requires employers with at least 100 employees to announce to employees that they will be fired 60 days before they are let go if the layoffs are reasonably foreseeable.  Because of the looming sequestration, courtesy of Obama, mass layoffs at defense plants are expected to occur after January 1.  But 60 days before that would mean the announcement would come just before the election, and Obama would have to deal with thousands of disgruntled former employees.

In July, the Labor Department laid the groundwork for this duplicity, saying it would be “inappropriate” for contractors to issue notices of potential layoffs that resulted from sequestration cuts.  But a few contractors, most notably Lockheed Martin, wanted to follow the rule of law, and send out notices the way they were supposed to.

Then, this past Friday, the Office of Management and Budget sent out a letter to contractors that they would be compensated for legal costs if layoffs occur due to contract cancellations under sequestration — but only if the contractors follow the Labor guidance.  The Labor Department knows that “employee compensation costs for [Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification] WARN act liability as determined by a court” might be likely, and they want to make sure the defense contractors don’t lose a cent in covering up the layoffs.{4}

Both campaigns have been warning us that this election provides a stark choice between two visions of how America is to proceed.  When President Obama warns us, he uses the general term “a politician” in the sentence “When a politician tells you he’s going to wait until after the election…”  When he speaks in such generalities, it begs the question is he telling us crucial details about his opponent, or is he accidentally revealing more about himself and his plan?

{1}http://bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2012/10/18/barack-obama-visits-manchester-new-hampshire/TOfgzcYx9wziT8rmY7pY8K/story.html {2} http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-26/obama-tells-medvedev-election-means-missile-defense-must-wait.html {3} http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/obamacares-admission-failure-waivers-demand {4}http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/10/03/Obama-bribing-defense-contractors-looming-layoffs

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s