Tag Archives: Bill Clinton

The Politician as Superman

It was November 6, 1990. I was sitting outside a campaign “victory” party, in the dark. Just about everyone else had left, since the candidate hadn’t actually won. As I sat there drinking from a bottle of champagne, and smoking a cigar, the campaign manager came out, and immediately asked me what I was doing. “Drinking and smoking,” I replied. “How can you do that? He didn’t win,” he said incredulously. I took a drag on the cigar, and calmly said “Nicht so etwas wie Übermenschen.” He asked me again, and while I knew he didn’t understand my reply because it was in German, I repeated myself.

x-ray delta one (CC)

“Nicht so etwas wie Übermenschen.”

Finally, the campaign manager asked what he should have, “What does that mean?”

“There is no such thing as Superman.”

The campaign manager didn’t get what I said, and flew off on a tirade about what had gone wrong with the campaign. He blamed himself, the voters, and me, in turns, looking for a scapegoat to blame for the failure. I sat there, and calmly watched him go through those contortions, drinking the champagne, and finishing the cigar. “Stop,” I said. “You’ve blamed everyone except the one that really is at fault.” He shut up, and looked at me quizzically. “I told you from the beginning that your man wasn’t a good candidate. He was a hard-sell, at best, for the office. The campaign failed because the candidate couldn’t be sold to the voters.”

I dropped the mostly empty champagne bottle in the trash, and walked away, because I simply couldn’t listen to anymore. It was yet another true-believer that refused to see a candidate for what he really was. The man was hopelessly flawed, and the only reason I’d even involved myself in the campaign in the first place was that I owed someone a favor. In all honesty, I’d begged to repay that favor any other way, because I didn’t want to be associated with that candidate. I’d managed to keep myself in the background, and when I showed up at the victory party, the only people that recognized me as a member of the campaign staff were the candidate and the campaign manager. As far as I know, it’s remained that way all these years – I still don’t name this one to anyone when listing campaigns I’ve worked.

And it’s appropriate that I use the example of a nameless fool running for office right now. While he’s the extreme, the fact is that every candidate is flawed. There is no Superman. People turning politicians into celebrities feeds a need to put people up on pedestals. But, the result is that eventually the people figure out that those people really don’t deserve that treatment in the first place, and necessarily can’t live up to the high expectations placed on them. Now, I pointed out the flawed nature of a couple politicians, and the fact that another writer was giving them too much credit in the strategy department. That ticked off at least one person, and that made me think about this unnatural desire to treat politicians like demi-gods.

I’m using that term now intentionally, because I actually want to make all those God-fearing, flag-waving patriotic conservatives out there to think twice about how they are acting now. Yes, we need solidarity, but not blindness. Politicians are human beings, and therefore, are imperfect. They make mistakes. Hiding that fact doesn’t help. Deifying current and past conservative politicians does us absolutely no good. Pretending that George W. Bush didn’t overspend during his tenure is a mistake, and the Obama camp is exploiting it daily. Pointing out that Bush screwed up by outing Valerie Plame removes the ability of the left to justify the current leaks that appear to be coming from the White House.

One rule applies in all of this. Every mistake a previous politician makes that is overlooked by adoring voters is increased by someone else later. Nixon was spying on the opposition, and it cost him the White House. Now? It’s commonplace. While it hasn’t happened yet, you can be certain that thanks to Bill Clinton and John Edwards for two, marital infidelity will not be a big problem for future politicians. As long as we don’t call our leaders on their mistakes, and hold them accountable in some way, they will continue to make bigger mistakes than their predecessors. It’s like dealing with toddlers – they keep testing the limits, and keep pushing, no matter what.

There is a fine line between solidarity and blind faith. I have been berated many times for pointing out mistakes made by conservative politicians, and accused of being part of the opposition, or at the very least, a disloyal conservative. The latest was someone saying I was wrong for pointing out that Sarah Palin said something stupid – outrageous, and made-for-TV, but still stupid. She was the one who made the statement, and I didn’t bother to pick on a liberal instead. Ignoring stupidity only encourages more of the same. If we don’t hold politicians accountable, then why are we bothering in the first place?

It is the height of hypocrisy. Conservatives scream that liberals are destroying this nation, and one of the primary reasons why we say this is happening is the fact that liberals do not hold their leaders accountable for their actions. They are failing to call Obama on his mistakes, blindly following him in spite of them. How are we any better if we are doing the same with our leaders? Again, “nicht so etwas wie Übermenschen.”

The Left goes after.. Bill Clinton?

Politico published an attack article today attempting to pain former president Bill Clinton as “out of control” and “sabotaging Obama’s strategy”. Has the left gone so extreme as to dismiss it’s former hero and replace him with .. Barack Obama?

“I think he had a good business career,” Clinton said of Romney and added that “a man who has been governor and had a sterling business career crosses the qualification threshold.”

Obama does not need Clinton undercutting him. The two are not close, but they are not supposed to be enemies. They have golfed together, they attend fundraisers together, their staffs talk and, oh, yeah, Clinton’s wife is Obama’s secretary of state.

Independents and center-left moderates love Bill Clinton so it’s difficult to understand why the liberal media would start attacking the left’s version of Ronald Reagan. Despite his fun with a White House intern, lying under oath and other suspicious activities while in office, Bill Clinton was wildly popular and his economic record is often the one spoken of when attempting to show that Democrat policies work. Now, however, it seems more important to get the progressive candidate for President of the United States re-elected than to understand and use President Clinton’s success.

Calling Clinton out on the “sabotage” wasn’t enough for the liberal website. Oh no – they went straight into full-on smear mode:

There are two things going on here. First, Clinton has always been cozier with Wall Street than Obama. In January 1999, I was at a very odd event for then-President Clinton on the 106th floor of the World Trade Center.

Richard Grasso, then-chairman of New York Stock Exchange, stood up and said, “In my little corner of southern Manhattan, the Dow Jones industrial average during the course of President Clinton’s tenure tripled. We have the lowest unemployment in 30 years, and 16 million jobs have been created!”

The crowd, which included a number of financial titans, cheered. This was a year after the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke and months after Clinton had been impeached, but Wall Street did not care. Bill Clinton had been good for The Street, and The Street liked him.

So now Bill Clinton is a Wall Street insider, a 1%er – the next face on a poster at an Occupy Wall Street protest. The politico can’t stop there, now they blame Bill Clinton for the primary loss of Hillary Clinton:

Second, there is the little matter of the 2008 Democratic presidential campaign. Hillary Clinton was the early favorite, but she lost to Barack Obama and Bill Clinton helped her lose.

He made one of the biggest strategic mistakes of her entire campaign: He insisted she seriously compete in South Carolina. Hillary’s staff wanted to spend its time and resources elsewhere, judging that South Carolina, with its large black electorate, was unwinnable.

Why is it so important for the left to now distance itself from a moderate like Clinton and cozy up to an extremist like Obama? Because the two are incompatible.

Clinton understood that the free market was necessary to get the tax revenues needed to pay for his pet projects and philanthropy. Obama does not. To Obama, the free market is an obstacle preventing him from doing what he thinks is best for all of us.

Clinton moved to the middle when he saw that far left policies were not only unpopular, they were ineffective. As a total opposite, even some on the left are describing Obama as tone deaf and unobservant as demonstrated by his moving further left. This presidency has to have seen the largest number of “doubling-down” references in media reports in American history.

The left must destroy Clinton’s legacy in order to install and grow Obama’s. Both of them cannot be the symbol of the Democrat party and it would seem that liberal media is choosing sides. Watch your back Bill, they have a new favorite son now.

While The Cat’s Away, Bill Clinton Comes Out To Play

From the “news we simply cannot make up” department, Bill Clinton recently posed in Monaco with two porn stars.  But not just any two porn stars.  As luck would have it, one of them (the one on the right) had recently won sex industry awards for:  “Best New Starlet” and two other awards that aren’t fit to print here. (even their their titles are graphic)

Nothing But the Best for Slick Willie


As you can see, it’s all fun and games for America’s most recently impeached president.

What Can Bill Clinton Teach Republicans about Winning in 2012?

In 1992, Bill Clinton made the phrase “It’s the economy, stupid!” a theme for his successful presidential campaign. Clinton focused on the one issue that the large majority of Americans agreed was the most important. Strategically, he made the right call: the economy had been in a recession for more than two years. People were craving for a recovery.

Clinton’s major achievement was to bridge the gap between himself and moderates who otherwise would disagree with him on social issues. Today, 20 years later, we are in a similar situation. We have had a bad economy for more than two years. People are once again craving for a recovery. The incumbent president has not managed to put the economy back on track, although Obama’s record is far worse than that of George Bush Sr. in ’92.

To win both Congress and the White House, all Republicans need to do is tell the story of how Obama’s policies have driven the economy into a thick muddy layer of big government and onerous regulations.

Despite this dream position, Republicans are showing disturbing signs of shooting themselves in the foot, nationally as well as at the state level. At a time when our state lawmakers need to spend every precious moment of legislative time and all their political capital on improving the economy, some Republicans are diverting focus to social issues.

There is nothing wrong per se with advancing pro-life legislation or protecting the family as the founding unit of a stable, free and prosperous society. But you have to pick your battles. At a time when the economy is sinking deeper and deeper into the quagmire of a European social-democratic welfare state, there are more urgent battlefronts to attend to. If the statists have it their way and America becomes a full-fledged welfare state, our traditional American social values will go the same way as our economic freedom. The controversy over forcing Catholic employers to pay for abortion is a case in point.

As an example of the consequences of diverting focus from the economy, consider the new Republican majority in the Virginia state legislature. Recently the Washington Examiner reported:

Virginia took another step Monday toward restricting abortions by defining life as something that starts at conception and giving fetuses the same rights as any citizen during a marathon legislative session in which Republicans pushed their most controversial measures. The House of Delegates gave preliminary approval to the so-called “personhood” bill a day before the General Assembly deadline to send legislation to the other chamber … During more than eight hours of debate, House Republicans advanced a litany of conservative initiatives ahead of Tuesday’s deadline, including bills that would allow the death penalty for accomplices in murder cases and create a voucherlike program that would give tax breaks to companies that pay for low-income students to attend private schools.

The “personhood” bill has since been declared politically dead. But the point about legislative priorities remains. Virginia has enough economic problems to keep the legislature busy. In 2009 the Tax Foundation ranked Virginia’s overall tax climate 33rd best in the nation, a notable deterioration from 2007 when Virginia ranked 22nd. As for business taxes, Virginia is also on a downbound train: its ranking for 2012 is 26th, down from 23rd a year ago.

On the jobs front, Bureau of Labor Statistics data show that Virginia lost 123,500 private sector jobs from 2008 to 2011 (September to September). During the same time, the state government in Virginia added 4,600 people to its payrolls.

Instead of attending to these economic alarm bells, Republicans in the Virginia state legislature spend their time pushing a social agenda that emboldens Democrats to reach out to swing voters at a time when their credentials with independents should be at their weakest.

To make matters worse, these unwise political priorities are now spilling over into the state’s pending U.S. Senate race. The two likely candidates for Virginia’s open seat (one of nine nationally) are Republican George Allen and Democrat Tim Kaine. So far, Allen has successfully exploited Kaine’s close ties to Obama and used the president’s economic-policy failure against the Democrat. But this advantage is now in jeopardy, as Tim Kaine is beginning to use the Virginia Republican conservative agenda against Allen. The Washington Examiner again:

The former Virginia governor and Democratic National Committee chairman is now trying to tie Republican George Allen to the divisive social agenda surging through the state’s Republican-run General Assembly in hopes of undercutting Allen’s support among independent voters. Virginia Republicans eager to flex their new majority status in Richmond are pushing a number of controversial measures on abortion, gay rights, guns and other initiatives shunned for decades under Democratic control. But every bill conservatives advance gives Kaine ammunition to use against Allen.

If Republicans can stay focused on the economy and Obama’s big-government agenda, they will mop the floor of the U.S. Capitol and the White House with their Democrat opponents. They will also make it easier for themselves to advance traditional American social values in the future.

Consider, again, the Bill Clinton example. In 1996 he had presided over an improving economy for four years and was able to win enough independent voters to get re-elected. He then turned his attention to some social issues he held dear, such as the creation of the SCHIP program (“Medicaid for kids”). By the same token, a Republican president and Congressional majority who can restore the American economy over the next four years will win a lot of credibility among independent and moderate voters. That will help them advance a social agenda that is pro-life, pro-religious freedom and pro family.

Furthermore, the path to a restored economy includes securing some of our traditional social values. Our economy will only improve if we roll back the welfare state, the conveyor belt of invasive government and radical social policies. Two examples:

  • Obama’s expansion of abortion-funding is tied to his Affordable Care Act – the defeat of ACA will, at least to some degree, restore the respect for life in America;
  • The campaign to legalize gay marriage is partly driven by the desire to give gay couples the same marital benefits as traditional couples get – by getting government out of the entitlement business, the gay marriage issue loses one of its main driving forces.

To paraphrase Bill Clinton: “It’s the welfare state, stupid!”

Beware of "C2ES" Climate Change Propaganda Group Retread

With the advent of super high speed internet and information sharing around the globe making it easier to expose nefarious groups and individuals that are spreading misinformation today, we are seeing the constant re-naming of those who are exposed to be propagandists/societal manipulators more frequently than ever before. This especially holds true in the Global Warming- which-is-now-Climate Change political propaganda arena.

It was recently quietly announced that a certain U.S. Climate change think tank had lost it’s main funding of charitable donations. The very same media manipulators who has previously deemed this group “a reputable think tank that sought solutions for climate change” seem to be a little miffed about how this particular group will now be getting their funding from big oil and green energy interests.  Notice how I wrote “a little miffed,” as opposed to furious there? The climate change scam supporters and pimps that faithfully promote the climate change biggest fraud to ever be perpetuated on the American public, will also be promoting this newly-named group 24/7, regardless of the fact that they are now being funded by big oil and green energy-government-connected- crony-capitalists. ( think Solyndra Light-Squared, and the rest of the entire solar/wind power-selling government-connected thieves)  

Meet the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, or C2ES

AFP Photo

C2ES is just a retread of one of the main originators of the then-titled Global Warming scam of the Clinton/Gore administration. C2ES was formerly known as the Pew Center on Global Climate Change. The President of the Clinton/Gore retread of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, which is now being called C2ES is none other than Eileen Claussen. In her fluffed up bio on the leftist-propaganda website, The Huffington Post, we see just how manipulative the media can be, not in what they print, but in what they purposely choose to leave out: 

Ms. Claussen is the former Assistant Secretary of State for Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs.

Prior to joining the Department of State, Ms. Claussen served for three years as a Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Global Environmental Affairs at the National Security Council. She has also served as Chairman of the United Nations Multilateral Montreal Protocol Fund.

Ms. Claussen was Director of Atmospheric Programs at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, where she was responsible for activities related to the depletion of the ozone layer; Title IV of the Clean Air Act; and the EPA’s energy efficiency programs, including the Green Lights program and the Energy Star program.

Of note is that this Global Warming propagandist has held various positions in the Extreme Political Activists  group known as the EPA, which is 100% controlled by far left environmental radicals under the thumb of Lisa Jackson today.

What they fail to include in that Liberal libation posing as a “bio” is the fact that Ms. Claussen was a major plank in the Global Warming fraud initiated by the Clinton administration with a heavy does of Al Gore at the helm. Yes that Al Gore. The Huff-blow bio goes on to mention a bunch of fluffy awards Claussen received from her green energy bed-pals, along with the fact that she is a long time member of The Council of Foreign Relations, or CFR. Now that we have drug Ms. Claussen out of the Al Gore/Clinton closet for all to see, we also see that in an article by the AFP, Ms. Claussen now claims C2ES will be.. wait for it…an “Independent, non-partisan solution center.”  I can practically hear our readers laughing out loud when reading that ludicrous statement, no matter where they may be reading from.   If C2ES is in fact an independent, non-partisan solution center, then they surely will not be sucking the sludge from the same taxpayer-funded-money trough as the rest of the government crony-capitalists in big oil and green energy are doing today, right? Not quite.

In the C2ES coming-out-of-the-Al-Gore-closet-under-a-new-name announcement, Claussen named their three new “strategic partners” as Entergy, HP and Shell, adding that they had made “substantial multi-year funding commitments to the new organization.” ( except for the fact that this is not a new organization, but the same old Al Gore-type Global Warming, propaganda-spreading, puppet group that has changed names.)

Major contributors” were listed as the Alcoa Foundation, Bank of America, GE, The Energy Foundation, Duke Energy and last but certainly not least, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.  Pay attention folks, there is a new Climate Change propaganda group that isn’t really new at all, and it’s now called C2ES.   Brought to you by the Clinton/Al Gore administration and now funded by various government-connected crony-capitalists in the big oil and green energy sectors.  All under the guise of being “independent and non-partisan.”


2012 just can’t get here fast enough!

Mr. Morality, Bill Clinton Calls for an End to Presidential Term Limits

Impeached, former president Bill Clinton specifically told Morning Joe that while he does not think he should be allowed to pollute our White House again in the future, run for POTUS again, so just whom would he have in mind when he says U.S. Presidents should be able to take a little break and then run for reelection again?  He tells America that we should just repeal the 22nd amendment to the U.S. Constitution in the above interview. Would Bill be suggesting that he would like his good friend, G.W. Bush to be allowed another shot at being our president? Not likely there, despite the media-muckers pathetic attempts to convince us that those two are lifelong buddies today. How about digging up Progressive Poppa FDR for a fifth term? He has certainly has had a good long rest. [in a graveyard where it is quite peaceful] I,m sure the progressive stage prop managers of today could find one of their Hollywood make-up artist pals to make FDR look presentable for photo shoots for another presidential campaign if they tried hard enough.  No, FDR probably wouldn’t be elected to another term today, as the whole world now knows FDR died of a massive brain tumor that exploded in a stroke that killed him.( That sure explains a lot, as far as how mentally competent the author of the progressive New Deals 1 and 2, was during his time in office) 

Stop the presses!  What if the person to whom Bill is referring to isn’t an ex-President of the United States ? What if Bill Clinton has now come to the reality of the distinct possibility that Barack Obama will become a one and done President by being thrown out of office in the 2012 elections? Barry is still relatively young, and with a few more years of mentoring from Billy Clinton and Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers, Barry just might be able to hide enough of his record to make another run for POTUS in the future. Would the American citizenry ever be so gullible and politically ignorant enough, to ignore just what Barack Hussein Obama has done to this country during his first term in office, and elect him at a future date? They certainly proved to be just that in 2008, when they elected him the first time, didn’t they?

   Pictured at the left is President Obama, Bill Clinton and Chicago slumlord extraordinaire Valerie Jarrett, whom with no actual credible experience in government is now serving as a senior adviser to the President, and whom many say is the driving force behind the far left Liberal Obama policies that have plagued this nation for over three years now.  We can only surmise  just what Clinton was lecturing Obama about on that occasion, yet when considering Clinton’s recent calling for the repeal of the 22nd amendment on Presidential term limits, we could now draw the following caption:

 “Now listen, Barry, these ignorant Americans have somehow caught on to our Socialistic agenda of transforming America into a third-world rat-hole by trampling on the U.S. Constitution and bypassing Congress by enforcing illegal laws by executive fiat, so here is what we are going to do. We will start a national propaganda campaign to repeal the 22nd amendment, so that when the American voters throw you out of office in the 2012 elections, we can reinsert you at a later date to continue our Socialistic agenda. Remember, I am the expert here on fooling the American public, just look at how I got away with saying I never had sex with Monica. Even though I was impeached, there are still enough gullible sheep who think we are the Democrats of yesteryear who actually cared about the working class and the poor. “

In getting back to the above interview with Joe Scarborough, once again Americans are being lectured by disgraced ex- President Bill Clinton, he of the “Head White House intern, Monica Lewinsky goes down under in the White House” fame.  With 2012 GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain facing an avalanche of allegations of “attempted” vague sexual advances while being married, ( just as Clinton was when he actually cheated on Hillary) and the media flooding our lives with the related sensationalist headlines across America the past few weeks, we must ask ourselves why we  constantly allow ourselves to be lectured by Slick Willy Clinton, the former pot-smoking-but-never-inhaling, philandering, dishonest, morally bankrupt adulterer, on anything concerning our lives today. Has America become that soullessly ignorant or so completely morally bankrupt today? Considering that the infamous “Little Blue Dress” Monica Lewinsky was wearing at the time she was showing Willy just how delicious she thought he was  started a pop-culture-like worship once upon a time, yes,  I,d say America is well on their way to becoming 100% morally bankrupt.

Willy refused to actually identify the actual piece of legislation that created term limits in America, while slickly also avoiding mentioning by name the Democratic President that the 22nd amendment was specifically drawn up for, to prevent future Presidents from remaining in the White House for more than two terms. That would be what many historians believe to be considered the father of the Progressive/Socialist movement in America, one Franklin Delano Roosevelt. (FDR) Not to be confused with the Grandfather of the progressive movement, Mr. Woodrow Wilson, with a dishonorable mention going to semi-Republican Teddy Roosevelt.

Past Progressive Presidents make GOP candidate Herman Cain look like an alter boy.

FDR was the President of the United States from 1933 – 1945.  President Franklin Roosevelt died in the first year of his fourth presidential term. In the room with him at the time of his death was his daughter, Anna Roosevelt Boettiger, an artist doing a portrait of FDR and…. his longtime mistress, one Lucy Mercer Rutherfurd.  Upon hearing of her husband’s death, Mrs. Roosevelt faced not only the disturbing news of FRD’s death, but also the fact that his mistress was with him on his deathbed in the White House.   While U.S Presidential history is chock full of philandering, womanizing, morally bankrupt adulterers, (FDR, JFK, Willy Clinton) today’s progressive media hypocrites are today consumed with Herman Cain’s ”suggested” or “wishful” unfaithfulness to his wife by unnamed and non-credible accusers. Golly gee whiz Batman, imagine what they would be doing if Herman Cain actually had Bialik under the White House desk like Slick Willy did, or carried on a decades long affair with a mistress who was at his bedside upon his death right in the White House? (As Poppa-Progressive FDR did)

The last thing the American people will ever allow to happen is the repealing of the 22nd amendment of Willy Clinton’s dreams in order to allow the Marxist ideologue and lifelong Bill Ayers student, Barack Obama to slither back into the White House again. It is also immensely disgusting to see the progressive-liberal media operatives putting the perverted, unfaithful adulterer who disgraced the United States office of the Presidency for all the world to see, on national television to lecture the American people.  Bill Clinton is a disgrace to this great nation, and nothing more.

2012 just can’t get here fast enough!







If We Can't Have Chris Christie, Let's Try Frankenstein

Let’s be honest, most people who plan to vote Republican in 2012  are not satisfied with the current field.  Two of the most recent examples are the rise and plummet of Rick Perry and the near comical begging of Chris Christie to get into the race.  Although… he did seem to take a curious tack for a man who wasn’t running…  But I digress.

Republicans are looking for a hero.  Heck, they might even be looking for a sandwich.  A lot of polls make it seem like President Obama would lose if he went up against a ham sandwich, but when you put him up against any one of these contenders who are actually running, he usually comes out ahead.

So what are conservatives to do?  Since it looks like Rick Perry’s plan to make offspring from Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain has little chance of happening, maybe they’ll have to see if they can clone some sort of monster together from various parts of the current contenders (and possibly some people who aren’t running too).

Let’s see what we can come up with….

1.  Chris Christie’s ability to control the media.  Remember when it looked like Sarah Palin couldn’t adequately tell Katie Couric what kind of magazines she read?  Yeah… Chris Christie won’t have that problem.

2.  Herman Cain’s relatability.  Whether he’s cracking jokes in a debate or telling you about his battle with cancer, Herman Cain is a man that many Americans can relate with.  (minus the incredibly non-PC stuff… and then again, there are people who relate to that too)

3.  Steve Jobs’ “Reality Distortion Field”.  Steve Jobs has a reputation for being able to distort reality to such an extent, he can tell you that your laptop doesn’t need a DVD drive, and you’ll believe him.  In a way, our current president has this ability too.  Remember when Barack Obama said you can keep your doctor if you want to?  Or how about “unemployment won’t go over 8%”.  When you’re a politician, few things are more valuable than being able to make things up and get away with it.

4.  Sarah Palin’s seemingly airtight background.  A guy moved into the house next door to Sarah Palin, and the best he could come up with is that she might have slept with Glen Rice in college.  He’s not the first “journalist” that’s wasted their money on a goose hunt to make Palin look bad.  Remember the emails?  Media outlets killed about 20 trees printing those emails up, and it looks like they found nothing.  I wonder what Obama’s emails look like?  Think Solyndra.  But, again, I digress…

5.  John Huntsman’s resilience.  He has all but had his podium toilet papered by audience members at debates, and he keeps showing up.  No matter how many times he’s been defiled on Twitter (does that word fit in this context, because it seems like it could) or how much Fox News tries to neglect him, John Huntsman walks around with all of the swagger of a top tier candidate.  (something Rick Santorum could learn from)

6.  John Stewart’s ability to get more credit than he deserves.  Again, this is something that Barack Obama already exhibits, but you cannot deny how invaluable it is to receive awards and accolades that you may or may not deserve.  (think emmys, nobel prizes)  And having the entire weight of American media telling everybody that you’re great doesn’t hurt either.

7.  Bill Clinton’s teflon coating.  If all else fails, and a candidate is really backed into a corner, it helps to be able to get off the hook by debating what the definition of “is” is.  Also go back to number two; the electorate will often overlook your flaws, if they think you can “feel their pain”.

8.  Dwight Eisenhower’s vision.  One of my favorite stories of all time is how we ended up with the great system of highways we have in this country today.  Eisenhower often spoke of his admiration for Germany’s system of roads compared to ours. (he even gave credit to them for making it easier to take Germany in WWII)  Once he became president, he made sure that the United States got their own system of roads that made it easier to travel throughout the country.  An interesting side note is that mass transportation hippies were against him, but Ike prevailed, and for that I thank him.

9.  Elton John’s mojo.  Elton John is like the honey badger of pop culture; he just doesn’t give a… well, he just doesn’t care what others think.  He knows how to party, he can laugh at himself, and somehow, he can be “proper” enough to do everything from singing at Princess Di’s funeral to singing at Rush Limbaugh’s wedding.  Add that to the fact that he’s been relevant for nearly 40 years, and you’ll be hard pressed to find a man who has more mojo.  Also… he sang the hit song from The Lion King.  The man has range.

10. Ronald Reagan’s worldview.  There is audio as far back as the 1940′s demonstrating that Ronald Reagan saw the world for what it is.  He was often able to identify what the problems of the day really were (versus what spin doctors said they were), and he was keenly aware of how to solve them too.  If we had leadership like that today, we could see “morning in America” once again.

If we can’t get Newt and Cain to make babies and we’re open minded to the idea of cloning, this list just might be all the ingredients necessary for a perfect candidate.  What do you think the Republicans need to win?  Who should (or should not) have been on this list?  Let us know on Facebook, Twitter, or in the comments below.  We’d love to hear from you.


Gov. Perry – Welcome to Your Past

During my misspent youth, I was a Democrat. Consequently, when I started my political consulting firm I wanted to be true to my mistaken convictions, so I only worked for Democrat clients.
[Note: Now that I’m a Republican who has seen the error of my ways, I often find myself trying to rationalize my membership in the party of debt, dependency and degeneracy by telling people I was a “conservative Democrat.” This is not all that uncommon among those of us who have seen the light and puts me in some pretty august company.
Recently I was watching a rerun of ‘Booknotes’ with Gertrude Himmelfarb — now a respected historian and neo–conservative, but in her youth a Trotskyite, which — for those of you suffering from recent history instruction in public schools — is a variety of Communist. When asked how she made the ideological journey from Trotsky to Reagan, it warmed my heart when explained that she was always a pretty conservative Trotskyite.]
In 1990 I found myself working as media consultant for Tom McRae who was Bill Clinton’s last gubernatorial primary opponent in Arkansas.
At that time Clinton was eight to ten years into his affair with Gennifer Flowers, had played jack–in–the–box with Paula Jones, reportedly used the state troopers to ferry women and was generally known as someone you wouldn’t leave unsupervised with your college–age daughter.
Yet our TV spots featured none of this lurid material for the simple reason that, regardless of the truth, the rumors were old news to voters and reporters. Clinton had been re–elected previously when Flowers was just starting to bloom. The fact that she had now taken root, along with a complete inventory of other women, was simply not a factor as he sought his fifth term.
Instead, our spots were built around “It’s time for a change” and highlighted the fact Clinton was just going through the motions while preparing to run for president. Our woefully underfunded campaign held Clinton to a meager 54 percent.
Two years later Clinton was in for a rude surprise during the New Hampshire Presidential Primary. Rumors he thought dead and buried arose in the form of tapes secretly recorded by Flowers and played for the news media.
Why was his old squeeze from the Ozarks suddenly relevant? Simple, Clinton changed the scope of his campaigning, from statewide candidate in Arkansas to nationwide candidate and new voters were unaware of his randy streak. These voters were encountering information that he thought was safely behind him and Clinton was caught unprepared. Overcoming the shock required a comprehensive campaign of lies to a gullible news media that just barely saved his campaign.
The same phenomenon is being repeated today — minus the lies and the lingerie.
Texas Governor Rick Perry is encountering past issues he previously overcame. If Perry had been content to stay in Texas and run for governor, US Senator or Congress the forced HPV vaccinations for schoolgirls and in–state college tuition for children of illegal aliens would have been non–issues.
This is because winning an election, similar to baptism, washes one clean of all past political sins. Where Christian baptism differs from elections is Christ doesn’t care about geography. You’re just as clean in Austin as you are in Arlington. But in politics absolution doesn’t travel across the border.
In Florida and elsewhere conservative Republicans are appalled at Perry’s executive decision to require schoolgirls to be vaccinated for a disease that comes through sexual activity and his signature on a law that grants in–state college tuition to the children of illegal aliens.
Perry appears to be appalled that voters have found out.
His debate answers are awkward and off–message for Republicans. He says his decision with regard to HPV vaccinations was wrong and he would not do it again. So far so good, but then he rationalizes by saying it would save lives. So would requiring every citizen of Texas to wear a ballistic vest when leaving the house, but it would not be a conservative policy.
His most recent answer to the tuition controversy only served to drive his poll numbers down. Telling opponents of granting special privileges to children of illegals that they “don’t…have a heart” is simply stupid. Democrats are the land of “follow your feelings,” Republicans prefer to follow the rule of law.
If Perry’s answers don’t improve his campaign will be the second bubble to burst, following that of Rep. Michelle Bachmann. But either way, he serves as an instructive lesson for politicians who are looking to expand their political horizons in the future.
Michael R. Shannon is a public relations and advertising consultant with corporate, government and political experience around the globe. He is a dynamic and entertaining keynote speaker. He can be reached at [email protected]

Is President Obama Pushing Us Into a Double Dip Recession? History Says YES

President Obama’s approval ratings among American voters have been dropping to historic lows as he heads into the third year of his first, and only term, as President of The United States. Electoral history backs up that last statement, in the fact that no incumbent President has ever been reelected with our current stubbornly high unemployment rate hovering over 9%. Throw in the fact that the dollar is weak, gasoline is still about double what it was when he took office, and the fact that many economists point to the total unemployment as to being more like 17%, not the 9% that the new Liberal math is using to get it at that level, and we end up with 63% of Americans  saying they do not like the direction the country is going under Barack Obama. That points to Obama as being what is simply know as a “One and done President.”

 Does Barack Obama know he is a one and done president?  He must know how disgusted most of America is  in the hope and change slogan that has now become simply,  no hope and change for the worse, when we see those sharply tanking approval ratings. Since Obama knows he will be defeated in 2012, relegated to the dustbin of being known as the worst President in modern American history, many folks believe he is setting up the next Republican President administration to fail by damaging our economy immensely. History also shows this to be a pattern of past Presidents. If you can create an atmosphere of long-term instability in our economy, it could lead Americans to eventually voting for Hope and Change 2.0.  in 2016,  just like they did in 2006 without any clear definition of just what kind of trans-formative change  candidate Obama was  talking about.

Barack Obama and his Liberal Party USA group of advisers, czars and high-powered appointees have been shown to try to replicate the failed Socialistic policies of past administrations of the lefto-sphere numerous times since Obama was elected. They have also used the gimmickry and manipulation of the masses techniques of past Presidents Carter, Wilson, Hoover, FDR, and Clinton often, ( while ignoring Truman’s economy recovery facts)  in trying to make their case for their Liberal wealth redistribution to buy votes campaigns.  Jimmy Carter, whom is widely known as the worst POTUS in modern history, along with Bill Clinton who is infamous for disgracing our White House with his Monica Lewinski down-under policies, are both still heavily involved in pimping the Barack Obama tax hike agenda of today. Do these Liberal elitists ever retire?  It says a lot about the current administration in their willingness to ignore Carter and Clinton’s incompetence and perversions, while trying to prop them up as respected people that Americans should listen to today.

The  bottom line is that, true to their Liberal ideology, Barack Obama and company are trying to tax us into a double-dip recession. History proves it, and the current stagnant economy due to the failed policies of the past 3 years, coupled with the numerous stealth tax increases hidden in the Obama agenda such as those being found in Obama-care, will prove deadly to our economy in the near future. Tax increases and massive over-regulation are piling up in all sectors of our economy, with many of them being back-loaded until…. 2013, right after Obama is kicked out of office. Coincidence? Not likely. Fake Democrats have a well-documented history of implementing stealth policies in able to regain power in future elections by crippling the economy through failed Keynesian economic policies. Then, they sit back and start screaming that it is all the conservative policies that hurt working Americans and everyone should get out and vote for Democrats. This is the proven cycle of the two-party political system, and people fall for it time and time again while ignoring the history of American economics.

         Today, on my local news I saw that Bill Clinton is telling Americans and Congress to pass Obama’s current massive tax hikes plan(s) RIGHT AWAY. The doomed-to-fail American Jobs Act, the newly announced Buffet Rule, and the hidden agenda of letting the Bush tax cuts expire are all in fact, tax hikes on every man, woman and child in America. ( Except for most of the Liberal base though, as they, like Buffett and Obama-bedpal G. E. , very rarely actually pay taxes)  That sent red flags dancing across my vision immediately. Bill Clinton’s fallacy about just what happened when he was President has been very well-exposed as to containing a very heavy dose of leftist propaganda in saying our economy skyrocketed during the Clinton years simply because he raised taxes on the rich. To be perfectly clear, history points to raising taxes as prohibitive to growing our economy time and time again. The current Liberal administration seems very good at using past history to dig out the trickery and manipulation tactics that have been used before to fool the American public into going along with tax increases that, in fact, will lead us into a double-dip recession. Is Barack Obama pushing us into a double dip recession on purpose? History says he is doing  just that, when we look at how past tax hikes have resulted in severe downturns in our economy throughout our presidential history.

In an article from The Heritage Foundation titled, Hoover, FDR and Clinton Tax Increases: A Brief Historical Lesson, we see indisputable facts that prove to us that raising taxes during a recession only leads us into a double-dip recession or even a depression. These historic examples  also show us to be the exact same tactics that the Obama administration is now using  as we head in  2012 and the Presidential elections.

                          Lets start with President Herbert Hoover back in the troubled economic times of  the early 1930’s.:

” After the 1929 stock market crash, the Smoot-Hawley tariff of 1930 raised import prices and more importantly threw a bucket of cold water on global trade flows, helping send the economy into deep depression. The economy had very little chance to recover. Along with gross and ongoing monetary policy mismanagement, President Hoover raised taxes in 1932. The consequences were devastating. As Alan Reynolds points out: ‘ President Herbert Hoover asked for a temporary tax increase…in June 1932, raising the top income tax rate from 25% to 63% and quadrupling the lowest tax rate from 1.1% to 4%. That didn’t help confidence or the Treasury. Revenue from the individual income tax dropped from $834 million in 1931 to $427 million in 1932 and $353 million in 1933′ ”  ( emphasis mine)

Note the highlighted lines there. Those were some whopping tax increases, and if Barack Obama and the Liberals in Congress get their way we will see the exact same thing when we look at the big picture and actually add all of the Obama tax increases already on the books to the new ones he is proposing today. Hoover’s huge tax increases also point us towards  the failed New Deal  Keynesian-style spending  that is always at the root of Progressive ( posing as democratic) policy. It led directly to a double-dip recession that really hurt the very working class people Democrats at the time purported to represent as we see here:

This caused a “double-dip” recession, sky-rocketing the unemployment rate to well above 20 percent. After 1933, the economy showed glimmers of recovery: unemployment dropped from near 25 percent in 1934 to under 15 percent in 1937, and economic activity was picking up. Contrary to Keynesian conventional wisdom, however, the recovery didn’t come as a result of New Deal spending. Christina Romer, former chief economic advisor to President Obama, makes clear: “Fiscal policy played a relatively small role in stimulating recovery in the United States.” Rather, the initial recovery happened largely because of monetary expansion, the “money supply increased nearly 42 percent between 1933 and 1937,” according to Ms. Romer. ( the monetary expansion link there gives us a very detailed look at the Great Depression and it’s causes)

          Five years later FDR repeated the same mistake as Hoover, as we see here


Unfortunately, President Roosevelt made the same crucial mistake President Hoover made 5 years earlier, so the recovery didn’t last. FDR raised taxes sharply in 1937 in an attempt to balance the budget. Once tax increases took effect, the economy collapsed into another recession – the second stage of the double-dip which lasted into WWII. ( emphasis mine)



       President Harry S. Truman, whom we all know was a huge history buff and an avid reader, learned just how dangerous Keynesian economic policies had been while he was serving as FDR”s Vice President , and as President in 1945 directed a true economic recovery through conservative, pro-growth principles:

As Burt Fulsom writes:

Congress reduced taxes. Income tax rates were cut across the board. FDR’s top marginal rate, 94% on all income over $200,000, was cut to 86.45%. The lowest rate was cut to 19% from 23%, and with a change in the amount of income exempt from taxation an estimated 12 million Americans were eliminated from the tax rolls entirely.

Corporate tax rates were trimmed and FDR’s “excess profits” tax was repealed, which meant that top marginal corporate tax rates effectively went to 38% from 90% after 1945….By the late 1940s, a revived economy was generating more annual federal revenue than the U.S. had received during the war years, when tax rates were higher. Price controls from the war were also eliminated by the end of 1946. The U.S. began running budget surpluses. ( emphasis mine)

How many of our readers can even imagine what a tax rate of 90%, as highlighted above, would do to this country ? Could that happen again? History already shows us that it will, if we do not address the current economic cliff we are standing on the edge of, and if we do not reinstate the free market principles that lead to overall  economic growth and create a stable economic climate . That simply means less taxation through corporate tax rate deductions and a repeal of the overbearing, expensive regulations that stifle economic growth.  The more companies and businesses pay in taxes, the less money there is for expansion and new job creation. It doesn’t take a Harvard trained elitist or a career politician to understand these facts. To the contrary, all it takes is a look at the history of economics above, with an eye on just what policies were good for America and which ones were proven to lead to double-dip recessions. It is historical fact.

             Last but certainly least, President Clinton’s policy record shows us both how misleading Liberals are when they say he lead us into the most prosperous economy in U.S. history, and their fallacy of whether or not he raised taxes to do it:

The disastrous mistakes from Presidents Hoover and Roosevelt underscore the importance that Washington not raise taxes in a weak economy. But that doesn’t stop the Left from advancing the notion. They point to Clinton’s record as proof. After all, Congress pushed through a big tax increase under President Clinton, and the economy boomed, right?  ( emphasis mine)

That much-overstated Liberal propaganda, when discussing the history of U.S. economic policy with regard to the Liberal tax-the- rich schemes, is in fact just that, mainly mind-manipulating propaganda put out by the ever- economically- illiterate Socialists posing as working-class champion Democrats as we see here:

Heritage senior fellow JD Foster adds:

The first period, from 1993 to 1996, began with a significant tax increase as the economy was accelerating out of recession. The second period, from 1997 to 2000, began with a modest tax cut as the economy should have settled into a normal growth period. The economy was decidedly stronger following the tax cut than it was following the tax increase. ( emphasis mine)

So there we have it, from Presidents Hoover, to FDR, to Truman, and finally to the myth of President Bill Clinton’s much-stated tax increases having ‘supposedly’ led to economic prosperity and job creation, we see that U.S. economic history shows us that raising taxes , especially during the current Obama-recession, will lead us straight into a double-sip recession. A double-dip recession, and possible  great depression are on the horizon for America due to Barack Obama’s current numerous tax increases, ( some obvious and many hidden) and  his big government-over- regulation-laden agenda. Obama knows he is a one and done President, and is doing everything he can to set up the next administration to fail by pushing for massive tax hikes during the current recession, while all the time blaming it on Republicans.  History tells us that this is, in fact, Barack Obama’s current agenda. Let’s all work together to avoid a double-dip recession that will hurt all Americans, and defeat Barack Obama in 2012.



Jon Huntsman Diagnosis: Delusional

The definition of delusional is: “a false belief held with absolute conviction despite superior evidence.”  

This diagnosis, without a doubt, is accurate for presidential candidate Jon Huntsman, Jr.

From the first moment of his official announcement that he would be running for president on the Republican ticket, the possibility of him winning the nomination has been laughable. Let’s take a look at the evidence against the former governor of Utah, which supports such an extreme diagnosis.

From the moment his name was floated as a serious possible candidate, one of the biggest hurdles he faced was the position he held at the time. On August 11, 2009, he resigned from his position as the governor of Utah to accept an appointment by President Obama as the United States Ambassador to the People’s Republic of China.

He submitted his formal resignation as Ambassador to China on January 31 of this year, and he officially stepped down from the position on April 30. On June 21, he made the formal announcement the he was running for the Republican presidential nomination in the 2012 election.

Since his announcement, Mr. Huntsman has tried to distance himself from the fact that he was part of the current administration. He came out critiscizing Obama’s economic policy, saying it has “failed” and is “in conflict with what he communicated to us in 2009.”

However, David Axelrod, who is now serving on President Obama’s reelection campaign, recently appeared on CNN’s “State of the Union”, and disputes Jon Huntsman’s “conviction” against the president’s policy.  Mr. Axelrod is quite likely more accurate about the situation, when, while discussing a 2009 trip to China, he said :

“If Jon Huntsman disagreed with President Barack Obama’s economic policy, he never voiced it during his time in the administration. If he had suggestions on the economy, he had an excellent opportunity to suggest them then, where we were all together in China. What has changed is not his view of the economy, but his view of his own chances to, perhaps, win the [Republican presidential] nomination. I understand. That’s politics. He’s a politician, and he sees an opportunity.”

President Obama & Jon Huntsman- Photo by Charles Dharapak/AP

Mr. Axelrod is correct: this is politics. Mr. Huntsman is a politician who “sees” an opportunity. Take whatever opportunity you can if it benefits you or advancing your political agenda or your political career. While this is something the American populace has become quite accustomed to: politics as usual, we are also tired of the political games.

Mr. Axelrod went on to discuss other issues that Mr. Huntsman appears to agree with, regarding the Obama policy, saying:

“He was encouraging on health care. He was encouraging on the whole range of issues. He was a little quizzical about what was going on in his own party. And you got the strong sense that he was going to wait until 2016 for the storm to blow over.”

Mr. Huntsman may be trying to distance himself from the current administration in his political games, but his own words of admiration for the very president he now “speaks out against”  has come back to haunt him. In April of this year, a handwritten letter was leaked to the Daily Caller’s Jonathan Strong.  In Governor Huntsman’s own handwriting, he praised the president, writing:

“You are a remarkable leader. It has been a great honor getting to know you.”

In keeping true to the intent of Mr. Huntsman, the actual word “remarkable” was underlined in the handwritten letter just as is depicted in this article. It would be quite difficult for the former governor to imply that it was just a formality , as he made sure to emphasize the depth of his approval for the president by underlining the word “remarkable”, and, the letter was handwritten.

He wrote two other letters- one to former President Clinton, the other to Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, where he praised the two of them as well.

Another piece of evidence to add to the argument that Mr. Huntsman is delusional is the recent tweets from his Twitter account, in an apparent back-handed jab at presidential candidate Rick Perry. Governor Perry voiced the fact that he is skeptical of the role humans play in climate change, as well as his view that there are “gaps” in the theory of evolution. In “response” to Governor Perry’s stance, Mr. Huntsman sent out a tweet which read:

“To be clear. I believe in evolution and trust scientists on global warming. Call me crazy.”

OK, Mr. Huntsman, as you wish. You are crazy. Hence, the delusional diagnosis. You most certainly have a false sense of belief that you could ever be the Republican presidential nominee when the evidence is stacked very high against you that you hold any of the values that are most important to Conservatives. Your absolute conviction despite the enormous evidence against you fits the diagnosis of delusional quite perfectly. Do you not realize that you are running on the Republican ticket, not the Democrat ticket?  Sir- with as much respect as can be mustered at this point, the majority of Republicans, Conservatives, and Tea Party folks agree with Governor Perry on one thing, even if they disagree with him on many others. Most of us do not buy into man-made climate change. Yes, we know the earth goes through cycles of climate change. It’s the way God set things up way back in the beginning of time. But, sir- again, as respectfully as possible I say to you- man-made global warming/climate change or whatever new name the progressives care to repackage it the next time around- it’s a money-making scheme! All the proof you need is the father of the global warming/climate change movement himself, Al Gore. If you are at all serious about this whole presidential candidacy thingy you’ve got going here, sending out tweets about believing in evolution and global warming would suit you better if you switched to the more appropriate Democrat ticket. I’m sure the Democrats would be quite pleased to have another option, as many are quite unhappy with the president you felt was doing a “remarkable” job.

Today, on CBS’ “Face the Nation”, Mr. Hunstman said that “the early polls are absolute nonsense at this point in the game.” He may be right when looking at the big picture, but when it comes to looking in the mirror he needs to face reality: he is delusional to think he would ever be the Republican presidential nominee. That is reality, no matter how the polls look.



The Daily Caller 
NewsMax Article 1
NewsMax Article 2 


Democrats Discover that One-World Government Doesn’t Include Them

One-World Governance Caution SignThe new World order and One-World governance: all countries participating in and living by the policies and rules of a single global government body. Recent history suggests that the United Nations is intended to be that governing body and Democrats in Congress just found out what that really means .. to them

In considering the Presidents decision to attack Libya, several Democrats  questioned the process Obama used in a Saturday conference call.

Reps. Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.), Donna Edwards (Md.), Mike Capuano (Mass.), Dennis Kucinich (Ohio), Maxine Waters (Calif.), Rob Andrews (N.J.), Sheila Jackson Lee (Texas), Barbara Lee (Calif.) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D.C.) “all strongly raised objections to the constitutionality of the president’s actions” during that call, said two Democratic lawmakers who took part.

Source: Politico

With the ultra-left well-represented on the call, this was a call between the Dem-ist of the Dems and one would not have expected to hear requests for the impeachment of President Obama. As the Politico article makes clear, the reason for their anger is not the disregard of the Constitution – they got side-stepped and aren’t happy about it.

“They consulted the Arab League. They consulted the United Nations. They did not consult the United States Congress,” one Democrat lawmaker said of the White House. “They’re creating wreckage, and they can’t obviate that by saying there are no boots on the ground. … There aren’t boots on the ground; there are Tomahawks in the air.”

One-World government is happening and the Democrats in Congress can’t believe they would be unnecessary in the New World Order. Did they not understand the implications of decades of cow-towing to the U.N.? Have they only just now understood the vision of their great President? Have they finally grasped the fact that their Liberal Utopian fantasy would first require them to become useless and all governing power ceded to the U.N.?

Hillary certainly has no qualms with it. Congress is in the way of her and Bill’s dream of a “new world order” and the U.N. is the gateway.

Mrs. Clinton has been trying to get the United States to abide by the U.N. Small Arms treaty as a way to disarm our populace and Bill was Mr. U.N., global governance, new world order ..

The U.N. is just one more global body for Obama to bow to and Congress is finally seeing that perhaps it is not the best course of action for them – but as far as Congressional Democrats are concerned, the affect on the country is irrelevant.



Dems Are Confused as to Why They Are Losing The Mid-Term Election Battle

Every one of the progressive leadership is running around making excuses for the “avalanche”, as George Soros put it, of inevitable Conservative wins.  Bill Clinton was out campaigning for Harry Reid and had this to say about it:

“You and I know the only reason this is a tough race is because people are having a tough time,” Clinton said. “When people are mad, it’s time to think.”[1]

So people are mad and now have started to think .. and because of that the former President surmises that Reid is losing.  Well, that much I agree with, but weren’t we thinking before?  Or did he mean that by electing Obama we weren’t thinking.  I still can’t read this guy, but I’m sure we’ll receive a definition of “thinking” shortly.

Obama is starting to do some self-examination as a possible cause.  Now, so close to the mid-terms, he’s admitting all sorts of mental errors in a Times Magazine interview where he said that he was

..too much like “the same old tax-and-spend Democrat,” realized too late that “there’s no such thing as shovel-ready projects” and perhaps should have “let the Republicans insist on the tax cuts” in the stimulus.

Suddenly he’s remorseful for having taken us from recession to near-depression?  For goading Congress into spending more than any President in history – and producing no positive results?  For deciding to raise taxes in terrible economic times?  Now he’s second-guessing his craptastic leadership?  Well, for the last one of his concerns, he’ll see those tax cuts back on his desk, let’s see just how sorry he is.

Maybe I have it wrong and the Dems really are starting to figure out that we’re pretty bright folks and we might have been right all along.  If that’s the case, then I really don’t get this explanation of why Democrats aren’t running on all the stuff that Obama seems now to be apologetic about.

Democrats aren’t running on the administration’s accomplishments like health-care and financial-regulatory overhaul and the stimulus because “it’s just too hard to explain,” Biden said.

Ah, we’re not smart enough to understand it.  Biden’s echoing of Pelosi’s sentiment that only the elites in D.C. know what’s good for us is ludicrous and insulting.  Insulting the electorate is not the way to go “Big F’Ing deal”-boy.

If Democrats are really soul-searching as to why they are going to lose big in the mid-terms, they have only to look at the men and women in the mirror.  They pushed the worst possible set of changes to the American health care system, they have held the spending controls in Congress since 2007, they have been pushing the largest tax increase in history, they pushed the idiotic, non-productive stimulus bill, etc.  Using the “party of no” argument against the GOP is not working.  If the party of no had prevented progressives from achieving anything, why do they have this huge list of failing “accomplishments” for which they are now making excuses.

This one is all on the far-left fringe.  They pulled their party to the left, the car fully in drive, with no regard to the cliff ahead.  Lean forward.. we’ll give you a “nudge”.

Democrats Driving the car right off a cliff

[1] Clinton urges voters to embrace Reid – http://www.lvrj.com/news/clinton-urges-voters-to-embrace-reid-104839399.html

Where is all that Obamacare Popularity Dems Were Promised?

When all the Health Care Reform pushes started, it was promised to be the golden goose for liberal Democrats.  Since it’s passage ..  not so much.

Over at HotAir.com Ed Morrissey delves into Bill Clinton’s realization of the health care massacre that is about to take place.

It’s not just the highly effective attack on it.  It’s also because people didn’t want a government takeover of health care in 2010 any more than they wanted it in 1993.  It’s hard to understand why Democrats took Bill Clinton’s advice seriously in the first place.  After all, Clinton himself didn’t take it at the time; he dropped HillaryCare and moved back to the center, and won his next election because of it.

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Republicans are hoping to stifle the Obama administrations policies, including health care reform, by “starving” them of money.

The White House concedes that Congress’s withholding funds would be a threat to the health-care law, but argues such a strategy could backfire with consumers, particularly if it threatened to nix popular provisions, such as allowing children to stay on their parents’ insurance plans until they turn 26.

If that doesn’t point to a policy in trouble, the newest polling numbers on the unpopular health care reform?  61% favor repealing Obamacare. From Rassmussen Reports:

Sixty-one percent (61%) of Likely U.S. Voters now at least somewhat favor repeal of the new national health care law, including 50% who Strongly Favor it.  That’s up eight points from a week ago and the highest level of opposition measured since late May.

It is doubtful that Obama will be willing to make the “move-to-the-middle” that Bill Clinton did after the 1994 elections.  Progressive Democrats may have sealed their own fate.

« Older Entries Recent Entries »