...I don't even think it would be possible for the GOP to change abortion law by themselves.
I feel like a broken record. But I also feel like this can't be said enough. It's true that the GOP can't outlaw abortion by themselves. It's a matter of constitutional law and therefore overturning it would require either a constitutional amendment, which they could never build enough support for, or a Supreme Court decision. But here's the thing. If Republicans win in November, they will very likely get to send a few justices to the Supreme Court and could therefore change the balance of the Court and overturn Roe if and when it's challenged. Furthermore, in the immediate term, Republicans would have all sorts of options available to them to limit access to abortion services, options like defunding Planned Parenthood or other health care providers that also perform abortions. In the states, there have been all sorts of maneuvers taken in an attempt to make abortion effectively illegal. Mississippi, for example, has exactly one remaining clinic that performs abortions. One. In the whole state.
Besides, there are more issues on the table at the moment and personally I think the country could use a good CFO right about now. Our house is burning down and we're arguing over the stain on the carpet.
If we don't fix the economic problem soon, there wont be a house with carpet left for us to argue over.
I'm not sure what you mean here. Are you likening issues like abortion to a stain on the carpet? If so, I find that to be an absurd view. In many cases, abortion is a life or death issue. And family planning more broadly is nothing if not an economic issue.
I am not certain that Romney is a "good" CFO but at least he is focused on the most immediate problem facing us at the moment.
Sort of. To hear the Republicans tell it, our most immediate problems are high taxes, and high debt and deficits. Our most immediate problem is our unemployment problem, which actually contributes to our debt problem. They tend to speak of the relationship as working the other way--ie high debt contributes to unemployment by creating uncertainty in the market or whatever. So nah, I mean I guess sort of kind of, they're focused on the economy in their way. But thus far, their campaign has been more about complaining about the state of the economy than proposing concrete solutions to help get it growing again. I mean, they're so quick to tout the dynamic effects of their tax plan but not exactly quick to tell anyone about what exactly they'd like to see the tax code look like.
Obama is just singin kumbaya and roasting marshmellows while he double checks his personal Drone hit list.
Bullshit. Obama passed the stimulus and the auto bailout, made a point of finding a way to extend unemployment benefits in spite of conservative opposition, and has worked to pass jobs bills that have been blocked by Republicans in Congress that are again, more concerned about debt than unemployment. Right now Congress is essentially closed for business on this front, which is why Bernake is ushering in another round of quantitative easing.
That said, Obama is definitely making his list and checking it twice. But a focus on national security and on the economy are not mutually exclusive. Indeed, a president needs to be able to maintain both at the same time and at all times.