Since yesterday when I posted this, none of my conservative friends have decided to argue with me about why Romney would be better off for the economy than Obama has been. That’s not to say that they won’t; I’m sure they’re all busy, you know, not doing that.
One friend complained that I was stacking the deck by listing those four facts as preconditions for debate. I’m not exactly sure how listing facts should be considered “stacking the deck” unless it really is true that reality has a well-known liberal bias. (Greg Stevens bait!)
Using our hypothetical of the two rocket scientists arguing about the specifications of a new rocket, imagine the following conversation:
Rocket Scientist 1: We need this much fuel to achieve escape velocity.
Rocket Scientist 2: No, that’s way too expensive. We can use this much instead.
Rocket Scientist 1: That’s not nearly enough. Look, if we know that we have this much thrust and we agree that gravity is around 10 meters per second per second, then…
Rocket Scientist 2: Woah, woah, woah! Now you’re stacking the deck!
Rocket Scientist 1: …
I’m not trying to say that it would be impossible to build a compelling conservative argument for Romney’s presidency that acknowledged the truth of those four facts. I’m sure it can be done. I’m just saying that I haven’t seen that argument made, or even attempted, yet. Not by the Romney campaign, not by any of his GOP rivals, not by any of the conservative media, and not by any of my friends. Yet.
Yesterday, the Romney campaign confirmed my 4th listed fact, which was that he policies offered by Mitt Romney to “fix” the economy are essentially identical to the policies offered by the Bush Administration over his eight-year presidency.
RNC spokeswoman Alexandra Franceschi told The Fernando Espuelas Show that the Republican party’s economic platform in 2012 is going to be the same as it was during the Bush years, “just updated.”
If you liked George W. Bush, you’ll love Mitt Romney!