The Republican presidential dynamic — various candidates rise and recede; Mitt Romney remains at about 25 percent support — is peculiar because conservatives correctly believe that it is important to defeat Barack Obama but unimportant that Romney be president. This is not cognitive dissonance.
Obama, a floundering naif who thinks ATMs aggravate unemployment, is bewildered by a national tragedy of shattered dreams, decaying workforce skills and forgone wealth creation. Romney cannot enunciate a defensible, or even decipherable, ethanol policy.
Life poses difficult choices, but not about ethanol. Government subsidizes ethanol production, imposes tariffs to protect manufacturers of it and mandates the use of it — and it injures the nation’s and the world’s economic, environmental, and social (it raises food prices) well-being.
In May, in corn-growing Iowa, Romney said, “I support” — present tense — “the subsidy of ethanol.” And: “I believe ethanol is an important part of our energy solution for this country.” But in October he told Iowans he is “a business guy,” so as president he would review this bipartisan — the last Republican president was an ethanol enthusiast — folly. Romney said that he once favored (past tense) subsidies to get the ethanol industry “on its feet.” (In the 19th century, Republican “business guys” justified high tariffs for protecting “infant industries”). But Romney added, “I’ve indicated I didn’t think the subsidy had to go on forever.” Ethanol subsidies expire in December, but “I might have looked at more of a decline over time” because of “the importance of ethanol as a domestic fuel.” Besides, “ethanol is part of national security.” However, “I don’t want to say” I will propose new subsidies. Still, ethanol has “become an important source of amplifying our energy capacity.” Anyway, ethanol should “continue to have prospects of growing its share of” transportation fuels. Got it?
Every day, 10,000 baby boomers become eligible for Social Security and Medicare, from which they will receive, on average, $1 million of benefits ($550,000 from the former, $450,000 from the latter). Who expects difficult reforms from Romney, whose twists on ethanol make a policy pretzel?
Read More at The Washington Post By George F. Will, The Washington Post
Please share this post with your friends and comment below. If you haven’t already, take a moment to sign up for our free newsletter above and friend us on Twitter and Facebook to get real time updates.
Follow @WestJournalism
Loading ...
Romney is a flip flopper on several issues. Why would I trust him not to flip flop if her were elected president? Romneycare (which he has defended but doesn't now) was the pattern for Obamacare. We need to get rid of Obama – however I do not believe Romney is the man to do that.
Hope Mitt doesn't get the nomination. I don't support ethonal. It drives up the prices of corn and other food. It's hard for the ranchers to buy corn to feed their cattle.
And ethonal is not good for your car's engine and you don't get as much mileage.
Criticize him as you will, but it takes a person of superior intelligence and organizational skills to do something like turn around the Olympics, or make hundreds of millions of dollars. These are facts, irrespective of your political views.
I have been driving my car for years on ethanol (but drive it also on regular fuel when ethanol is not available where I am at a particular time). Ethanol is much cleaner for your engine, and I have been getting a much higher gas mileage with my vehicle. Cattle should be fed on more grain than corn, and ethanol can be produced from any organic material. It doesn't have to be just corn, it can be 'green waste', as well. There are so-called Third-World-Countries that are way ahead of us in developing those kinds of fuels.
Except that Romney made millions in the private sector, whereas Obama had never run a hot dog stand. Romney understands business. Romney understands how to create jobs. Romney understands negotiation, something totally foreign to Obama.
Criticize him as you will, but it takes a person of superior intelligence and organizational skills to do something like turn around the Olympics, or make hundreds of millions of dollars. These are facts, irrespective of your political views.
As for Romneycare, it became Democare as soon as the Massachusetts legislature over-rode his vetoes.