Tag Archives: Romney

A New Moral Majority? Calling ALL People of Faith

When John F Kennedy ran for president there were many who questioned whether a Catholic should be president. Would his presidency give the Pope a direct line to the country’s administration?

Kennedy addressed the question reminding Americans “I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant, nor Jewish…” “…where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials–and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all.”

Today some look at Mitt Romney’s Mormon religion and ask if his beliefs will negatively impact the country. When asked about his faith in a recent CNN  interview Romney replied:  I am often asked about my faith and my beliefs about Jesus Christ. I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind. Every religion has its own unique doctrines and history. These should not be bases for criticism but rather a test of our tolerance. Religious tolerance would be a shallow principle indeed if it were reserved only for faiths with which we agree.

Is Romney a Better Choice for Christians?

It is expected that this will be a close election. Because of the impact on religion including the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare); the value issues, including sanctity of life, marriage and religious freedom; and concern a the rise in secularization of society groups who might otherwise stay out of the fray are speaking up.

They have looked at the issue and the candidates.  Many specific religions are not recommending one candidate but are instead reminding people to look at what the candidate stands for.

Do you know someone of faith still on the fence? Perhaps they would feel better knowing that many faithful have found the best choice.

This week Reverend Billy Graham published an advertisement aimed at his Christian followers. You can read about it here. He wants voters to at the state of the country and vote their Biblical principles.  Son, Rev. Franklin Graham, offered an opinion on whether Christians could vote for a Mormon.

We are at a profound crossroads. Our secularized society has shaken its fist in God’s face and rejected His very name. Like Joseph and Daniel, we must not compromise when government clashes with the worship of God. We must not silence our voices to God’s law. We must use our influence to elect those who will govern with respect for the sanctity of marriage as between one man and one woman; the sanctity of life; and yes, the protection of God’s beloved nation Israel. We must not cast votes for officials—whether candidates of the Democratic, Republican, or Tea Party, or of a religious persuasion—that are against these principles of God. We have, in the past, elected Christians who have defied some of these very principles.

We need something like what Jerry Falwell did in the 1980s. We need a “moral majority”—made up of Christians, Jews, Mormons, Catholics and many others of faith—to come together to take a stand for our religious freedoms and rights.

In recent days, President Clinton said that President Obama “has a plan to rebuild America from the ground up.” But God-fearing Americans have no desire to see America rebuilt—but rather restored. To “rebuild it” would be to create a new nation without God or perhaps under many gods. This was never the intent of those who shed their blood for the freedom to worship as “one nation under God.”

I pray that all Christians and God-fearing Americans will put aside labels and vote for principles—God’s principles—that for many years have resulted in His blessing upon our nation.

So, can a Christian vote for a Mormon? The answer is yes.

Catholics, while not endorsing one candidate are asking their members to vote their values as seen in this powerful video.


Dr. Alveda King, Dr. Martin Luther King’s niece, wrote an opinion piece in the Washington Times promoting black Christian voters vote for moral values and the candidate who work to improve the black community.

This time, in 2012, I beg my brothers and sisters in the black community to look past color and vote for God’s values, not those of a particular political party.

I was in an African-American church in Virginia earlier this month, and afterward many people came up to me with tears in their eyes. Regarding the 2008 election, they said, “I just didn’t know what to do; I just didn’t know. But now you say there are other people on the ballot, like state and local levels. There are referendums and constitutional issues. If I can’t vote for any candidate in the presidential slot, at least I can write someone in.”

Don’t ever say I’m going to vote for the lesser of two evils. No, we can’t think that way. We are not voting for evil. We are voting for the best candidates possible.

Early on in Mr. Obama’s campaign, people came to find out that I opposed his agenda, and I took criticism from friends and family and even other pastors. They thought the black community would be influential in the Obama administration. Besides, we all would be praying for him. While I don’t doubt the power of prayer, Mr. Obama has done very little, if anything, to help the black community. In fact, he has turned his back on the very values that are the moral backbone of the black community.

 

A diverse group of Christian leaders penned an open letter last month praising the social policies found within the Republican Platform of Mitt Romney.

 The letter also focuses on the moral principles in the Republican platform, which are “squarely within the Judeo-Christian tradition” and are “at stake in today’s society.”

Romney and his running mate, Paul Ryan, are thanked for running on a platform which is a “political compass” in the “confusing moral thickets of our day.”

The signers encourage support for Romney even though there may be “differences in a candidate’s theological doctrine.” This is despite the fact that “some have tempered their enthusiasm” for the Mormon candidate. Government policy is the issue, the letter says, not theology.

A well-known Evangelical pastor Bishop Harry Jackson created two videos; in the first, he lists four reasons he will support Mitt Romney and in the second, four reasons he will not support Barack Obama.

These are challenging times and for many a challenging decision. My own favorite pastor put it succinctly:

I think this [issue] is one of the reasons why many Christians struggle with this year’s election.  Fortunately, we’re not electing a pastor but a president.  I’m really praying for a change and I hope one more week is enough time to reach enough people to capture a victory.

Vote November 6.

 

 

America Deserves Better

The U.S. economy grew at a 2 percent annual rate in the third quarter.  The slight improvement was the result of more consumer and federal government spending.  Consumer spending improved from a 1.5 percent rate to 2 percent annual rate.

And federal spending surged.

Despite the modest increase, economic growth remains too weak to advance hiring.

This report is the last before Americans vote for president eleven days from now.

http://tinyurl.com/9vve7n2

Mitt Romney has consistently criticized Barack Obama’s economic record, correctly noting that the pace of growth has slowed over the past two years.  This year’s 1.74 percent annual growth rate lags behind last year’s 1.8 percent growth.

Hoping to boost his image and enhance his chances at re-election, look for the Obama campaign to use the pickup in growth as evidence that the economy is improving.

When convenient to building his image in the minds of his followers, Obama and his loyal bastion in the openly biased American news media love to compare him to President Ronald Reagan.

As a result of Reagan’s economic policies, at this point in his presidency the U.S. GDP was experiencing a growth rate of 7.2 percent.

That was a real recovery.

Since the current recovery started approximately three years ago, the American economy has grown at the slowest rate of any post-recession recovery since World War II.

Under new leadership, with the proper policies in place, America can do better than this.

America deserves better than this.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/26/america-deserves-better/

Romney Surges

With less than two weeks to go before Election Day, Mitt Romney has eliminated the 16 point advantage Barack Obama once enjoyed among women.  Last month, women preferred Obama over Romney 56% to 40% on the economy. Now, the difference is 49% for Romney and 45% for Obama.  Where understanding people’s problems is concerned, Obama’s lead among women has shrunk from 58%-36% to a 50%-43%.

The polls consistently show a real surge to Romney, away from Obama:

Rasmussen: Mitt Romney 50% nationwide, Obama 47%.

Gallup: Romney 50%, Obama 47%.

ABC News/Washington Post: 49% Romney, 48% Obama.

Reuters/Ipsos: Romney 47%, Obama 46%.

AP-GfK: Romney 47%, Obama 45%.

In the battleground state of Michigan, once considered a lock for Obama, not only is the race now tied Romney 47%, Obama 47%, the Detroit News endorsed Romney:

“As we said, this is more than a choice between two individuals. America is locked in a struggle over what it will be as a mature nation.

A country built on rugged individualism finds itself increasingly under the thumb of a federal government that is ever expanding its reach into the lives of its citizens.

Obama has proved himself a disciple of the doctrine that for every problem there’s a government solution.

Romney, by contrast, embraces individual initiative and entrepreneurship. He would turn back the encroachment of the bureaucracy into the private sector.

Romney would replace the heavy hand of government with the invisible hand of a rational marketplace working to produce broad prosperity.

While both poverty and dependency have increased on Obama’s watch, Romney promises to replace government checks with private sector jobs and reverse the decline in middle class incomes. It is heavy lifting, but we favor the candidate who is committed to it.

Romney’s goal is to help all Americans live independent and productive lives, free to rise to the extent of their personal capabilities. He would not shield them from risk or the consequences of their decisions, but neither would he deny them their earned rewards.

Our hope is that Mitt Romney would restore faith in the core principles of free men and women, free minds and free markets that made America great, and will keep it so.”

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20121025/OPINION01/210250332/1008/opinion01/Editorial-Mitt-Romney-President

In his never ending quest to elevate America’s political climate above hateful, petty partisan rhetoric, in a Rolling Stone interview Barack Obama called Mitt Romney a bullshi**er:

“We arrived at the Oval Office for our 45-minute interview … on the morning of October 11th. … As we left the Oval Office, executive editor Eric Bates told Obama that he had asked his six-year-old if there was anything she wanted him to say to the president. … [S]he said, ‘Tell him: You can do it.’ Obama grinned. … ‘You know, kids have good instincts,’ Obama offered. ‘They look at the other guy and say, “Well, that’s a bullshi**er, I can tell.”’”

http://lonelyconservative.com/2012/10/classy-obama-calls-romney-bullshitter/

Such class…such poise…such leadership…such inspiration…such an example for young Americans.  To have an Oval Office occupant who conveys to the world at every available opportunity that he bears no responsibility for the consequences of his policies, words or actions.

Romney’s surge is for real and for good reason.

America deserves better.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/25/romney-surges/

Game Over

Mitt Romney and Barack Obama argued foreign policy in the final 2012 presidential debate in Boca Raton Fl.  Romney looked like a solid, strong American Commander in Chief, while Obama resembled an ageing hippie college professor wannabe enraged at having his beliefs successfully debunked in public.

Obama insulted Romney, speaking to him in patronizing fashion while mocking his stance on defense cuts: “I think Governor Romney maybe hasn’t spent enough time looking at how our military works. You mentioned the navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916. Well, governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets because the nature of our military’s changed.”

Then Obama became truly condescending when he said “There are these things called aircraft carriers where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines.  The question is not a game of Battleship, where we’re counting ships, it’s what are our capabilities”.

So Obama apparently believes that Mitt Romney, someone who also graduated from Harvard, who also just happens to have earned both a business and a law degree, doesn’t know what aircraft carriers and submarines are.

In short, Obama’s performance was crude and un-presidential.

Not unusual for the narcissist in chief, the words “I”, “me” and “mine” seemed to come out of his mouth every four or five seconds.

Despite numerous assertions by the likes of MSNBC’s Chris Matthews and other card carrying members of the “progressive” Party Pravda, the night was won by Romney when Obama, instead of offering viable answers to serious questions posed by Moderator Bob Schieffer, angrily attacked Romney with red herring arguments.  To which Romney replied: “Attacking me is not an agenda”.

That moment laid waste to the entire Obama re-election strategy, which was to attack Romney with viscous smears and repeated false accusations in hopes the damage inflicted would set Romney so far back in the polls he could never recover.

Unfortunately for “the smartest man in the world” and his hatchet wielding political henchmen, the strategy has completely backfired.  Going into the last two weeks of the race their campaign is borrowing money, while Romney is financially poised to blanket swing states with political ads favorable to him.  Ads that reflect the calm, cool, thoughtful, caring individual American voters witnessed in the debates.  The man who stands in stark contrast to the phony Romney portrait the Obama campaign intentionally painted.

Naturally, because “progressives” are so tolerant and open minded, Obama supporters are still threatening to riot and assassinate Romney.

Not the least bit surprising, after the debate was over Chris Matthews claimed that support for Romney is fueled by race hatred.

Once one team starts taking cheap shots and committing flagrant fouls, it is a sure sign they have lost and the game is over.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/24/game-over/

From Russia-With Love

Have you ever wondered where MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, The New York Times, Newsweek, Time Magazine et al get their talking points?

It is difficult to determine if Chris Matthews is America’s answer to Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey or Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey is Russia’s answer to Chris Matthews.

Pravda.ru, Russia’s online neo-KGB government controlled news site, sounds troublingly like what can be found online at Yahoo News, MoveOn.org the Daily Kos or Media Matters.

Or is it the other way around?

Consider some excerpts from Bancroft-Hinchey’s piece on the upcoming U.S. presidential election.  Quite presumably referring to writers for National Review, The Wall Street Journal etcetera or people who appear on FOX News, he ponders:

“There are those who somehow manage to get their articles printed in reputable international newspapers, claiming that a vote for Obama is a vote for “murder” or “destroying America” or “lack of freedom” but then again there are those who trick their way into the homes of the stupid and gullible selling dreams and promising the Earth in exchange for a pay-check or a pledge to clean the windows once a month.”

Then Bancroft-Hinchey makes a claim that is repeated ad nauseum by “progressive” pundits who actually appear multiple times a day on FOX News:

“They never turn up again, just like the “birther” tsunami which peaked a few months ago and has whittled down to nothing after being shouted down from all sides of the political spectrum. The “birthers” claimed that President Obama was not eligible to stand for office, despite the fact that he would have been vetted by everyone, by every newspaper and journalist, from the day they announced he was a candidate.”

Apparently propagating revisionist history is practiced by both the Russian Pravda and America’s “progressive” Party Pravda.

Of course, as America’s “progressive” Party Pravda does with vigor, Russia’s Pravda relishes bashing Romney with straw-man arguments.  Long a staple of radical fringe left extremists world-wide:

“These same people support Mitt Romney. Who? You know, the gaffe guy, the one who opens his mouth and insults people, or accuses them of things they never did. In short, a foul-mouthed oaf, a wannabe President with no credentials beyond the Governorship level.”

Never mind that Obama’s credentials going in to the 2008 race were being a community organizer, an invisible State Senator from Illinois and a first term junior U.S. Senator who began running for the presidency almost immediately after taking up residence in the Beltway.

Then, in true “progressive” form…wait, this is from Russia.  In true Communist form, Moscow’s Pravda throws up the classic red herring argument by comparing Romney to George W. Bush:

“Mitt Romney, without this competence, without Barack Obama’s skills, wants to be there, and so do those ousted elements from the Bush regime dying to get back in. Rumour has it that Senator McCain is ear-marked for Secretary of State. Ask a Nam Veteran what they think of McCain and then decide whether this Bush regime remnant is the perfect external image of the US of A.

Governor Romney’s position in the Peter Principle is…Governor Romney. Not President Romney. Everyone knows it, the Obama freeze in debate number one gave rise to some flights of fantasy (OK Barack Obama is better at being President than debating maybe, and so?)…and so we can conclude that he is better at handling the extremely difficult conditions bequeathed to him by the Republican Bush regime than at making an idiot of himself in televised debates getting everything wrong, as Mitt the Twit does.”

Mitt the twit? No doubt the likes of George Stephanopoulos or Brian Williams wish they could work for MSNBC or Current TV so they could use such language.  For these proud, card carrying members of the “progressive” Party Pravda, it must be discouraging having to conform to broadcast media standards.

Russia’s Pravda falls short of accusing Republicans of wanting dirty air, dirty water or seeking to leave old people and special needs kids to fend for themselves.  Instead, they choose to attack the GOP in their own unique style:

“Right, same old, same old Grand Old Party. The same Grand Old Party which just four years ago had the United States of America synonymous with sodomy, illegal detention, rape, urination in food, sleep deprivation, murder, torture, water-boarding, concentration camps…”

Then, there is one last swipe at Romney:

“And on a more serious note, would YOU trust a guy who has never had a glass of beer in his life? Or says he hasn’t…”

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/21-10-2012/122517-usa_decision-0/

A review shows that when comparisons are drawn between American news media and Russia’s Pravda, such comparisons are not made in a vacuum.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/22/from-russia-with-love/

Romney’s War on Women? Maybe Not.

This morning the Romney Response Team sent out a new ad of women who had worked with Romney.

I was struck by the familiarity of the first woman in the ad, Jane Edmonds. I knew I’d seen her somewhere. Sure enough, she was a speaker attesting to the strengths she had seen in Governor Romney. What was particularly memorable was that she is a Democrat. You can watch her inspirational speech below:

Kerry Healy, Lt. Gov. under Romney wrote the following:

In fact, of the twenty top positions in the Romney administration, ten of them were filled by women, more than any other state in the nation. Romney’s Chief of Staff was a woman – Beth Myers. As we took office, our administration actively sought to recruit the best and brightest women the Commonwealth had to offer. And Governor Romney wasn’t just checking a box. He sought out our counsel, and he listened to our advice. We didn’t always agree, but we were always respected. Mitt Romney didn’t judge the people who were in his administration by their gender. He wanted the best, male or female.

Listening to these educated women who worked along side and respected Mitt Romney makes me think about the war on women. One has to wonder if it is just a contrived tool focusing on a singular issue and hoping that other educated women will not look at all the policies of  Mitt Romney.

 

Debate Highlights “progressive” Way

Obama lied about his response to the Libyan attack.  The day following the 9/11 anniversary terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, he did not state from the White House rose garden that it was a terrorist attack.

And later, he blamed it on a Youtube video.

As did White House press secretary Jay Carney and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton; which was followed by UN ambassador Susan Rice repeating the same lame excuse five times in one day on the Sunday morning television political talk show circuit.  This was done again by Obama in a speech he gave to the UN general assembly, where he blamed the video six times and never once called the incident a terrorist attack.

Everyone knows the Obama administration, in a desperate attempt to obscure its foreign policy failures and defray responsibility for the deaths of four Americans including America’s ambassador to Libya, spent weeks blaming a heretofore unknown anti-Islamist internet video trailer for the violence.

Candy Crowley exceeded the limitations placed on the moderator when she stuck her nose where it did not belong by openly siding with Obama’s claim.  Meanwhile Obama’s wife violated the rules by aggressively leading the studio audience in applause when Crowley interrupted on behalf of her flailing, visibly struggling husband.

Never mind that Crowley gave Obama nine percent more time than was given to Mitt Romney.  Forget that she interrupted Romney twenty eight times.

How can media bias in America be ignored when every moderator for the debates has been a member of the institutionalized “progressive” left’s Obama cheerleading machine?

Obama lied about oil, gas and coal production.  Permits for oil drilling on public land have been reduced by over fifty percent since Obama seized power in 2008.  Attempts to produce natural gas on public lands have been obstructed.  Coal production has been demonized and prevented.  Energy prices have increased notably, especially the doubling of gasoline prices at the pump.

Romney dismantled the idea that a second Obama term would lead to economic recovery by noting the failure left in the wake of Obama’s broken campaign promises.  Obama did not cut the deficit in half, he doubled it.  He has not reduced the national debt, he has added over $6 trillion to it.  Obama’s policies have not stimulated the economy.  After spending $878 billion on non-existent shovel ready projects that turned out to be financial bailouts for fiscally irresponsible blue states, in 2012 GDP is growing slower than in 2011, and in 2011 it grew slower than in 2010.  At this point in his presidency the tax rate reduction policies of Ronald Reagan, which inspire Romney’s financial plans, had created 7.2 percent economic growth.  GDP growth is over six percent slower today than it was under Reagan.

The Frank Luntz focus group showed a huge swing in Romney’s favor by a group that was comprised of undecided voters who largely voted for Obama in 2008.  A similar MSNBC panel had a similar response.

And in true “progressive” form, the debate resulted in a flurry of assassination threats against Romney on Twitter.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/17/debate-highlights-progressive-way/

Tonight on the Dark Side with Kira Davis

10/16/12  Debate wrap-up. PLEASE NOTE: Show will start 30 minutes late tonight to accommodate the debate. Hey, that rhymes! Tonight at 10:30 pm ET/7:30pm Pacific on the CDNews Network on BlogTalk Radio. And don’t forget to join my live chat on kiradavis.net tonight starting at 8:45 ET/5:45 Pacific.

UPDATE: Listen to the replay of last night’s show here, or click through the link to download

Listen to internet radio with CDNews Radio on Blog Talk Radio

Crowley: Biased Bad Joke

For the pending second presidential debate, the format agreement says that after each question from the audience and a two-minute response by each candidate, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are expected to have an additional discussion facilitated by the moderator.  This year the Hofstra University town hall debate moderator will be Candy Crowley of CNN.   The language of the debate-format agreement means that Crowley’s participation is to be limited.

As the document states: “In managing the two-minute comment periods, the moderator will not rephrase the question or open a new topic … The moderator will not ask follow-up questions or comment on either the questions asked by the audience or the answers of the candidates during the debate or otherwise intervene in the debate except to acknowledge the questioners from the audience or enforce the time limits, and invite candidate comments during the two-minute response period.”

http://thepage.time.com/2012/10/14/moderator-role-under-scrutiny-before-the-debate/

Yet Crowley’s take on her role is: ‘I’m not a fly on the wall’.  It has been suggested that debate questions must be pre-submitted in order to allow Crowley to choose the questions.

Of course, coming from members of today’s openly biased media this is nothing new.

In 2008 Tom Brokaw of NBC News moderated a town-hall debate between Obama and John McCain. Brokaw redirected the topics, changed questions from the audience and asked too many of his own questions.   Brokaw defended his performance by citing that a debate commission official praised that debate as “good television.”

Good television?  Has the bar for debates between two people vying to be President of the United States of America been arbitrarily reduced by news media pundits to being “good television”?

So, when are the hosts of Survivor, American Idol, or Snookie and Kate plus eight going to declare their candidacy?  Should the briefcase brigade from Deal or No Deal be considered among the front runners for 2016?

Members of  today’s news media are so openly biased they would keep protecting and defending Obama while actively working for his re-election even if there was verifiably authentic video showing Obama burying Caylee Anthony’s body in the Florida swamp.

Having people of this ilk unilaterally changing their role in debate proceedings because it is “good television” is most certainly not in America’s best interests.

It is a suicide pact.

America is at an existential decision making point.  The 2012 presidential election will be a watershed moment in history.

All the questions submitted by the Hofstra audience should be shuffled by twelve different people who are not actively involved in the debate proceedings, then read by Crowley in the order she receives them.  She should be a professional, stick to the role assigned her and keep her two cents out of the debate.

As NewsBusters reported immediately after Mitt Romney chose Paul Ryan as his running mate:

“…the goal of the Obama-loving media is to rip him to shreds.  Doing her part Saturday was CNN’s Candy Crowley who claimed some Republicans (unnamed, of course) think this ‘looks a little bit like some sort of ticket death wish.’”

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/08/11/cnns-candy-crowley-ryan-pick-looks-little-bit-some-sort-ticket-death-#ixzz29N2psx9D

The reason Romney won the first debate and is experiencing a major surge in popularity is it was the first time a large number of American voters were able to see Romney as he is, rather than the filtered version presented to the public by the “progressive” Party Pravda.

When watching the Hofstra debate proceedings, remember Crowley, like her fellow “progressives” in the media, is openly pulling for Obama.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/15/crowley-biased-bad-joke/

Ohio Miners Speak Out Against “Absolute Lies”

In August Mitt Romney made headlines as scores of Ohio coal miners stood to hear him speak. While coal mine owners are known contributor to GOP candidates the miners themselves have voted Democrat. But times have changed. Today, it’s all about jobs: 1,300 coal jobs were lost in the second quarter of 2012. 

Shortly after the Romney visit multiple news stories (e.g. Huffington Post) were written letting the public know that “the miners were coerced into attending the Romney rally.” Huffington Post

The stories seemed to have enough truth in them that Team Obama made this ad:

This weekend the miners of Century Mine came forward with an open letter to President Obama asking him to stop the ad, claiming it contained absolute lies and misinformation. Wheeling Intelligencer The miners included 500 signatures from the working employees of Century Mine.

As you watch the miner’s press conference listen for these salient points:

  • Due to security, the mine was closed for the Romney Rally. Historically, during mine closures, including bad weather, miners are not paid. Miners were told they could make up missed hours if they wished.
  • Miners cannot be paid to attend political events.
  • No employee was forced to attend the event. Lists of attendees were made due to security concerns.

There can be no doubt that workers in this former Democratic stronghold are now very concerned with the policies of the Obama administration and they’re not sit idly and be used as pawns.

What do you think?

For the Undecided

Decidedly Liberals, Progressives, or Socialists are not swayed them from their unbridled compassion. Categorically, Conservatives know that there are now only two choices, slow intoxicating governmental growth, or mainline fascist socialism. God bless the undecided, for they are the hope of this world.

The Undecided must balance their views with a sense of proportion. For instance, balance the need for the underprivileged to attain health care with the exorbitant cost of “Obama Care.” The voter must decide if taxing us all to pay for it will do more good than the unemployment that such taxing will so clearly cause? Each party points to the pain that the other party intends to cause, while explaining the good their plan creates.

An economy runs on profits. Only profits can perform R&D. Only profits can be reinvested. Profits grow a company, hire more workers, give workers raises, and send employees to school or training. It takes profits to take the risks of innovation. Taxes reduce profits. Taxes deplete job opportunities. Taxes slow R&D. Increased taxes downsize the workforce.

For those who believe that taxes are also used to create jobs, consider this. Stimulating an economy by taxing to create employment is akin to opening the refrigerator door to cool the kitchen. Although you’ll feel some cool for a short time just in front of the open door, the overall effect heats the kitchen. Eventually the refrigerator will work so hard trying to cool all the heat it is producing that it breaks down and there is no longer even a cool spot to show for it.

Considering real proportions, dynamics, and balance, the damage done by over taxing the economic system outweighs any employment it can “create.” Government should only be for those things that cannot be done by private industry, such as national defense and safety and monopoly regulations. Providing for everyone is never the efficient or effective way to accomplish such a goal. Private industry will provide for our needs because there is profit in it. If the need is real, industry will find a profitable way to fill it.

Often it is government that causes the inequities that plague a “free market system.” Free market does not mean that industry can do as it pleases but regulation for the sake of “leveling the playing field” always serves to tilt it. Once the market is unnaturally slanted, industry automatically takes advantage, and the public looses, despite the government’s intentions.

Find the candidate who wishes to remove unnecessary, unenforced, and unenforceable regulation while also removing the tax burden on the economy. Each time in our history that taxes are reduced, the economy has produced greater tax revenues because of how it stimulated a growth economy. Find the candidate who proposes to eliminate tax shelters and loopholes while stemming the revenue requirement.
When it comes to diplomacy, find the candidate that does not attempt to buy friends or placate them. Select the candidate that understands that Muslim nations take apologies as a sign of weakness to be taken advantage of.

It takes faith to reduce taxes in order to increases revenue. It takes faith to stand strong against terrorists in order to reduce their threat. It takes faith in the American system to allow industry to provide for its customers better than the government ever could.

The wise independent voter understands that it hurts the poor and increases their numbers to enable them with greater entitlements. With welfare perks like a home, food, healthcare, phones, and cars, many poor cannot afford to find a job.

The frugal voter understands that government entitlements inherently do more harm than the good they intend. The compassionate citizen understands that there is more compassion in supplying an opportunity than a handout.

God bless the undecided. May they choose well.

Gargoyle Joe Is Your Debate Firewall?

Biden’s new debate coach is not an improvement over John Kerry.

What does it say about a campaign when its hope for putting a stop to a precipitous decline in the polls is Joe Biden? Last night fireman Joe was at his pompous, bloviating best in the Vice President Debate with Cong. Paul Ryan. The most memorable line in his paper thin, fact–free rebuttals came when Biden looked directly at the camera and asked viewers, “Who are you going to believe? Me, or your lying eyes?”

Earlier in the week Obama staffers were trying to pin the blame for the current President’s poor showing on John Kerry’s debate preparation, but I don’t think replacing Kerry with the Cheshire Cat was much of an improvement. In the split–screen shots Biden looked like a dirty old man staring at an elementary school swing set as he leered and grinned during Ryan’s answers.

When he wasn’t interrupting and talking over Ryan, Biden was muttering and chuckling to himself like Gollum in the underground lake. I suggest that whoever posts these clips on YouTube use Aqualung as the background music.

The only time I had any sympathy for “Good Old Joe” was when the camera showed a view of the back of his head and you could see where even his hair implants were thinning.

Believe it or not Biden took a full six days off the campaign trail just to prepare for the debate. To put this in perspective, Jesus didn’t require six days to prepare for the crucifixion.

Presumably the first three days of preparation were devoted to words Joe wasn’t supposed to say including but not limited to: gay, marriage, chains, crushed, taxes, jobs, 7/11, Slurpee, f–ing, deal, articulate, bright and clean. And the last three days to words he should say. In fact, according to a report in the Daily Mail, Joe was programmed with hand–me–down one–liners that Obama refused to use on Romney.

Fortunately, since the debate was held before a mixed audience, Biden did not have to adopt with the black dialect Obama affects when he’s speaking exclusively to minorities. Biden got to keep all his ‘g’s and was not be required to use “folks.”

The process wasn’t brainwashing per se, but it required at least a light rinse.

And somewhere during all this preparation Joe found time to rent a floor polisher so he could buff his teeth.

This focus on Biden brings back memories doesn’t it? Joe was added to the team for his “extensive foreign policy experience” and his “long term Washington expertise.” Yes, 69–year–old Joe was cashing a government paycheck and sticking his foot in his mouth at time when the 42–year­–old Ryan had to be content with his thumb.

This is why conservative columnists hav alwayse been grateful Biden is the white guy.

Last night while showing off his expertise, Biden claimed the US is Israel’s best friend and that Obama and Netanyahu have personally met 12 times. Both are lies: Obama pledged to create some distance from Israel and the two have met nine times.

“Foreign Policy” Joe stated emphatically that the consulate in Libya had not asked for additional security, intelligence experts did not warn of an attack and that he knows from security briefings that Iran is a long way from getting an atomic bomb.

Unfortunately Ryan failed to point out that Thursday’s Washington Post had printed the emails asking for additional security at the consulate and he failed to ask Biden if the “intelligence experts” who assured him Iran is a long way from the bomb are the same ones who promised him the Libyan consulate was in no danger.

After Romney won the first debate so decisively, one would have thought MSM coverage of the VP event would be reality–based. But that’s not so, the media remains an Obama co–conspirator. CNN reported its own poll of debate watchers “a draw.”

Yet the graph clearly shows Ryan won 48 percent to 44 percent. What’s more, 28 percent of viewers said the debate made them more likely to vote for Romney compared to the 21 percent who said they were more likely to vote for Obama. And Ryan was judged more likeable than both “Public Trough” Joe & Big Bird by 53 percent to 43 percent, both of the latter being outside the margin of error.

And a pathetic AP reporter by the name of Jocelyn Noveck claimed, “the vice president also came up with the two catchiest phrases of the night – “bunch of malarkey” and “bunch of stuff.” Both of which are trite and ancient.

Fortunately, participants in a Luntz debate focus group that — was not on the MSM or Obama campaign payroll — felt Biden was “arrogant.” Personally, I thought that if Joe had a few feathers he could play Foghorn Leghorn.

The best part about the debate was viewers now realize to their horror that a lying boastful buffoon is a heartbeat away from a President that is helpless without a teleprompter.

Or as Barbara Schribner wrote: Now we can put a set of teeth on the empty chair.

 

 

American Success or European Failure

The most recent Washington Times/Zogby poll shows voters now favor GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney over Barack Obama on two key issues: the economy and national security.

Obama had been leading prior to the October 3rd debate.  The results of that debate changed a lot of minds.  On national security, Romney is now preferred 48 percent to 45 percent, while on jobs and the economy, Romney now enjoys a 50 percent to 44 percent advantage.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/8/obama-loses-lead-key-voter-issues/

This major swing in popular support is reinforced by the latest Rasmussen poll, which shows Romney now leads Obama in eleven key swing states.

Those eleven states were all won by Obama in 2008 and are considered competitive in the 2012 contest. The states include Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin. In those states a total of 146 Electoral College votes are at stake.

According to Rasmussen: “In the 11 swing states, Mitt Romney earns 49 percent support to Obama’s 47 percent. One percent (1 percent) likes another candidate, and three percent (3 percent) are undecided.”

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_swing_state_tracking_poll

Americans are beginning to recognize the choice offered to them in the November 6th election.

During the debate, Romney made it clear that he was a pro-American successful businessman who supports America’s free market economy over centrally planned big government control. He has also staked out a preference for peace through strength over neo pre-WWII style appeasement in foreign affairs.

While the Islamist world descends into flames and violence in response to Obama’s failed foreign policy initiatives, Europe is currently giving America a real time expose on why choosing to follow their economic model would be a grave mistake.

German Prime Minister Angela Merkel landed in Greece to streets filled with violent mass protests.  Cradle to grave nanny state dependency has conditioned too many Greeks into believing that a struggle-free life is owed them simply because they were born.

Since the global “progressive” socialist mindset not only shares the Marxist philosophy but also employ “the ends justify the means” “progressive” tactics wherever they appear, some of the Greek protestors dressed like Nazis.  They got so out of hand that police were forced to fire tear gas and use stun grenades.

The latest presidential polls indicate Americans perceive the importance of this election with greater clarity.

The choice is between restoring the formula that made America the world’s economic giant and sole military superpower or settling for descent into economic decline and military irrelevance through adoption of the anti-growth tax and spend nanny state big government policies practiced by European Union members.

Jobs, economic growth, smaller government that cost less, and peace through strength, or riots in the streets by government enabled bums who think the world owes them a living and believe apologizing for America will solve the world’s problems?

For Americans, picking between American success and European failure should be an easy choice.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/09/american-success-or-european-failure/

Tonight on the Dark Side with Kira Davis

10/7/12 Atlas Shrugged: Part II opens next week and producer Harmon Kaslow joins me to talk about the movie and the new cast. Also, I’ll wrap up the debate and tell you who is REALLY to blame for Obama’s performance. And Louis Fowler stops by for his weekly Entertainment Crack-Up. Tune in tonight at 10pm ET/7pm Pacific on the CDNews Network on Blogtalk radio.
UPDATE: Listen to a replay of this show here or click the link to download

Listen to internet radio with CDNews Radio on Blog Talk Radio
« Older Entries Recent Entries »