Close window  |  View original article

Nothing Succeeds Like... Failure?

Obama trumpets his incompetence and condemns Romney's achievements.

By Petrarch  |  September 4, 2012

The Republican Party has been known as the Stupid Party for a long time.  It's increasingly clear that it's the Unlucky Party too.

How could a political party not be well in the lead over a President who's presided over the longest and highest unemployment since the Great Depression?  Reagan asked Americans whether they were better off after four years of Jimmy Carter and Americans responded.  Far more Americans have suffered far worse under four years of Obama - and yet, it seems that half the voters want more of the same.  "Thank you, sir, may I have another?"

In fact, one the more bizarre aspects to this current political campaign is its Through-the-Looking-Glass element.  Ordinarily, politicians trumpet the good things they've done and the bad things hiding in their opponent's record.  That's not what's happening this time.

Insofar as Obama is talking about his record at all, he's talking about creating jobs - exactly what he has totally failed to do for four years running.  You'd think he'd be talking about almost anything else but that.

Of course, most of his ads are attack ads against Romney.  What bad thing does Obama want America to think about Romney?  He's rich - that is, he's been successful!  What kind of an attack is that?

A few weeks back, Obama famously said of entrepreneurs' businesses, "You didn't build that."  He was trying to say that government has every right to steal most of the money of successful businessmen, because they themselves contributed very little to their own success; really, the credit goes to "society" in the form of government workers and other leeches.

But the fact is, in one sense he's right: nobody, not even Mitt Romney, can become a billionaire entirely on their own.  That's the whole point of capitalism: to harness the power of human imagination and enterprise in such a way that, when people benefit themselves, they can't help but benefit others too.

Mitt Romney has created and sustained a whole host of jobs, from his fellow executives at Bain Capital to every last employee of Staples to, yes, the staff that takes care of his Olympic dressage horse.  How are these not worthy jobs in a way that, say, an IRS auditor or Assistant Secretary for Secretarial Assistance is?

Somehow, the fact that Mitt Romney has been stunningly successful in everything he's ever done disqualifies him for the Presidency.  In contrast, the fact that Barack Obama has never done anything in the real economy, and even in the not-real world of the community organizer was a dismal failure - well, that seems to somehow be a reason why he ought to be President!

Mitt Romney created an investment company that made him and his partners many billions of dollars, in the process rescuing failing companies like Staples and their associated thousands of jobs.  No, he wasn't successful in rescuing every company Bain invested in; but if there had been no Bain Capital, there would be no Staples and a good many other now-profitable companies.  Obama has never run anything nor created a single real job.

Mitt Romney did, at the very least, a decent job as governor of Massachusetts, a state in which Republicans are almost as rare as palm trees.  Prior to becoming President, Obama had never held an executive position at any level of government much less private enterprise.

Mitt Romney rescued the corrupt and failing Salt Lake City Olympics and turned it into what's regarded as one of the best Winter Olympics ever.  Obama, well, he inherited a corrupt and failing federal government... which is now even more corrupt and failing even more disastrously than before.

Yet it's Obama who's the qualified one, and Romney to be rejected because he's "rich"!  When did success become a reason to be hated and feared?

The 2012 election presents the most stark contrast between competing visions for America's future that we've had in a long time: socialism vs. capitalism, freedom vs. statism, bureaucratic sclerosis vs. individual success.  By presenting Mitt Romney's successes as a reason for rejection, Barack Obama is actually doing America a favor in drawing the contrast between what Democrats stand for and what Republicans believe in even more starkly.

Now we just have to hope that, deep down, Americans still actually do believe in success.