I Got A Tan from Standing in the English Rain

Cheerio from London! I've completed my move (actually a week ago) and I'm still figuring things out, but as of right now, I am a resident of London, England, United Kingdom, The Queen's Most Venerable and Pants-less Domain. I still don't have a phone, sadly, but it just makes me remember what living in the 90's was like. Ah yes, good times.

Anyway, I've been loosely keeping up with the 80's sitcom that is American politics, and I must say, I did not expect Mitt Romney to unleash his full bourgeoisie upon America so soon. In that video, Mitt denigrates those who use some sort of "government handout," whether it is the retiree who receives social security checks (after paying into the system his entire life), or the family on welfare that does not have enough to make ends meet.

What's even more hilarious is how he talks about his wife, saying something along the lines of "we don't want people to get tired of Ann (Romney)," as if she spoke in some kind of Fran Drescher-like voice and talked only about her vast collection of handbags.

Seriously Republican Party? This is the best you've got? Are you actively trying to lose this election? What with Paul Ryan's ludicrous new lie about Obama and NASA, I don't know how you guys expect to win anything. Ever. As kids, I bet you guys were the ones who bragged "oh yeah, I've got a girlfriend, but she lives in the next state over," as if that proved your machismo.

There may be a silver lining in this, however: Romney's campaign demonstrates how poorly the moderate Republicans work with the Tea Party Conservatives.

From the outset, Mitt Romney was always the frontrunner; that much had always been obvious. He was rich (note, when I say rich, I mean that he could probably buy Australia), he had "moderate" success (see what I did there?) in Massachusetts as governor, and he ran a "successful business" (see what I did there?). Of course, his positions have oscillated more than a spinning fan in summer, so the Republican core thought the best VP candidate would be, of course, the ultra-conservative, ultra-religious, ultra-deluded Paul Ryan, who makes dubious claims based on what color his stool is in the morning (hint: it's red).

Sadly enough, it is the super-rich who bankroll the ultra-conservative Tea Party, and of course encourage moderate Republicans to turn more conservative. Will there still be moderate Republicans who dislike this new trend? Jon Huntsman certainly demonstrated his willingness to be a moderate during the Republican debates, and if he had actually been selected as the Republican nominee, he would certainly have a better chance than Mitt Romney at this point.

I guess the crux of this blog entry is this: moderate Republicans, please do not support Mitt Romney just because he's running on the Republican ticket. If so, you might as well vote for a cardboard cutout of Ronald Reagan, since it will probably have a better budget plan than Mitt Romney.

That's all for now.
Das Flüg

My usual procrastination

It's been a while since I've posted, but for good reasons:

First, I've been writing heavily for another book. I've reached 60,000 words pretty quickly, if you understand how much that is.

Second, I've had to find accommodation in London in a hurry because of certain extenuating circumstances. Doing so is very time-consuming and, I assure you, very stressful. Thankfully, I've found a good place.

Now, as that cool breeze rolls in and reminds us all that it is yet another presidential election season, I think my only real complaint (for once, I only have one) is: How can anyone who makes less than $250k a year, or is a woman, or is a fiscal conservative, or is a senior, support the Romney-Ryan ticket?

No, seriously. How? I can't wrap my head around the support that Romney has from the Republican Party and various other sects of "traditional" American conservatism. The only people who should support the ticket are people who stand to benefit from his ludicrous budget plan, and that is a vast minority of voters.

I feel as if so many Republicans are suffering from a bad case of confirmation bias- that is, they're ignoring all the blatantly terrible and inconsistent positions of Mitt Romney just because they want Republicans to win.

Here is a list of all the topics Mitt Romney has changed his mind on (taken from www.procon.org, an overview of presidential positions):

• Abortion (Pro, then Con)
• TARP
  
• Automotive bailout
• Outsourcing
• Health care (multiple times)
• Social Security Privatization

(Not to mention that his foreign policy positions are confusing.)

His fiscal plan is simply puzzling. Romney somehow wants to cut all spending to 20% of GDP which, as the article so accurately states, is impossible.

So why, why, why is anyone in their right mind supporting this? Mitt Romney can trumpet the words "America" and "freedom" all he wants, but that doesn't make his policies any less confusing.

This is simply my opinion: the Cold War still exists. I don't mean that the United States is still holding its finger over the big red button, staring menacingly at Russia from across the table, but that the two parties in the United States are in a virtual war. Why?

Why not? There is no major enemy in the world to threaten the United States with immediate destruction and force government hawkishness. There is no external threat that "directly attacks" American values, regardless of what various pundits call "Socialism" or "Communism" or "Jihad." If there is no viable external threat to America, then there must be an internal one. If it is not physical, then it is ideological.

So are people willing to vote for a man who believes that not everyone should have equal rights, or that women should not have the right to choose (even if they're raped)? It makes no sense. It makes none at all.

That's all for now,
Das Flüg