Tag Archives: 2012 Election

OVERCOMING OBAMA’S NEW NORMAL

Going into election day a Romney win appeared imminent. The experts augured a certain victory for Mr. Romney. George Will predicted 321 electoral votes for the Governor, Dick Morris boldly projected 325 and Karl Rove modestly assured 279 electoral votes for a Romney presidency. President Obama had a four year record that was, from any dispassionate perspective, abysmal, if not criminal in nature.

A Romney victory foretold the Republic’s salvation from President Obama’s oppressive and dangerous regime.  This is a president who enacted fiscal policies that reduced America’s credit standing and engendered unemployment, deficits and public debt of record proportions. He was on a quixotic mission to punish productive Americans with greater taxes while cultivating a plantation like dependent state for those suffering under his punitive policies. Mr. Obama has the dubious distinction for being the first president to enlist Marxist class warfare rhetoric by expounding on the evils of America’s free market system. He conducted a shadow unconstitutional government of unelected czars immune to congressional approval after campaigning on a guarantee to have the most transparent presidency in history.

President Obama’s first term was devoid of statesmanship. Instead of demonstrating strong, mature leadership, he displayed petty, childish divisiveness. He blamed his predecessor for his own failures and engaged in inflammatory oratory that pit American against American. The President affronted the Constitution through his obsession for centralizing presidential powers, resulting in massive regulations that stifled business expansion and economic growth. His landmark achievement ObamaCare, although held to be constitutional by the Supreme Court as an enormous tax, is a centralized governmental overreach to control one-sixth of the American economy that will cost $1.7 trillion over the next decade. Additionally, President Obama tramples on the First Amendment rights of the Catholic Church by requiring the Church to comport with anti-life activities of ObamaCare.

Some of President Obama’s most egregious offenses were on the international front. He dishonored America by his disingenuous remarks on his “Apologize for America” tours, and neglected his sworn duty under the Constitution as Commander-In-Chief by refusing to fashion a cogent policy on terrorism. The domino effect resulted in terrorist attacks on American embassies across the Middle East, a dictatorial regime in former ally Egypt, the deaths of four Americans at the American consulate in Libya, and cleared a path for an Iranian nuclear enrichment program putting America’s only Middle East ally, Israel, in harms way.

Many of the President’s 2008 supporters were furious for being enticed by his “hopey-changey” sloganizing. In hindsight they felt duped and their support for him made them feel as though they bought that celebrated bridge in Brooklyn. Their anger was palatable and they would right their wrong by sending him packing from the White House. The burning question that consumed many 2008 Obama voters was whether the President’s dismal record reflected a purposeful effort to denounce America’s Constitution, it’s heritage and reduce its world standing out of pure disdain due to his Marxist upbringing, or was it simply due to sheer incompetence? Neither reason was cause for consolation.

Who would vote to re-elect a President who was only transparent in his capacity for deception and incompetence? Putting aside the suspicion of massive voter fraud, to begin to answer that question it is safe to assume that the President secured his base. I’m referring to the usual suspects who cling to the progressive/socialist democratic agenda every election cycle and cast a democrat vote solely to support some personal mania. They are legion and include the phony celebrity crowd, union thugs, environmental and feminist zealots, the secularist atheists and agnostics infamous for booing God at the DNC convention, abortion enablers, race baiters, anti-gun fanatics, and, of course, the democratic party’s mainstay, the anti-American manic-depressives. His base also includes the “reflexive” democrats. This tragic lot mindlessly votes democrat simply because some influential figure in their life, a parent, teacher, or their butcher, directed them accordingly. This community of misfits is the perennial heart and soul of the democratic base. They are a veritable Neverland of hypocritical pretense, odious self-centeredness and willful ignorance, and fortunately for the Republic this collective operates on the periphery of the American electorate.

Apart from the progressive/socialist extremists wing of the Obama voting bloc it’s important to mine what was the primary issue that was the tipping point for Obama voters. The Third Way performed a study of 800 Obama voters that included democrats, republicans, and independents, and the results showed that an overwhelming number of Obama voters favored increasing taxes on the wealthy and increasing government spending, intervention on “income inequality” issues and government welfare programs. The GOP experts in their search to identify the primary reason for what many believe to be Mr. Obama’s upset victory agree with this evaluation. Former Vermont Governor and ubiquitous GOP advance man John Sununu (R) chalked up the President’s victory to a growing base that’s now “dependent, to a great extent economically, on government policy and government programs.” Linda Chavez, Chairman of the Center for Equal Opportunity, pointed out that individuals and families living well above poverty levels now qualify for numerous government assistance programs. Heather MacDonald of the Manhattan Institute attributes the Obama victory to the growing wave of Hispanic voters who voted for the President by a margin of 75 percent due to the President’s dependent state polices. MacDonald states that, “It is not immigration policy that creates the strong bond between Hispanics and the Democratic party, but the core Democratic principles of a more generous safety net, strong government intervention in the economy, and progressive taxation.”

But there is cause for solace for the GOP.  Despite The Third Way’s results showing that the President’s non-base voters support a social democratic welfare state, his voter turnout dropped appreciably from 2008.  The president’s dreadful record caused many who voted for him in 2008 to suffer from what could only be described as voter remorse, and the 2012 voter results reflected that sentiment. The Bipartisan Policy Center reports that despite an increase of eight million eligible voters in 2012 voter turnout dipped from 62.3 percent of eligible citizens voting in 2008 to 57.5 percent in 2012. This reduction in turnout was mostly in the democrat camp where the democrats had 4.2 percent less turnout in 2012 than in 2008 compared to the GOPs dip of only 1.2 percent.  The Pew Research Center’s long view shows that Mr. Obama received less of the popular vote in 2012 than 2008 and was flat or down from 2008 in virtually every age group. Obama is the first president in U.S. history to win re-election despite (a) winning fewer electoral votes, (b) a diminished popular vote total, and (c) a lower aggregate vote nationwide.  Guy Benson reported that, at the end of the day, only 406,348 swing state votes separated Obama and Romney, and if Romney would have garnered those votes in the swing states in the right proportions he would have had 275 electoral votes.  Additionally, the 2012 election resulted in conservatives retaining control of the House of Representatives, 30 Governorships and in 24 states Republicans control both the Governorships and the legislatures. Therefore conservatives indeed are certainly not relegated to the wilderness of the American polity.

Notwithstanding the President’s atrocious record and his reduced support in 2012 he seduced a particular faction of America to embrace his vision of a new normal of high unemployment as a means to foster widespread government dependency. Thus his obsession to inhibit America’s free-enterprise system is the method to his maddening mission.  President Obama’s policies of dependencies caused America’s welfare state to increase 19 percent under his administration. According to the Heritage Foundation’s Senior Research Fellow Robert Rector there are 79 means-tested federal welfare programs, at a cost approaching $1 trillion annually. In his report, Rector said the increase in federal means-tested welfare spending during Obama’s first two years in office was two-and-a-half times greater than any previous increase in federal welfare spending in U.S. history, after adjusting for inflation. President Obama’s lure of dependency infects those who take the bait with lethargy and despair, ultimately requiring them to repay the price of inducement in the form of higher taxes and depressed communities.  Mr. Obama’s “handout hell” brings to mind the sagacious quote, “The American Republic will endure until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money”.

The President’s ideological vision for a socialist welfare state is a mandate for mediocrity not excellence, and a program to punish success and enable failure. Russell Kirk said, “…to seek for utopia is to end in disaster”. America has bore the brunt of the Obama “hope and change” utopian vision and must now endure four more years of polices that foster decline, fear, and discord. The President will undoubtedly continue his mission into his second term to ignore the Declaration’s First Principles, circumvent the canons of the Constitution, and exert his energy to sully the principles of conservatism that forms the basis these founding documents.

But in the face of such malaise there is promise. The 2012 Obama turnout was markedly reduced and the fundamentals of his socialistic welfare state are baseless and its results have been in free-fall failure since his 2009 inauguration.  If, under the Obama mandate, America’s stagnant GDP, which is now less than it’s debt, a loss of American credit worthiness and consistent high unemployment and profligate spending is not sufficient evidence, one must only look to other nations to see the dire effects of a socialist state. The mainstream media can run protective cover for the Obamas regimes rage against America for so long. The public’s conscious awareness of the calamitous ramifications of his socialist policies are at critical mass and his reduced voter turnout, albeit sufficient for victory, is evidence of that realization.

The solution for America’s Obama woes is not more doses of failed socialist ideologies, but a rekindling of the conservative sentiment that enlivens the spirit of American greatness.  The principles of conservatism are the foundation for America’s cause of order, freedom and justice. America’s cause provides the unfettered opportunity to reap the practical and moral rewards of our concerted efforts, recognize natural law, and exercise our natural rights.

America was ordained to unleash in humankind the “moral imagination”, the imagination that inspires one to lead a virtuous life. The moral imagination was described by conservative philosopher Russell Kirk as aspiring to the “apprehending of right order in the soul and right order in the commonwealth”, and that the moral imagination “informs us concerning the dignity of human nature, which instructs us that we are more than naked apes”.

Russell Kirk also referred to those “permanent things” that animate a fulfilling life as, “…things in society: the health of the family, inherited political institutions that insure a measure of order and justice and freedom, a life of diversity and independence, a life marked by widespread possession of private property. These permanent things guarantee against arbitrary interference by the state. These are all aspects of conservative thought.” John Attarian aptly describes the permanent things as “… norms of courage, duty, justice, integrity, charity, and so on – (that) owe their existence, and authority, to a higher power than social good”. American conservatism inhabits these ideals inherent in the moral imagination and the permanent things. These ideals are central to conservatism and foster a society that preserves freedoms and inspires the best in our nature, and they take their cues from the Judeo-Christian traditions that form the underpinnings of America’s system of justice.

Conservative values and principles forged the American idea, but progressive/socialist’s have been successful in shaping the conservative narrative. The progressive/socialist’s capacity to fashion destructive public policy is matched only by their talent for canards when defining conservatism in the public square. This is where the conservative’s natural inclination toward restraint, decorum and an assumptive attitude for public acceptance of time honored and successful conservative principles has been turned against them by the intimidating prevarications of the progressive/socialist mob mentality. In order to distract the public from the horrendous results of their policies the progressive/socialist must depict the conservative through a smudged lens of lies and deceits.

In an era of Obama-driven socialist policies destined to damage America but lauded by a liberal educational establishment and its negative ramifications shielded by over 80 percent of the American media, the conservative can no longer assume the public will, as a matter of course, recognize the inherent benefits of the conservative course for America. Conservatives must endeavor to be aggressively proactive with their message and principles.

Solutions have been aplenty for conservatives to take back the presidency to counteract the progressive/socialist assault on conservative America, and the central theme is coalition building. Erick Erickson of RedState proposes that conservative must focus on preserving the conservative brand. Erickson believes that the movement must extricate itself from conservative organizations that are more fixated on the GOP leaders in their groups and not the conservative movement. The focus needs to be on the conservative cache of ideas, not the leaders. Erickson says, “Conservatives need to take their brand back from the GOP and disentangle themselves from the ego driven side of conservative institutions that make it about the leaders of the organizations and not the ideas these claim they’re promoting once they get back off their next donor funded book tour selling books to other donors”. Along with applying state of the art political technology Erickson suggests that conservative grassroots coalition building is imperative. Resolute conservative groups such as Heritage’s Action for America and Club for Growth should be leveraged to build coalitions and grassroots support.

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich presented a 25 point report to the RNC that outlines a host of viable propositions, amongst them are campaigns built around “coalitions, long term party building and team efforts versus consultant-based campaigns”. One of the former Speaker’s tactical suggestions is for conservatives to become fully acquainted with the democrat’s strategies by “…build(ing) a library of must reads” that are the blueprints for the democrat’s strategic approach to campaigning. I suggest that number one on that reading list should be “Rules for Radicals” by Saul Alinsky. Alinsky’s tome is the bible for the democratic party’s electioneering efforts, and Barack Obama has the dubious distinction of teaching its tenants while he worked for the criminal, and now defunct, ACORN organizing group.

Conservatives must realize they can execute on all the well thought out strategic and tactical plans they devise, but their best laid plans to take back the White House will fall short if their message misses the mark. Messaging is the means for success. As distasteful and untruthful the democrats messages and candidates may be, as a party they stand aligned daily with the mindset that the perception of their message becomes a reality for voters. The GOP must emulate their opponents vigilance with a conservative message that is clear, relatable and uplifting to the voters.

There will forever be factions of the American electorate that opt to take advantage of its well-intended welfare systems than their own God given talents. And there will always be politicians such as Barack Obama that promise the electorate false utopias energized by destructive policies, cherry coated with bribes, lies and divisiveness. Conservative makes no such promises. Conservatism recognizes humankind’s innate desire to maximize their God given talents and endeavors to lay the foundations for a society to enable man’s potential. This was the vision for America’s founders that caused America to be the greatest country in the history of humankind.

Conservatism rejects the Obama-led progressive/socialist new normal that inhibits potential and is designed to lull Americans into a catatonic state of mediocrity. To quote Pope John Paul II, “Do not be satisfied with mediocrity! The world will offer you comfort. But you were not made for comfort. You were made for greatness.” In the GOP’s quest to craft a coherent message that represents conservatism and resonates with the electorate, the late Pontiff’s remarks are an excellent starting point.

What has changed?

USMAPDIVIDED31

The GOP increased their majority in the House of Representatives.  The “progressive” Democrats held on to a slim Senate majority.  Barack Obama still occupies the White House.

With fifty three House members demanding that Obama answer questions about the lethal, ham handed disaster in Benghazi and the equally bungled cover-up, do not expect a sudden flowering of bipartisan harmony.

Especially since the likes of Russian President Vladimir Putin have expressed happiness at Obama’s reelection.  America will now find out what “more flexibility” means.

In the wake of Obama’s re-election, stocks nosedived across the board Wednesday morning, plunging over three hundred points.  Worries about the pending “fiscal cliff” and fears that America will follow Europe over the precipice chilled investments.  The Dow traded under 13,000.  For the first time since early September the S&P 500 fell below 1,400.

Fears that Obama will introduce a carbon tax as a way to cut the U.S. budget deficit also frosted Wall Street.  With the continuation of Obama’s hostile energy policies, perceptions that such a tax will have a major impact on America’s deficit are largely based on European style speculative wishful thinking.

Obama will attempt to reinstate Clinton-era tax rates on Americans who run small businesses; those described by Obama as “not paying their fair share”.  Without the development of America’s domestic energy, a move that would create millions of jobs that could not possibly be shipped overseas, there is no reason to anticipate an economic boom in the United States.  Without such a boom, Clinton-era tax rates will simply dampen investment, destroy small businesses and further damage the American economy.

The government’s $16 trillion debt and the looming $600 billion tax increase scheduled, along with mandatory spending cuts, otherwise known as the “fiscal cliff” further complicate the economic outlook.

Americans can fully expect that Obama’s second-term will lead to increased federal spending.  As he did in his first term, Obama will expand government.  Because he remains in the White House and “progressives” retain control of the Senate, obamacare will be fully implemented, yet another wet blanket on the economy, as well as a death sentence for aging Americans.

Welcome to the divided States of America.

While “progressives” celebrate a continuation of the downhill fundamental transformation of America from a Constitutional Republic into a run of the mill low growth high unemployment European style cradle to grave nanny state, half of the American population remain fully opposed to such plans.

As founded, America is the greatest nation in the history of the world.  America’s founding principles and the up to then unknown personal freedoms and liberties they unleashed are being replaced by the enticement of entitlements and empty promises of a free lunch.  Without America’s founding principles leading the free world, mankind stands at the precipice of a thousand years of darkness.

Those who believe in American principles must continue to stand up and push back against the anti-growth, anti-prosperity, anti-morality, anti-God, anti-American agenda of “progressives”.

In 1776 George Washington’s Continental Army lost the battle for New York City.  The year 1777 saw the loss of Philadelphia.  In 1779-1780, his undermanned, underfunded, and underequipped army suffered greatly and shied away from major battles.  It was not until the victory at Yorktown in 1781 that victory was achieved and Britain recognized the independence of the United States.

For Americans, this is today’s Valley Forge.  The outlook is bleak and victory seems beyond grasp.

The choices are to give up or continue the fight.

In December 1944 during the battle of the bulge Brigadier General McAuliffe and his battalion were besieged within the city of Bastogne.  German General Heinrich Freiherr von Lüttwitz gave McAuliffe two hours to surrender the town.

What was McAuliffe’s response?

To the German Commander: NUTS!

Today, in response to the smug, holier than thou attitude of the self-imagined, self-appointed members of the institutionalized “progressive” intellectual elite, there is no better response.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/11/07/what-has-changed/

Conservatives- It’s Time to Stand Up

There are a lot of different factions being blamed for Mitt Romney’s loss last night- the media, voter intimidation, fraud, the Tea Party.

None of these is the real reason. The right wing continues to lose because we continue to care about what other people think about our identity. Pundits say we’re racists, we push Marco Rubio and Mia Love to the front of the party. Pundits say we’re too extreme, we run a moderate in an attempt to assuage independent voters.

When are we on the right going to stop worrying about public opinion? As long as we allow others to define our party’s image and message, and focus on identity politics and not message, we are going to lose. And deserve to.

Time after time, we run moderate candidate after moderate candidate, arguing we’ll appeal to more people.

And does it work?

No. Not only did Mitt Romney lose last night, but nearly every conservative running for Congress, except for Michele Bachmann, was defeated.

People had a hard time believing Romney as a person? No wonder. He was running as a conservative, a moderate, and a centrist. He can’t really hold all of those positions. Of course he’s going to come off as fake.

And the idea that conservatives can’t win because of their religious social positions is absurd.

Exactly how is making no exception for rape or incest any more extreme than believing in partial birth abortion, or late term abortion? It’s not. They’re both legitimate arguments. Yet, Barack Obama supports third trimester abortions, and no one screams about how evil he is.

The only reason this is an issue is because of fear mongering from the media.

As Barack Obama stated in his race against John McCain, when you can’t run on a record, you make issues out of nonissues. Sound familiar?

And yet, the main stream media is continuing to spin the race. MSNBC started talking about how the evil right wing gun nuts were going to rise up against Obama even before the results had finished coming in.

Enough of the rhetoric. Our silence, and our willingness to let these pundits frame political talking points, is only making this worse. It’s also helping us lose elections. How much time did we spend talking about social issues instead of the economy?

Conservatives- it’s time to stand up and say enough. It’s time to stop letting others define our values. It’s time to stop being distracted by racial, gender and class politics.

It’s the only way we can win.

 

 

Virginia Black Pastors target Romney with racist religious brochure for Obama

Mitt Romney greets workers at call center on November 6, 2012 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Just when you think that you may have seen it all, this time it is black racism which rears its ugly head to target Romney’s religion with hate literature. It has been reported that a group of African American pastors in Virginia have aligned themselves with the same politics of hate and revenge that Obama called for on Friday in a campaign stop in Ohio.

The pastors, who have formed a group called, “Greater Hampton Roads Christian Leadership Conference,” have decided to use deception and racism to scare their parishioners to vote for president Obama.  They developed a brochure to compare Obama’s alleged religious practices with their lies and misconception of what Mitt Romney’s Mormon beliefs are.

The lies and innuendos are obviously false on their face, but the true point is that these pastors and their leader Rev. Lin Hill had no intention on presenting the truth.  In fact, if they had done the same amount of research that a fifth grader would have been expected to do, the truth would have been easy to find.

Rev. Lin’s purpose was apparently darker, more sinister in design, because by waiting until the last minute to circulate 100,000 copies of  his amateurish literature, he hoped to push black voters to the polls through hate. So this religious leader of the 2,500 member Bethany Baptist Church in Chesapeake, Va., circulated a lie, which is against his own Christian faith.

The only reasonable conclusion that can be conferred on his conduct is that he studied his theology of hate and lies from the same gospel book of Obama’s own religious mentor Rev. Jeremiah Wright who told his congregation in 2003,  “God Bless America.’ No, no, no, God damn America!”

One has to ask, is this the shepherd of God that Rev. Lin is following and wants to emulate?  If so, it is indeed tragic that he and his fellow ministers would denigrate their hallowed office of the church.  How can their parishioners seriously consider these fallen men of the cloth true followers of the teachings of Christ, when they find solace in spreading rumors of hate and racism against another human being?  Is their commitment to hate and division so important to their politics of supporting  Obama, to throw their commitment to God under the bus?

America has come to expect this type of behavior from president Obama.  His campaign has been riddled with advertisements which bombarded the nation’s living rooms with character assassination attack ads against Mitt Romney.  Last Friday, America witnessed Obama calling out in frustration and desperation to rally his supporters to go to the polls with revenge and hate in their hearts.  Gold star from Satan for Obama.

But, why did Rev. Lin and the others sink to the Chicago-style gutter level of Obama’s brand of politics?  It appears that it was easy, it was convenient and Rev. Lin, like Obama, did not care to present the truth, when a lie would serve their purpose.

What are the parishioners of his church and the black 100,000 voters in the Chesapeake, Va., suppose to think?  Do they feel it is perfectly acceptable to accept the practices of vile deceit instead of religious truth from their leaders of faith?  One would think and hope not.  Truth is the only acceptable behavior that must be presented to their flocks of God.  Only followers of Satan would embrace a lie over the truth and deceit over honesty.

The outcome of the presidential race shall soon be a memory in the annuals of political campaigns, but the callous deceitful practices of this collection of misguided pastors should be resolved.  The Mormon Church and Mitt Romney deserve better from these alleged pastors of faith.

They should have taken a cue from the highly admired international evangelist Rev. Billy Graham.  He does not regard Romney’s faith a cult, because it is not.  In fact, the majority of the evangelical leaders and members of the Christian faith have followed Rev. Graham’s lead.

The deceptive practices of  the likes of Rev. Lin and his circle of pastor supporters should serve as a warning sign for America.  Nearly, fifty years ago, Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. offered the nation a universal teaching based upon the religious foundation of brotherhood, love, fellowship and mutual honesty.

Fifty years ago, Mitt Romney’s father, then Governor of Michigan worked with religious leaders and civil rights leaders to stand up for freedom for all of God’s people.  He walked in civil rights marches with Rev. King.  Yes, he was a Mormon and he was a follower of Jesus Christ.  And yes, Rev. Lin you could have been more of a leader of the church in standing up for truth, but you chose a darker path.

Now it is up to the leaders of your congregation and of the community that your church resides in to determine if they would rather keep a follower of  Satan-type deception or choose a true leader of faith.

This election and its results will melt into history but If America is to be a great nation that is built on the solid rock of religious brotherhood, then its religious  leaders must have impeccable character. Unfortunately, Rev. Lin and his fallen fellow pastors have shown that there religious character is a deplorable disappointment.  They owe their flocks and God an apology, before they resign.

( Click – Let me know what you think )

For Love of Country

love of country

Speaking in Springfield Ohio, Barack Obama mentioned Mitt Romney.  As soon as he mentioned Romney’s name, the crowd began to boo. Obama responded, “No, no, no. Don’t boo, vote. Voting is the best revenge.”

Mitt Romney questioned the President’s rhetoric  at a campaign stop in New Hampshire. “Vote for revenge?  Let me tell you what I’d like to tell you: Vote for love of country. It is time we lead America to a better place.” the candidate said.

This is but one snapshot highlighting the difference between Americans and “progressives”.

The choices Americans have on Tuesday November 6, 2012 fall into two distinct categories. The difference between these two philosophies is so clearly defined that it should be easy for Americans to decide where their sentiments lie.

The Declaration of Independence was a radical document because for millennia mankind had been ruled by monarchs, Caesars, Czars, or similar forms of dynastic oligarchies determined by bloodline. The universally accepted school of thought was that Kings, Queens, Emperors or Caesars were anointed by God, or were even gods themselves. Only monarchs or nobilities appointed by monarchs owned anything. They “allowed” the “common people” to work the land as serfs, indentured servants or as slaves. But “common people” were never “allowed” to own property. All they produced belonged to the monarch and was the monarch’s for the taking.

America’s Founding Fathers disavowed this view of society.

They declared that all men are created equal, that in effect, all men are kings. That they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. Among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. They declared that people could govern themselves without a monarch or an oligarchy ruling over them.

This was a radical departure from centuries old norms. They envisioned a system which allowed “common people” to own property without first obtaining permission from a “divine” ruler. Anyone could come to America, work hard, earn money, save it and buy property.

Those who rebelled against the Royal British Crown knew that if they failed in their endeavor, they would all hang. Yet, “with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence” they pledged to each other their Lives, their Fortunes and their sacred Honor.

The Declaration of Independence was the mission statement for the United States Constitution.

Yes, the Constitution established an imperfect government, which among other flaws still allowed slavery. Yet at that point in history, the original 13 colonies could not have formed one nation capable of maintaining a semblance of unity had they not reached the 3/5ths compromise. But the Founding Fathers were wise when they wrote the Constitution. They ensured that the Constitution could be amended, so that in time slavery and other injustices could be altered through an orderly process which provided change that enjoyed overwhelming bi-partisan support.

The Marxist school of thought is in direct opposition to the uniquely American concept that everyone has the right to own private property. How would Americans react if, after years of struggle, they finally owned their own home, then government “informed” them that it did not belong to them, that it belonged to “all the people” and Americans had to let strangers live on their property whether they liked it or not?

If an all-powerful, big government oligarchy is allowed to seize private property in this manner, as in the concept of “social justice” or “economic justice”, America is dead.

The real philosophical divide in the United States lies between the intent of America’s Founding Fathers and the intent of “progressives”, who favor the Marxist view.

The American idea, the shot heard round the world, is that We The People can govern ourselves. By the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God we are entitled, by virtue of our humanity, to the maximum amount of Individual Liberties consistent with law and order, and to the Right of private ownership, not the least of which is the Right to own and decide for ourselves. These Liberties and Rights are to be equally protected by a constitutionally limited, representative government that derives its just powers from the consent of the governed.

This is a distinctly exceptional American idea.

The “progressive” idea is that an all-powerful centrally planned government, with extreme hostility towards private ownership, forces redistribution of wealth in the name of social or economic “justice”. In order to ensure “fairness”, an oligarchy of self-imagined, self-appointed “intellectual elites” will control businesses, industries and people who are incapable of governing themselves. This was the position of a fringe minority who called themselves “progressives” until early twentieth century Americans saw for themselves exactly how bad “progressive” ideas were.

The “progressive” idea came to America from Britain’s Fabian Socialists, who advocate socialistic democracy, and from Germany’s Frankfurt School, who came to America after fleeing Adolph Hitler because they knew Hitler would kill them for being Communists.

These ideas are European, not American.

The settlers who founded America rejected European ideas in fleeing Europe searching for a better future.  America has been a success and a beacon to freedom seeking people for over two centuries because the American idea is the better idea.

Among Americans unpolluted by “progressive” ideas, there is little debate that the United States of America is the most inventive, productive, prosperous and charitable nation in the history of the planet. There has yet to be put forth one rational, logical argument to support abandoning the highly successful American idea in favor of a European idea that is currently failing in Europe itself.

Before voting on Tuesday, November 6, 2012, decide which fate America deserves.

Then vote not for revenge, but for love of country.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/11/05/for-love-of-country/

Romney Rising

2012-Presidential-Election

In Ohio, voting machines are changing a vote cast for Mitt Romney to Barack Obama.

Maybe that is what the “progressive” Democratic Party needs to combat lower voter turnout for the Democratic ticket.

For “progressive” Democrats and their much heralded ground game, which in early voting has not been as effective as advertised, perhaps their real problem is that more voters trust Mitt Romney to break gridlock in Washington DC.

Polls have consistently shown that the enthusiasm, which was so strong for “progressive” Democrats in 2008, has switched sides. The Tea Party generated momentum and enthusiasm that appeared in 2010 has carried over into 2012 and is working in favor of Romney/Ryan and the Republicans.

Perhaps that two thirds of the meager number of jobs created during Obama’s four years in office having gone to both legal and illegal immigrants is the problem.

Said Steven A. Camarota, research director at The Center for Immigration Studies:

“It’s extraordinary that most of the employment growth in the last four years has gone to the foreign-born, but what’s even more extraordinary is the issue has not even come up during a presidential election that is so focused on jobs.”

Obama’s record on the economy is dismal, which is why he and his campaign team have focused so much energy and invested so much money in attempts to distract voters away from the economy and the tens of millions of Americans who cannot find a decent job to much more important matters like big bird, binders and bayonets.

According to Obama, David Axelrod and other “progressive” Democrats, women far less concerned with a lack of jobs, the price of groceries, escalating energy prices and economic uncertainty than they are with receiving $120 a year worth of birth control pills from the government.

There is more news for “progressive” Democrats.

The latest surge in financial support and months of spending restraint means the Republican National Committee is flush with cash- $68 million as of Oct. 17th.

That is nearly seven times what the Democratic National Committee has left.

The cash on hand difference allows Romney to ramp up the scale of his campaign in the final days, spending far more heavily on ads, mailers and telemarketers. This reinforces the momentum Romney has enjoyed since the first presidential debate on October 3rd.

Republicans started making a play for Pennsylvania this week, forcing “progressive” Democrats to spend their dwindling resources in response.

The new Pennsylvania push is a sign that Obama’s candidacy is waning and Romney is on the rise.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/11/01/romney-rising/

On November 6th, Remember Obama’s Record

Obama Messiah III

In 2008, America was tired.

War-weary.  And fearful of an impending financial crisis.

The country hungered for change.

Candidate Barack Obama offered the nation a sappy-sweet promise of “hope and change” full of high emotion and little substance to which many disillusioned Americans fell prey.

In 2012, America is more fearful than ever.  The promised change has not come.  In its place, a dark agenda of wealth redistribution, punitive taxes and massive expansion of government control in all areas of our lives.

Some saw this coming.  Others are just awakening to the nightmare.

Now, Barack Obama says he wants four more years to finish what he started.

Except this time, the happy talk and lofty rhetoric is gone.  There’s a record to review.

And the reviews are not good.

The polls are reflecting this truth and it’s only going to get worse.

Because when Americans go to the polls on November 6th, we will remember the Obama record.

We’ll remember Obamacare being forced down our throats without one Republican vote and without anyone reading the bill.  Our voices were heard loud and clear at town hall meetings across the nation.  Yet, Obama and Congressional Democrats chose to rule against the will of the people.

We won’t forget or forgive them for it.

As the details of Obamacare slowly dripped out, people of faith joined in protest of provisions requiring religious institutions to provide health insurance that covered abortions and abortifacients.  Barack pledged that there would be no taxpayer funded abortions in Obamacare.  But, now he demands that religious organizations violate their conscience and support the murder of unborn babies.

Obama repeatedly promised that no American earning over $250,000 would receive a tax increase.  America believed and was then shocked to find 21 new taxes hidden within the 2,000 pages of the Obamacare law.  We won’t forget that.

He said that Obamacare was not, in any way, a tax on Americans.  Yet, when Obamacare reached the Supreme Court, the Obama team argued that the law actually was a tax and, therefore, constitutional because of Congress’ power to tax.  The Supreme Court clarified.  Obamacare is a tax, the largest in U.S. history.

In 2008 Obama promised to lower the unemployment rate to under 6%. Yet, today, true unemployment is in the 15% range with untold Americans underemployed or having given up looking for work altogether.

Meanwhile, Obama has not passed a single budget since entering office.  Both Democrats and Republicans have rejected his budget proposals.  That is inexcusable, and it will be on our minds.

As gas prices soar, we’ll remember that Obama restricted American oil production and rejected the Keystone Pipeline while championing and providing financial assistance for oil drilling by Brazil.  His war on coal is killing jobs in coal producing states and threatening to decimate the entire U.S. coal industry.

Meanwhile, Barack channeled 90 billion dollars for “green energy” to companies like Solyndra, Abound Solar, A123 Battery Co, Ener1 and Beacon Power all of which went bankrupt.

We remember Obama’s foreign policy record as he insulted our closest allies by returning the bust of Winston Churchill to Britain and choosing to put “daylight” between America and Israel.  Remember Barack’s hateful glare at Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu?

And who can forget Obama’s overseas apology tour as he criticized America while standing on foreign soil?

Americans heard Obama, on a hot mic, tell Russian President Medvedev and, by extension Vladimir Putin, that he’d have “more flexibility” after the election to deal with difficult issues such as missile defense.

Obama championed the “Arab Spring” while a radical, Islamist government arose in Egypt with anti-American, anti-Christian sentiments.  Coptic Christians are beaten and slaughtered in Egypt and in Nigeria.  According to Obama, the “Arab Spring” is a victory for democracy.

We know better.

We remember the Iranian protests of 2009 as they sought freedom for their nation and asked “Obama, are you with us or against us?”  Obama’s silence was deafening.  Iran remains in the hands of radical, apocalyptic Islamists committed to achieving nuclear weapons and the destruction of Israel and the United States.

Two days after the announcement of Bin Laden’s death, Vice President Joe Biden revealed that U.S. Navy SEALs had ended OBL’s existence.  One month later, the Administration provided the name of the planner and SEAL commander to Hollywood producers.  90 days after Bin Laden’s demise 22 U.S. SEALS, most from SEAL Team 6, were killed in Afghanistan when their helicopter was shot down by a rocket propelled grenade.  30 service personnel died that day.  The worst single day death toll in the entire Afghanistan war.

We will not forget them or that Obama Administration leaks likely contributed to their deaths.

Meanwhile, Libya is in shambles and Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three brave Americans are dead.  We remember their names:

Glen Doherty.

Tyrone Woods.

Sean Smith.

And we won’t forget that they were abandoned in their hour of need or that Barack Obama continues to lie to the American people about the events of that day.

Mr. President, when you needed them, the SEALs responded and killed Bin Laden.  When they needed you in Benghazi, where were you?

We are repulsed by the President’s lawlessness as he signed executive orders circumventing Congress and changing U.S. policy toward illegal immigration, effectively implementing “The Dream Act” without Congressional approval.  And by refusing to defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and negating key work provisions of Bill Clinton’s Welfare Reform Act, he violated his oath, and the law, once again.

Maybe it’s all in a day’s work for him.   But, we expect our presidents to obey the law.  We’ll remember that Barack did not.

We’ll remember Operation Fast and Furious and seek to honor U.S. Border Agent Brian Terry and his grieving family.  The Obama Administration allowed thousands of weapons to “walk” into Mexico.  Those weapons killed Brian Terry and are now killing Mexican citizens.

And we won’t forget that President Obama invoked Executive Privilege to prevent the truth from being known about this deadly scandal.

We’ll be reminded that Obama has repeatedly lied to the American people as demonstrated in numerous articles, fact checks and witnessed by tens of millions of Americans during the recent presidential debates.

We’ll surely remember Obama quoting the Declaration of Independence, “We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal and endowed….with certain unalienable rights…” regularly omitting the words “by their Creator.” 

All parents will remember that Barack and Michelle Obama mandated what kind of food and how much of it our children can eat while at school even to the point of confiscating our children’s homemade lunches.

And no one will ever forget You didn’t build that!”

As Americans vote this next Tuesday, we will remember the Obama record and how it has affected the people in our lives.

We’ll think about family and friends who are out of work or are just barely scraping by.

We’ll think about the millions of Americans who have lost their homes and now wonder if they’ll ever own a home again.

We’ll think about our children and every parent’s dream that their children’s lives will be better than their own.

Many will wonder if they’ll ever retire or if being a senior citizen means having to say “do you want fries with that?” or “welcome to Walmart” until they can no longer physically perform.

We’ll remember our men and women in uniform and wonder if their Commander in Chief truly values their lives and the sacrifices of their families.

Business owners will wonder if they’ll be able to expand and hire new workers or if they’ll be forced to lay off more of their valued employees.  Even worse, if they’ll be forced to close their doors forever.

And entrepreneurs will wonder if opportunity will still exist in America.  If free enterprise can survive another four years of Barack Obama.

Americans will remember the Obama record.

His inability to get things done, to perform on behalf of the American people.

And to tell the truth.

Obama will be weighed in the balance against previous presidents, and he will be found wanting.

Incompetent.  Dishonest.  And un-American.

As history judges the record of President Barack Obama, it may be that his one, signature achievement was not only unintended, but something that no one thought possible.

In less than four years, Barack Obama has made even Jimmy Carter seem competent by comparison.

And Bill Clinton seem honest.

On November 6th, we’ll remember.

 


Romney needs to focus on messaging as election approaches

Mitt-Romney

What’s the first thing people think about when someone mentions Mitt Romney? It seems to be something along the lines of he has great hair and is generally considered to be a nice guy. He may be the nicest guy in the world, but kindness doesn’t stop rogue regimes from committing acts of war; bold words backed up by action do. And that precisely is Mitt Romney’s problem- his messaging is virtually nonexistent. Considering how close the election and debates are, this is a serious problem. Romney’s favorite ice cream flavor may be vanilla, but to win this election, he must be anything but. And he needs to start doing that immediately.

Of the many things Barack Obama can be accused of, blandness is not one of them. After running on the promise of change, he delivered. From day one, he’s been clear about his policy goals, and for the most part has accomplished them. And he stands by his policies.

Does Mitt Romney have any policies? Yes, but do most voters know what they are? And why isn’t he articulating them in his television appearances and ads? Yes, this election is a referendum on Obama’s policies. But a referendum is only effective if an opponent provides a clear contrast; a choice. How can Americans make a choice if they’re unsure about what the opposition plans to do once he gains office?

To see how much Romney’s murky message has hurt his campaign one need look no further than polling on the economy, the biggest issue of the election. Romney is a highly successful business owner. Obama was a community organizer, and since assuming the presidency has had 43 straight months of unemployment above 8 percent. Logically, based on past experience, Americans should trust Romney to handle the economy. Yet, Romney leads by a slim margin. Why? We know Obama’s plan- a combination of raising taxes on the wealthy and various government investments to jump-start the economy.

So far, Mitt Romney’s platform for spurring economic growth consists of an 87 page long, 59 point plan. What average, working American with a family has time to read that? Chances are, not very many. No wonder Mitt Romney has such a slim advantage over Obama in polling cataloguing trust in handle the economy. How can you trust someone if they don’t tell you what they’re going to do?

And if Mitt Romney really wants the full support of conservatives, who are still highly suspicious of him, he needs to stand for something. He can’t give speeches after momentous healthcare legislation is upheld by the Supreme Court and make milk toast speeches about repealing but replacing some aspects of that legislation. He can’t speak in generic, politically correct platitudes. He can’t be afraid of offending some special interest group- they’re going to find something to be offended about. The same holds true if he really wants to bring moderate and swing voters into the 2012 Republican fold. He needs to be himself- advance the policies he believes will benefit the country and stick by them.

In the end, most Americans understand they’re not going to agree with everything a candidate stands for, but character matters. For the most part, Americans would rather hear a strong advocate for something they disagree with than the incoherent question-dodging of politicians hoping to avoid saying something real and in doing so dissuade someone from voting for them. Americans are not that easily fooled, and don’t like being treated as if they are.

That’s why Romney needs to actually start standing up for something, anything. He comes across as distant from the American people because by attempting to appease various voting blocks his character is lost and ends up standing for nothing. And all the money in the world can’t buy enough 30-second ad spots to make up for this. Only Mitt Romney, the real Mitt Romney, can do that.

Surviving the humanist hurricane

The upcoming elections aren’t about Republican vs. Democrat; conservative vs. liberal; Romney vs. Obama. Not entirely, at least. They’re much bigger than all that.

November signifies nothing new. It’s a microcosm of a much greater struggle – one that predates mankind. These elections are about truth vs. lies; light vs. darkness; good vs. evil.

Ultimately, November represents a high point – or a low point if you prefer – in the epic clash between diametrically opposed and fundamentally incompatible worldviews.

On the one hand, we have the Judeo-Christian worldview. It is both informed by and fully acknowledges absolute truth as revealed in the Holy Scriptures. It holds that individuals and nations together are accountable to a sovereign, holy Creator who “does as He pleases with the powers of heaven and the peoples of the earth” (Daniel 4:35).

It was within the framework of this worldview that our great nation was formed. The historical record is undeniable. Our unique constitutional republic can operate harmoniously within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition alone.

It declares that, rather than by man – than by government – we are “endowed by [our] Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
On the other hand, we have the secular-humanist worldview. It, too, represents a tradition old as the days of Noah. It holds that there is no absolute truth and imagines, absolutely, that, as theological giant Francis Schaeffer often described, “Man is the measure of all things.”

It is from this humanist perspective that Barack Obama views the world. He and other “progressives” who share his worldview willfully ignore that, as history proves, when man is the measure of all things, all things can, and usually do, go horribly wrong. Consider, for example, the hundreds of millions killed under the humanist regimes of Hitler, Stalin, Mao, et al.
When man is the measure of all things, all things are necessarily relative. Relativism measures our deeds on a scale unbalanced, with no fixed lines of demarcation between right and wrong. It presumes that the only thing immoral is to presume that there are things immoral.

Schaeffer, writing in “The Christian Manifesto,” noted: “What we must understand is that the two worldviews really do bring forth with inevitable certainty not only personal differences, but total differences in regard to society, government, and law. There is no way to mix these two total worldviews. They are separate entities that cannot be synthesized.”

Indeed, we are at an impasse. We play a zero-sum game that is no game at all. Somebody must win, and somebody must lose.

“It is not too strong to say that we are at war,” wrote Schaeffer, “and there are no neutral parties in the struggle. One either confesses that God is the final authority, or one confesses that Caesar is Lord.”
Under the Judeo-Christian tradition, God is the final authority. What God giveth, God taketh away. Under humanism, man – through government – is lord. What government giveth, government taketh away.
Evangelical luminary Dr. R.C. Sproul once observed: “Humanism was not invented by man, but by a snake who suggested that the quest for autonomy might be a good idea.”
That snake’s eggs have hatched, leaving us to contend with a nest of humanist vipers.

In the end, eternal Truth – the image of God in the person of Jesus Christ – will crush, underfoot, the heads of that snake and his viperous brood. Yet, until such time, believers must not tarry but, rather, faithfully join the struggle – no matter how rough the waters become.

And the waters are becoming rough.

Our Founding Fathers had the divinely inspired foresight to construct a constitutional levee against the humanist hurricane. Regrettably, in recent decades that levee has given way, resulting in a devastating secularist flood. Amid the debris and drifting out to sea are, among other things, the dismembered bodies of 55-plus million unborn babies, the tattered institutions of natural marriage and family and respect for sexual purity, virtue and morality.

Also drowning beneath humanism’s neo-Marxist undercurrent are individual liberty, American sovereignty, fiscal solvency and national security. Each of these indispensable items, within both public policy and our cultural at large, barely clings to life.

Ephesians 6:12 declares: “For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.”

Indeed, we are at war. Our struggles are complicated by the reality that many of the aforementioned rulers and authorities – to include Barack Obama and the larger “progressive” establishment – embrace the humanist philosophy. As noted, this philosophy was first planted in the mind of man by the very garden snake who commands “the powers of this dark world” and the “spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.”
But there is hope. Real hope. Not some nebulous, superficial hope fabricated to fuel a cult of personality.

There is hope in Christ.

Jesus commands His followers to be His hands and feet – to be salt and light in a rotting world that loves darkness.

True, salt preserves, but in an open wound, it also burns. Humanism is an open wound.

True, light’s bright glare can be illuminating to those eager to see. But it is also blinding to those whose eyes have become adjusted to darkness. When the light of Christ is shined, it sends lovers of evil scurrying for the shadows.

Indeed, we struggle to survive the humanist hurricane. America is keeping her head above water; but barely. The upcoming elections may determine whether we as a nation sink or swim – live or die.
Still, whatever happens in November, we must continue to faithfully tread the torrential waters. Although we have a profound opportunity to calm those waters on Nov. 6, humanist storms will always come.
We can once again gain solid footing on dry land, but to do so, we must first save ourselves.

Yet, not alone; we’ve been offered a hand up. We’ve been thrown a lifesaver.

And that Lifesaver walked on torrential waters.

Paul Ryan: The Right Man in the Right Place at the Right Time

Paul-ryan

Congressman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the newly nominated GOP candidate for Vice President of the United States, is the right man in the right place, at the right time.

He understands that his duty as Vice President will be the calling of his generation to preserve for his children and their children the America that was given to his generation.

He acknowledges that the current administration came into office during an economic crisis.  He also realizes that today 23 million men and women are unemployed or underemployed.  He sees one in six Americans living in poverty.  He understands that millions of young college graduates cannot find work and have been forced to move back in with their parents.

He sees that without a change in leadership in the White House the next four years will be just more of the same.

As a Congressman, he has been a front row witness to the wasteful Stimulus spending, the catastrophic government takeover of health care, and the robbing of seven hundred and sixteen billion dollars from Medicare to fill the financial void left in the healthcare law despite all the law’s hidden taxes.

Ryan vowed that “Medicare is a promise, and we will honor it. A Romney-Ryan administration will protect and strengthen Medicare, for my Mom’s generation, for my generation, and for my kids and yours.”

As Ryan stated midway through his nomination acceptance speech: “So our opponents can consider themselves on notice. In this election, on this issue, the usual posturing on the Left isn’t going to work. Mitt Romney and I know the difference between protecting a program, and raiding it. Ladies and gentlemen, our nation needs this debate. We want this debate. We will win this debate.”

Ryan pledged that he and Presidential nominee Mitt Romney “will get America creating wealth again. With tax fairness and regulatory reform, we’ll put government back on the side of the men and women who create jobs, and the men and women who need jobs.”

He confirmed that if elected, the GOP ticket has a goal to “generate 12 million new jobs over the next four years,” and “keep federal spending at 20 percent of GDP, or less.”

On foreign policy, Ryan stated that “a Romney-Ryan administration will speak with confidence and clarity. Wherever men and women rise up for their own freedom, they will know that the American president is on their side.”

In a rousing, crowd pleasing close, Ryan gave the following assurance:

“We will not duck the tough issues, we will lead.  We will not spend four years blaming others, we will take responsibility.  We will not try to replace our founding principles, we will reapply our founding principles.

The work ahead will be hard. These times demand the best of us – all of us, but we can do this. Together, we can do this.  We can get this country working again. We can get this economy growing again. We can make the safety net safe again. We can do this.  Whatever your political party, let’s come together for the sake of our country. Join Mitt Romney and me. Let’s give this effort everything we have. Let’s see this through all the way. Let’s get this done.”

Ryan’s speech was vintage Paul Ryan, calm, fact filled, plain spoken and direct.

Congressman Paul Ryan, the Republican nominee for Vice President offers proof that his generation is ready to be handed the torch of leadership.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/08/30/paul-ryan-the-right-man-in-the-right-place-at-the-right-time/

Weekly Standard Says Christie “Under Serious Consideration” for VP Spot

Gov. Chris Christie (R-NJ)

Gov. Chris Christie (R-NJ)

Say What? New Jersey Republican Governor Chris Christie is now under “serious consideration” for the number two spot on the ticket.  At least that’s what Stephen Hayes and Bill Kristol at The Weekly Standard have insinuated in their post published today.  I know the chatter about who the nominee will be is intensifying, but from I’ve heard from top conservative activists at the AFPF’s Defending the American Dream Summit this past weekend is that T-Paw is probably going to be Mitt’s running mate.

Some have clamored for Rep. Paul Ryan due to his conservative credentials and intellectual prowess on the economic issues threatening our nation.  However, Kristol and Hayes cited one email in particular that was a response to their Go For Gold piece published this month.  This person declares that he/she:

…Was an early supporter of Pawlenty for president and then for VP, but have to throw my lot in with you now and hope for Ryan as VP.

I thought this election would simply be about competence and jobs, jobs, jobs.  As a conservative I would have gladly liked someone exciting that would stirred my soul, but I just wanted to win.

But now I see that even if Romney was the best of a bad lot of candidates he needs help articulating where we are, how we got here and the path forward … and Ryan does that better than anyone but maybe Christie. So let’s go for broke and have the fight!

So, Kristol and Hayes conclude their piece stating:

Speaking of Christie: As of Friday, when we wrote the editorial, we’d been led to believe Christie wasn’t in serious consideration. We now have reason to think he may be. So to be clear: We’d certainly include him with Ryan and Rubio as potential gold medal finalists. As to choosing among the three of them? A photo finish. But choosing a VP candidate who will help Romney run a big, forward looking campaign—that is not a close call.

We need to “go for broke?”  In 9 out of the last 10 presidential elections, the candidate with the edge in the polls 100 days from Election Day won.  As I’ve written before, it’s a dead heat.  It’s unpredictable.  We don’t need reckless hail mary passes when it’s tied and we’ve just completed the third quarter.  Romney can afford to be safe.  As for Christie, he is doing some good work in the Garden State, but two northeastern Republicans on the ticket would be anathema to the base.

However, AllahPundit of HotAir posted about this development this afternoon and wrote:

The argument against picking him has always been that (a) he’ll overshadow Romney and (b) he’s enough of a loose cannon that he’ll say something damaging on the stump. As to the latter point, Christie’s been stumping for Romney for months without any miscues; in fact, he’s trusted enough that Romney chose him, among the Republican all-stars who were with him, to give the closing remarks at the big GOP confab in Colorado a few days ago. He’s not a dummy. He can rein himself in with the stakes this high. As to the former point, the more the election looks like it’s slipping away from Romney, the more I’d bet he’s willing to make peace with the idea of a larger-than-life VP if that guy can help him win. And Christie probably can help: Just four days ago, an FDU poll of the deep blue state of New Jersey found CC with a 55 percent approval rating there, including 65 percent approval among independents. Some conservatives would argue that that’s because Christie, apart from fiscal issues, is basically a centrist, but I doubt Romney cares about that either. If tea partiers are willing to line up behind the guy who signed off on RomneyCare in the interest of bouncing The One, adding a guy to the ticket who believes in global warming isn’t going to deter them. The question at this point is, simply, would Christie increase Romney’s chances of winning more than any of the other shortlisters? There’s an argument to be made that, yeah, he would. Risky, but potentially high reward.

That’s a nice number for Christie, but rarely does the VP candidate carry his/her home state in the general election.  Furthermore, do we really believe that New Jersey will swing towards Romney because Chris is on the ticket?  Talk about wishful thinking.  Like California, the last time New Jersey went Republican in a presidential election was 1988 and don’t count on the squishy folks at the NJGOP to make a move towards changing that aspect.  I like Governor Christie, but he should finish the job in NJ first.

We will learn soon enough. According to Mediaite:

Kristol went on to say that he thinks Thursday is the day to watch as the most likely time in which Romney would reveal his V.P. pick

If you look at Governor Romney’s schedule, he’s got events in Illinois Tuesday, Iowa Wednesday, a fundraising breakfast Thursday morning in New York – his calendar then is clear, so far as I can tell, Thursday afternoon and Friday,” said Kristol. “Then he begins a barnstorming tour Saturday in Virginia, North Carolina Sunday, Florida Monday, Ohio Tuesday.

WashPost Front-Pager on Collapsing Net Worth Missing One Word: ‘Obama’

A new economic report from the Federal Reserve doesn’t offer much hope. On the front page of The Washington Post,  Ylan Q. Mui underlined “the Federal Reserve said the median net worth of families plunged by 39 percent in just three years, from $126,400 in 2007 to $77,300 in 2010. That puts Americans roughly on par with where they were in 1992.”  

Furthermore, “the data represent[s] one of the most detailed looks at how the economic downturn altered the landscape of family finance. Over a span of three years, Americans watched progress that took almost a generation to accumulate evaporate. The promise of retirement built on the inevitable rise of the stock market proved illusory for most. Homeownership, once heralded as a pathway to wealth, became an albatross.”  What’s more interesting is that Mui’s article doesn’t mention Obama once  — in a front page piece during an election year — right after he told reporters the private sector is “doing fine.”

Mui quotes Mark Zandi, economist for Moody’s, saying “It’s hard to overstate how serious the collapse in the economy was…we were in free fall.” However, some have taken this to be another indictment of Bush administration policies.

Steve Kornacki at Salon.com noted that despite this terrible news, Obama may still succeed at blaming Bush.  He cites an Obama 50% approval rating andin  “an upcoming book, political scientists John Sides and Lynn Vavreck used data stretching back 60 years to create a model that predicts presidential approval based on economic conditions. As of the end of 2011, Obama was racking up scores significantly better than the model suggested he should be.”

Furthermore, “Sides and Vavreck suggest that, among other things, Obama may be benefitting from the public’s lingering memory of George W. Bush’s presidency and, more specifically, the imploding economy he passed off to Obama in January 2009. The new Fed figures may support this idea, in that they illustrate how steep, and pervasive and enduring the decline in family income has been since the final year of Bush’s tenure.”

After four years, a failed stimulus, high unemployment, three consecutive trillion dollar deficits, and an unconstitutional trillion dollar new health care entitlement program, it’s still somehow Bush’ s fault.

This default setting liberals have displaying their animosity towards Bush is both amusing and painfully insufferable.  When will they criticize the president for failing to take responsibility on the economy?

Kornacki states that “Obama won’t be able to run a Morning in America campaign, but he’s counting on context winning out, with a crucial chunk of voters remembering what he inherited (and, perhaps, understanding the obstruction he’s faced from Republicans in Congress) and giving him the benefit of the doubt, even if they’re not enthusiastic about it. For now, his poll numbers suggest Obama might actually pull this off. But the election is still five months away, and it’s an open question whether his support can withstand more discouraging unemployment reports and all of the Republican attacks to come.”

South Carolina June Primary, DESTROYED

ballot

As of today I am no longer a candidate for my county council, along with many other candidates in Oconee County, South Carolina.  The recent lawsuit that was filed by the democratic party in Florence County, removed every candidate who had not filed a paper copy of their economic interest statement, even though that same information was filed electronically over the internet, which is easier and faster to access.  Now, here in Oconee County, South Carolina, we will have no sheriff on the ballot next Tuesday.  We have no challengers for any of the incumbents, who favor legislation that is destructive to private property rights and liberty.  Now, our county and the rest of the State of South Carolina is under attack, by the Progressives.  The only reason that Democrats cause problems like this, is because they cannot win common sense arguments, so now they must create a problem to ensure that there is less of a Republican turn out in November.

Creating Issues like these are the only way the democrats will have a chance to win in the November Election.   It may create a problem for Republicans in the General Election,  if the voters are so upset about the primary and the Republican party, that they may think it was the fault of the Republican Party and not look any further into the issue.  However, it may cause such a problem across the state, that it may give President Obama an upper hand. In a state that is suppose to be conservative, with a firestorm as this issue is sure to cause, South Carolina may become a possible swing state if this issue becomes much larger than anyone expected it to be.  With the Political realm and all the problems that politicians have caused over the past decades, it would not be a surprise if something so troubling actually caused South Carolina to become a swing state for the General Election.  The only problem is that the conservative movement is alive, just not well here in South Carolina.  A good majority of the Republicans, are RINOs.  They do not represent what Republicanism stands for, which is another cause for concern, not just here in South Carolina, but across the country.   Conservatives are fighting battles on two fronts in order to preserve our nation.  We not only have to fight the RINO party, but we also are battling the Progressive party, which has swallowed up what use to be the Democratic Party.

Now, trying to figure out exactly what I should do is the problem.  I would have to gather 5% of the voters here in my district, which would amount to only about 500 signatures, however, I would need those names by Noon on July 16th. My outcome is still unknown.  I am also not sure if I am willing to register as an Independent, I am a strong conservative, I believe, and I will not change what I call myself or consider myself to be, just because some Progressive decided to use Judicial Activism to achieve their goals.  I have other avenues that I may be able to utilize in order to make change in this county, and ultimately in this great nation.  We conservatives must fight this massive machine anyway that we can.  It is our JOB to stand up and defend what has made this nation great.  We must UNITED across this country and STAND TOGETHER to defend our LIBERTY.  Stand with me, join me in this fight against TYRANNY.  LET US DEFEND THIS NATION TOGETHER.  Spread the word of what has happened here in South Carolina.  We must protect other states from running into this very same problem.  We must work TOGETHER, WE MUST DEFEND LIBERTY AT ALL COSTS. STAND WITH ME!

Some of us here in the county have thought about starting a 3rd party.  Maybe it is finally time, at least at local levels, who knows, we do need to start fixing these problems.  If we do not fix them here in the local levels, we cannot fix them in Washington. Starting local is the only course we have to restore America to the great country she once was, frankly still is, we are just running out of time.  Our nation is facing some of her most perilous times right now, and the Progressive Party will never give up, we must also stand our ground.  The bigger question remains, what impact will this have come November?

To read the cases for more in depth information, click HERE!

 

The RNC’s Latest “Solyndra” Ad

RNC Ad Solyndra Red Flags

This latest ad from the RNC treads familiar ground in calling President Obama out for the government backed loan guarantees that Solyndra received, but it does try to push a new angle.  It goes out of its way to suggest to viewers that Solyndra was an avoidable folly and one that had many red flags.  While some might say this exemplifies the President’s bad business sense or even a lack of leadership skills in general, this could also point toward the fact that he was going to reward his friends with tax payer money, whether the boondoggle would prove fruitful or not.

How effective do you think this ad will be?  So far, does Romney seems like a better or worse campaigner than you were expecting?

Obama’s Rich Bashing Is Backfiring

President Obama and his team thought they could deliver a headshot to Romney with the grossly inaccurate Bain ad that detailed how they closed GST Steel.  Well, Romney left Bain in 1999 and GST Steel folded in 2001.  Not to mention, Bain’s managing director, Jonathan Lavine, was still at Bain when GST closed its doors. Mr. Lavine also happens to be an Obama bundler raising between $100-200,000 for the president’s re-elect campaign.  I’ve mentioned this in a previous post.

However,the president continues to push this anti-Bain narrative, which isn’t sticking and killing his chances at winning the affluent vote.  Yes, bashing the rich may seem like the “cool” and “liberal” thing to do, but, as Michael Barone aptly pointed out, the last class warfare president that won was Harry Truman in 1948.  The same could be said about Obama’s populist vein.  The last populist president elected was Andrew Jackson.  History seems to be against him.

Barone wrote:

Today there are a lot more affluent people. The 2008 exit poll told us that 26 percent of voters had household incomes over $100,000. Half of them voted for Obama. He needs those votes again. My hunch is that Obama’s attacks on Bain will strike most affluent voters as offputting and that Romney’s calm responses will strike them as reassuring. If you want more jobs created, you don’t go around attacking job creators. Most affluent voters believe that free markets, appropriately regulated, tend to produce fair outcomes. They see investors not as vultures but as creators of jobs and promoters of innovation that increase national productivity and make everyone better off. They see class warfare as attacks on themselves.

Furthermore, Barone cites areas where the president is probably already doomed.  Especially, in states he needs to win this November to continue his agenda of dependency and big government policies.  Policies that have not reduced the high unemployment rate, gave us consecutive trillion dollar deficits, and added another $5 trillion dollars to the national debt.   The rich, and Americans in general, see Obama as ineffectual and totally antithetical to the values he promised to bring to Washington.  This is starting to have an effect no matter how much Obama tries to pivot on the matter.  Barone continues by listing how the president is losing his grip on this demographic that he needs to win again to ensure re-election.

Here’s evidence that Obama has already lost many affluent voters. The popular vote in House elections is a good proxy for presidential and party support, and voters with incomes over $100,000, evenly split in 2008, voted 58 to 40 percent for Republicans in 2010.

Northern Virginia, which Obama carried 59 to 40 percent and which provided 95 percent of his statewide popular vote margin, went 52 to 47 percent for House Republicans in 2010. Nine suburban Denver counties voted 53 to 46 percent for Obama but switched in 2010 to 54 to 42 percent Republican.

Virginia and Colorado are on everyone’s target state list. But Obama also hurt the Democratic brand among affluent voters in other states.

The four suburban counties outside Philadelphia voted 57 to 42 percent for Obama but 52 to 47 percent Republican in 2010. The six suburban counties outside Detroit voted 54 to 45 percent for Obama but 53 to 44 percent Republican in 2010. That means Pennsylvania and Michigan could be in play.

Affluent suburbs outside the South trended heavily toward Democrats in from 1992 to 2008. Now they seem to be trending Republican.

All we need is Romney, who finally clinched the nomination in last night’s Texas primary, to stay focused and hammer the president on the economy, the debt, deficit, high unemployment, and the rest of his dismal record.  However, expect this 2012 election to be the dirtiest since 1824.

« Older Entries