The President Bets on Hollywood for Campaign Cash - image: Daily Mail UKFrom the Boston Herald via McClatchy Newspapersheadline: “Mitt Romney to business Help is on the way”, speaks to a meeting that Romney attended in Washington with national business leaders – discussing his plans for an economic upturn and the differences between Obama’s policies and the policies of business. When one considers that without private businesses and one who has a clue as to how they run, there is simply no money flowing – no hiring, no research, no reinvestment – all staples that fund the Federal Government, even if there are tax cuts or “incentives” to lure businesses back to the U.S. in place. To someone who is lower to middle income, watching the price of everything rise, as the dollar stretches to the limit, with or without a job at this point, it is understood that something is very wrong with the economy. Whatever policies are in place simply are not working. The Obama Campaign shot back with the usual “go back to the policies that put the nation at risk in the first place” (paraphrasing from Herald article) – surprising that they did not invoke the “George Bush” mantra. By now, it must be glaringly apparent to most of the nation, that the policies of the administration simply are not working, the problem being the simple rule: the Government makes on product, offers no services to sell, and cannot run without taxes – the bigger the government, the theory goes, with more entitlements, fewer jobs, and less revenue, the worse the situation becomes. One does not need to be an economics major to understand that without small to large businesses, the nation cannot pump the money into the fed necessary to keep the Government solvent. That is one concept that appears to escape most, if not all, those who are insistent on larger government and hold the belief that government can solve all problems. Unfortunately, they forget the part that there are limited resources when there are few new hires, and businesses are afraid to hire, due to the “unknown” and often “erratic” behavior of the Fed. If one looks at the “Bush Tax Cuts” for example, the Congress has yet to agree or disagree on continuing those much maligned cuts – yet, without a strong leader to work with and convince Congress to act, party politics rule (on both sides) and nothing gets done. That affects businesses – it’s the paperwork and accounting that costs businesses when tax codes are changed modified, or rules and regulations concerning healthcare are changed or modified. It makes those investors and small businesses hesitate – and hold back on hiring. Right now the only thing that appears to be pumping money into the “economy” is the General Election campaign, and that’s a minimal effect. Romney’s prescription may sound somewhat out-dated, however, one may also call it one school of economics versus another – one that works, and then one that is based on theory, and has a short history of complications. (See Carter Administration bigger government, bigger taxes, and more misery). It is not so much that any one person can solve all the nations problems, it’s a question of who would do the better job of pushing the Congress to work, have the ability to understand how to work with both the private sector and the government, and – here it comes – the concept of trickledown economics. Would a President Romney have the temerity to push Congress (both sides) to work on an issue to aid the public, or would he hire a committee, wait six months and then ignore the results? One only needs to look at Romney’s behavior as Governor of the Commonwealth to understand he knows how to work both sides, and that even with odds against him, he would push the most indicted body of lawmakers in the nation’s history to get something done. In other words, Romney’s confidence in his ability translates into getting the job done – the key word – job. If one looks at the recent donors to either campaign, one finds Romney receiving aid from business and individuals – most recently the 15th richest man in the world - Sheldon Adelson, has given millions to the PAC that supports Mitt Romney’s candidacy – and that figure could, according to Forbes Magazine, go over $100 million. Those that view business as essential to the economy might factor in who is donating to whom – to get a clue as to which of the two candidates are more business (i.e. jobs oriented – or more government and ideologically driven).Case in Point, Business Week reports that Obama is tapping into entertainer, i.e. celebrities, to support his campaign against Romney – President Barack Obama is using the entertainment industry on both coasts to help fill the fundraising hole left by defections of some Wall Street donors. Obama has been hitting California and New York in the race to stay ahead of Republican Mitt Romney in fundraising for the presidential campaign. He’ll be in New York tonight for the second time this month for an event at actress Sarah Jessica Parker’s house and another co-hosted by singer Mariah Carey at the Plaza Hotel, aiming to raise $4.5 million. “If you go to New York to raise money at Sarah Jessica Parker’s house you’re really going to Los Angeles,” said Joel Aberbach, a political science professor at the University of California, Los Angeles. “He’s getting a better reception from show business people than finance people, and those are the moneyed classes on the two coasts.” California, the headquarters for the music, movie and television industries, is outpacing New York as a funding source for both candidates. Through the end of April, California donors have raised $19 million for Obama and $10.6 for Romney compared to New York’s $12.2 million for Obama and $9.7 million for Romney, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. It becomes a matter of who does one trust in 2012 – A celebrity who apparently has no need to worry about paying the rent or the businessman who has to worry about staying in business and build the business, which one cannot do without hiring. Sure, the report cites that the President is losing his “Wall Street” donors, but one has to look at business across the nation that apparently aren’t giving to the campaign to reelect Obama – they are looking towards Romney – the mom’s and pop’s the mid-sized businesses.It’s all perception – if one looks at a celebrity as the know it all-tell it all – then one might be tempted to take a chance on Obama for a second term – however, if one feels that a celebrity is certainly entertaining, but no more or less politically astute than a light bulb, then they may be shopping, or in the Romney camp – with the economy always a “surprise” – poor jobs reports, etc., it’s a good bet on Romney (see Adelson).Does this drive everyone to the point of “shut up already, we get it” (The robo-call are on, and it is annoying in June, imagine how annoying they will be in November?) – Speaking of celebritiesJoan Rivers had a thing or two to say about both candidates – via CNN On the presidential race, Rivers says, “How dare you spend two years campaigning? This country’s in trouble. They should do what England does. Six weeks – to find out what everyone thinks before they vote for them for Parliament. That makes sense. Two years? First of all, the President – get into the White House and do your God-damned duty. And Mitt Romney. Two years, you all hate each other and now they’re all going to come together and say, ‘but we really love him.’ I find it disgusting. The money spent? The money spent? Outrageous. Obama went to a dinner party for Democrats? $40,000 a plate. You’re not Democrats. You’re not Democrats. You’re very strong Republicans. I find the whole thing disgusting. Both sides disgusting.”Once in a blue moon someone from tinsel-town makes a valid point. The Money spent – on both sides – while American’s are hurting – is a bit discouraging – However, it is a fact of life that a politician must campaign, (re: Rivers versus Obama), and that Primaries bring out the most devious and downright nasty sides of the participants and in the end, they sit around a campfire and toast marshmallows (Mitt and the Republicans who ran against and into the Romney Scorched Earth Policy of winning.). The idea that the two party system has pretty much melded into one big glob of self-inflated egos, and keeping the status quo – is set in the minds of many American’s – Ms. Rivers should attend a Tea Party event, she might find she fits in – because most American’s have had it – and Americans now have two choices, (not 3 real choices or 4 real choices, but two), it’s now come down to a question of continuing what Obama has done in the past four years, or moving forward with a man who has governed and run a business, and is ultimately qualified to be President – that’s Bill Clinton on Romney.It's the Economy Stupid: Romney did not have to say that, it appears to be a given, Romney at a recent campaign rally - Mesa, AZ - image from the Washington Post
read more: Romney Taps Business – The Engine that Could – Obama Taps Hollywood – Selling an Image – Joan Rivers Isn’t Buying Any of It – Is the General Public?