Today is the day. I've had a countdown on Biblical Conservatism for over a year. Today is the day American is given the chance to change course.
The Drive-By Media is already calling the election for Obama. I've already told you why this is happening...they are either a) delusional enough to believe their +5-10% Democrat turnout models or b) we can expect that these polls will be quoted as reasons why Romney's election must be the result of some sort of fraud.
Back in 1964, Ronald Reagan gave a famous speech in support of Republican Barry Goldwater called "A Time for Choosing." Today we are again at a time for choosing.
Today, I am speaking not to those of you who have already made up your mind. I'm speaking to the few of you who inexplicably have not. Today, as you step into that booth to cast your vote, you have a choice.
Today our choice is whether or not to keep on the same path we are currently on. The path we are on is one of failure. It is a path of $1 Trillion deficits and no plan to fix it, save for raising taxes on "millionaires and billionaires." Except by the numbers this will only raise about $60 Billion per year...which is only 6% of the deficit. There is no problem to bridge the other 94% of the gap.
Today our choice is whether or not we want to take proactive steps to to fill our nations energy needs with real, tangible energy solutions that we already have domestically like oil, coal and natural gas; or do we want to continue to effort after a solution by burning billions on fantasy green energy.
Today our choice is whether we want to put America back to work by not regulating and taxing those who own businesses.
Today our choice is whether or not we choose to continue to be the last, best hope of mankind and a shining city on a hill or if we want to let the sun set on the United States as a superpower as the sun set on the Soviet Union, the British Empire, the Roman Empire, the Greek Empire, the Babylonian Empire and the Egyptian Empire before us.
Today our choice is whether or not we want to have a President who will defend Americans in harms way or one who will pretend that a preplanned, forewarned terrorist attack was because of a video and then attempt to create a revisionist history of things that just happened.
Today, our choice is whether or not we want our country back.
So I close with a quote from our 40th President, Ronald Wilson Reagan:
Are you better off now than you were four years ago? Is it easier for you to go and buy things in the stores than it was four years ago? Is there more or less unemployment in the country than there was four years ago? Is America as respected throughout the world as it was? Do you feel that our security is as safe, that we’re as strong as we were four years ago?
And if you answer all of those questions ‘yes’, why then, I think
your choice is very obvious as to whom you will vote for. If you don’t
agree, if you don’t think that this course that we’ve been on for the
last four years is what you would like to see us follow for the next
four, then I could suggest another choice that you have.
Showing posts with label Mitt Romney. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mitt Romney. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
Thursday, October 4, 2012
Mitt Romney Wins Debate By Several Touchdowns
Last night, Mitt Romney absolutely flattened President Obama in the debate like a cartoon character under a steamroller. It was like watching Abraham Lincoln debate Milton Waddams. OK, I exaggerate a little. But I was continually waiting for President Obama to go search for his stapler.
Mitt was on point. He was packed with facts. He was charismatic. He called Obama out on his blatant lies at one point, and did it so tactfully that President Obama could barely respond. He also took the wind right out of President Obama's sails by bringing up and disarming the President's best retorts on issues like Obamacare (and Romneycare) and what the President was about to say (falsely) about Governor Romney's tax plans. It reminded me of Harvey Dent taking the gun from the mobster in Dark Knight, except of Dent had seen the gun in the mobster's coat and taken it before he even pulled it out.
Mitt was, frankly, brilliant. You know how I know? Because the Drive-By Media is in pure, unadulterated spin mode now. They are saying Romney won by lying. They are saying "it doesn't matter because Obama's still leading in the polls" (in fantasy world with a +8% Democrat turnout, mind you). They are on full blown defense. Their candidate just showed up and was incompetent in a debate. So much for being such a great rhetorician, right? I guess Obama just missed his teleprompter.
So let's talk about President Obama, shall we? Remember how I said all through the primaries that Foghorn Leghorn could beat Obama in this election? (I still believe that, just like I still firmly believe we will win on November 6th). Well it sounded to me like Foghorn Leghorn showed up to debate in place of Barack Obama. A whole lot of rambling. A whole lot of stuff made up on the spot (which Foghorn Leghorn was fond of doing, as well, by the way).
Friends, the Drive-By Media is going to tell you a different story. They aren't claiming Obama won the debate, because frankly, that's like saying Picket's Charge went really well for the Confederacy. Fact is the Left does not know what hit them. President Obama made Jimmy Carter's 1980 debate performance look strong. They don't know what to do, friends!
They're going to double down on skewed polls, that I can guarantee. They are going to talk about how debates don't matter. But debates do matter. President Obama had to go toe to toe with Mitt Romney last night. As conservative columnist David Limbaugh said on Twitter during the debate: "So far it's a boxing analogy -- O is flailing away blindly without even seeing his target much less hitting it. Mitt's blocking & punching."
That's how the debate went. Obama flailed, Romney kept hitting him and hitting him and flat out won. In the end, do you want to know how Mitt won? He did precisely what I've told you he needed to do: He effectively communicated conservatism. Bottom line: If the same Mitt Romney keeps showing up for the next 33 days, Barack Obama does not have a chance. Game on.
Mitt was on point. He was packed with facts. He was charismatic. He called Obama out on his blatant lies at one point, and did it so tactfully that President Obama could barely respond. He also took the wind right out of President Obama's sails by bringing up and disarming the President's best retorts on issues like Obamacare (and Romneycare) and what the President was about to say (falsely) about Governor Romney's tax plans. It reminded me of Harvey Dent taking the gun from the mobster in Dark Knight, except of Dent had seen the gun in the mobster's coat and taken it before he even pulled it out.
Mitt was, frankly, brilliant. You know how I know? Because the Drive-By Media is in pure, unadulterated spin mode now. They are saying Romney won by lying. They are saying "it doesn't matter because Obama's still leading in the polls" (in fantasy world with a +8% Democrat turnout, mind you). They are on full blown defense. Their candidate just showed up and was incompetent in a debate. So much for being such a great rhetorician, right? I guess Obama just missed his teleprompter.
So let's talk about President Obama, shall we? Remember how I said all through the primaries that Foghorn Leghorn could beat Obama in this election? (I still believe that, just like I still firmly believe we will win on November 6th). Well it sounded to me like Foghorn Leghorn showed up to debate in place of Barack Obama. A whole lot of rambling. A whole lot of stuff made up on the spot (which Foghorn Leghorn was fond of doing, as well, by the way).
Friends, the Drive-By Media is going to tell you a different story. They aren't claiming Obama won the debate, because frankly, that's like saying Picket's Charge went really well for the Confederacy. Fact is the Left does not know what hit them. President Obama made Jimmy Carter's 1980 debate performance look strong. They don't know what to do, friends!
They're going to double down on skewed polls, that I can guarantee. They are going to talk about how debates don't matter. But debates do matter. President Obama had to go toe to toe with Mitt Romney last night. As conservative columnist David Limbaugh said on Twitter during the debate: "So far it's a boxing analogy -- O is flailing away blindly without even seeing his target much less hitting it. Mitt's blocking & punching."
That's how the debate went. Obama flailed, Romney kept hitting him and hitting him and flat out won. In the end, do you want to know how Mitt won? He did precisely what I've told you he needed to do: He effectively communicated conservatism. Bottom line: If the same Mitt Romney keeps showing up for the next 33 days, Barack Obama does not have a chance. Game on.
Thursday, September 27, 2012
Romney is a Strong Debater, MSM Will Claim Otherwise
The first of four debates is a week away. Mitt Romney could genuinely use a good performance in these debates. (I won't go so far as to say Mitt NEEDS a great performance, because I do not believe for a minute these Drive-By Media polls that show Obama winning comfortably or even at all.)
Now I watched nearly every debate in the Republican primary season. I blogged on most of them. While I think Mitt was sometimes out debated by Newt Gingrich, President Obama is no Newt. Take away his podium and all of a sudden Obama doesn't sound so smart.
The fact is I spent a lot of those debates rooting against Governor Romney and being frustrated at how well he performed in those debates because it meant my candidate (as you regular readers should know, I endorsed Newt Gingrich in the primary season) was losing ground.
Now I flat out guarantee you that the Drive-By Media is going to say that Obama won the debates in post-game. It turns out reality isn't much of a concern to the Drive-Bys. I can say this with such confidence because I remember the same Drive-By Media calling the flat retread of a convention by the Democrats brilliant and the energetic celebration of American by the Republicans flat. Just to shock you folks, the Drive-By Media is in the tank for Obama so they won't report reality.
However, the good news is the majority of Americans don't trust the media! According to Gallup, 60% of Americans trust the media very little or not at all. To get more specific, 58% of Democrats trust the media (shocker) while only 31% of Independents and 26% of Republicans trust the media.
Here's the reality: Barack Obama is not used to being questioned. He's used to kid gloves. You start daring to question his brilliance and he gets more flustered than a hen thrown out of a helicopter 100 feet off the ground. (You're welcome for that visual.) If Mitt actually goes after him he's going to slam dunk Obama in these debates. Ditto for Paul Ryan in his debate with Joe Biden.
I'll be back in a week to point out I was right, but for now you've got the prediction in writing. Be prepared for Mitt to mop the floor with Obama. Also be prepared for the Drive-By Media to tell you to try their weird Jedi Mind Trick and tell you that you did not see what you saw.
Now I watched nearly every debate in the Republican primary season. I blogged on most of them. While I think Mitt was sometimes out debated by Newt Gingrich, President Obama is no Newt. Take away his podium and all of a sudden Obama doesn't sound so smart.
The fact is I spent a lot of those debates rooting against Governor Romney and being frustrated at how well he performed in those debates because it meant my candidate (as you regular readers should know, I endorsed Newt Gingrich in the primary season) was losing ground.
Now I flat out guarantee you that the Drive-By Media is going to say that Obama won the debates in post-game. It turns out reality isn't much of a concern to the Drive-Bys. I can say this with such confidence because I remember the same Drive-By Media calling the flat retread of a convention by the Democrats brilliant and the energetic celebration of American by the Republicans flat. Just to shock you folks, the Drive-By Media is in the tank for Obama so they won't report reality.
However, the good news is the majority of Americans don't trust the media! According to Gallup, 60% of Americans trust the media very little or not at all. To get more specific, 58% of Democrats trust the media (shocker) while only 31% of Independents and 26% of Republicans trust the media.
Here's the reality: Barack Obama is not used to being questioned. He's used to kid gloves. You start daring to question his brilliance and he gets more flustered than a hen thrown out of a helicopter 100 feet off the ground. (You're welcome for that visual.) If Mitt actually goes after him he's going to slam dunk Obama in these debates. Ditto for Paul Ryan in his debate with Joe Biden.
I'll be back in a week to point out I was right, but for now you've got the prediction in writing. Be prepared for Mitt to mop the floor with Obama. Also be prepared for the Drive-By Media to tell you to try their weird Jedi Mind Trick and tell you that you did not see what you saw.
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
When Carter Beat Reagan (According to Pre-Election Polls)
Oh, you thought the 2012 Election polls that show a very weak incumbent President in a surprisingly close election with his challenger?
In 1980, as the American Spectator reminded us recently, The New York Times was showing President Jimmy Carter in a horse race with challenger Ronald Reagan in several crucial swing states.
The states in question were:
Texas: About a month before Election '80, the Times told it's readers the race sat at Carter 40%, Regan 39%. On Election Day, Reagan won the state by 13%. A 14% swing in Reagan's favor from the pre-election polls.
Pennsylvania: The Times claimed that, again about a month before the election, Reagan was leading Carter by only 2%. On Election Day, Regan won the state by 7%. A 5% swing in Reagan's favor from the pre-election polls.
Illinois: About two weeks before the election, the Times stated that Illinois was "too close to call." According to their recent CBS/New York Times poll, Reagan was leading Carter 34% to 33%. On Election Day, Reagan won the state 49% to 41%. A 7% swing in Reagan's favor from the pre-election polls.
Ohio: Again, about two weeks before the election, the Times called Ohio a close race, with Reagan leading Carter by only 2%. On Election Day, Reagan won Ohio by 10%. An 8% swing in Reagan's favor from the pre-election polls.
Florida: This time the Times refused to publish their own poll. Instead, they quoted "recent local newspaper polls" that showed Reagan leading Carter by 2%. On Election Day, Reagan beat Carter to win Florida by a staggering 17%. A 15% swing in Reagan's favor from the pre-election polls.
New York: Imagine New York as a swing state? (As a lifelong resident I cannot.) But in 1980, the Times, just over a week before the election, stated that Carter was leading Reagan by 9%. On Election Day, Reagan won New York by 2%. An 11% swing from the polls.
Michigan: In Michigan, the Times did not report the actual race as it sat that day, save for saying it was close. On Election Day, Reagan won by 6%.
Nationally: A week before the election, the New York Times/CBS Poll had Carter leading Reagan 39% to 38%. On Election Day, Reagan beat Carter by 10%. An 11% swing in Reagan's favor from the pre-election polls.
So friends, when we look at history, especially when we're looking at a weak President who is oddly reminiscent of Jimmy Carter in his policies, success (or lack there of) and the Drive-By Media is again trying to tell tales about how close the race is or how Obama is winning, just remember the Election of 1980. And how Carter beat Reagan. Oh wait...
* Swing State in 2012
Source: The American Spectator -How Carter Beat Reagan
In 1980, as the American Spectator reminded us recently, The New York Times was showing President Jimmy Carter in a horse race with challenger Ronald Reagan in several crucial swing states.
The states in question were:
- California
- Texas
- Pennsylvania
- Illinois
- Ohio *
- New Jersey
- Florida *
- New York
- Michigan *
Texas: About a month before Election '80, the Times told it's readers the race sat at Carter 40%, Regan 39%. On Election Day, Reagan won the state by 13%. A 14% swing in Reagan's favor from the pre-election polls.
Pennsylvania: The Times claimed that, again about a month before the election, Reagan was leading Carter by only 2%. On Election Day, Regan won the state by 7%. A 5% swing in Reagan's favor from the pre-election polls.
Illinois: About two weeks before the election, the Times stated that Illinois was "too close to call." According to their recent CBS/New York Times poll, Reagan was leading Carter 34% to 33%. On Election Day, Reagan won the state 49% to 41%. A 7% swing in Reagan's favor from the pre-election polls.
Ohio: Again, about two weeks before the election, the Times called Ohio a close race, with Reagan leading Carter by only 2%. On Election Day, Reagan won Ohio by 10%. An 8% swing in Reagan's favor from the pre-election polls.
Florida: This time the Times refused to publish their own poll. Instead, they quoted "recent local newspaper polls" that showed Reagan leading Carter by 2%. On Election Day, Reagan beat Carter to win Florida by a staggering 17%. A 15% swing in Reagan's favor from the pre-election polls.
New York: Imagine New York as a swing state? (As a lifelong resident I cannot.) But in 1980, the Times, just over a week before the election, stated that Carter was leading Reagan by 9%. On Election Day, Reagan won New York by 2%. An 11% swing from the polls.
Michigan: In Michigan, the Times did not report the actual race as it sat that day, save for saying it was close. On Election Day, Reagan won by 6%.
Nationally: A week before the election, the New York Times/CBS Poll had Carter leading Reagan 39% to 38%. On Election Day, Reagan beat Carter by 10%. An 11% swing in Reagan's favor from the pre-election polls.
So friends, when we look at history, especially when we're looking at a weak President who is oddly reminiscent of Jimmy Carter in his policies, success (or lack there of) and the Drive-By Media is again trying to tell tales about how close the race is or how Obama is winning, just remember the Election of 1980. And how Carter beat Reagan. Oh wait...
* Swing State in 2012
Source: The American Spectator -How Carter Beat Reagan
Thursday, September 13, 2012
Obama's (Lack of) Response to Libyan Attack was Disgraceful, Romney's was Presidential
As I'm sure you are aware, the United States Embassy in Cairo, Libya was attacked and our ambassador was killed.
So here's what the US Embassy said shortly before the attacks:
The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims – as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.
Wow. Friends, WE apologized BEFORE we were attacked. We're apologizing for "hurting the religious feelings of Muslims?" Well apparently it wasn't a good enough apology, because then they attacked.
I know we're going to hear how "It wasn't Obama!" but friends, the administration absolutely cleared this statement. Americans were attacked overseas. Frankly if the President DIDN'T know about this that says what a weak leader we have elected President.
Now let me ask you a question: Do "hurt feelings" justify violence? Do "hurt feelings" justify murder? OF COURSE NOT! I don't care how badly your politically correct feelings are hurt...you do not get to kill Americans (or anyone else, frankly).
One man was Presidential yesterday in the wake of this. No, it wasn't the actual President of the United States. It was the man who I believe will be President in a mere four months, Mitt Romney.
Mitt Romney had a chance yesterday to look Presidential, and he nailed it. (President Obama had an opportunity to be weak and pandering...and he nailed that opportunity as well as Governor Romney nailed the opportunity to look Presidential.) It was reminiscent of Ronald Reagan when Americans held hostage in Iran boarded a plane to go home as Reagan was sworn in as President.
Here's what Governor Romney said in the wake of the attack:
It wasn't until far later in the statement that Romney condemned the liberal attempt to apologize. Of course that's what the liberal media is focused on...and not how weak Obama was in a difficult moment. How dare Governor Romney criticize poor Obama...he's had it so tough! Friends, I'd like to remind the Drive-By Media of something important: Mitt Romney, in addition to being a candidate for President, is also a citizen. That means, for four months more anyway, Barack Obama is Mitt's President too...and in this country it is not only our right to question our leaders it is our responsibility. Even if that President has thin skin.
My friends, we need a real leader. President Obama has clearly refused to be that. Mitt Romney I am convinced will lead. And that's the kind of President this nation deserves.
This ad was not paid for by any political candidate, party or PAC. It has been posted as part of this Blogger's personal endorsement of Mitt Romney for President. It is not subject to equal time laws.
So here's what the US Embassy said shortly before the attacks:
The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims – as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.
Wow. Friends, WE apologized BEFORE we were attacked. We're apologizing for "hurting the religious feelings of Muslims?" Well apparently it wasn't a good enough apology, because then they attacked.
I know we're going to hear how "It wasn't Obama!" but friends, the administration absolutely cleared this statement. Americans were attacked overseas. Frankly if the President DIDN'T know about this that says what a weak leader we have elected President.
Now let me ask you a question: Do "hurt feelings" justify violence? Do "hurt feelings" justify murder? OF COURSE NOT! I don't care how badly your politically correct feelings are hurt...you do not get to kill Americans (or anyone else, frankly).
One man was Presidential yesterday in the wake of this. No, it wasn't the actual President of the United States. It was the man who I believe will be President in a mere four months, Mitt Romney.
Mitt Romney had a chance yesterday to look Presidential, and he nailed it. (President Obama had an opportunity to be weak and pandering...and he nailed that opportunity as well as Governor Romney nailed the opportunity to look Presidential.) It was reminiscent of Ronald Reagan when Americans held hostage in Iran boarded a plane to go home as Reagan was sworn in as President.
Here's what Governor Romney said in the wake of the attack:
It wasn't until far later in the statement that Romney condemned the liberal attempt to apologize. Of course that's what the liberal media is focused on...and not how weak Obama was in a difficult moment. How dare Governor Romney criticize poor Obama...he's had it so tough! Friends, I'd like to remind the Drive-By Media of something important: Mitt Romney, in addition to being a candidate for President, is also a citizen. That means, for four months more anyway, Barack Obama is Mitt's President too...and in this country it is not only our right to question our leaders it is our responsibility. Even if that President has thin skin.
My friends, we need a real leader. President Obama has clearly refused to be that. Mitt Romney I am convinced will lead. And that's the kind of President this nation deserves.
To my regular readers: Have you liked Biblical Conservatism on Facebook yet? YOU ARE MISSING OUT on the news I read to prepare this blog and the political and political cartoons and memes that make me laugh! Click here to see the page and ,like us!
This ad was not paid for by any political candidate, party or PAC. It has been posted as part of this Blogger's personal endorsement of Mitt Romney for President. It is not subject to equal time laws.
Tuesday, August 21, 2012
Biblical Conservatism Officially Endorses Romney/Ryan Ticket
It's been a long time coming, friends. I spent a good deal of time in the primary season promoting different candidates. I had endorsed Newt Gingrich as my first choice to run against Barack Obama. Once Governor Mitt Romney became the presumptive nominee, I found myself willing to back him because honestly, we need to stop the Obama agenda.
Then something happened. It was Saturday, August 11th, about 9:30 am. I strolled into my favorite barber shop for a haircut. The news was on. The headline read simply "Romney Announces Paul Ryan as Running Mate." I won't lie, friends, I did a fist pump in the air. "Game on!" I thought to myself. Governor Romney did it! He picked a running mate that told me what he really intended to do as President: Govern as a conservative.
It meant he wasn't going to run a pastel campaign. It meant he was on board with real reform. It meant he wasn't going to be a wimpy moderate like some other recent Republican nominees (looking right at you, John McCain.)
So now we've got a candidate with legitimate business experience whose successes don't require the moving of the goalposts to be considered actually successful. (Not "It would've been much worse if we didn't act" baloney, real results.) We're talking about a man who actually created jobs. A man who actually made payrolls. A man who made real world decisions in the private sector, rather than working in liberal Academia and being a professional protestor. Moreover, I took a look, and it turns out Mitt has, as he claimed, genuinely lived his life as a conservative. Which means more to me than fancy speeches!
We've also got a Vice Presidential candidate in Paul Ryan, who wants to actually DO something about our problems with Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security...not just band-aid it for a few more years but actually make it sustainable. We've got a serious man who wants to actually make our entitlement programs sustainable.
Together, friends, we've got America's comeback team. We've got two men who have real plans and real ideas to bring America back to prosperity. I'm proud to officially endorse the Romney-Ryan Ticket in 2012. When you've gone in one direction for four years and things haven't improved, isn't it time for a change?
Or let me word it as a great American once put it: Are you better off than you were four years ago? If the answer is no, then vote Romney/Ryan on November 6th.
Then something happened. It was Saturday, August 11th, about 9:30 am. I strolled into my favorite barber shop for a haircut. The news was on. The headline read simply "Romney Announces Paul Ryan as Running Mate." I won't lie, friends, I did a fist pump in the air. "Game on!" I thought to myself. Governor Romney did it! He picked a running mate that told me what he really intended to do as President: Govern as a conservative.
It meant he wasn't going to run a pastel campaign. It meant he was on board with real reform. It meant he wasn't going to be a wimpy moderate like some other recent Republican nominees (looking right at you, John McCain.)
So now we've got a candidate with legitimate business experience whose successes don't require the moving of the goalposts to be considered actually successful. (Not "It would've been much worse if we didn't act" baloney, real results.) We're talking about a man who actually created jobs. A man who actually made payrolls. A man who made real world decisions in the private sector, rather than working in liberal Academia and being a professional protestor. Moreover, I took a look, and it turns out Mitt has, as he claimed, genuinely lived his life as a conservative. Which means more to me than fancy speeches!
We've also got a Vice Presidential candidate in Paul Ryan, who wants to actually DO something about our problems with Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security...not just band-aid it for a few more years but actually make it sustainable. We've got a serious man who wants to actually make our entitlement programs sustainable.
Together, friends, we've got America's comeback team. We've got two men who have real plans and real ideas to bring America back to prosperity. I'm proud to officially endorse the Romney-Ryan Ticket in 2012. When you've gone in one direction for four years and things haven't improved, isn't it time for a change?
Or let me word it as a great American once put it: Are you better off than you were four years ago? If the answer is no, then vote Romney/Ryan on November 6th.
Biblical Conservatism is responsible for the content of this message.
It was not paid advertising and is not open to equal time requirements.
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
The Left Would've Attacked Any Republican VP This Way
I can hear it now, primarily from wimpy moderate Republicans, bemoaning how Governor Mitt Romney picked a "lightening rod" like Paul Ryan for his running mate. I'm hear to give you a newsflash, friends: The Left would've attacked ANY Republican this way! It's what they do.
Don't believe me? Remember how the Drive-By Media treated John McCain BEFORE he was the Republican nominee? He was their favorite Republican, on account of what a wimp he was on many important issues. They loved the McCain-Feingold Law and it's restriction of Freedom of Speech. Then he became the Republican nominee, specifically running against the Drive-By Media darling and liberal "Messiah" Barack Obama. They ramped up the same laundry list of attacks they always pull out.
The reality is the Left has no new ideas. It's always some form of "The Republicans are mean spirited! The Republicans want old people to die! The Republicans want to take away your XYZ!"
The only advantage the selection of Paul Ryan gave the Left was about a ten minute head start. That's it. Fact of the matter is Governor Romney could've picked Santa Claus and liberals would similarly bemoan the choice. I can hear it now:
"The Romney/Claus ticket is biased against non-Christians!" (Because, remember, atheist liberals are laboring under the ridiculous impression that Santa has anything to do with Christianity for some reason. Don't look for logic. They're liberals.)
Bottom line: Mitt made a good choice. Don't let panic set in. In fact, be excited! Governor Romney made a bold choice to actually be strongly conservative! He didn't chicken out as I feared he would! Remember back in July when we talked about the running mate potentials (The Good, the Bad and the Wild Cards)? He actually picked someone from the Good List!
As far as attack ads? Well, the Left would've done this anyway, whether we picked a wimp or a solid conservative. So be glad we now have a solid conservative.
Don't believe me? Remember how the Drive-By Media treated John McCain BEFORE he was the Republican nominee? He was their favorite Republican, on account of what a wimp he was on many important issues. They loved the McCain-Feingold Law and it's restriction of Freedom of Speech. Then he became the Republican nominee, specifically running against the Drive-By Media darling and liberal "Messiah" Barack Obama. They ramped up the same laundry list of attacks they always pull out.
The reality is the Left has no new ideas. It's always some form of "The Republicans are mean spirited! The Republicans want old people to die! The Republicans want to take away your XYZ!"
The only advantage the selection of Paul Ryan gave the Left was about a ten minute head start. That's it. Fact of the matter is Governor Romney could've picked Santa Claus and liberals would similarly bemoan the choice. I can hear it now:
"The Romney/Claus ticket is biased against non-Christians!" (Because, remember, atheist liberals are laboring under the ridiculous impression that Santa has anything to do with Christianity for some reason. Don't look for logic. They're liberals.)
Bottom line: Mitt made a good choice. Don't let panic set in. In fact, be excited! Governor Romney made a bold choice to actually be strongly conservative! He didn't chicken out as I feared he would! Remember back in July when we talked about the running mate potentials (The Good, the Bad and the Wild Cards)? He actually picked someone from the Good List!
As far as attack ads? Well, the Left would've done this anyway, whether we picked a wimp or a solid conservative. So be glad we now have a solid conservative.
Monday, August 13, 2012
Romney Knocks It Out of the Park with VP Pick
Paul Ryan. Bam! With one fowl swoop, Governor Romney picked the perfect running mate.
Now I know the Obama people and their willing counterparts in the Drive-By Media are going to act like they’re thrilled with the pick of Paul Ryan as his running mate. They’re going to say that this is a gift to Obama. They’re going to act super confident. But here’s the reality of what was said by the campaign behind the scenes:
News Report: Mitt Romney announces Paul Ryan as his running mate!
Now I know the Obama people and their willing counterparts in the Drive-By Media are going to act like they’re thrilled with the pick of Paul Ryan as his running mate. They’re going to say that this is a gift to Obama. They’re going to act super confident. But here’s the reality of what was said by the campaign behind the scenes:
News Report: Mitt Romney announces Paul Ryan as his running mate!
Obama Campaign: Crap! Double crap! Crap crap crap crap! Crapapalooza!
You know WHY the Obama campaign is genuinely concerned, no matter what they tell you publicly? It’s simple. Mitt refused to pick a wimp. The Drive-By Media would’ve called a pick like a Rob Portman “serious.” Rest assured, friends, when the liberal media calls a candidate “serious” they mean “wimpy moderate.” They called Jon Huntsman a serious Presidential candidate, remember?
Governor Romney showed with the pick of Paul Ryan that he wasn’t going to run a pastel campaign. He picked the man whose budget plan sent the Left into spins of ridiculousness in rhetoric that was last rivaled only by their panicky ridiculousness when Newt Gingrich and the Contract with America passed Welfare Reform. At that point the cuts were “draconian” and the Republicans were “mean spirited.” With Paul Ryan, the Left started claiming that the Ryan Plan, quite literally, wanted to “push Grandma off a cliff.”
Friends, when the Left gets ridiculous, you know you’ve hit a nerve. You know you’ve upset them. You know you’ve hit a nerve and really, really worried the Left when they start to pull out cartoonish bumper sticker slogans. It’s because liberal Democrat’s ability to hold on to power is entirely predicated on one thing: buying the votes of one group of people with someone else’s money, either taxed or borrowed. It was modern liberalism that changed the focus on taking care of “taxpayers” to taking care of “voters.” Specifically, liberals take money from taxpayers to give different government services (some genuinely needed, most not needed) to “voters” who don’t pay taxes. If we ever get our finances really in order for good, then their jig is up. (And for the record, the reforms of the 90s were not from President Clinton. Clinton was dragged, kicking and screaming, by Newt Gingrich and the Contract with America, into those reforms. Then he took credit for it. Stupid reality always goes against liberal talking points.)
Paul Ryan scares the living crap out of the Left. He’s intelligent and articulate. He’s got a real plan that will work that includes real, reforms that aren’t “draconian” or “mean spirited.” They’re just logical reforms to preserve Medicare and Social Security and balance the budget. This is the man who is about to be our Vice President, friends.
This is the precise sort of pick Governor Romney needed to make. He’s a strong conservative who can effectively communicate conservatism. He’ll take it to Obama and his record of abject failure. He’s also, as conservative commentator S.E. Cupp noted on Twitter, is the only pick that would make both the conservative base and the Republican establishment happy. The guy who is officially the next in line politically is the exact type of person we need.
Friends, trust me when I say, no matter how much the Obama campaign pretends they are happy about the pick of Paul Ryan, they aren’t happy. Not one bit. Bottom line: Mitt Romney knocked it out of the park by picking Paul Ryan. Game so very on!
Friday, August 10, 2012
Obama Super-PAC Ad Shows How Little the Left "Understands" Business
In yesterday's blog, we discussed the ad that the Obama Super-PAC put out entitled "Understands," specifically how the ad was completely packed with lies. Today, I want to examine something else important about the ad: It shows how ridiculous the liberal mentality is about employment and business.
Buried deep within the ad is a liberal mentality: People are OWED a job and OWED health insurace from their employer, and if you lay off an employee due to perfectly legitimate business reasons, you are denying that person the paycheck they are owed just for breathing and denying them health insurance they are owed just because they work for you which they are owed because they are breathing.
Friends, as I stated repeatedly, I am not without sympathy. I am very sorry Mr. Joe Soptic's wife Ranae died of cancer. I really do feel bad. However, to blame Mitt Romney, Bain Capital, or pretty much anything besides CANCER is absolute ridiculous.
Just as importantly, this attitude that Bain Capital failed Mr. Soptic by laying him off in any way is absolute baloney. Here's how employment works, for you liberals out there: A business starts producing a product that people either need or desire that they can sell for more than it costs them to produce. Business is going well, so now they have more demand for the products they sell than they can keep up with...so they hire more people! So a job is created! The employer then finds a person they want to hire. They agree to a contract. The contract is this: The employee sells his labor to the employer. This labor can be purchased in currencies that include both monetary compensation and other benefits. One of the most popular benefits is Health Insurance.
This contract can be terminated by either party, pretty much at any time. The employee can decide they want to go sell their labor to another company at any time. The employer can also terminate the employment, whether it be because the employee is not fulfilling his end of the contract or because the employer no longer needs to purchase labor because the demand for the product has dropped. That, my friends, is known as LIFE.
But liberals like Mr. Soptic believe he was OWED a job and health insurance. Honestly, that's the only reason you could legitimately blame Bain Capital or Mitt Romney for a woman dying of cancer; theoretically due to lack of insurance; is if you believed Bain or Romney OWED Mr. Soptic a job. And frankly, friends, that's just not how life works.
Buried deep within the ad is a liberal mentality: People are OWED a job and OWED health insurace from their employer, and if you lay off an employee due to perfectly legitimate business reasons, you are denying that person the paycheck they are owed just for breathing and denying them health insurance they are owed just because they work for you which they are owed because they are breathing.
Friends, as I stated repeatedly, I am not without sympathy. I am very sorry Mr. Joe Soptic's wife Ranae died of cancer. I really do feel bad. However, to blame Mitt Romney, Bain Capital, or pretty much anything besides CANCER is absolute ridiculous.
Just as importantly, this attitude that Bain Capital failed Mr. Soptic by laying him off in any way is absolute baloney. Here's how employment works, for you liberals out there: A business starts producing a product that people either need or desire that they can sell for more than it costs them to produce. Business is going well, so now they have more demand for the products they sell than they can keep up with...so they hire more people! So a job is created! The employer then finds a person they want to hire. They agree to a contract. The contract is this: The employee sells his labor to the employer. This labor can be purchased in currencies that include both monetary compensation and other benefits. One of the most popular benefits is Health Insurance.
This contract can be terminated by either party, pretty much at any time. The employee can decide they want to go sell their labor to another company at any time. The employer can also terminate the employment, whether it be because the employee is not fulfilling his end of the contract or because the employer no longer needs to purchase labor because the demand for the product has dropped. That, my friends, is known as LIFE.
But liberals like Mr. Soptic believe he was OWED a job and health insurance. Honestly, that's the only reason you could legitimately blame Bain Capital or Mitt Romney for a woman dying of cancer; theoretically due to lack of insurance; is if you believed Bain or Romney OWED Mr. Soptic a job. And frankly, friends, that's just not how life works.
Wednesday, August 8, 2012
Obama's Poll Numbers Are Only Good With a Fantasy Electorate
Those of you who read this blog regularly know that one of my favorite things to do is dissect polling samples from the Drive-By Media which clearly come from Happy Imagination Land (since they have no bearing on reality. Do I do this because, frankly, it's an easy post to put together and there's a ton of source material? Partly. But also so you realize how absolutely ridiculously prevalent this is from the Drive-By Media.
You see, friends, despite what the same media sources who give you these skewed samples claim, polls are not an attempt to guage public opinion. Rather, it is an attempt to SHAPE public opinion. Sure, Mitt Romney is pretty well guaranteed the conservative VOTE. But the vote isn't all that matters, as I've told you time and time again. It's about passion. It's about donations, too. If conservatives with money vote for Romney but don't donate, it's going to be a rough election. Ditto for conservatives who vote for Romney but don't volunteer or help convince their friends to vote for him. If the Drive-By Media can convince you that Romney's campaign is a lost cause, people who do a whole lot less donating, volunteering, and convincing.
So we get these polling samples based on a fantasy electorate. Consider this Pew Poll (which likely would've been the subject of a post if I wasn't on vacation last week). It claims Obama has a 10% advantage over Governor Romney. There's only one problem: It claims that there will be a 19% advantage of Democrats over Republicans in voter turnout. NINETEEN PERCENT! Now let's give you a nice fat reality check, from Breitbart.com:
In the bestelection season Democrats have enjoyed since Nixon resigned, 2008, the Democrat advantage was only D+8, but Pew is now attempting to hustle us into believing the turnout this year is going to be D +19.
To be honest, here in the Real World, there's about as much chance of the Democrats seeing a +19 advantage in turnout this time around as we do of seeing Barney Frank purchase a Chik-Fil-A franchise as part of his retirement investments. Friends, assumption that we're going to see a Democrat turnout advantage on par with 2008's +8 advantage is not going to happen!
Why do I say this? Well, how about the fact that Republican voter has risen 16% since 2008, while Democrat voter enthusiasm has dropped 22% since the 2008 election. For the record, in 2008, Democratic Voting Enthusiasm was at 61%, and now it has dropped to 39%. In 2008, Republican Voting Enthusiasm was at 35%, but today it's up to 51%. So even though Republican Voter Enthusiasm has spiked, and Democrat Voter Enthusiasm has plunged, we expect the 2012 election to see Democrat voter turnout that exceeds even the best advantage in recent memory four years ago? Go ahead and pee on my leg and tell me it's raining, too.
Bottom line, friends, is that Obama is hanging on by a thread at this point. He's got small leads in polls of Registered Voters. (20-30% of registered voters won't show up to vote, by the way...and Republican voters are more reliable than Democrat voters, historically.) Friends, do not believe the Drive-By Media poll cooking samples. We are on our way to win.
You see, friends, despite what the same media sources who give you these skewed samples claim, polls are not an attempt to guage public opinion. Rather, it is an attempt to SHAPE public opinion. Sure, Mitt Romney is pretty well guaranteed the conservative VOTE. But the vote isn't all that matters, as I've told you time and time again. It's about passion. It's about donations, too. If conservatives with money vote for Romney but don't donate, it's going to be a rough election. Ditto for conservatives who vote for Romney but don't volunteer or help convince their friends to vote for him. If the Drive-By Media can convince you that Romney's campaign is a lost cause, people who do a whole lot less donating, volunteering, and convincing.
So we get these polling samples based on a fantasy electorate. Consider this Pew Poll (which likely would've been the subject of a post if I wasn't on vacation last week). It claims Obama has a 10% advantage over Governor Romney. There's only one problem: It claims that there will be a 19% advantage of Democrats over Republicans in voter turnout. NINETEEN PERCENT! Now let's give you a nice fat reality check, from Breitbart.com:
In the best
To be honest, here in the Real World, there's about as much chance of the Democrats seeing a +19 advantage in turnout this time around as we do of seeing Barney Frank purchase a Chik-Fil-A franchise as part of his retirement investments. Friends, assumption that we're going to see a Democrat turnout advantage on par with 2008's +8 advantage is not going to happen!
Why do I say this? Well, how about the fact that Republican voter has risen 16% since 2008, while Democrat voter enthusiasm has dropped 22% since the 2008 election. For the record, in 2008, Democratic Voting Enthusiasm was at 61%, and now it has dropped to 39%. In 2008, Republican Voting Enthusiasm was at 35%, but today it's up to 51%. So even though Republican Voter Enthusiasm has spiked, and Democrat Voter Enthusiasm has plunged, we expect the 2012 election to see Democrat voter turnout that exceeds even the best advantage in recent memory four years ago? Go ahead and pee on my leg and tell me it's raining, too.
Bottom line, friends, is that Obama is hanging on by a thread at this point. He's got small leads in polls of Registered Voters. (20-30% of registered voters won't show up to vote, by the way...and Republican voters are more reliable than Democrat voters, historically.) Friends, do not believe the Drive-By Media poll cooking samples. We are on our way to win.
Monday, July 23, 2012
Obama Claims He Didn't Say "You Didn't Build That"
President Obama's ridiculousness has risen to a new level, friends. Now he's running an ad where he claims that he never said "If you've got a successful business, you didn't build that!" Here's the absolutely ridiculous part of it: HE SHOWS IN THE VIDEO WHERE HE INDEED SAID THAT!
The ad, which you can see here claims specifically that President Obama did not say what Governor Romney quotes him as saying. Then, at the 36 second mark of the video, IT QUOTES OBAMA!
Honestly, friends, what is the President trying to pull? Does he think he's a Jedi now or something? "President Obama didn't say that...and those aren't the droids you're looking for." I'm taken aback at the blatant lie that is self-disproved within the very same video.
Yes, I know the President did explain himself somewhat in the same speech noting he spoke of bridges and roads. Yet the fact that the President continues to wilfully ignore the very obvious fact that the businesses that he continues to attack PAID INTO THE POT THAT BUILT ROADS AND BRIDGES! So it turns out...and this is at least the second most mind-numbing part of this statement: THOSE BUSINESS DID PAY FOR THE BRIDGES AND ROADS! We discussed that very reality last week on Thursday here at Biblical Conservatism. Government expenditure come from taxes. Taxes come from taxpayer. The wealthy pay the lions share of taxes. Not that complicated.
Friends, I know I'm ranting a bit in this post, and if that bothers you I'm truly sorry. But I think this commercial by the President deserves a rant. He sits there and tells you he didn't say something then seconds later shows us where he said it, verbatim. The fact that he calls Mitt Romney a liar while proving him to be truthful in the same video is just as maddening. Especially when the President proceeds to lie to our faces while calling someone a liar then prove to us that he's lying all in 30 seconds!
Enough is enough, friends. I'm asking you, I'm BEGGING you, to help me in electing Somebody Else in 2012. And that Somebody Else is Mitt Romney. He's not the perfect candidate, but he's certainly a better option than the President we have now.
The ad, which you can see here claims specifically that President Obama did not say what Governor Romney quotes him as saying. Then, at the 36 second mark of the video, IT QUOTES OBAMA!
Honestly, friends, what is the President trying to pull? Does he think he's a Jedi now or something? "President Obama didn't say that...and those aren't the droids you're looking for." I'm taken aback at the blatant lie that is self-disproved within the very same video.
Yes, I know the President did explain himself somewhat in the same speech noting he spoke of bridges and roads. Yet the fact that the President continues to wilfully ignore the very obvious fact that the businesses that he continues to attack PAID INTO THE POT THAT BUILT ROADS AND BRIDGES! So it turns out...and this is at least the second most mind-numbing part of this statement: THOSE BUSINESS DID PAY FOR THE BRIDGES AND ROADS! We discussed that very reality last week on Thursday here at Biblical Conservatism. Government expenditure come from taxes. Taxes come from taxpayer. The wealthy pay the lions share of taxes. Not that complicated.
Friends, I know I'm ranting a bit in this post, and if that bothers you I'm truly sorry. But I think this commercial by the President deserves a rant. He sits there and tells you he didn't say something then seconds later shows us where he said it, verbatim. The fact that he calls Mitt Romney a liar while proving him to be truthful in the same video is just as maddening. Especially when the President proceeds to lie to our faces while calling someone a liar then prove to us that he's lying all in 30 seconds!
Enough is enough, friends. I'm asking you, I'm BEGGING you, to help me in electing Somebody Else in 2012. And that Somebody Else is Mitt Romney. He's not the perfect candidate, but he's certainly a better option than the President we have now.
Friday, July 20, 2012
Obama Back Pedals as Romney Advances
Last week, Barack Obama made the claim "if you have a business, you didn't do it all on your own." Since then, the President has been back pedalling. He knows he stepped in a big, smelly pile of dog doo, friends. That's the bad news for the President, and it's telegraphed in liberal polls where the President's favorability numbers are dropping and the Drive-By Media is scrambling for an excuse.
In the mean time, Governor Mitt Romney found something he seemed to have lost since the primary season, his...errr, shall we say...marbles. Since becoming the presumptive GOP nominee, Governor Romney's marbles had seem to have disappeared under the sofa. Not sure where they went. He was busy saying how President Obama was just a nice guy who didn't have a clue in some misguided, marble-less attempt to win over the independent swing-voter.
Then, just as the President was placing his wing-tip directly in a smelly pile of dog doo, someone in the Romney house must've vacuumed under the sofa, because...(taa-daa!)...there's Mitt's marbles! Governor Romney went and shined those bad boys up and took them out for a spin, going right after President Obama as needed to be done, about his claim that "business owners don't deserve the credit for succeeding, government does...so pay more taxes!"
This ad, which debuted Thursday online for Governor Romney, was one big marble-filled run at the President's absolutely ridiculous claim:
In the mean time, Governor Mitt Romney found something he seemed to have lost since the primary season, his...errr, shall we say...marbles. Since becoming the presumptive GOP nominee, Governor Romney's marbles had seem to have disappeared under the sofa. Not sure where they went. He was busy saying how President Obama was just a nice guy who didn't have a clue in some misguided, marble-less attempt to win over the independent swing-voter.
Then, just as the President was placing his wing-tip directly in a smelly pile of dog doo, someone in the Romney house must've vacuumed under the sofa, because...(taa-daa!)...there's Mitt's marbles! Governor Romney went and shined those bad boys up and took them out for a spin, going right after President Obama as needed to be done, about his claim that "business owners don't deserve the credit for succeeding, government does...so pay more taxes!"
This ad, which debuted Thursday online for Governor Romney, was one big marble-filled run at the President's absolutely ridiculous claim:
BAM! Mitt nailed it! It was about time Governor Romney found those marbles and went after President Obama. Believe me, the President will lie through his teeth to beat Governor Romney. He's already had a surrogate call Mitt a felon based on false and unproven claims then refused to apologize when he was hammered for his false claims. When facing a President who is going to lie to keep his office, it seems that it's wise for Governor Romney to go ahead and tell the truth, for crying out loud!
This ad, I hope, signals a big shift in the Romney campaign. One can only hope Mitt's marbles will stay out and in his pockets so he can fight the good fight and win. President Obama's certainly not done falsifying stories to suit his desire to keep his job. Governor Romney needs to stay on the attack. There's plenty of completely true things to attack with President Obama. Do that, Mitt...keep those marbles shined up and in your pocket at all times...and you will be our nation's 44th President.
This ad, I hope, signals a big shift in the Romney campaign. One can only hope Mitt's marbles will stay out and in his pockets so he can fight the good fight and win. President Obama's certainly not done falsifying stories to suit his desire to keep his job. Governor Romney needs to stay on the attack. There's plenty of completely true things to attack with President Obama. Do that, Mitt...keep those marbles shined up and in your pocket at all times...and you will be our nation's 44th President.
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
Obama Camp Slanders Romney, Refuses to Apologize
Last week, the Obama Campaign sank to new lows, accusing Mitt Romney of a felony and also of "outsourcing jobs" at Bain Capital during a time when Governor Romney no longer worked at Bain!
Honestly, friends, we might as well blame George Washington for the 2012 Federal Budget based on Obama's logic. It makes absolutely as much sense.
According to Stephanie Cutter, Deputy Campaign Manager for President Obama,
Either Mitt Romney, through his own words and his own signature was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the SEC, which is a felony, or he was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the American people to avoid responsibility for some of the consequences of his investments," Cutter said, responding to a newspaper report that Romney was listed as Bain Capital's CEO after 1999, when he has repeatedly said he left the private equity firm.
The fact is the President has deliberately distorted history to claim that Governor Romney was an "outsourcer." When factcheck.org (a site not known for being generous to the GOP, by the way) came back and debunked the Obama campaign's claim, the Obama campaign responded by accusing Governor Romney of falsifying federal disclosure forms when stating he was not working at Bain. When called out on the preposterousness of THIS claim, the Obama administration took statements from news clippings, citing them as somehow holding more water than sworn statements on federal documents. Uhuh. Said Factcheck.com, "Nothing in the SEC documents contradicts what Romney has certified as true."
So there is no evidence, but the Obama Campaign, specifically Stephanie Cutter, continued to cover their tails instead of acting like grown-ups and apologizing:
"He's not going to get an apology," Cutter said. "Just a few months ago in the primary Mitt Romney said to his opponents - who were crushing him at the time – 'stop whining.' And that's a good message for the Romney campaign. Instead of whining about what the Obama campaign is saying, just put the facts out there and let people decide rather than trying to hide them."
Or how about Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, longtime Obama associate and former chief of staff, who said:
"Give it up about Stephanie. Don't worry about that," Emanuel said on ABC. "What are you going to do when a China president says something about you? Stop whining. If you want to claim Bain Capital as your calling card for the White House, defend what happened to Bain Capital and what happened to those jobs that went overseas, those jobs that were actually cut and eliminated."
Translation: We're sticking to our story, even though it's false. Here's a misdirection about Romney. They continue to act as though Governor Romney can be blamed for decisions made when he NO LONGER RAN BAIN CAPITAL.
Which brings me back to where we started: President Washington, why did you add $5.3 Trillion in new debt from 2009-2012? (We're using Obama logic, after all...and NOTHING can be Obama's fault.)
Honestly, friends, we might as well blame George Washington for the 2012 Federal Budget based on Obama's logic. It makes absolutely as much sense.
According to Stephanie Cutter, Deputy Campaign Manager for President Obama,
Either Mitt Romney, through his own words and his own signature was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the SEC, which is a felony, or he was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the American people to avoid responsibility for some of the consequences of his investments," Cutter said, responding to a newspaper report that Romney was listed as Bain Capital's CEO after 1999, when he has repeatedly said he left the private equity firm.
The fact is the President has deliberately distorted history to claim that Governor Romney was an "outsourcer." When factcheck.org (a site not known for being generous to the GOP, by the way) came back and debunked the Obama campaign's claim, the Obama campaign responded by accusing Governor Romney of falsifying federal disclosure forms when stating he was not working at Bain. When called out on the preposterousness of THIS claim, the Obama administration took statements from news clippings, citing them as somehow holding more water than sworn statements on federal documents. Uhuh. Said Factcheck.com, "Nothing in the SEC documents contradicts what Romney has certified as true."
So there is no evidence, but the Obama Campaign, specifically Stephanie Cutter, continued to cover their tails instead of acting like grown-ups and apologizing:
"He's not going to get an apology," Cutter said. "Just a few months ago in the primary Mitt Romney said to his opponents - who were crushing him at the time – 'stop whining.' And that's a good message for the Romney campaign. Instead of whining about what the Obama campaign is saying, just put the facts out there and let people decide rather than trying to hide them."
Or how about Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, longtime Obama associate and former chief of staff, who said:
"Give it up about Stephanie. Don't worry about that," Emanuel said on ABC. "What are you going to do when a China president says something about you? Stop whining. If you want to claim Bain Capital as your calling card for the White House, defend what happened to Bain Capital and what happened to those jobs that went overseas, those jobs that were actually cut and eliminated."
Translation: We're sticking to our story, even though it's false. Here's a misdirection about Romney. They continue to act as though Governor Romney can be blamed for decisions made when he NO LONGER RAN BAIN CAPITAL.
Which brings me back to where we started: President Washington, why did you add $5.3 Trillion in new debt from 2009-2012? (We're using Obama logic, after all...and NOTHING can be Obama's fault.)
Thursday, July 5, 2012
Obama's Slight Bump Means Nothing in November
After the Obamacare Decision, President Obama's polling numbers against Mitt Romney have bumped a couple of points. That's really it, a couple points. We've seen these quick bumps for Obama before. We've also seen these quick bumps fall off the end of the Earth again.
We saw it when Barack Obama gave the order to kill Osama Bin Laden. He bumped up above 50% and stayed there...for about a week. Then he fell back down below 50% and to the doldrums. He's crept above Romney for now. He's even seen a couple of polls where his projected win is outside the margin for error (unfortunately for the President, except for a highly questionable and anomalous Bloomberg poll, they were all with Registered Voters not Likely Voters.) But really, that's all the bump the President has seen is a couple of points.
Obamacare remains unpopular. As has been the case for most of the law's life, about 10% more disapprove of the law than approve of it. Obama himself remains unpopular. Using the three Likely Voter Polls in the current Real Clear Politics Average, Obama has 46% approval and 51% disapproval. Even when we add in the two polls of Registered Voters, Obama only creeps up to 47% approval with 49% disapproval. Only when RCP adds in five polls of "adults" does Obama get over 50% approval...and as I've said before, if you're going to poll adults you might as well also poll Martians and kodiak bears, because they have absolutely as much say in elections as people who aren't registered to vote.
So what does Obama have to look forward to in a "bump?" Unless Obama convinces Hillary Clinton to be his running mate and dumps Joe Biden, he doesn't have THAT to boost him. (Meanwhile, unless Romney manages to completely and utterly screw it up, Romney can gain 5-10 points in the polls by his Vice Presidential pick.) The so-called "Convention Bump" might help Obama, but that bump rarely stays, an d since it comes after the Republican Convention, it can only really regain losses from the Republican Convention.
Friends, the President is still in trouble. Only Mitt Romney imploding (by being too moderate or too wimpy) can get Obama re-elected. Otherwise, the recent Supreme Court decision on Obamacare will become academic, as the Republican Party is about to win the 2012 election. Game on.
We saw it when Barack Obama gave the order to kill Osama Bin Laden. He bumped up above 50% and stayed there...for about a week. Then he fell back down below 50% and to the doldrums. He's crept above Romney for now. He's even seen a couple of polls where his projected win is outside the margin for error (unfortunately for the President, except for a highly questionable and anomalous Bloomberg poll, they were all with Registered Voters not Likely Voters.) But really, that's all the bump the President has seen is a couple of points.
Obamacare remains unpopular. As has been the case for most of the law's life, about 10% more disapprove of the law than approve of it. Obama himself remains unpopular. Using the three Likely Voter Polls in the current Real Clear Politics Average, Obama has 46% approval and 51% disapproval. Even when we add in the two polls of Registered Voters, Obama only creeps up to 47% approval with 49% disapproval. Only when RCP adds in five polls of "adults" does Obama get over 50% approval...and as I've said before, if you're going to poll adults you might as well also poll Martians and kodiak bears, because they have absolutely as much say in elections as people who aren't registered to vote.
So what does Obama have to look forward to in a "bump?" Unless Obama convinces Hillary Clinton to be his running mate and dumps Joe Biden, he doesn't have THAT to boost him. (Meanwhile, unless Romney manages to completely and utterly screw it up, Romney can gain 5-10 points in the polls by his Vice Presidential pick.) The so-called "Convention Bump" might help Obama, but that bump rarely stays, an d since it comes after the Republican Convention, it can only really regain losses from the Republican Convention.
Friends, the President is still in trouble. Only Mitt Romney imploding (by being too moderate or too wimpy) can get Obama re-elected. Otherwise, the recent Supreme Court decision on Obamacare will become academic, as the Republican Party is about to win the 2012 election. Game on.
Tuesday, July 3, 2012
Obamacare Still Can Be Overturned...At the Ballot Box
Friends, I know we all spent the last few days feeling bad about the Supreme Court's Obamacare Decision. I did too, I won't lie. It took me a few hours to realize that there is still a solution because We the People control this government. And since Obamacare doesn't go into effect until January, we can absolutely get it out of the way before it can do real damage.
Now let's talk about this election, shall we? Romney and Obama have been basically tied in polls of likely voters for quite some time. Romney's biggest problem? A lack of enthusiasm. As I wrote last week, the Obamacare decision awoke the sleeping giant that is the Tea Party. We are now heavily behind Romney and will fight very hard for him.
Now to the Senate. The Senate deck is stacked in the favor of the GOP just based on the number of elections. Currently the Democrat caucus (which includes 2 Independents who caucus with the Democrats) hold a six seat lead in the Senate. For those of you who think this is tough to beat, look at the actual seats up for election.
There are a total of 33 Senate seats up for grabs in 2012. Of those 33 seats, on 10 are part of the Republican caucus! So 23 of 33 seats up for grabs in 2012 are part of the Democrat Caucus. Compare that to 2010 where there were 37 seats up for grab but with a nearly even split - 18 Republican and 19 Democrat. The Republicans had a +6 net gain out of that election. Translation, the GOP won approximately 65% of the seats in the election.
If the GOP can mirror 2012 (a reasonable possibility given the political climate) and win 65% of total seats up for grabs, that would mean a 9 seat swing and the Republicans taking back the Senate with a +3 margin of victory. I'll even tell you what I think the best 9 seats to pickup would be for the GOP: Florida, Ohio, Michigan, Pennyslyvania, North Dakota, Virginia, Nebraska, New Mexico, and Wisconsin are all swing states where Romney could conceivably win. I would go so far as to say I feel comfortable about winning North Dakota, Virginia, and Wisconsin (because of how Scott Walker won his recall challenge). The others are all plausible pickups.
As far as the House of Representatives is concerned, as long as the GOP does no worse than a net loss of 48 seats, we can repeal Obamacare. This is really not a big concern. Then we need new President Romney to use the bully pulpit to get scare the tar out of Senators to vote on the the repeal. After that, Ding Dong the Law is Dead!
But all this is conditional. We need to fight the good fight and repeal Obamacare.
Now let's talk about this election, shall we? Romney and Obama have been basically tied in polls of likely voters for quite some time. Romney's biggest problem? A lack of enthusiasm. As I wrote last week, the Obamacare decision awoke the sleeping giant that is the Tea Party. We are now heavily behind Romney and will fight very hard for him.
Now to the Senate. The Senate deck is stacked in the favor of the GOP just based on the number of elections. Currently the Democrat caucus (which includes 2 Independents who caucus with the Democrats) hold a six seat lead in the Senate. For those of you who think this is tough to beat, look at the actual seats up for election.
There are a total of 33 Senate seats up for grabs in 2012. Of those 33 seats, on 10 are part of the Republican caucus! So 23 of 33 seats up for grabs in 2012 are part of the Democrat Caucus. Compare that to 2010 where there were 37 seats up for grab but with a nearly even split - 18 Republican and 19 Democrat. The Republicans had a +6 net gain out of that election. Translation, the GOP won approximately 65% of the seats in the election.
If the GOP can mirror 2012 (a reasonable possibility given the political climate) and win 65% of total seats up for grabs, that would mean a 9 seat swing and the Republicans taking back the Senate with a +3 margin of victory. I'll even tell you what I think the best 9 seats to pickup would be for the GOP: Florida, Ohio, Michigan, Pennyslyvania, North Dakota, Virginia, Nebraska, New Mexico, and Wisconsin are all swing states where Romney could conceivably win. I would go so far as to say I feel comfortable about winning North Dakota, Virginia, and Wisconsin (because of how Scott Walker won his recall challenge). The others are all plausible pickups.
As far as the House of Representatives is concerned, as long as the GOP does no worse than a net loss of 48 seats, we can repeal Obamacare. This is really not a big concern. Then we need new President Romney to use the bully pulpit to get scare the tar out of Senators to vote on the the repeal. After that, Ding Dong the Law is Dead!
But all this is conditional. We need to fight the good fight and repeal Obamacare.
Friday, June 29, 2012
Obamacare Ruling Has Just Woken a Sleeping Giant
It's name is the Tea Party. Friends, do you know what caused the Tea Party? It was Obamacare. The Tea Party was kind of in a lull until yesterday's ruling by the Supreme Court. Now, friends, you've just made us angry. And we get organized when we're angry.
Mitt Romney's biggest problem...an excitement gap...just went bye bye. Because now conservatives are necessarily bent on getting rid of Obamacare at the ballot box. We always were, friends...it's just we were hoping the Supreme Court would stand up for liberty. They didn't. Well, Chief Justice Roberts didn't. (Still mad at you, buddy.) As conservatives, we believe in personal responsibility, and not the forced kind. If you want to purchase health insurance, fine. If you choose not to, that's fine too, but don't ask us to pay for it with our tax dollars. (We may be willing to pay for it in our churches and charities, just not through taxes.)
The Tea Party just woke up, friends. Mitt Romney just got huge boost. Because the Tea Party is once again awake and by the way, we're still mad as hell. We are not going to take this ruling lying down. If the Supreme Court is going to refuse to uphold the Constitution, then we're going to do it at the ballot box.
My fellow Tea Party patriots, get ready, because Election 2010: The Sequel is in post-production. Debuts on November 6, 2012. Game on.
Mitt Romney's biggest problem...an excitement gap...just went bye bye. Because now conservatives are necessarily bent on getting rid of Obamacare at the ballot box. We always were, friends...it's just we were hoping the Supreme Court would stand up for liberty. They didn't. Well, Chief Justice Roberts didn't. (Still mad at you, buddy.) As conservatives, we believe in personal responsibility, and not the forced kind. If you want to purchase health insurance, fine. If you choose not to, that's fine too, but don't ask us to pay for it with our tax dollars. (We may be willing to pay for it in our churches and charities, just not through taxes.)
The Tea Party just woke up, friends. Mitt Romney just got huge boost. Because the Tea Party is once again awake and by the way, we're still mad as hell. We are not going to take this ruling lying down. If the Supreme Court is going to refuse to uphold the Constitution, then we're going to do it at the ballot box.
My fellow Tea Party patriots, get ready, because Election 2010: The Sequel is in post-production. Debuts on November 6, 2012. Game on.
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Once Mitt Connects, Obama is Done
Now that Mitt Romney is the official Republican nominee we are getting some level of accurate polling data in this November's Presidential matchup. So far, it's been pretty close. Yet the writing is also on the wall that suggests that Obama's numbers will be dropping off after Mitt Romney becomes less unknown to the voting populace.
Ironically enough, the Drive-By Media is claiming that it's Mitt who is out of touch with most Americans. Ironic, since their beloved President has never had a real job in his life and was a professor, then a community organizer, and then he became a professional politician. Apparently THAT is the typical career path of the average American.
Here's a nice dose of reality for those of us who want to see America fire Obama in 2012: He's only doing as well as he is because Romney is still an unknown quantity to many Americans. A lot of people still believe that Mitt is basically C. Montgomery Burns. But here's the thing: People trust their own eyes before they trust the Drive-By Media stories. I remember when the first Republican Primary debate happened last year. I heard so many people who were so very shocked that Michelle Bachmann wasn't a fire-breathing dragon.
Mitt's going to do the same thing. He's going to rationally explain what Bain Capital does, and explain the utter stupidity of the Obama line that "Bain didn't exist to create jobs." Well no duh, Mr. President. As I stated before, that's not why businesses form. Unfortunately, our President is a man who simply does not understand how business works.
Friends, President Obama has nothing positive to run on, save for making an increidbly obvious decision to go get Osama Bin Laden. I've said it over and over. His biggest domestic achievement is Obamacare, remains tremendously unpopular, so much so that the law is now ADVERTISING how great it is as if it was a public service announcement!
Let's also remember that there are multiple major scandals on this administration's back, like Fast and Furious where Attorney General Eric Holder is now in contempt of Congress. Or how about the Green Energy subsidies that have gone belly up...after investing back in major Obama donors.
For that matter, tell me the last time Obama was above 50% approval for a significant period of time? Or even having higher approval than disapproval for more than a few days?
Remember when Obama was going to spend $1 Billion on this campaign? His fundraising is down! As a matter of fact, Mitt Romney is beating Obama in fundraising!
Friends, the only reason Obama is hanging on by a thread is that Mitt Romney remains unknown. That is not going to last, friends. The Drive-By Media is trying so hard to protect Obama. It's not working, because there are other outlets to compete with the Drive-Bys, friends (outlets with more consumers).
Bottom line: As soon as Mitt Romney connects with voters, President Obama's job is lost.
Ironically enough, the Drive-By Media is claiming that it's Mitt who is out of touch with most Americans. Ironic, since their beloved President has never had a real job in his life and was a professor, then a community organizer, and then he became a professional politician. Apparently THAT is the typical career path of the average American.
Here's a nice dose of reality for those of us who want to see America fire Obama in 2012: He's only doing as well as he is because Romney is still an unknown quantity to many Americans. A lot of people still believe that Mitt is basically C. Montgomery Burns. But here's the thing: People trust their own eyes before they trust the Drive-By Media stories. I remember when the first Republican Primary debate happened last year. I heard so many people who were so very shocked that Michelle Bachmann wasn't a fire-breathing dragon.
Mitt's going to do the same thing. He's going to rationally explain what Bain Capital does, and explain the utter stupidity of the Obama line that "Bain didn't exist to create jobs." Well no duh, Mr. President. As I stated before, that's not why businesses form. Unfortunately, our President is a man who simply does not understand how business works.
Friends, President Obama has nothing positive to run on, save for making an increidbly obvious decision to go get Osama Bin Laden. I've said it over and over. His biggest domestic achievement is Obamacare, remains tremendously unpopular, so much so that the law is now ADVERTISING how great it is as if it was a public service announcement!
Let's also remember that there are multiple major scandals on this administration's back, like Fast and Furious where Attorney General Eric Holder is now in contempt of Congress. Or how about the Green Energy subsidies that have gone belly up...after investing back in major Obama donors.
For that matter, tell me the last time Obama was above 50% approval for a significant period of time? Or even having higher approval than disapproval for more than a few days?
Remember when Obama was going to spend $1 Billion on this campaign? His fundraising is down! As a matter of fact, Mitt Romney is beating Obama in fundraising!
Friends, the only reason Obama is hanging on by a thread is that Mitt Romney remains unknown. That is not going to last, friends. The Drive-By Media is trying so hard to protect Obama. It's not working, because there are other outlets to compete with the Drive-Bys, friends (outlets with more consumers).
Bottom line: As soon as Mitt Romney connects with voters, President Obama's job is lost.
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
No Mr. President, the Private Sector IS NOT fine...
First and foremost, still 8% of Americans are unemployed, three full years after Obama claimed unemployment wouldn't go above that number. Just as importantly, an additional 10% of Americans are underemployed...working part time instead of full time. (According to Gallup.)
Secondly, the Private Sector ALWAYS bore the brunt of the recession. Government, friends, actually has grown significantly since December of 2007.
Take a look, friends. Federal government continued to add jobs until about First Quarter 2011, at which point they dropped a few but still remain 11.6% in the black in terms of hiring since December 2007. State governments are at a slight negative, a drop of -1.3% aggregate since 2007, but even so they saw a spike for a solid two years and did not begin any real drops until around 2011. Local governments are at an aggregate of -2.8%, but like states, they didn't even begin to drop below their starting point until 2010.
Now for the why states and local governments are dropping as is the Federal government from their four year high: THEY WERE TOO BIG TO BEGIN WITH! That's right, friends. Government was doing too much, and yes, had too many bureaucrats. Now, all of a sudden, poor old government is being forced to move toward living within it's means. It's just not fair is what it is...government has to live within it's means, so now it's suffering.
Sorry, Mr. Obama, government is not suffering. It's just finally catching up with the realities the rest of us have dealt with for quite some time now. Government was spending too much, employing too many redundant bureaucrats, wasting our hard earned dollars. Now they are seeing some cuts in their spending (which was too high to begin with). Poor government.
This, my friends, is the President we have. This President who believes government being asked to cut their spending like the rest of us had to do years ago is just plain cruel. This President wants to stay our President. We must not let him. Let's elect Somebody Else in 2012.
Monday, June 11, 2012
Bain Capital Attacks Show How Little the Left Understands Business
Bain Capital. It's been President Obama's big focus of attacks against Governor Mitt Romney in the 2012 Presidential Campaign. The attacks boil down to this: "Bain Capital wasn't in business to create jobs. It was in business to make money."
Anyone with an ounce of a clue hears ideas like that and says "NO DUH!" People don't start businesses so they can provide people with jobs or benefits. Anyone who has ever run a business can tell you that. Unfortunately, this is what your garden variety liberal thinks is the purpose of businesses; to give people jobs.
Now don't get me wrong...creation of jobs is a positive consequence of a successful business. That does happen. It's part of the great symbiosis of Capitalism and the economy. To give a good analogy, I did not go to college to form lasting friendships. I went to college to get a degree so I could get a good job. That was the purpose of me going to college. However, one additional positive consequence of me going to college was me meeting some of my closest friends. It often happens that way, just like when you open a business and it is successful, you often create jobs. Creating jobs is the frequent consequence of opening a business, but it is not the purpose of opening a business.
So to attack Bain Capital for "not being in business to create jobs" is complete foolishness. Then again, consider the source. These attacks came from a man who has never run a business or even had a real job in his life in President Obama. That's where you get hairbrained overly idealistic but unrealistic premises like the one the President is giving now.
As to the fact that Bain Capital "liquidated assets and fired people," well, again, it shows how little liberals understand business and economics. Here's what Bain really does: Bain Capital comes in to failing businesses and buys them in an attempt to salvage that company. For those of you in Palm Beach County, FL, that means that the company was failing ANYWAY and all the employees were about to lose their jobs ANYWAY, then Bain comes in and attempts to save the business (including some to all of the jobs that would otherwise be lost).
Ideally, Bain is able to turn around the company. For them that means they buy the company up at a low price, turn it around so that it becomes profitable again, then sells the company at a profit to other investors to continue it forward. When this works, abracadabara, tons and tons of jobs are saved and often more jobs are created as the now successful business continues to grow. When this is unsuccessful, the company closes, and yes, people lose their jobs. But remember, they were going to lose their jobs much sooner if Bain hadn't come in to try to salvage the company.
In short, when Bain succeeds, they genuinely save jobs (not just the phantom "jobs created or saved" statistic the Obama Administration invented) and often create them. When Bain fails, people at the least had jobs longer than they would have had Bain not entered the equation. Either way, this is a far more sound economic plan than the Obama plan of "Criticize businesses and punish them for success until the economy turns around." For those of you from Palm Beach County, FL, that means "The beatings will continue until morale improves."
Then again, this is the same President who said "When you’re president...as opposed to the head of a private equity firm, then your job is not simply to maximize profits. Your job is to figure out how everybody in the country has a fair shot. Your job is to think about those workers who get laid off, and how are we paying them for their retraining?” - President Obama
Actually, Mr. President, no...that is not your job. Your job is not to try to create your own definition of "fairness" by redistributing wealth and paying for retraining. That's not the job of the President. Fairness is created by maintaining equal opportunity, not equal results. You know what does a fine job of that? The United States Constitution.
My friends, the Left has shown us once again how little they understand how business works. Considering their misunderstanding of how business works is what has continued this economic mess as to this day in conjuncture with Republicans foolishly using liberal economic theory at the outset (looking at you, T.A.R.P. ). The Bain Capital attacks are just another example of why we need to defeat Obama. Even if he's a genuine economic fool and not someone with malicious intent, he's still a fool. So let's elect a businessman in 2012 who has a clue of how to fix this problem. (For those of you in Palm Beach County, FL, that'd be "Mitt Romney.")
Anyone with an ounce of a clue hears ideas like that and says "NO DUH!" People don't start businesses so they can provide people with jobs or benefits. Anyone who has ever run a business can tell you that. Unfortunately, this is what your garden variety liberal thinks is the purpose of businesses; to give people jobs.
Now don't get me wrong...creation of jobs is a positive consequence of a successful business. That does happen. It's part of the great symbiosis of Capitalism and the economy. To give a good analogy, I did not go to college to form lasting friendships. I went to college to get a degree so I could get a good job. That was the purpose of me going to college. However, one additional positive consequence of me going to college was me meeting some of my closest friends. It often happens that way, just like when you open a business and it is successful, you often create jobs. Creating jobs is the frequent consequence of opening a business, but it is not the purpose of opening a business.
So to attack Bain Capital for "not being in business to create jobs" is complete foolishness. Then again, consider the source. These attacks came from a man who has never run a business or even had a real job in his life in President Obama. That's where you get hairbrained overly idealistic but unrealistic premises like the one the President is giving now.
As to the fact that Bain Capital "liquidated assets and fired people," well, again, it shows how little liberals understand business and economics. Here's what Bain really does: Bain Capital comes in to failing businesses and buys them in an attempt to salvage that company. For those of you in Palm Beach County, FL, that means that the company was failing ANYWAY and all the employees were about to lose their jobs ANYWAY, then Bain comes in and attempts to save the business (including some to all of the jobs that would otherwise be lost).
Ideally, Bain is able to turn around the company. For them that means they buy the company up at a low price, turn it around so that it becomes profitable again, then sells the company at a profit to other investors to continue it forward. When this works, abracadabara, tons and tons of jobs are saved and often more jobs are created as the now successful business continues to grow. When this is unsuccessful, the company closes, and yes, people lose their jobs. But remember, they were going to lose their jobs much sooner if Bain hadn't come in to try to salvage the company.
In short, when Bain succeeds, they genuinely save jobs (not just the phantom "jobs created or saved" statistic the Obama Administration invented) and often create them. When Bain fails, people at the least had jobs longer than they would have had Bain not entered the equation. Either way, this is a far more sound economic plan than the Obama plan of "Criticize businesses and punish them for success until the economy turns around." For those of you from Palm Beach County, FL, that means "The beatings will continue until morale improves."
Then again, this is the same President who said "When you’re president...as opposed to the head of a private equity firm, then your job is not simply to maximize profits. Your job is to figure out how everybody in the country has a fair shot. Your job is to think about those workers who get laid off, and how are we paying them for their retraining?” - President Obama
Actually, Mr. President, no...that is not your job. Your job is not to try to create your own definition of "fairness" by redistributing wealth and paying for retraining. That's not the job of the President. Fairness is created by maintaining equal opportunity, not equal results. You know what does a fine job of that? The United States Constitution.
My friends, the Left has shown us once again how little they understand how business works. Considering their misunderstanding of how business works is what has continued this economic mess as to this day in conjuncture with Republicans foolishly using liberal economic theory at the outset (looking at you, T.A.R.P. ). The Bain Capital attacks are just another example of why we need to defeat Obama. Even if he's a genuine economic fool and not someone with malicious intent, he's still a fool. So let's elect a businessman in 2012 who has a clue of how to fix this problem. (For those of you in Palm Beach County, FL, that'd be "Mitt Romney.")
Friday, June 1, 2012
Romney Running MateTalk (Part 3)
With Mitt Romney close to officially clinching the Republican nomination, talk of his potential running mate pick has heated up. The Drive-By Media, as usual, is calling the bad ideas brilliant and the good ideas bad. According to them, if you're wimpy and moderate, you're perfect, if you're solidly conservative and strong enough to call out Obama, you're a bad option for Mitt.
Genuine political wisdom for Republicans is to ignore the Drive-By Media's suggestions and go the opposite way, so that's what I'm about to recommend. So here comes some real, solid recommendations (and non-recommendations) for Romney's #2, categorized as Good Ideas, Bad Ideas, and Wild Cards (essentially good ideas that are unlikely to happen). Today we'll start with part three, Wild Cards. These three names I consider unlikely at this point, but still wins if Romney goes that way:
Genuine political wisdom for Republicans is to ignore the Drive-By Media's suggestions and go the opposite way, so that's what I'm about to recommend. So here comes some real, solid recommendations (and non-recommendations) for Romney's #2, categorized as Good Ideas, Bad Ideas, and Wild Cards (essentially good ideas that are unlikely to happen). Today we'll start with part three, Wild Cards. These three names I consider unlikely at this point, but still wins if Romney goes that way:
Wild Cards
1. Kentucky Senator Rand Paul: Think about it, friends...what better way to get the Ron Paul supporters on your side than to have Rand as your VP? Not to mention the fact that Rand is as conservative as his father on economic issues and is more realistic when it comes to foreign policy. Moreover, I think most people expect Rand to take up his father's mantle when it comes to being a Libertarian crusader in the Republican Party, so he's likely to be a Presidential candidate next time around anyway, and one who has a better chance than his father to succeed. I don't think Mitt will pick him or Rand will accept, but if the stars aligned this would be a home run.
2. Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice: Condoleezza Rice served in two past Presidential administrations in the Defense Department including being George W. Bush's National Security Advisor before becoming the Secretary of State in Bush's second term. She is well spoken and also has terrific fiscal conservative roots. For example, as the Provost of Stanford University, she took the school from a $20 million deficit to a balanced budget. She also has the ability to pick up both female voters and minority voters. While she wouldn't be the home run that Senator Rand Paul would be, she would be a big win for Romney.
3. South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley: Governor Haley is a Tea Party darling. She's fiscally conservative, pro-life, and a solid communicator of conservatism. Again, she's a huge win. Like Marco Rubio and Bobby Jindall, she's the child of legal immigrants. Really a great option for Romney. I'd consider Governor Haley the most likely of the Wild Cards if only because of her endorsement of Mitt early on...surprising to many in the Tea Party.
---------
Any one of these three would make a great running mate for Mitt Romney, although I wouldn't expect any of them to happen. If they did, however, they could each bring in key groups that Romney needs to have to win, whether it's Ron Paul libertarians, women, or the Tea Party.
At any rate, we need to push Governor Romney to pick a top notch running mate. You know, not a moderate wimp.
---------
These three names I consider unlikely at this point, but still wins if Romney goes that way:
---------
Any one of these three would make a great running mate for Mitt Romney, although I wouldn't expect any of them to happen. If they did, however, they could each bring in key groups that Romney needs to have to win, whether it's Ron Paul libertarians, women, or the Tea Party.
At any rate, we need to push Governor Romney to pick a top notch running mate. You know, not a moderate wimp.
---------
These three names I consider unlikely at this point, but still wins if Romney goes that way:
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)