Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Does God (or Mother Nature) Favor Obama Over Romney?

Oh, I just cannot resist this, :-).  So the Great October Surprise turns out to be a monster Frankenstorm/Snowicane combining a hurricane with a nor'easter that happened to show the lowest pressure readings at its center ever recorded for a storm north of Cape Hatteras.  Is Sandy a message from God or Mother Nature or Whomever or Whatever about the current presidential election?  While some argue that it may favor Romney, I find almost everything about it likely to tilt the other way in its "recommendation."

1)  Republican Governor Chris Christie of NJ, obviously a leading candidate for the GOP nomination in 2016, has publicly praised both Obama and FEMA in unequivocal and unstinting terms for their handling of the crisis.  This contrasts with the pathetic performance under Bush of FEMA after Katrina (emphasized by Brownie criticizing Obama and FEMA for "moving too fast," hack, cough).

2)  Suddenly there is attention on Romney's statement back in June that he wanted to abolish FEMA, and that funding it is "immoral."  Of course, he has since denied this, but today was refusing to answer reporters' questions about whether he wants to eliminate it or not.

3) There is also attention on the fact that the GOP House, with Paul Ryan among the leaders of this along with Eric Cantor, pushed hard for major cuts in disaster relief aid.  This was a major part of one of the repeated holdups in budget negotiations that have happened.  More embarrassment.

4)  While Romney has called for sending responsibility to state governments, his own record as Governor of Massachusetts is a major embarrassment in this regard.  He provided no aid for flood relief to Peabody and Greenfield in the state when they were flooded.  In the case of Peabody, it was flooded again during his term after he had turned down aid earlier for it after its first major flood.

5)  While Obama is acting as Commander-in-Chief and overseeing well-managed FEMA operations, Romney held a supposed "Red Cross Relief" event in, gasp, Dayton, Ohio, on a day of supposed "no campaigning."  This amounted to asking for people to provide goods to be given to the Red Cross, with Romney being photographed receiving them, with lines of his supporters waiting to give them to him.  The only problem with this is that the Red Cross has publicly stated that they do not want goods, but money instead.  However, people giving money does not provide a photo op.

6)  While neither candidate has mentioned "climate change" during this campaign, it is well known that Romney has publicly agreed with climate skeptics during the primary campaign and has opposed any new climate-related legislation, even though as Governor of Massachusetts he had a more reasonable view (more flip flopping).  OTOH, in his first two years when the Dems controlled the House, Obama did propose a climate bill that got through the House, whatever one may think of it (and it was pretty flawed), only to have it filibustered to death by the Republicans in the Senate.  Once the House went GOP, with Tea Party ravers denouncing climate science as a "hoax," it was clear that there was no point in trying further on that route, and any mention by him of climate change in the campaign would have brought a frenzy of ads in Ohio charging Obama with threatening autoworker jobs, with white male workers in auto-related industries in that state probably providing the ultimate pillar for his reelection.

So, I am not going to make any statement about the existence or nonexistence of deities or grand natural forces with intent, and I am also not going to predict how ultimately voters will swing or respond to anything in particular here.  But I will be very surprised if after this we see any more serious claims in the media about "Romnentum," or whatever. There really is nothing in this for Romney other than goofy whining about Obama spending a lot of money to deliver some pizza to campaign workers in Orlando, Florida this past Sunday.  Poor guy; I almost feel his pain... :-).


Bradley Stack said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Barkley Rosser said...

I want people to know that this post is not only highly snarky, but possibly disrespectful of the tragedies that have happened to many people, with 61 dead around the country at the latest count. I am contributing financially to the Red Cross, but I apologize to anybody who finds this post of mine offensive. I recognize how it can be viewed as such.

OTOH, I did start with how I could not resist...

kevin quinn said...

Barkley: if you're right about the political impact, how long before we hear the wingnuts accusing Obama of creating the hurricane!

ProGrowthLiberal said...

As a resident of New York City - I just have to say that a little snark is a welcome change. We need to laugh a bit. In fact, we have a rumor hear that Christie and Obama are dting each other. In thise case - good policy performance just happens to be good politics.

ProGrowthLiberal said...

Kevin - I'm waiting for the Romney ad saying "Obama did not cause Sandy but he made it WORSE".

Anonymous said...

Food stamps caused Sandy!

Yes, folks, it's true.

You see, when poor people get food stamps, they use them to pay for food. When they buy food, they eat it. When they eat food, they digest it. The products of digestion are flatulence and fecal matter. Flatulence and fecal matter release methane into the atmosphere. Methane is a greenhouse gas. Greenhouse gasses cause global warming. Global warming makes the oceans hotter. Hotter oceans increase the energy of storms and hurricanes, like Sandy. Therefore, food stamps caused Sandy.