Mitt Romney is running for president of the United States .
He wrote what amounts to a personal profile in the form of an article in which
he details the experience he has had in business – at least, the part of it which
he believes qualifies him for the job. The article was published in the Wall
Street Journal on August 24, 2012 under the title: “What I Learned at Bain
Capital” and was given the subtitle: “My business experience taught me how to
help companies grow -- and what to do when trouble arises. When you see a
problem, run toward it before the problem gets worse,” a sentence that was
lifted from the article.
The profile may be impressive for someone seeking a similar
job but Mr. Romney is running against Barack Obama who is the sitting President
and has a record that is well known to the public. Thus, the Romney profile
will have to be looked at not in isolation but in comparison to that of Obama.
But because the Romney profile is a description of the self, it only represents
the glossy side of a career and none of the crude side, some of which was
discussed in public but will be ignored in this discussion.
To be fair, however, we must only compare the glossy side of
Obama's profile against that of Romney. To this end, we look at a President who
has managed a 15 trillion dollars economy for four years in a row, has saved
the financial system and the auto industry from collapse while being commander
in chief of the most powerful military in the world, a post in which he ended
one war and started to wind down another. And these were troubles he inherited
before he sat behind his presidential desk. In making this comparison, Obama
wins hands down.
So then, what else is there by which to compare the two
candidates? Well, there is the fact that each has a different vision for the
future. Obama's vision is pretty well known, being the completion of what he
started. That is, now that the American economy has been stabilized despite the
predictions it was going to implode, Mr. Obama will see to it that the private
sector will thrive under rules that match the challenges of the modern
globalized economy, not the outdated rules that almost ended the American
economy.
To assist the private sector in attaining its maximum potential,
the President will continue to work on developing a set of public-private
partnerships -- as he has been doing from the start -- between the government
and the public sector. This should replace the widespread view that the
government is the enemy that must be fought against, not the friend that is
here to help and to facilitate matters when help and mediation are needed.
Nothing is more important to do in a world where the giant economies of the
future have learned to co-ordinate between the two sectors, and have chosen to
march together with one vision toward the goals they define in concert.
As to the Romney vision for the future, his article says a
few things about it. He begins with this: “I will take a sensible approach to
tapping our energy resources, which will both create jobs and make energy more
affordable for every sector of our economy.” The problem is, he did not say
what magic wand he has hidden in the bottom drawer of his desk by which to
accomplish a miracle that has eluded many American presidents and other world
leaders for decades now.
Here is another revealing passage: “My plan for a stronger
middle class includes policies to give every family access to great schools and
quality teachers, to improve access to higher education, and to attract and
retain the best talent from around the world.” Well, allow me, Mr. Romney to
ask with all due respect, that you skip the vague talk about policies, and give
instead details as to how you will build great schools, how you will incubate quality
teachers, and how you will improve access to higher education. And while you're
at it, having done all this, why on earth would you still want to acquire and
retain talent from around the world? Would you not be producing your own at
home?
He also says this: “I am committed to capping federal
spending below 20% of GDP and reducing nondefense discretionary spending by
5%.” Well, nondefense discretionary spending in the federal budget is peanut,
and 5% of that is not worth the shell of a peanut. As to capping federal
spending below 20%, it so happens that everyone who made a promise like this,
changed their mind right after they got the job and were asked to deliver on
the promise. Romney will not do any better especially when you consider that
his overall promises are more outlandish than any made before him.
And the proof of this is the way he ends his profile: “I
know what it takes to turn around difficult situations. And I will put that
experience to work, to get our economy back on track, create jobs, strengthen
the middle class and lay the groundwork for America 's increased competitiveness
in the world.” I tell you, my friend,
not even a mother would say this about her child. As a retired teacher, a
school master and previous owner of a school, I met many a mother who came to
tell me what a prodigy her son was but turned out to be less than a fraction of
what she described.
And what these mothers described was only a fraction of what
Romney is saying about himself. I must therefore conclude that he will not
deliver a fraction of a fraction of the vague promises he is making.
Thus, the American electorate has the tried and proven
Barack performance to weigh against the vague promises of what seems to be a
dreamer that may well turn out to be the flip-flopper he is reputed to be.