Mitt Romney's explanation of his election loss — that President Obama bought the election with "gifts" such as health insurance coverage and student loan forgiveness — is the topic of my column this week. Please check it out at the New York Sun (here), Reason (here), or Newsmax (here). It was also excerpted at National Review Online (here).
Two other takes on the "gifts" explanation struck me as worth passing along.
One, by Rabbi Steven Pruzansky, writing, in the Jewish Press:
Imagine two restaurants side by side. One sells its customers fine cuisine at a reasonable price, and the other offers a free buffet, all-you-can-eat as long as supplies last. Few – including me – could resist the attraction of the free food. Now imagine that the second restaurant stays in business because the first restaurant is forced to provide it with the food for the free buffet, and we have the current economy, until, at least, the first restaurant decides to go out of business.
The second, by Michael Ledeen, writing, at PJ Media:
Romney seems to be a sort of economic determinist. He thinks people who receive stuff from the state are automatically statist. But that's false (for starters, I am on that list of "takers" — I get Social Security — and I'm no statist). Some number of those on government payments are unhappy; they'd like to get out from under. It's wrong, politically and morally, to write them off as lost souls.
