Tag Archives: Presidential campaign

Should a Child be used in Vulgar Hollywood Romney Attack Ad

Hollywood Actor Samuel L. Jackson uses Child in Vulgar Romney Attack Ad

When America as a nation is strong its leaders do not have to resort to distortion, distraction, deception, or vulgarity to convey the strength and integrity of the nation’s principles.  Yet, as the election winds down, and Mitt Romney gains political ground, Hollywood and its race baiting actors like Samuel L. Jackson are out pandering to liberals and minorities. Their transparent goal is to convince Obama followers to ignore the reality of President Obama’s economic failures and continuing foreign policy cover up.

The Obama campaign has resorted to using a child in a vulgar Hollywood Romney attack ad to encourage the president’s supporters to vote.  It is using a child uttering profanity in a Hollywood ad called “Wake the F**K UP”, to defend a failed presidency and incite Obama supporters.  Is this the hope and change Obama was referring to in April 2008, when he spoke of a “New America” in his hope and change speech.

It is no secret that Americans are suffering, and have 23 million out of work, underpaid or have given up looking for work.  It is no sudden revelation that upwards of 46 million Americans are on food stamps and the nation’s seniors will suffer from $716 billion being ripped from the budget to finance Obamacare.

The Obama White House refuses to explain to America how the administration has managed to leave the nation abysmally worse off than when it came into office.  Instead, the Obama campaign has decided to sink to an unimaginable low.  It uses a child and an actor to scare voters into accepting this type of low brow presidential incumbent tactics.

Is this how desperate a president will go to depart from the honor and dignity of a President Washington, Lincoln, Eisenhower, or Reagan?   Would any one of these presidents ever consider using an actor or a child muttering profanities to defend their record, their work, or their presidency? 

Yet, Obama and his campaign seem to feel quite comfortable at allowing Jackson to use his thug-like bulging eyed persona to inflame voters into action.  Somehow Jackson seems to feel that his well crafted movie hooligan behavior, which he perfected in movies like, Jungle Fever, Pulp Fiction, and Shaft, will encourage his minority audience and guilt-ridden white liberals to vote for Obama.  Jackson’s sham is based upon Obama supporters believing that he’s the real deal when it comes to knowing what’s good for minorities and Americans in general.

Well, if this Hollywood actor, whose own personal worth according to Celebrity Networth is in the neighborhood of $150 million, can feel your economic desperation and daily anguish, why does he hide behind a child?  Why does he need to use a young girl as his vehicle for defending Obama?

The answer is clear.  Liberals and Hollywood’s information-challenged aristocracy love to wield racism as a mallet against republicans.  Obama’s campaign embraces a time perfected Chicago-style smear and fear campaign approach, where using anything and anyone, even a child is permissible.

In fact Obama forecast his own 2012 campaign behavior in 2008, when he said, “If you don’t have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from…You make a big election about small things.”

So enter stage left, Hollywood’s thuggish acting Jackson, who has perfected the art of reading lines which are fed to him. Yet, he like his Hollywood liberal Obama supporters lacks the ability to think, to be critical, and to actually learn the facts.

Well, Jackson, your little foul mouth array of profanity will not sell your brand of racism to America.  Your crutch is based on distortion.  The fact that Obama and his Chicago handlers have no shame in using your brand of uncultured misrepresentation, speaks volumes about Obama and what he thinks of America’s values.

Well, here’s a message for Samuel L. Jackson, Madonna, George Clooney, Jay-Z & Beyonce, and all the others multi-millionaires in the Obama Hollywood stable.  America has woken up!

You have conveyed a warning to American parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles and anyone who cares about a civilized society that refuses to submit to your vulgarity as the standard for the nation’s future.  America will tune out your brand of boorishness.  America will reject your vileness, because the nation and its children need real answers, real solutions and real leadership, not uncivil, craven infantile potty-mouth behavior.

Hollywood and liberals may believe in a Democrat Party that will deny God three times at the democrat convention.  But the majority of Americans embrace their faith, their God and their patriotic traditions.  Voters will not falter and hide behind a child to exercise their right to vote for a future free from dismal disappointment and vulgar ineptitude.

Move aside Samuel L. Jackson, stick to your fictional characters, and let the adults in the room work on solutions for this nation, without name-calling and thug-like behavior. 
Before you go into your polling place or send in your absentee ballot, ask yourself one important question.  Do you want your child or any child to represent the image the child in the Obama Hollywood attack ad portrays?  Be the adult in the room and show Samuel L. Jackson and Obama and his handlers to the door out, for misbehavior and conduct unbecoming of the office of the presidency. 

And yes, Samuel L. Jackson, this nation will survive your vile attempt to place a bump in the road to impede America’s decency.  Hollywood, America has woken up!

 

Let me know what you think ( Click )

 

 

 

 

Obama Relying on Small Donors Worldwide

Yes, there is a law against political campaigns in the U.S. soliciting or accepting donations from citizens of other nations. Even Citizens United did not open that as option. But, it’s a distinct possibility that the Obama campaign has been doing just that, under the radar with small donations.

epSos.de (CC)


This morning on Fox News, it was pointed out that there have been some “irregularities” on the Obama campaign website, when it comes to donations. The law states that donations of $200 or greater must be reported. But, the Obama camp is relying heavily on small dollar donations, and according to web-tracking, some of them could be coming from other countries, including Persian Gulf States and China. Additionally, the website does not ask for the security code on the back of individuals’ credit cards, increasing the probability that there are fraudulent donations made with stolen card numbers.

Of course, this is not new for the Obama campaign – it could be argued at this point that it is an actual strategy on their part. The Daily Beast reported almost exactly four years ago on this same issue with the Obama camp. Then, it was a matter of anonymous donors using apparently fake names and addresses to make multiple small donations. It was caught on the radar that time, because the sum total donations from certain individuals far exceeded the $200 ceiling, and for that matter, the $5000 personal limit. That time, it included two Palestinians in Gaza – the excuse then was that the Obama camp had assumed “Ga” meant Georgia. Since that involved purchasing campaign shirts, the excuse falls a little flat, assuming that the shirts actually made it to Gaza.

This campaign cycle, Obama supporters are regularly hit with emails requesting small dollar donations – $5 is a typical request, while they do occasionally ask for amounts like $14 or $20. It will undoubtedly be argued ad nauseum that this tactic tips the fundraising scales unfairly in Obama’s favor, and is hated by big dollar donors to the SuperPAC’s. But, the legality of the situation needs to be addressed as well. And there is no excuse, period.

The technology is available to prevent foreign small dollar donations to any campaign soliciting money online. Doubt that? Try visiting the British site for BBC, and try viewing their programming. You will be met with a notice stating that the media in question is unavailable to you. Their system recognizes if someone is attempting to access their content from a foreign nation. Could it be hacked? Probably. However, failing to use such a security feature implies that the Obama campaign honestly doesn’t care about even attempting to abide by campaign funding law. Of course, it could also be argued that they don’t care about their donors either, since they have failed to use the online purchasing security options suggested by card-issuers. “It’s all about the money.”

The Inverse Political Ratio Between National Prominence and Life.

pro_life_bumper_stickers_a_babys_right-p128745344150637751en8ys_400

 

When Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell ran in 2009 the Washington Post spent the campaign trying to persuade the FTC to penalize him for false advertising since his campaign was not built around social issues.

Any time a “conservative Republican,” does not make the three A’s (abortion, abstinence & alternative lifestyles) the centerpiece of his campaign; the Posties are convinced he’s misleading voters.

McDonnell didn’t have to discuss social issues because at that time conservative Virginia felt he was solid on those points. Instead, McDonnell focused on jobs and economic development.

(For what happens during a campaign when the base no longer trusts the candidate see Obama 2012.)

Now social conservatives may have to re–evaluate McDonnell. In sharp contrast to Gov. Scott Walker (R–WI) who remained conservative during nationwide controversy, McDonnell appears to be avoiding controversy at the expense of his commitment to social conservatives. Initially in hopes of becoming the Romney VP pick, now for a spot in the administration.

The differing outcomes of June’s three controversies illustrate my point.

The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority controls construction of Metro’s Silver Line rail route to Dulles Airport. MWAA has an appointed board of directors, but only a minority is appointed by Virginia’s governor. And only one of the Virginia appointees was McDonnell’s, the other three having been appointed by his Democrat predecessor.

The board initially required a Project Labor Agreement (PLA) specifying only union contractors — or contractors paying union wages with union work rules — could bid on Phase II of the Silver Line.

McDonnell and the legislature objected and the board responded by giving construction firms with a “voluntary” PLA a higher rating during bid evaluation.

McDonnell forcefully responded by reiterating no additional Virginia taxpayer dollars would be forthcoming unless the PLA was eliminated. Then he took advantage of a recently passed federal law and made two new appointments to the MWAA board, even though the existing board refused to seat them.

McDonnell did not budge an inch during the controversy even though there was a danger Phase II would never be built. The MWAA board finally decided completing the line was more important than scratching union backs and it eliminated the PLA requirement.

The governor decisively employed financial and public pressure to bend the board to his will and score a victory for Virginia taxpayers.

The second example is the firing of the University of Virginia’s first female president, Teresa Sullivan, on June 10th.

Rector Helen Dragas, a McDonnell appointee, lobbied other members of the Board of Visitors until she had enough votes to fire Sullivan. Then Dragas confronted Sullivan with the tally and demanded her resignation, without doing so at a formal board meeting.

Although legal, the maneuvering ruffled more than one set of university feathers and it lacked the transparency and ritual hand–wringing demanded of most academic decisions.

Uproar ensued. There were board resignations, “superstar” professors threatened to leave and large donors put a clamp on their wallets.

McDonnell had no role in the ouster and was out of the country when it happened, but the bad publicity was on his watch. Twelve days later he delivered an ultimatum: if the board did not make a final decision on Sullivan by Tuesday the 26th, McDonnell would demand the entire board’s resignation on Wednesday the 27th.

The Board reinstated Sullivan. McDonnell again was decisive and swift.

Compare those two instances with the third. In 2011 McDonnell signed a bill regulating abortion clinics the same way out–patient surgical centers are regulated. This resulted in two outcomes: first veterinary clinics no longer had more regulations than abortion clinics. And second, Democrats finally discovered a small business burdened by unnecessary regulation.

Step two was implementation by the Virginia Board of Health — completely dominated by McDonnell appointees. But McDonnell’s board voted to grandfather existing abortion mills, exempting them and effectively gutting the new law. The decision surprised abortion cheerleaders and stunned pro–life advocates.

Representatives from the Attorney General’s office advised the board it was improper to amend a law passed by the General Assembly, but the board refused to change its decision.

So what did the governor do when his board acted willfully, shocked his pro–life base and affronted the General Assembly? He did nothing. His spokesman said, ““The governor will review the final regulations when the board submits them for his review.”

It’s now over two months later and the governor is evidently “reviewing” up a storm. This gains him nothing from abortion promoters, who will never support him, and erodes the trust of the life community. The delay only serves to avoid MSM negative publicity.

I’m sorry to say it’s difficult to avoid the conclusion Gov. McDonnell is proving to be another Republican who “grows in office” but not in stature.