Matt Bai quotes Chris Rock in today’s New
York Times:

“Only
Pres Obama could prevent a depression, end a war, get bin Laden, bring
unemployment below 8 percent, then be told he can’t run on his record.”

    Mr. Obama deserves
a second term. Here’s why:

     He has shown Quiet Courage: The signature of his presidency is his ability to make very difficult decisions, often in the face of his advisors telling not to do what he ultimately decided to do. Let’s look at four examples:   

• Health Care: Healthcare insurance for everyone via an expansion of private insurance was probably the exact sweet spot in this environment. Also give the President high marks for the use of the individual mandate, a long-time Republican idea to ensure personal responsibility. Including both the

private option and the mandate showed that the President was willing to respect Republican ideas and utilize traditionally preferred Republican methods in implementing health care reform. Rather than proceed with a safer legislative agenda, Obama went for healthcare with full knowledge that by doing so he may have cost himself a second term in the White House.

• Auto Bailout: Mr. Obama made this decision in the face of divided opinions from his team of advisors and it provided a positive effect on the economy. While Mr. Romney said “we should let Detroit go bankrupt,” even the conservative financial publication “The Economist,” has tipped their hat to the Administration on the bailout, saying:

    “Given the panic that gripped private purse-strings,” the magazine wrote in an editorial. “It is more likely that GM would have been liquidated, sending a cascade of destruction through the supply chain on which its rivals, too, depended.” 

    The industry is now profitable, hiring aggressively
and expanding, which indicates it was a good call.

• Foreign
  Policy: Mr. Obama deserves credit for his role
  in bringing Osama Bin Laden to justice. That was not an easy call, and most of his advisors were against
  taking the risk of sending Seals into Pakistan to get him. Al Qaeda has
  been greatly damaged by Mr. Obama’s policies, although it is still capable of
  inflicting damage. He also deserves high marks for his successful coalition building, resulting in buckling
  sanctions on Iran and the toppling of the Qaddafi dictatorship, despite a
  chorus of boos from his loyal opposition.

• Hurricane
  Sandy: Although the
  presidential race is too close to call, Mr. Obama left the campaign trail to his opponent to focus on getting
  the federal government geared up to assist the states in the northeast that
  were damaged so severely. This was his
  “Katrina” moment, and he did the right thing even though his
  politician’s instincts (and his handlers) probably screamed: “go to Ohio.”

President Obama has shown
himself to be a courageous decision-maker. He made the right calls on the big
questions. Sadly, his public defense
of his administration’s goals and signature legislative achievements was far too quiet.
He failed to bring the country along with his agenda.

Rather than use his
political capital to educate and re-assure the American people, Mr.Obama barely fought back at all
and as a result, lost the messaging war. The office of the Presidency
deserved a stouter defense. When you have a bully pulpit, you should use it
assertively, not apologetically.

There are some important
disappointments with Mr. Obama:

• The Economy: Has clearly improved over where it was when he took
  office. We have seen steady and consistent positive job growth for 31
  straight months. Likewise, the GDP growth rate has been positive for the
  last 13 months, after not growing in five of Obama’s first six months in
  office.

But,
we still have high unemployment, particularly long-term unemployment; middle
class income has stagnated for 10 years and US companies are not investing in
their US operations. Mr. Obama has articulated some government programs to
partially address unemployment, but they have not passed into law. Given the divided government we will
likely have post-election, this may remain the new normal for the middle class
in our country.

• National
  Defense Authorization Act:
  On any list of reservations about re-electing Barack Obama is his signing of
  the National Defense
  Authorization Act (NDAA)
  which potentially reduces our rights to due process and sets up indefinite detention of American citizens with no
  burden of official charges being filed. Although President Obama is on record
  stating that he will only use these expanded powers against those who would do
  us harm, no one should be comfortable with ANY President having these powers. Mr. Romney will not repeal the Act if he
  is in power.

• Foreign
  Policy:
  The “surge” of additional troops into Afghanistan was a failure. Our remaining
  mission is rife with problems and no real solutions. Mr. Romney has said he
  would not change our exit date from active warfighting in Afghanistan. Our
  drone program in Pakistan has not made us more secure and is a growing problem.
  The decision whether to continue drone attacks in Pakistan needs to be addressed
  early in the next administration. Both candidates indicate they wish them to continue.
  Dropping bombs on sovereign nations certainly hasn’t done much to improve
  foreign relations around the Middle East.
  

• Questionable
  Decisions on Financial Institutions: President Obama’s choices for key leadership in our
  Treasury department, especially Tim Geithner as Secretary of the Treasury and Larry Summers as Director of the White House
  National Economic Council were poor choices. The Dodd-Frank financial reform law will not protect us from future bailouts. In fact, Dodd-Frank actually widened the federal safety net by granting 8 Clearing House institutions the right to tap the Federal Reserve for funding when the next crisis hits.  The HARP program
  intended to provide relief to distressed home owners has been poorly
  communicated, under-utilized, and mostly ineffective.

In
the end run, President Obama hasn’t been nearly as great as we needed him to
be, or is he evil and anti-American as others suggest.

Let’s review the bidding. If Mr. Romney wins, he has promised
to:

• Pass another trickle down tax cut on top of making the Bush tax
  cuts permanent

• Repeal Obamacare, voucherize Medicare, block grant Medicaid and
  food stamps

• Push defense spending to 4% of GDP, when no one should be pushing more defense spending

• Deregulate financial markets and environmental protections

• Offer budgets that deeply cut discretionary spending including education and the environment
  

Mr. Romney has pandered to his party since he first started running for president in 2008.Earlier in 2012, he rejected a 10 part spending cut to 1 part tax increase ratio to deal with the deficit. Despite his slide to the middle during the debates, what should bother voters most is his ability to completely
deny that agenda and gain ground in the polls. 

He argued that he didn’t really
have a big tax cut (the first debate); that the tax cut he didn’t really have
could be paid for by magic math; that his foreign policy is the same as the
President’s (the last debate); that his plan will add 12 million jobs, a number that forecasters tell us we’re
likely to see regardless of who wins.

The bottom line is that Mr. Romney has an agenda that works only if you don’t believe most of what he says.

How did we devolve to a country where someone can assert
things with virtually no backup in reality and not only be taken seriously
but be making the election very close when
his opponent is the incumbent President with a solid, if not inspiring, record?

Let’s hope undecided voters wake up by November 6th.