Why Mitt Romney So Awfully Failed!

Sandy Was Romney’s Opportunity To Shine

Besides being way too vague and timid on policy issues or his reform plans, he missed his opportunity when superstorm Sandy hit the north east coast. Mitt Romney turned out to be as timid as those too big to fail bank CEOs who were arm twisted by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.

A Mormon Without Charity When It Counts

Did nobody advise Mitt Romney to write immediately a check of one million dollars to the Red Cross or other aid organizations in the wake of Sandy? This would have been one heck of a photo op.

If the some of the richest Americans commit half of their billions of dollars of their wealth to good causes why couldn’t he seize the opportunity?

Fuel Trucks Anybody?

Why did Romney not immediately buy hundreds of fuel trucks to help the victims of Sandy to fill up their cars? Each truck could have been emblazoned with “Vote For Romney!”. Thus, he would have proven leadership and that one man alone can outdo the federal and state governments.

Losing Faith In The American People

Yes, I do as a first generation immigrant to the USA!

Four More Years With Obama

What happened on election day of November 6, 2012? The souls of the founders of this great nation had to witness how one of the worst presidents since Franklin D. Roosevelt was reelected. This must have hurt! Was this a vote of a food stamp nation or an electorate of which 40% or so pay no federal taxes?

Those Who Voted For Obama

Deserve Neither Liberty Nor Safety

The Great American Experiment is only 236 years old, but the majority of the current generation of American people is too complacent and ignorant. Many contemporaries would never subscribe to “give me liberty or give me death” or would never pledge “our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor”.

Benjamin Franklin said it best “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” What would Benjamin say today?

What happened to the Tea Party that turned the election of 2010 around?

Is it possible that conservative Christians did not vote for a Mormon to become president, because e.g. Mormons are considered to be a sect?

Last Best Hope

The World is watching as this exceptional Nation continues to vanish from earth by its own doing.

Let me conclude with Abraham Lincoln’s famous quote from his Second Annual Message on December 1, 1862: “In giving freedom to the slave we assure freedom to the free--honorable alike in what we give and what we preserve. We shall nobly save or meanly lose the last best hope of earth.”

My hope is that non-Western countries like India, China, Brazil and so on will not repeat these mistakes, but learn from them and exceed were the Westerners failed.

Arizona Proposition 114: Protecting Crime Victims From Liability For Damages Deserves No Vote

Preface

I know, I am coming late, only two days left to the November 6, 2012 election. Unfortunately, I did not have time to read the Arizona’s General Election Guide any earlier.

Official Content Of Proposition

Here is the link to the official webpage for Proposition 114.

“1. Article II, section 31, Constitution of Arizona, is proposed to be amended as follows if approved by the voters and on proclamation of the Governor:

 31. Damages for death or personal injuries

Section 31. No law shall be enacted in this state limiting the amount of damages to be recovered for causing the death or injury of any person, EXCEPT THAT A CRIME VICTIM IS NOT SUBJECT TO A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES BY A PERSON WHO IS HARMED WHILE THE PERSON IS ATTEMPTING TO ENGAGE IN, ENGAGING IN OR FLEEING AFTER HAVING ENGAGED IN OR ATTEMPTED TO ENGAGE IN CONDUCT THAT IS CLASSIFIED AS A FELONY OFFENSE.

 2. Article XVIII, section 6, Constitution of Arizona, is proposed to be amended as follows if approved by the voters and on proclamation of the Governor:

 6. Recovery of damages for injuries

Section 6. The right of action to recover damages for injuries shall never be abrogated, and the amount recovered shall not be subject to any statutory limitation, EXCEPT THAT A CRIME VICTIM IS NOT SUBJECT TO A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES BY A PERSON WHO IS HARMED WHILE THE PERSON IS ATTEMPTING TO ENGAGE IN, ENGAGING IN OR FLEEING AFTER HAVING ENGAGED IN OR ATTEMPTED TO ENGAGE IN CONDUCT THAT IS CLASSIFIED AS A FELONY OFFENSE.

 3. Short title

This measure may be cited as the "Crime Victims Protection Act of 2012".”

No Arguments Against Proposition 114

According to the above mentioned General Election Guide “[t]here were no arguments “against” Proposition 114” only two separate arguments for it.

This caught my eye. Do we have to assume everything is OK with this proposition? Is it so self-evident? I doubt it.

My Arguments Against This Proposition

Such common sense, detailed legalistic instructions should never be written into a constitution! Period. A constitution should be written in a concise language that almost anyone can understand. It should be strictly limited to essential principles.

If a criminal successfully sues an innocent victim of the crime for injuries inflicted by the victim while committing the crime, then something is wrong with the judge or jury or the victim’s attorney was incompetent. Instead of a constitutional amendment, a law would be in my estimation sufficient to achieve this purpose.

Just the long winded definition of these two constitutional amendments are big red flags indicating there will be lots of trouble ahead to interpret these legalese.