Centro Latino for Literacy PSA






¡Exprésate!  

On The Selection of A President

Taking on "Round Two Goes To The President"

By Guadalupe Gonzalez, Contributing Writer
Published on LatinoLA: October 19, 2012


On The Selection of A President


I have just completed reading the transcripts of the second Presidential Debate, which occurred on October Sixteenth, 2012. (See New York Times, October Seventeenth, 2012) A recently published article on LatinoLA -- Obama's Debate Performance May Not Translate to Votes -- indicated that "It took Obama almost ten minutes before responding to these attacks, calling Romney a 'liar.'"

My close reading of the entire transcript, following the broadcast of the debate, reveals that President Obama in fact, NEVER called Romney a "liar." Granted, President Obama indicated on various occasions that what Romney was stating was "untrue."

The most obvious of these moments occurred when Romney challenged President Obama as to what the President had stated in the Rose Garden during a press conference after the assault on the Benghazi consulate. Romney seemed to underscore his claim by glaring at the President, much as one of my supervisors used to glare at me, out of sheer hatred. (I had eight years seniority on my much vaunted supervisor, who was a numbskull.)

The author then matter of factly states that, "Name calling in politics is a sign of weakness and frustration, and Obama's name calling didn't resonate well with undecided voters." There are absolutely no verifiable facts provided to add credibility to this assertion. In fact, various polls published on 10.18.12 indicate that voters were swayed toward President Obama.

The moderator CNN's Candy Crowley, who has herself been told to pick a switch and wait behind the barn, fact checked Romney's statement and corrected him immediately.

In order to "spin" the debate's events, the author of the recent article commented on President Obama's "demonstrating poise and aggression as if his job depended on it, which it does." To make such a statement denigrates the voters of this country, as if a mere ninety minutes will ascertain the decision of each voter and the fate of this country, which hangs in the balance.

In reality, there are many other elements which will be decisive in this election. Women's rights, Latino rights, Immigration regulations, the economy, Students' rights to an education, Jobs, International Affairs, the ill-fated and, indeed, asinine wars in which the Bush-Cheney Administration caused us to be embroiled--all of these will play a role in each voter's decision. To assert that ninety minutes and a "performance" will win us over or turn us off is sheer folly.

How many of us have Dads, brothers, uncles, cousins, friends, sisters, Moms, aunts overseas? How many of us have looked into their eyes during their short furloughs and seen something other than the bright, loving, laughing eyes we used to see?

Consider how many of the Romneys have served their country by going to war.

None.

Not one of them.

In fact, Romney's grandfather was so hell-bent on having his five wives, he left the United States for Mexico, where he could do as he pleased. Then, when the revolution began in Mexico, some of the Romneys fled Mexico to avoid the war there. Today, Ann Romney on the program, "The View", contradicted her own husband by asserting that many Mormon men go to war. But not her men. They were on their "missions." You know what that mission was? Knocking on your door on a Saturday morning and telling you about the Mormon church. The Romney men chose that instead of going to war. Pretty easy decision, I think. War? Door? Hmmmmm.....I'll take the door.

How many of us have sisters, girl cousins, aunts who have fibroids, Mamis who are going through menopause and need hormonal adjustments? And how many of those women go to clinicas or Planned Parenthood, not because they are sluts who need birth control pills, but who need them in order to regulate their cycles and stop the hemorraging? Rush Limbaugh, quick to Romney's defense, says all "those women" want is "sex, birth control and abortions." No, that is not what we women are after.

I know a young woman who was raped while she was on a local college campus. Being a respected Christian, she chose to have that child, at great cost to her mental and physical health. She had the choice to place the child for adoption, or to abort the child that was conceived in violence. She had been a virgin. That young woman had a choice as to her decision. I also know another woman who discovered that her first baby was irrevocably damaged and whose quality of life would essentially be non-existent. She and her husband made a difficult choice after much medical consultation and anguish. Romney and those of his ilk would take that choice away.

I have been to get-togethers, generally baby showers, where the ladies talk and I am asked, in Spanish, "And how did you come over?" I take that as a compliment that my Spanish is that good, that ladies think I was born in Mexico. But then I explain I was born here of immigrant parents who came here legally, my Dad having gotten leave from the Navy to return home for his bride, mi Mami.

Romney wants "illegal aliens", as he calls them, to "self-deport." What idiocy. To yank your children out of schools, to divest yourself of all or most of your worldly possessions, to walk away from what you have earned through the sweat of your brow? And, make no mistake about this: People grouse about "immigrants" taking away jobs that native born Americans would want.

Give me a break.

Do you think the prissy high school or college kids want to earn less than minimum wage working in the hot and dusty fields? Going to the bathroom in a filthy port-a-potty? The women becoming sexual prey for men? The Migra being called on payday for a raid so the workers do not need to be paid? Por favor--usen su cabeza.

The author of the article uses loaded words and phrases such as "...hammered the President"..., "Not letting the President off the economic canvas, he pummeled him...", "...He even touted the idea...", "Finally, he explained without mincing words..." All of these phrases were deliberately used in an attempt to depict Romney as a real fighter.

The author intersperses all of this with assertions that "Romney is the most (sic) experienced of the two candidates..." Yeah, because of Bain Capitol that Romney utilized to pillage working factories and businesses until he plowed them under. That is a good business model? I think not. Further, the author states that the upcoming debate between the two candidates will deal with the issue of foreign policy, and "...could be a deal breaker for both candidates among undecided voters." No--it could be a deal breaker for one or the other candidate--not both.

And, finally, the author hopes that there will be a discussion regarding how the candidates will deal with Congress.

I have an idea: How about electing a Congress that is not obstructionist to the President, whose members do not sign a pledge to Grover Norquist to never, ever under any circumstances, vote to raise taxes on anyone? Grover Norquist is a lobbyist that has the GOP by the short and fuzzies. Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan signed that pact. Yeah, and why would Romney want to sign that? Well, because then all his wealthy bon vivant buddies will not be able to take advantage of the tax loopholes that they take. Leaving people like you and me to sweat it.

And as for taxes, Romney's father revealed twelve years of his taxes. Mitt Romney grudgingly gave up two years. And he does not account, ever, for the BUCKS SOCKED AWAY IN THE CAYMAN ISLANDS AND IN SWITZERLAND. And he pays no tax on those accounts.

Last night I heard Taggart Romney, one of the Romney sons, say he wanted to jump out his seat during the debate and throw a punch at President Obama. He qualified this by saying, "But there were too many Secret Service between us." Taggert Romney said this, unapologetically. He has one hundred million dollars in his trust fund, you know.

This is what happens when it is "THEM", i.e., the rich, powerful and entitled, versus "US", i.e., those of us who are used to dragging ourselves out of bed everyday, going to work, eating fast and going to the bathroom faster, so we do not get docked our pay, and putting up with the crap our supervisors choose to hand us.

And, by the way, the third and final Presidential Debate takes place on Monday, October 22, 2012.

Guadalupe Gonzalez(c)2012




s

About Guadalupe Gonzalez, Contributing Writer:
Writer, Orgullosa Latina
Bachelor of Arts: LMU: Political Science
Juris Doctorate: UCLA School of Law
Los Angeles Attorney




   print this










OUR CONTENT SECTIONS


Arts & Entertainment Comunidad Forum People El Editor's Blog


Careers Expresate Hollywood Tecnología RSS Feeds





Most shared by Our Amigos