Friday, January 27, 2012

Gingrich sinking to Romney's level

Newt,

I implore you to use January 26th's GOP debate as an example of how even the most sound minded and most articulate can tire and slip with fatigue. You appeared tired at times and perhaps satisfied with what occurred in South Carolina whereas Mr. Santorum and Mitt Romney elevated their diction and talking points with succinct verifiable facts for the first time to the point where dare I say it, they spoke as fluidly as you Mr. Speaker.

Where I saw true grit and due diligence, was in Romney's attack on your investment portfolio that is NOT in a blind trust. The weakest argument given by a former CEO of consulting firm that dealt with mergers and acquisitions was that he was unaware of any of the positions in his blind trust including Goldman Sachs and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. However, your public razing of Romney to this end backfired when you failed to state your own investments before attacking Romney for the very investment positions you have interest in whether directly or through mutual funds. Moreover, your assertion that your contract with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac  prohibited lobbying is but a halve truth. In your second contract it did not have any clauses prohibiting lobbying and Mr. Romney criticized you for this in rapid succession and your rebuttal was off topic and generic.

I thought Rick Santorum's critic of Romney's state run health care system was precise and well posed and while Romney was quick to try and extricate himself from Obama Care, he forgot his sneakers. In truth Mr. Santorum was factual accurate, the health care in Massachusetts mandates payment by 100 percent of the population in the state not just those who wish to seek public sponsored health care. Romney see -sawed from an 8 percent population pool that paid into the state run health care system to a 4 percent pool and his numbers on the quality of care were derided with accurate facts by Mr. Santorum. Kudos

The running hyperbole that is Ron Paul's libertarian idealism at times was more honest and respectable than anything any of the candidates could muster from their bowels of their patriotic hearts. However, his age, asserted once again by Wolf Blitzer and his knack for stammering give little credence to his honest words, honest in their fervor and soul.  Mr. Speaker, going back to you, please once again, I implore you, read Sun Tzu's Art of War and refrain from attacking an enemy with hundreds of millions of dollars more in compaign financing in laborious media wars. You are smarter, have more experience in Washington, and your ability to walk the bi-partisan line is something that will achieve far more productive facets of legislature than what I would think would come from Mitt Romney.

Finally, I don't think repealing all of Dodd Frank and Sarbanes Oxley is required to improve lending and increase or GDP/economy. I think disclosure controls are incredibly important, but in term of say the Vockler Rule, I don't know why you wouldn't just reinstate Glass Steagall if you are going to thwart proprietary trading. Goldman Sachs has already issued 4 year CDs tied to Nasdaq equities that themselves control which already bypasses this rule. Lets keep our government's hands off free market capitalism as you say but maintain the beginnings of mercantilism particularly in the use of domestic resources to control inflation and GDP. The Saudis who buy our Treasury bills don't want the Keystone Pipeline nor offshore oil drilling with direct injection into the U.S. unless its for our reserves..... I will leave this argument for another letter.

Good Day,

Brendan

No comments:

Post a Comment