Massachusetts Conservative Feminist | Ordinary: Degrees of Moderation and Sanity

2012 GOP Update: Ron Paul Upset in Maine? Romney To Lose Yet Another State! – Romney Rushes to Portland in Last Ditch Effort - Analysis

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Sat, 11 Feb 2012 12:25:00 +0000

Ron Paul Had to Speak from a Balcony to Accommodate Crowds in District Romney Hopes to Win - compare to crowd at last minute Rally for Romney in Portland Last night - image National Review

Reuters: The State of Maine, where Mitt Romney won over 50 percent of the vote in 2008, is now seen as a “different state” than it was four years ago – as are the balance of the states with few exceptions where Romney had actual ground games and extensive support of the State GOP. Ron Paul is running so strong in the caucuses, that Romney took a last minute flight from CPAC (Conservative Convention) in Washington DC, in order to try to rally troops in Portland. The Portland Press Herald suggests that the win will go to a 200 vote difference, with Paul taking the expansive and remote 1st district, and Romney possibly pulling out a victory in the more populated 2nd District which includes Portland.

A win by Paul would show that the U.S. House member from Texas can actually come in first in a 2012 GOP contest, something he hasn't done. Paul spent two days in Maine last month, drawing large crowds, and is spending today in the state, visiting caucus sites in Sanford, Lewiston and New Gloucester and holding a party in Portland.

However, the more populated areas of the second district are also the homes to the States universities where Paul has an extensive organization of both students and Libertarian and Tea Party members. It is another case where the ground game is more than likely going to trump the much “ballyhooed” former front-runner, who spent little to no time in Maine compared to Paul. In addition the other candidates, Gingrich and Santorum did not compete in Maine, where Romney is now faced with the same situation as Missouri – going one-on-one with a single candidate – where after his loss in Missouri, one of his aids noted that Romney is “vulnerable” in one on one match-ups. No kidding right on CNN – giving one the impression that Romneys campaign is not in control of its message.

The Bangor Daily News noted that Romney’s quick sprint from CPAC to a Portland Rally was met with both supporters and hecklers, but judging from the Video that is shown on the site, the attendees for Romney were mostly reporters and Romney surrogates and state officials, who are part and parcel of the “establishment” – while elsewhere in Maine Ron Paul has been pulling crowds in the thousands, even in remote areas, with a little help from his fans in Massachusetts.

The fact is that if Romney can’t pull out a win in Maine, and is faced with a strong Santorum in Michigan and possibly Arizona, going into Super Tuesday will be a nightmare. Romneys other home state, Massachusetts has campaigns in place for Santorum and Paul, with Gingrich having run television ads. The anti-Romney sentiment in Massachusetts, with exception of the State Republican and usual party leaders, is palpable. (That's less than 10%) In addition, as of the moment, Virginia is another of those one-on-one primary states, where Romney will be wishing he had begged the State’s AG to allow Gingrich and Santorum to compete with the 10,000 plus signatures they collected. In 2008 Ron Paul clobbered Romney in the state’s Primary – and one can only imagine as the anti-establishment sentiment has grown. In the final analysis as Santorum grows stronger, and should Paul pull a victory out of Maine, Romney will have to reassess his campaign.

Rick Santorum and the Women’s Vote – Would his Position on Women in the Front Lines of War Derail his Candidacy – Think again

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:07:00 +0000

Rick Santorum and his family - Surrounded by Women - Imagine your daughter on the battlefield? image: girlsinwhitedresses.wordspress.com

From the Washington Postcomes an article by Jennifer Rubin, regarding Santorum’s view of women serving in the military – on the front lines, as suggested recently by the Administration. She takes offense that Santorum feels that emotions might preclude women safely conducting themselves on the front lines – something that is easy for a woman who stands no chance of being on the front lines to rattle on about. She goes further into Rick Santorum’s take on women, as far back as 1990, when he wrote about his family and the role of women and men in the family – one that is decidedly conservative and Catholic in nature – she takes offense at that as well.

Will Santorum’s view of women serving on the front lines really make women turn on Rick? It’s unlikely given that it would be women’s daughters serving on the front line, let alone their sons, and frankly, one might not care how “sexist” his viewpoint may be, it works when it involves the safety of our nations children, especially women. What Ms. Rubin fails to see, is that not all women are rushing to join a combat unit, we also have no data on how effective a woman will be in combat, we do know that women serve in the military and honorably, and that they are on the front lines, unable sometimes to defend themselves due to ridiculous restrictions that are more than archaic – however, give us guns but don’t put us on the front lines – we’re mothers, and daughters, and those roles should be considered.

Emotion – do women tend to react emotionally? To deny that is to deny that there is a moon, sun and stars, it is not to say that woman cannot effectively defend themselves, but, there is a difference between worrying about one’s daughter on a date, and worrying about one’s daughter on the front lines of a battlefield. That is an emotion that cannot be denied, except when it suits those on the left who can somehow tie in a political incorrect gaffe from the opposition team (i.e. Conservative versus Liberal)

It is his opinion, and frankly, this blogger among other mothers that have young teenage daughters, are not so enamored of the decision either. Perhaps we are tired of war, and perhaps we would like to see the troops come home, and perhaps we would like to see a bit of tradition upheld – or make that directive elective – as in, “if you want to go to the front lines, go ahead, but if not, you can just continue on with what you are doing.”.
Rick Santorum, a man who calls his wife a hero, a man who holds her education and her successes up as part and parcel of why she is the love of his life –can be a bit old fashioned, but one might be hard pressed to find him not advocate for equal pay for equal work (check his voting record on that for instance), and to stand up for women on all issues – he is pro-life, admittedly and unabashedly – and that is the problem with Rick Santorum and the left – so to those who feel this will be the end of Rick and the women, think again. There are those who will be offended, naturally, those who want to go to combat and those who would never leave Manhattan or Washington and feel that a woman should be the first to go – they are also the first to citizen a well –worn pantsuit – catty to the core - defending Abortion to the teeth.

There are women who believe in equal rights, but equal rights, as far as wages and educational opportunities are concerned, but are we really that ridiculous that we must lobby for, what amounts to, suicide? This from a feminist who is also anti-war when it comes to real cannon fodder – rather than the use of air strikes and drones.

GOP Update: Santorum Tells it Like it is: “The Gotcha Politics of Mitt Romney” – Romney May Have Overplayed his hand - Santorum More Electable.

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:36:00 +0000

Romney, Gingrich and Santorum to Speak at CPAC - image florida primary dot come

It is no secret that Mitt Romney and His Super PAC (which he does not control), unleashed attack after attack on Newt Gingrich as soon as he rose in the polls, causing Gingrich’s campaign to fall under the never-ending barrage of advertisements in Iowa, (not to mention robo-calls and emails). It was suggested that Gingrich was done, and Romney went off to win one of his home state’s Nevada, he ignored the fact that Rick Santorum won Iowa. To date, Romney has won three out of the eight contests, with Santorum winning four, and Gingrich one, giving the reality that Romney is no longer the front runner some teeth.

Santorum is a seasoned politician, in the vein of Newt Gingrich or anyone who has spend more than one term in office, and he is, for all intents and purposes, squeaky clean. While in the Senate, he did his job based on the state of Pennsylvania and voted towards what the former industrial powerhouse needed to survive – in other words, he did what he was hired to do by the voters of Pennsylvania. That is what Romney has to use against Rick Santorum – so far. While Romney was Governor of Massachusetts, he did what he thought was best for the populace in the “they can’t take care of themselves, so we’ll just mandate – health care”. Romney was known in Massachusetts as the guy who would do or say anything to keep in the good graces with the most corrupt group of Democrats this side of Chicago – and that involved: being pro-choice, raising taxes, etc. Highly recommended: The Bluest State, a book available on Amazon.com, written by Jon Keller, and outlining the aforementioned like no one else has ever done. Although, the sub-title reads: How Democrats Created the Massachusetts Blueprint for American Political Disaster”, it belies the fact that prominent Massachusetts politicians are mentioned in the book, a real eye-opener. Those in Massachusetts already know the story, but the rest of the nation – not so much.

It is not that Romney is a horrible person, it is that he fights dirty, changes his mind frequently, does what he feels is best politically, which may not be popular with those who employed him, and is a smart guy when it comes to making money. The problem is that Romney is not seen as “the nice guy”, no matter how hard he might be trying, it falls flat. The reality is such that if one does not like a candidate, one will either not vote at all, or vote for – Obama.

Rick Santorum on the other hand is likable, he polls the highest of the four remaining candidates with likability – he also knows his stuff – which is of import and has not changed position for political purposes – he has drive, and passion, and he is able to draw a distinction between Mitt Romney’s attack machine, short, and sweet and to the point.
The Drudge Report Title the link to the National Journal story : “No More Mr. Nice Guy”, the actual article reads: “Energized Santorum Unloads on Romney’s Gotcha Politics” – the video that accompanies the article (shown below) depicts a rather calm Santorum, just laying out the facts – which is why he is resonating with voters - everywhere, including Massachusetts.

No polls have been taken yet, however, Massachusetts is ready for change, it is a palpable “Scott Brown” type of atmosphere, and there will be those that root for the home team guy, (being Romney), but one might note, everyone knows who is running on the Republican side – the coverage is on the 6 and 11 local news, CNN is the station of choice, (and the entire state is not like Amherst and or Cambridge) –it might be a Romney landslide, but it might not. With Santorum organizing in Super Tuesday States and getting teams in place now (in Massachusetts mind you), and he comes in even or one state behind Romney by March 6th, then the race is set for an upset.

CPAC, the Annual Conservative convention will take place this week, and one thing that is certain, according to Eric Erikson of Red State Romney still considers himself (as does the national GOP elite), the front-runner, and hopes to cement this perception with those conservatives attending. That said, Santorum, Gingrich and a host of other “notable” conservatives, will also be speaking – it is understood that Santorum continues to be perceived as a nice guy who might not be able to withstand the Romney onslaught, or raise the funds, and or simply be electable – even though he more than bested Romney is states, particularly Minnesota and Colorado, that were Romney’s before a ballot was cast. It is a perception that has been shattered, and should those at CPAC respond more favorability to Santorum than Romney, these activists may go back to their home state and get on the stump for Rick. Why, because every poll indicates he is more electable than Romney, he is raising money hand over fist, and he is relentless on the campaign trail, while remaining consistent, and he can spar with the best of them, while maintaining his dignity. This is something that this blogger missed, following trends of the GOP and looking for the ABR (Anybody but Romney) given the fact that this blog is from Massachusetts (hint), however, Santorum’s voice, his performances in the debates, both on social issues, but most importantly on economic and national and foreign policy issues, when given the time by the moderators and the media, prove him to be the well-rounded, smart guy, who is both the anti-Romney and the anti-Obama. Lastly it does not matter if he is wearing a sweater vest or a suit jacket – works either way. That’s what happens when you have a candidate that believes in his candidacy, and believes most importantly in the nation and is willing to put himself and his family fortunes on the line – not for accolades, or power, but to fix and correct and work with everyone, for everyone. One has a tendency to believe his speeches, because he is – genuine.

In 2008 CPAC was 24/7 Romney, and it was difficult to watch this unfold, as it is supposed to be, again, a Conservative convection – therefore, this weekend, It will be imperative to check in on CSPAN or CNN to see how the speeches are received, and how well received all the candidates are comparatively. If Santorum is received well, then one will understand there is a new front-runner, both by states won, and by popular demand. Watch CPAC live this morning at 9 on www.c-span.org/Events/GOP-Presidential-Candidates-Address-CPAC.

To correct the continuous erroneous reporting on the delegates that Santorum won in Minnesota and Colorado – they exist and will be awarded in March, just prior to Super Tuesday.

Video title belies Santorum's delivery of the message

GOP Update: Primaries on Deck: Michigan and Arizona (2-29 and 2-30) – 1 CNN Debate on 2-22 - A Santorum win in Michigan and Arizona (Analysis)

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 11:44:00 +0000

The GOP Contenders (Minus Ron Paul) image politico

With less than three weeks to go before the Arizona and Michigan primaries, speculation on who, of the four remaining GOP candidates, will rise to the occasion, is rampant. (ABS News). In particular, the GOP Establishment candidate, Mitt Romney, who has won two states, has the majority of the delegates, with Rick Santorum second at this early stage in the game.

The delegate count is currently: *Romney (107), Santorum (68), Newt Gingrich (32) and Ron Paul (9) (Fox News via AP Analysis). The Delegate Counts are somewhat confusing - Romney’s 107 delegates come from a combination of actual delegates won in proportional Iowa, New Hampshire and Florida, however, the some of the delegates come from the GOP “Super Delegates”, those senators and congressmen and other party leaders who have endorsed Romney – (AP) inflating his advantage in this early stage. In real terms Romney has 85, to Santorum’s 35, Gingrich’s 34, and Ron Paul’s 13, which is closer to the actual count, and includes the states actual proportional distribution. With 1144 Delegates needed to win, one can see where endorsements might help with overall front-runner’s “bragging rights” (Real Clear Politics). However, each delegate tally appears to be different depending upon the source, given the fact that some reports include the total delegates awarded, while some adjust for early primary penalties for States holding primary/caucuses prior to a certain date. Looking at the numbers provided by Real Clear Politics in terms of actual popular vote count delegates, adjusted for proportional distribution and penalties, it looks more like a horse race, or what it truly is, anyone’s game.

The next two states to weigh in are Arizona and Minnesota, and the pundits are looking towards the 2008 election as a way to judge just how well Mitt Romney will do in both states – a tactic that apparently failed dismally in Colorado. In the 2008 races, Romney held fast to the northern and more moderate Western States, where if he lost, it was to the more Moderate John McCain (especially Arizona, where it is literally McCain’s home state. There have been some changes to the party narrative since 2008 – namely the Tea Party and the 2010 elections.

Now in Arizona, under the direction of Governor Jan Brewer (*a Tea Party favorite), the state will most likely vote on the issue of immigration in part while in Michigan, which was a completely moderate State in 2008), took a change towards conservatism in 2010, and has not looked back. However, there is a large voting bloc of Mormon's which may, or may not sustain Romney. Michigan, one of Mitt Romney’s home states (the state where he grew up and his father was Governor for three terms) belies the fact that Santorum has more of a connect to the rank and file voter given his background, than Romney (Detroit Free Press). Michigan, not unlike other states, north, south, east and west, became more Conservative in 2010, which means that 2008 results must be adjusted or they become totally useless.

Romney is not taking this laying down, an article in Business week suggests that Romney’s scored earth method of winning hearts and minds, will turn his attention towards Rick Santorum – who, after besting Romney in the West and Midwest Contests of CO, MO and MN, needs a dose of what it is that Romney does best, either through his actual campaign or his Super PAC – attack, without regards to facts, candidates that are in his way to the nomination.

The problem with this method, the constant attacks, the barrage of ads, may have worn out its’ welcome, especially against a candidate whose record is primarily squeaky clean, and one who is able to counter with facts on Romney’s records – Between Santorum and Gingrich, Romney is playing a game that will end up, once again, costing him the nomination (refer to 2008). Negative advertising may work at first, but it grows old, and fast, in the high tech world of today where every ad played in Iowa, has been seen in all 50 states via YouTube, and the cable networks.

Rick Santorum, to his credit, is taking this in stride (so far) and rebutting Romney’s initial salvo’s with calm and measured facts. Given the fact that debates have played a huge part in the fortunes of candidates in each of the primaries, the primary on the 22nd, is the one where Romney needs to step away from the teleprompter and come up presidential. If Gingrich is in attack mode, (as he has vowed to stop Romney), and goads Romney into rebuttals, Santorum will be able to pull out of this debate looking as squeaky clean as Ron Paul. Gingrich and Romney’s dislike for one another is almost palpable at this stage in the contest, and one cannot see Romney not taking the “bait’ so to speak. Now with the podiums in order of Romney in the middle with undoubtedly Santorum and Gingrich as bookends, the CNN debate will be the one to watch, and the winner, will be the one who will undoubtedly do best in both Arizona and Michigan. One other note: despite the debate coach, Romney still has problems with delivery and connecting to the “average person” and Michigan, an industrial state, is tailor made for Santorum and his pro-manufacturing proposals, and background.

Arizona, is most likely to go to the least establishment candidate, one who has a strong border policy. It is difficult, at this point, to tell which candidate will end up rising in Phoenix.

However, if one were to place bets on first and strong second finishes in both Arizona and Michigan, one might want to take the Pennsylvania Senator over the former Massachusetts Governor, given the aforementioned. Especially if Gingrich goads Romney into attacks during the debate and if Romney ramps up over the top attack ads on Santorum in either of these states (a la Florida and Iowa vis a vis Gingrich), it may be yet another route for Santorum in the long run.

Voter turnout - it has been dismal in the first states, which can be explained one of two ways, (the notion that Republican's and Independents are satisfied with the current administration should be taken with a very large grain of salt. Most likely it is a question of why show up - on the one hand, the establishment candidate, Mitt Romney has been touted as a foregone conclusion. If the base actually feels he can lose to a less moderate candidate, and after this week's Santorum wins, that is more than possible, the voter turnout will improve - or, alternately, another theory is that no matter who wins, the rank and file will come out and vote in droves in November. One is tempted to believe the former rather than the later.

Best line from the Tuesday night Caucus, via CNN - on Missouri, "Romney is more vulnerable when he is faced with a one on one race" (paraphrased), delivered by CNN Analysis during caucus watch.

Santorum Trifecta! Wins Colorado (40%), Minnesota (45%) and Missouri (55%) Caucuses – Decisive Victories – A New Front-Runner in the GOP - Analysis

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:30:00 +0000

Rick Santorum and Karen Santorum, the perfect couple, celebrate pre-victory speech in Missouri - image: Washington Post

At approximately 1:30 am EST, the State GOP of Colorado reported that Rick Santorum had won the Colorado GOP Caucus, bringing the third victory of the night to the former Pennsylvania Senator, and GOP Presidential candidate. Earlier, the states of Minnesota and Missouri had weighed in with Santorum as a clear preference in the all important middle of the nation – where Santorum had won Iowa, in the first of the nation decision. Colorado, a Western State that had shown clear preferences for moderates in 2008, chose the more Conservative Santorum, who has a solid economic plan that includes, in Santorum’s words “not 99 or 95, but 100% of the people”. The second generation, Italian American, hails from a blue-collar background and staunchly defended those manufacturing jobs so important to Pennsylvania, and the nation, during his tenure in the Senate. He drew a sharp distinction between himself and the former front-runner and establishment candidate, Mitt Romney, and went on to challenge the nation’s voters in a call to support his candidacy that was nothing short of commanding. It was the premise, that Santorum could not win due to a lack of funds and name recognition, and that he had run a ground game in Iowa, where he had visited every corner of the state, explained his Iowa victory. It was anticipated by the media and pundits that this fiscal and social conservative, with a squeaky clean record, was a nice guy who would be the first to drop out due to the inevitability of a Romney coronation – it is now apparent that this myth has been exploded. Romney, in his speech in Denver, tampered down expectations of a Colorado win early, noting he hoped to come in first or second, and then congratulated Santorum for winning both Missouri and Minnesota – it was anticipated that Santorum would win the Missouri contest, which was a precursor with no delegates awarded, and a primary to be held in March, but it was expected that Romney would win both Minnesota and Colorado, by pundits and the constant drumbeat of a the eventual nomination of former Bay State Governor.

Perhaps more than any other reason, the lower turnout at GOP caucuses and primaries can best be explained by the fact that the GOP establishment and the media have been noting that Romney was the eventual nominee, regardless of the fact that only four states had weighed in by close of January. The fact that the former Governor, U.S. Olympic CEO and CEO and founder of an investment firm, Bain Capital, had not gotten support in the polls form the beginning, apparently did not dissuade those in the elite of the GOP from pushing Romney forward – and it has backfired. The fact is that Romney, although well-intentioned, appears stiff and unapproachable, and his former policies as Governor, do little to contrast himself as an alternative to President Obama. It is, as if to say to caucus voters and to those who voted in early primaries – why show up and vote – the winner has been established.

Newt Gingrich, who had vowed to stay in the race and defeat Romney, has more than accomplished this task, and the longer he stays in the race, goading Romney, the more this boosts Santorum, who stands above the fray of the petty personal attacks that have all but destroyed Gingrich and Romney in the eyes of the electorate. Romney, who’s Super Pac began the assault on Gingrich as frontrunner, when he rose in the polls, and then later after Gingrich won South Carolina, attacking him outright through his campaign, was met by a rebuttal by Gingrich’s campaign as well as the Super Pac which supports Gingrich – Romney, more than any other candidate, is the one that the Obama administration would prefer to face in the fall, and now are faced with the possibility of an extended GOP primary, that will result in the end, not in the Romney anticipated win, but with a Santorum win, one which would pit a working class hero up against the elite, a complete reversal of the roles most often associated with both political parties.

It would not, in this opinion, be any surprise, if on Super Tuesday, Santorum bested Romney in Massachusetts, and going forward, taking those states in what are known as swing states rounding out the primary season. The Romney attack machine has already taken one shot at the Senator and apparently that fell flat, as Santorum refuses to rise to the bait, and calmly points out the discrepancies in policies, and refutes the inaccuracy of the attacks. Rasmussen Polling, which now shows Santorum leading Obama, while Romney falls short, also played a part in the narrative that the grandson of an Italian immigrant, who worked it the coal mines of Pennsylvania could, indeed, go onto become the President of these United States.

With this three-state victory, it will be clear to voters that the narrative is not as strong in the case for Romney and one might anticipate larger turn-out in the upcoming primaries, particularly on Super Tuesday. That will be the “winnowing” field for those four candidates that are left in the race: Gingrich, Romney, Paul and Santorum, all vowing, however, to stay up until the Convention.

The 70 delegates that were up for grabs in yesterdays contests will be awarded in March (CNN), and although the current delegate count favors Romney (who won two states, and has been given delegates by the GOP), the figure is at approximately 102 delegates – there’s a long road to the 1140 that is necessary to win the nomination.

What to expect going forward: Attacks on Santorum by the Romney campaign (or its Super Pac) and attacks by the media, which will, in all likelihood, attempt to portray Santorum as the “religious right”, a candidate that is all about Social Issues rather than a complete candidate who is also strong on foreign policy, economics and jobs. He is, in this bloggers minds, the anti-Obama, having been one of those that had searched for an alternative and actually listened to the narrative that nice guys finish last – clearly and specifically in the case of Rick Santorum - not so.

Next up: (Presidentialelectionnews.com): February 28th, Arizona and Michigan, March 3rd Washington, and finally March 6: Alaska, Georgia, Idaho, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Vermont, and Virginia – next debate: Feb. 22, CNN

Santorum’s speech below, is worth watching, it depicts a man that does present, in his words, “Not a clear contrast to Mitt Romney, but a clear contrast to Barack Obama”

Learn more about Rick Santorum and where he stands on the issues: www.ricksantorum.com

Santorum’s Rise Unleashes the Romney Attack Machine – Romney Attacks Santorum on Pork, but - Ran Olympics on Federal Funds – McCain Appalled - Analysi

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 11:54:00 +0000

Mitt Romney Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum, now Romney's Target: Besting Romney In Polls, A Family Man who resounds with Blue Collar Voters, and one who can school Romney in the debate arena - without using a teleprompter - image Politco.

Rick Santorum is a nice guy, and one knows the old epitaph – “nice guys finish last” – well, that’s not always the case. First, Santorum must survive the “Romney Attack Machine” – legendary in politics since he began to run for the Office of the President in 2006. A combination of PAC’s and the campaign itself, Romney focuses on each rising candidate in turn; unleashing a barrage of negative advertising that is often misleading. With Rick Santorum, who is as squeaky clean as they get – Romney has gone the fiscal conservative anti-pork in the Senate Route. From The Boston Globe: “Romney Looks to Squelch Santorum’s Late Rise”, speaks to the tactics employed by Mitt Romney in order to maintain his alleged front-runners position.

The problem is the headline is also misleading – if anything, Santorum had an early rise, and has maintained momentum in states that were not partially Romney friendly, winning Iowa, besting Romney in a very close race. Gingrich took the state of South Carolina, and had been under attack by Romney since his polling numbers showed he was besting the former Bay State Governor. Money might not buy votes, but it sure can make your opposition look bad, and by default, one might get a win. The problem with this philosophy is that the public soon becomes aware of a pattern – and if it were just one candidate, that would be possibly overlooked, but every single candidate that stands to best Romney – that becomes habitual.

The fact of the matter is that there are several candidates that are equally compelling and that currently there are no real front-runners, given the very low delegate count and 5 states weighing in – one might also note that until Super Tuesday, on March 6th of this year that the front-runner will not be established. It is where the opportunity exists for one candidate to amass enough delegates should they win the majority of the states, to claim that mantle. It appears Romney may have the same difficulties he had in 2008 when he spent most of his energy on demonizing Mike Huckabee, former Govenor of Arkansas
Now that Romney’s calling out Rick Santorum as a spendthrift, instead of thrifty Rick, there appears to be hundreds of articles available pointing to the fact that when it came to Pork, Romney had no problems taking Federal Funds – in fact he embraced it to the point where John McCain went to bat against the millions requested to support the Salt Lake City Olympic Games. Understanding that the Olympic Games are a host nation’s responsibility – and that Romney, as the CEO actively sought and fought for federal funds, his pork laced attacks on Rick Santorum fall a tad flat.

Nowhere is this more evident than in an article from the Desert Sun found on Newsbank (a fee based newspaper archive).

In an article from the Desert News: Avaialbe at Newsbank.com:

Deseret News, The (Salt Lake City, UT)
September 20, 2000
Edition: All
Section: Wire
Page: A01

Topics:
Index Terms:
News
McCain vows to wage war on S.L. 'pork'
But Romney says he's confident funds will come
Author: Lisa Riley Roche and Lee Davidson, Deseret News staff writers
Article Text:
WASHINGTON -- Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John McCain, R-Ariz., vowed Tuesday to kill any bills with "pork-barrel" spending for the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics.
But Mitt Romney says he is confident needed federal funds still will come.
"I'm expecting the funding we need to host the Games," the Salt Lake Organizing Committee president told reporters in Sydney Wednesday. "I'm quite confident."
But in Washington, D.C., McCain was vowing war.
"I will filibuster and do everything in my power to delay any more appropriations bills that have this pork-barrel spending for Salt Lake City," McCain said. He was specifically attacking a treasury appropriations bill that contained a Secret Service request for $14.8 million to improve law enforcement communications for the Games.
"The Olympic Games, supposedly hosted and funded by Salt Lake City, which began in corruption and bribery, have now turned into . . . an incredible pork-barrel project for Salt Lake City and its environs," McCain told the Senate.
McCain complained that numerous Utah road, transit, sewer and other projects have been been quietly tucked into appropriations bills through the years -- with the excuse that they are critical to the Olympics -- without the normally required "authorization" through separate legislation.
"Instead, they are stuck into an appropriations bill without scrutiny," McCain said, adding he will do everything possible to block funding for any more "unauthorized" projects.
Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah, told the Senate, "I know of no funds in the 2001 bill that are yet to come before us that have not, in fact, been authorized in the appropriate procedure."
McCain said a U.S. General Accounting Office report he formally released last week projected that the federal government will spend $1.3 billion on the Utah Games, far more than the $609 million it spent for the Atlanta Games in 1996 and the $75 million spent for Los Angeles in 1984.
He said host cities increasingly use the Olympics as an excuse for pork-barrel spending.
Bennett, however, said all but $254 million of the $1.3 billion would have gone to Utah anyway through projects such as rebuilding I-15 and constructing the new TRAX light-rail system, which would have proceeded without the Olympics but not as quickly.
Romney said that since he took over SLOC in early 1999 he has tried to make it clear that light rail and the I-15 reconstruction are not needed for Salt Lake City to host the Games.
He said Wednesday he resisted pressure from former Salt Lake City Mayor Deedee Corradini to sign a letter stating light rail was essential to the Games.
After meeting with congressional leaders, Romney said he realized such a statement could jeopardize SLOC's chances of getting federal help. "I thought it was very important that we not overstate in any way what was an Olympic project and what was not," he said, adding that Corradini came around to his way of thinking.
Romney's predecessors were more willing to go along with state and local officials in claiming that the big-ticket transportation projects were needed.
McCain does raise some legitimate points, Romney said, especially questioning what role the federal government should play in staging the Olympics.
Unlike other countries that provide government funding for the Games, the U.S. government's financial responsibility has never been clear.
What the Salt Lake Games need from the federal government is money for buses and park-and-ride lots, as well as projects such as the road to Snowbasin, site of the Olympic downhill and super giant slalom courses.
Federal funding is also key to providing security at the Games, as well as staging the Paralympics that follow for the world's disabled athletes.
Some $77 million in transportation funds are still needed from this session of Congress, Romney said, calling the appropriation crucial to the Games.
"If it did not get put in place, I would question our ability to host the Games," he said. "I believe our requests in Washington are appropriate."
Romney also said inclusion by the GAO of light rail and I-15 costs as Olympic funding is "absurd." Although I-15 and light rail will be used during the 17 days of competition in 2002, Romney said, "$1 billion wasn't spent to get ready for the Games." The actual amount of federal funds going toward the Games will be closer to about $250 million, Romney said.
Meanwhile, Bennett told the Senate an increase in federal spending for the Olympics in Utah over previous Games is appropriate -- because threats are increasing and the Games are becoming more complicated. "As the Olympics get bigger and bigger, with more and more nations, more and more athletes, and more and more opportunities for international terrorism, they become a bigger and bigger problem for the federal government," Bennett said.
Meanwhile, Romney said he spent several days in Washington lobbying for the final funding request before coming to Sydney last week. He also said he has congressional and White House support.
"We're less than a year and a half away," Romney said. "That's no time to change horses midstream."
E-MAIL: lee@desnews.com; lisa@desnews.com
Copyright (c) 2000 Deseret News Publishing Company
Record Number: 0009200155

Romney needs to stop the negatives while playing the victim every time someone fights back – it will not win him hearts and minds, and it will not win him the nomination – that contest appears to be developing on its own between Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich heading into the Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri contests this week. Santorum, according to polls, is in a good position to do well in all three states, and to break the Romney as front runner myth prior to Super Tuesday. In addition Romney is no longer the one who is best positioned to beat the President in the fall – Santorum is – this according to Rasmussen Polling and of course, subject to change. Romney has been seen in this light from the beginning, a combination of name recognition and the foregone conclusion that he will be “the front runner”. This has been blasted in the news, by the GOP Elite, and may account for the low voter turnout in the primary and caucuses to date. If Romney is pre-ordained to be the winner, why bother to vote? (Fox, CNN discussions)

That is Rick Santorum’s biggest challenge, to help the voters understand that he is a viable alternative, and those contests today will establish that fact. One can, therefore, anticipate Santorum under blazing attack by Romney should he take even one of the 3 states, let alone 2. In addition there is the vitriol from the left labeling him as “religious” – stick in the word “Christian or Catholic” and one understands that the game is on, and Santorum is now seen as a viable threat to Obama – not Romney.

What to watch for in the next debate then? Santorum receiving questions based on social issues rather than his rather strong positions on the economy, specifically manufacturing, as well as foreign policy and national defense. Of all the candidates, Santorum and Gingrich have the strongest showings is past debates on these specific issues, with Ron Paul taking the lead on economics. Should the moderators at CNN allow Santorum and equal stage with equal topics, he stands a chance of besting both Romney and Gingrich. With Newt Gingrich, who has risen from the ashes in the past, one can look at the race as between Santorum and Gingrich – both battling to unseat Romney from the artificial throne upon which he is currently seated. Romney, who does not give a speech without a teleprompter, (sound familiar), is up against the best in the orator business, especially when it comes to Gingrich, and Santorum, who studied under Gingrich, has found his footing in the debate arena,. However, it will depend a great deal upon the behavior of the candidates, should Gingrich continue to attack Romney, it will open the door for Santorum to take the high road, once again, and this scenario is far from unlikely. Moreover, Santorum is seen as most likable by the GOP voters in poll after poll, and with Romney’s inability to reign in his attacks, should he turn up the heat on Santorum in the debate arena, let alone in the primary states via advertising, that will be the final straw for those who are sick and tired of the personal and over the top policy attacks – and Romney’s bid.

There are a few remaining primary debates: courtesy of www.2012 presidentialelectionnews.com:

February 22, 20128pm ET on CNN
Location: Mesa Arts Center in Mesa, Arizona
Sponsor: CNN and the Republican Party of Arizona
Participants: TBD

March 1, 20128pm ET on CNN
Location: Georgia
Sponsor: CNN and the Georgia Republican Party
Participants: TBD

March 5, 2012Air time TBD on NBC
Location: Reagan Library in Simi Valley, CA
Sponsor: Reagan Library, NBC News and Politico
Participants: TBD

March 19, 20129pm ET on PBS
Location: Portland, OR
Sponsor: Oregon Public Broadcasting, NPR, PBS, The Washington Times and the Oregon Republican Party Participants: TBD

2012 GOP Update: National - Santorum Leads Obama, Romney Falls Behind – Media turns up Santorum “Religious” rhetoric, Ignores Polling on MO, CO, MN

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 11:47:00 +0000

Rick Santorum surrounded by Press - image Salon.com

2012 GOP Presidential Candidate, Rick Santorum is now leading President Obama in the Rasmussen Daily Presidential-GOP match-up polling by 45 to 44%, while Romney has fallen to 43% versus Obama 47%. In addition, Public Policy Polling has has Santorum in 2nd place in the Colorado primary to be held on Tuesday, while he leads in both Missouri and Minnesota. One would, given the fact that it is early in the primary contest, and the Massachusetts Governor has three rivals in Santorum, Gingrich and Paul heading into Super Tuesday, one would think that the media push for one candidate, an early winner in Romney, be premature. This given the polling data, as well as the fact that the other candidates, specifically Gingrich and Santorum, have each won a primary or caucus to Romney’s three wins, two of which were anticipated early (Nevada and New Hampshire). In the Maine Caucus, which has had little to no attention, one would anticipate a Romney win as well, however, Ron Paul is favored to win as the Maine caucus began on Saturday with Nevada, but will not finish on the same day.(The Hill)

Yet Rick Santorum keeps hammering home the same message, “don’t count me out” – he is clearly able to articulate the contrast he presents to voters versus Romney. On the eve of the Nevada contest, it was brought home in the most ridiculous of manners by CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, who, covering the Romney victory speech, noted back and forth with the field reporter, that Romney’s teleprompter was in place. Although that may seem petty in the broader scheme of things, it is another point in the litany of “why Romney is just like Obama” and faces an uphill battle against a president who, by all polling data, especially Gallup, should not win a second turn. (The others being: Moderate, Massachusetts, Health Care and Romney’s “miss-speak” on the fate of the nation’s poor versus the middle class.
Meanwhile, the media, regardless of which way it leans is refusing to accept the fact that there are other candidates in the race that might win at all – and since it looks like the beginning of a Santorum surge, and Santorum is “squeaky clean” as one can be in politics – there are only two tactics left: Denial and Religion.

In a lively piece by the Los Angeles Times: entitled: “As Nevada counts, Republican candidates press on” which details Gingrich’s second place win, his press conference rather than traditional post-primary speech and a lampoon on Saturday Night Live. They also touched on the dust-up between Obama and the Catholic Church, the new ruling that insists the Church affiliates must provide insurance that covers contraceptives, which is against Catholic doctrine. Both Gingrich and Santorum are Catholics and both had different takes on the ruling, which inserts the Government into Religious institutions - Gingrich straight forward Catholic defender, while Santorum held to a more Constitutional viewpoint. Yet, in the pro-Romney piece, the Times speaks to Santorum as the candidate that is specifically courting the evangelical vote, noting that his appearances in Colorado focused solely on that Demographics in rallies, which is blatantly false. In addition, the AP released an article this morning specifically aimed at Santorum titled: “Santorum refuses to bow despite another loss”as if winning only one out of 5 contests held to date, and having the potential to a) best the President, and b) win multiple states between now and Super Tuesday, just weren’t on the table.

What is on the table is religion - the fact that the piece focused on one of several events Santorum had attended in Colorado on Saturday, a church service, while ignoring the Republican sponsored events such as a Lincoln Breakfast. In addition, it dismisses his win in Iowa completely and although one might reasonably assume Romney, who has the backing of the establishment GOP, the DNC (they would want to run against no other candidate), and of course, the media, it is the blatant disregard for the facts and the Presidential candidate, that is most evidenced by this on small AP article.

Super Tuesday on March 6th, will, in all likelihood, be the bellwether as to who stays in and who leaves the GOP nominating process – and it is far too early to call this a Romney dominated contest given the makeup and geography associated with the Super Tuesday States, it may well show multiple wins, by multiple candidates, and with a plethora of proportional delegate states (including Massachusetts), Ron Paul will continue to amass delegates – and may give Romney a headache in Virginia, where he bested him in the 2008 primary – Romney and Paul being the only two on the ballot.

What is healthy for the GOP is a continued process; this is basically due to several factors, including a full vetting of the candidates, and the media being forced to focus on the events. If one were to sign up for Google News alerts on all candidates, one would find that those alerts, which were in the hundreds two weeks ago, have dwindled to merely mentions – former presidential candidate, Mike Huckabee, and Sarah Palin, former VP candidate, both had more news alerts this past weekend, despite two caucuses being held, than any of the candidates – no one more evident than Mitt Romney.

Therefore, one might want to pause before discounting Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney’s campaign is just beginning to wake up to the fact that Santorum should be next in line for hits from Mr. Negative, who’s staff begin to send out emails on Santorum(according to the LA Times article: “In a tacit acknowledgment of Santorum's potential to do well Tuesday, Romney's campaign attacked him in an email Sunday as a defender of congressional earmarks.”
However, Santorum, unlike other candidates in the race, has bested Romney in the Florida Debates, and has little that the Romney campaign can truthfully challenge. In fact, there are few if any Congressional Representatives and or Senators, who do not accept earmarks, and Governors, accept those earmarks – even Governors like Mitt Romney.

Therefore, before one counts out anyone, pick a candidate, either Gingrich, Santorum or Paul, and donate – to keep it going and if one is not a fan of the Massachusetts Governor, it’s a sense of gratification to donate to a campaign that can do well, is doing well, be it any of the aforementioned (in truth, Santorum is doing the best at this point and has the greatest potential, next to Ron Paul to actually defeat Mitt Romney and go on to defeat President Obama. This makes one wonder if, back in the early stages of the debate process, where Gingrich acknowledge his friendship and pride in Santorum, and later continued to promise to stop Mitt Romney, if he weren’t throwing himself on the proverbial sword, in an attempt to weaken Romney while Santorum rose in the polls. If this were the case (speculation only), it would explain a lot.

Rick Santorum, Catholic, and Italian American – would be the first Catholic-Italian American President of the United States, just imagine the field day the press would have with that one – and the pride that Italian Americans’ would feel in being able to cast their votes for the first time for one of their own. Of note: there are 70 million Catholic voters, most of which tend to vote Democrat as they are blue collar (if the nation still had a blue collar workforce), and that is Rick Santorum’s bailiwick. That should give pause to any contender, be they GOP or the President.
According to the latest U.S. census Italian Americans’ are third in overall population with those of Irish decent in 2nd, and those of Germanic Decent being the largest group.

Therefore, one has to use the old adage, which may not be terribly politically correct but true non-the-less: “It ain’t over until the fat lady sings” and she hasn’t even begun a tune at this stage.

To donate to the Santorum Campaign visit: www.ricksantorum.com - although money can’t buy love, it can buy airtime.

New York Times Floats Elizabeth Warren, Advisor to Obama, Running for MA Senate as DNC Presidential Candidate in 2016

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 12:30:00 +0000

Elizabeth Warren with Obama and Geithner, image reason.com "Just How Stupid Does Elizabeth Warren (& Barack Obama) Think You Are?">

With the GOP Presidential Primary Race the number one topic in the news lately, Obama’s latest approval rankings by Gallup showing approval above 50% in only 10 States (and DC)(i.e. unelectable), and the price of gas inching towards $5.00 per gallon this summer (CBS) an article in the NY Times suggests that the 2016 election is already starting, and those on the left might as well start to pick out some candidates.

One name that stands out among the rest is one Elizabeth Warren, best known in Massachusetts as the one who would hope to unseat popular Senator Scott Brown The quote from the Times is priceless:

“A plausible newcomer for 2016, Democrats say, is Elizabeth Warren, who advised Mr. Obama on the creation of a consumer-protection bureau for financial products and is now running to be a senator from Massachusetts (against Scott P. Brown, the incumbent and a Republican hero). She can deliver a punchy case for economic fairness, which has already made her a YouTube sensation. Obviously, she first would need to unseat Mr. Brown.

(NYTimes, 2/5/2012)

The woman who takes credit for starting the Occupy Wall Street Movement, (Business Insider) is about as viable a candidate as Mickey Mouse, even in Massachusetts Scott Brown, who is yes, a Republican – (the times “Republican hero” may be a stretch) was elected in a Massachusetts wave of resentment towards the Democrat Party and the state of the union back in 2009 (and it hasn’t gotten better – fair warning). It was the fact that Brown never wavered from telling those from the Tea Party, or those Die-Hard Massachusetts Conservatives (of which there are more than one would think), that he would be an independent vote in the Senate, and has done exactly that – Brown votes for Massachusetts, sometimes it’s not the most conservative vote sometimes it is, making him appealing to the number one voter in Massachusetts –the Unenrolled. The unenrolled voter is neither Democrat nor Republican, rather, the 51% of the electorate when given a choice of a viable candidate, will turn the entire state red. To think that Lizzie Warren, Obama advisor, and Occupy Wall street supporter, will garner more than Democrat support, is, at this point in time, a bit unthinkable - thus the “she first needs to unseat Mr. Brown” from the NYTimes.

To float her name as a candidate for President is a sign that the left (Progressives) have no grasp on the reality of what works for the nation – and that to continue to use Massachusetts as a stepping stone for extremist, might not be the best of plans. Understandably Massachusetts does offer Amherst, Cambridge, P-Town and of course, the hills west of the Connecticut River, where time has stood politically still since Arlo Guthrie first penned Alice’s Restaurant, does not, when the Democrats are being watched (as in the case of the Scott Brown election), belie the fact that Republicans can win by 5 points or more in a statewide election. Brown won the MA vacant senate seat despite the dead voting and DNC operatives trolling for votes in every nursing home in the state.

Perhaps Lizzie Warren, the Marxist academic, might do better by launching a bid for senate up the street, in Vermont, if the DNC wants her to run for President in 2016, then perhaps they can convince Bernie Sanders to retire. Other names floated in the article: Hillary Clinton and Maryland Governor, Martin O’Malley.

Trump Endorses Mitt Romney – Let the Panic, Punch Lines and Punditry Begin - Analysis

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 11:30:00 +0000

Trump Endorses Romney - The "Thrill is lacking" - image inquisitr.com

From the Boston Globe: Donald Trump, Real Estate mogul, and reality television star has backed a GOP Candidate – the new American Idol, one Mitt Romney. Romney appeared somewhat “befuddled” during his endorsement by Trump in Las Vegas, according to the Boston Globe. That’s one version – there are several – over on the far left - Mother Jones speculates that the real reason Trump endorsed Romney was political in nature, that Romney needed a Trump endorsement instead of that endorsement going to Gingrich – in a tea-party infused vote-getting scheme, that also involved Trump holding Romney’s hand in public.. One can find articles outlining how Romney bought the endorsement, which makes little sense considering the wealth on both sides of this “deal”.

Endorsements, as far as they go, give publicity to both parties, unless of course, the endorsee has no access to airtime, or is in essence only known in a small circle – for example the endorsement of a private citizen, is, to this mind, of more import that that of a Hollywood Star or Television Star, musician, athlete, or the everyday endorsement on finds from the Media for either the President or Mitt Romney – depending on the outlet. It is a manner in which both parties get attention, and most publicists will note that any publicity is good publicity.

But what about Trump and his conservative credentials – are they more “tea-party” or “Republican Party”? It’s hard to tell from this perspective, one might say neither – and be closer to the truth – As a self-made man, who has done well is real-estate despite his personal ups and downs, perhaps Trump understands Romney better than perhaps the more intellectual Gingrich or the very balanced Santorum, and as a stated Republican/Tea Party kind of guy – the Libertarian, Ron Paul.

Trump’s endorsement will be talked about for the next 48 hours, or perhaps less, as Romney at present seems to be filling the need for the media’s feed of a main and central national Character. Although pushed by the right media (Fox News and the Drudgereport – especially), Mitt Romney has had problems generating enthusiasm above polite clapping – however, the left jumped in, especially when it appeared on Newt Gingrich might actually run over the GOP’s pre-ordained candidate, Mitt Romney. Trump, who is a frequent guest on Fox News, and from local New England talk host, Howie Carr, plays golf with Rush Limbaugh. Perhaps Trump is more a part of the “mainstream” Republican machine than first thought – and should Romney win the nomination, and then of course, the Presidency (anyone who believes that this race is winnable by the current President lacks a clear senses of history and a dose of reality: inflation, increased unemployment figures, and personal income, across all spectrums, especially the poor and middle class, and his record), perhaps Trump (as suggested and most sanely)would be in line for a new gig, say Ambassador to China.

How likely is that to happen? Not at all likely – considering the fact that Romney is a businessman, and as such, he does know how to make “deals” – and since he is actually a hybrid (politician and businessman) one can best be sure that he will make promises to win endorsements and support, and when it comes time to get down to business, chose who he feels is the best fit for the “job at hand” – the old saying: “S—t rolls uphill” refers to the top of the Corporate heap, when a staff runs amok and bad things happen, well, the guy at the top suffers and generally – is fired. Romney, and this is Massachusetts “lore” (i.e. rumor as there is only hear-say), has been known to promise the moon and the stars to those who will help him achieve a goal, like the Governorship of Massachusetts, and then completely forget that promise once elected. Apparently, this leaves a lot of resentment on the floor, but overall, those individuals recover and become - opponents, or if rank and file Massachusetts Republicans get back in line and support whoever they are told to support.

It goes without saying the endorsement was odd, considering that Romney has appeared to shun “the Donald” at every step, and he did appear very uncomfortable in accepting the endorsement from Trump, but for that matter, so did Trump – he lacked the enthusiasm one might except from a Trump endorsement.

The GOP race for the nomination continues this weekend in Nevada where Romney is expected to win handily – given the fact that he has had an organization in place – and that’s the key – follow the Establishment GOP Logic, and one finds a pattern that makes some wonder why bother to vote?

The Reality

There are always a batch of GOP approved candidates and one of those is a favorite (regardless of electability), and so, the guy that comes in second or perhaps even third, (if the guy that comes in second is...less than acceptable by the elite corp), that candidate then becomes a cheerleader, and in four years or eight, is on the stump and yes, before the party begins, is touted as the front-runner – (See Bush, Dole, Bush, McCain, and now Romney – just for fun.) The main point that is never mentioned is that they are all, to a man (and or to a woman, if there were one who had gotten into the race, or done well enough to stay in the race) Republicans. For better or for worse, they are "Party animals", just like their Democrat counterparts.

Should Romney get the nomination, then it will be for some, a choice between Obama Lite and Obama, and, truth be told, people who hold doubts about the former Massachusetts Governor, even those in Massachusetts who would prefer that Ron Paul be the nominee (and there are more than a few of those), will hold their nose and vote for – Romney. In this season of “anyone can beat Obama” should be a shoe-in; even if there is a third party candidate from which to choose.

That said this nomination process is not over, and that is a good thing – for entertainment purposes, for the country – especially – as long as Gingrich, Santorum and Paul remain in the race. This is true, should the aforementioned amass delegates in those 26 proportional states, then the contest remains anyone’s ballgame until someone reaches 1100 delegates, and that’s a ways off. This shines the light on the candidates and their ideas far longer than the Obama campaign would like – strategically it is sound – and sound strategy that goes against GOP logic. Therefore, a week after Super Tuesday and the settling of the dust, so to speak, the calls for this one or that one to get out of the race will begin (a la McCain and Huckabee).

The closest to a second place at this point is one Newt Gingrich, who is much maligned by the press and the Romney Campaign, and the GOP, and anyone who could possibly be considered establishment, with only 5 states weighing in by the weekend, it is still too early in this game to crown a winner – (although both candidates would prefer that the case) – So, grab the popcorn, and sit back and enjoy the ideas that will be bandied about and especially the hysteria from the left, and the most important thing to be assured of is this: no matter which one of the candidates wins the nomination, and despite the rhetoric from the RNC that they will choose a candidate if their choice is not brought to the convention on say, the popular vote, those who fought hard and long and lost, will come back as fierce proponents of the nominee – then begin their careers as either talk show hosts for Fox News, or perhaps earn a post in the administration, or, wait eight years, (in the case of the very young Santorum, who is the most appealing candidate at this point – from an anti-Romney point of view), and run as the “anointed” one. The problem both Gingrich and Santorum both have is they have both bucked the Republican system, Gingrich to the point of causing much chagrin and gnashing of teeth and blatantly false accusations and rhetoric from those who know him well – because – when all is said and done, the head of the free world is also the titular head of the party that brought him to the table.

Therefore, the Trump endorsement will mean little in a week or two, as so many endorsement do, what will matter is how strong those Conservatives, the base, react in this election, and one can bet the house, they are not going down the road of concession anytime soon. Newt and Santorum, therefore, (or one of them) will be with us through June, when the primary season ends – and that will make their job, as party cheerleaders (following the common wisdom that it must be Romney, will be Romney, and there’s nothing anyone can do about it being Romney), will be to bring the base to its senses and get them out to vote.

Of course, one cannot forget South Carolina and its predictive primary nature. It is a case where anything can happen, and yes, (no tin foil here – only pragmatism), Gingrich may well rise like a Phoenix from the ashes of Romney’s PAC’s assaults, and the myriad sources of irritation, and win the nomination outright – Romney may be in “safe” territory now, but on Super Tuesday, the shakeout will begin, and should he fail to sweep on Super Tuesday, especially in battleground states, then it will be anyone’s (well, the guy with the most delegates) at that point game. Call this blogger crazy, but on several points, Gingrich is the better candidate, intellectually, in the debate arena, and in the ability to appeal to both spectrums, in spite of the media, and in spite of the negative ads – there is a genuineness about the man, as there is about Rick Santorum, (someone who is given little credence, and who should be watched closely, as he has substance.) Gingrich also knows how to bully both parties into doing what needs to be done, a quality that one finds, to date, lacking in one Mitt Romney. Romney is, to this mind, the appeaser, one who would enter the White House with good looks, and the perfect agenda, and then sit right down with Harry Reid and negotiate something that would appeal to both parties, rather than actually be what the country needs. Perhaps he has changed, and does so daily, but one gets the impression that what the nation needs is someone who could care less about what either Party wants, but what is necessary to put the House in Order – and that’s with or without

Trumps endorsement – which, one has to believe was given based on the hard line Romney has taken with China - a favorite target of Trump is the reason that is the beginning and end of the “why Romney” endorsement.

Excellent Article on Isreal and Newt Gingrich

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 12:07:00 +0000

This blogger came accross an excellent article outlining Newt Gingrich and his history with the State of Isreal - it is simply a must read - From yourish.com: "Hiding the truth about Newt Gingrich and Israel". Well researched, and well written. One has to understand that the media, and the powers behind the political parties, be they Republican or Democrat, distort the truth, on a consistant basis - listerally pushing candidates taht are "favored" over competant candidates who are not - regardless of the truth, or in some cases the popular vote of the party members.

Breaking: Trump in Las Vegas – May Endorse Newt Gingrich Today

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 12:03:00 +0000

Trump with Gingrich - image Christian Science Monitor

Google News viaAFP: Sources have indicated that Donald Trump will endorse Newt Gingrich, 2012 GOP Nominee today from his Trump International Hotel and Tower. Trump, who has yet to endorse, has made the statement on several occasions that he would consider an independent run if the GOP did not nominate the right candidate – basically, Trump has made up his mind to push who he considers to be the right candidate towards the nomination. For all the pooh-poohing from the pundits on Trumps brand, especially when it comes to politics, they could not be farther off base.

One has to remember, that whoever Trump endorse, will take on that apprentice, American Idol mantel, as Trump has the ability to get his message out to the general population. This is one endorsement, if made today that might well put the chosen candidate on the fast track. Between the recent spates of “state by state” endorsements from Sarah Palin for Newt Gingrich, and should Trump endorse today, that will put considerable weight behind the former speaker of the House.

He did, indeed have a dreadful performance it the debates in Florida, yet, a second place finish, under a barrage of negative advertising from the Romney camp – came in at a respectable 31.9% with 531,294 Register Republicans (closed primary) to Romney’s total of 771,842 (State of Florida a larger version of the State of Massachusetts in 2005) – This may be the impetus that Gingrich needs to get back on track – push the positive and answer then ignore the negative’s coming from the Romney campaign, one which is laterally fighting on 3 fronts in Nevada. Is there yet another uptick in the future for Newt Gingrich, absolutely, one can never say never, in this particular race – Gingrich ahs the gravitas and the poetical experience necessary to take on the field – especially if he gets a little help from Donald Trump.

The Nevada Caucus – Romney, Gingrich, Paul and Santorum – Is “Romney’s State” – “Safe GOP Moderate?”

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 11:41:00 +0000

Nevada has a varied population, perhaps as diverse as Florida’s, but obviously a Western flavor of frontierism that continues to pervade those who head west to find their fortunes. There are also obvious difference between the north and south of the State, but overall the State leans Conservative, with a bold streak of Independence. Like the Florida Primary, the Nevada Caucus is a Closed Caucus meaning only those who are Registered Republicans may vote in the caucus, however there is an opportunity for voters to change registration to vote in the Republican primary NV GOP.

Endorsements:

Sarah Palin has, again, endorsed Newt Gingrich in the same manner she had in South Carolina and Florida, ( Las Vegas Sun) it worked in South Carolina, however, the closed GOP primary, left out the Tea Party base that holds the Governor in such high esteem - yes, Independents and disenfranchised Democrats – were not voting on last Tuesday. It remains to be seen how much impact she will have on Nevada, since it is, again, a closed GOP Caucus.

Sharon Angle, the Tea Party Firecracker that upended the establishment GOP in Nevada in 2010 beating the incumbent and going on to lose to Harry Reid has endorsed Rick Santorum. Santorum is modeled on Gingrich, yet more of a Mr. Rogers style, social values Conservative, not, repeat, not to be confused with the fact that he has a solid foreign and domestic policy agenda – in other words, Santorum is the combination the best of the evangelical political worlds – but then again, so is Newt Gingrich. The choice between the two comes down to age, wisdom and the grandfatherly look, to youth, a Gingrich protégé (politically speaking), who is handsome and very presidential when he loses the sweater vest. Yet again, Tea Party members must be Registered Republicans to vote for either of the aforementioned.

It is no secret that two of the contenders in this race, Santorum and Ron Paul have a gift (so to speak) for the Caucus, while Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney may be relying on their advertising – that said, Gingrich is closer to the think of the Western Conservative than Romney. Regardless of the fact that this primary is closed, this is going to be one interesting Saturday.

Check Northern Nevada Talk: check out KKTF FM – talk radio Carson City/Reno. - Northern Nevada Tea Party focused Talk .
Not unlike the Florida panhandle – just for reference.

Ron Paul, may have more strengths in the caucus State and this may be his opportunity to grab a win – he is activiely courting the one voting bloc that is designated “Romney”, the Mormon Church. According the San Francisco Chronicle, Ron Paul Supporters are going door to door, and laying out Ron Paul’s policies, which align with that particular faiths vision of independence and liberty – comments from Nevadan’s in this piece, may give Romney’s team heartburn, especially if he loses any of the 25% voting bock that is the Mormon Church in Nevada.

Nevada will be the 5th State to weigh in on the GOP nomination – Grab the popcorn!

Romney Wins FL Closed GOP Primary: State Scorecard: Romney 2, Gingrich 1, Santorum 1 – Nevada On Deck - Analysis

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 11:47:00 +0000

Romney wins Fl by 14% over Gingrich in Closed Republican Only FL Primary

Mitt Romney the former Massachusetts Governor, Bain Capital Founder and Salt Lake City Olympic Savior has won the Florida GOP Primary – with 100% of the vote counted, Romney captured 46% of the Republican closed primary; Gingrich 32%, Santorum at 13% and Paul at 7% (Freedomslighthouse). The FL State GOP, in moving the date up in the calendar year, was penalized and lost delegates – 50 delegates instead of 99 were awarded to Romney prior. In Florida’s case all delegates were awarded to the winning candidate (Romney) and it is not a proportional state – over half the states award proportional delegates (everyone picks up delegates, according to placement).

The total delegate count to date is illustrated very well on CNN Politics: where Romney currently leads with 84 delegates, 66 won in primary contests, and the balance awarded by the GOP as “unpledged delegates”. Gingrich at 27, Ron Paul at 10, and Rick Santorum at 8 with one unpledged delegate – the total delegate count to win the election: 1144.

Give the Devil his Due:

Romney did extremely well in this Republican Only Primary, winning by 14% over Gingrich who, despite the barrage of negative advertising continued by Romney and his PAC, came in a respectable 2nd with a vote tally over 500,000. It appears that Romney’s forte is the negative ad, which played well in this particular state. Santorum and Paul, unlike Gingrich, did not compete in the State of Florida.

The Speech: Romney’s wife Ann gave a very remarkable and entertaining pre-Mitt introduction speech, the candidate himself, gave a short pointed speech skewering the President – and what Romney has learned in the last month since he was hammered by Gingrich in SC is to become a better communicator. Watching Romney deliver a speech prior to this elicited a deep desire to take a nap – in all seriousness, the man does not exude excitement or the ability to connect with the given audience – he now has this down (or appears to given his speech upon winning Florida: keep the speech short and to the point, as if watching a PowerPoint rather than a teleprompter: Romney ticked off the speech speaking first to the hard won battle between all candidates, and then why he, and not Obama should be the next President, he also looked sincerely into the camera, looking more Mitt than ever before - he out-Obamaed the president in his ability to work the camera to his advantage. For that performance – Mitt deserves credit – his fortunes may well lay with his ability to be coached through both the debates and the speeches – if he can continue in this vein, he may do as well in the Republican only contests.

Doesn’t the Republican only contest represent all facets of population?

Hardly: In a closed primary only Republican’s can vote, therefore, as the Tea Party is mainly made up of the anti-establishment (i.e. non-Republican and non-Democrats) they were not truly represented in Florida, in addition, Independents tend to also include those who would normally vote for either a Republican and or Democrat, making it difficult to tell if Romney could carry any Democrats, as in Blue Collar workers.

Therefore although Florida is another notch in the delegate belt, what Romney needs to do to convince everyone on the planet that he is indeed capable (we all know he’s the GOP chosen candidate and that the last man anyone in Washington wants in the White House is Newt Gingrich, who will boot them to the curb, no doubt) – he needs to win a state that a) is an open primary, with proportional votes, and by a wider margin that 14 points. Romney simply is not picking up the base, therefore, he has to be picking up the independent and Democrats that will swing, if he cannot, he will be yet another Republican Nominee who almost beat the incumbent. On that Speech by the way, Ann Romney delivered a rousing speech beforehand, thanking those who helped the campaign, and obviously the main cheerleader for her husband, Mitt.

On Newt Gingrich:

In delivering his Concession Speech, CNN political Analysis David Gergen” said it best (Paraphrased) “That was the speech Newt should have delivered in the Debates and he may have won Florida.” Gingrich’s speech was rousing, acknowledging briefly the fact that Florida was a loss and making a point that there were 46 additional states to weigh in – in addition Gingrich had honed his message as not only the Anti-Romney candidate (although Rick Santorum has some creds on that as well), but as the Anti-Establishment Candidate – an independent voice, for the people that would not give a whit about political party –in other words, a man that would run the nation based on the ideal our Founders put Forth in framing the Constitution. Political parties were their worst nightmare – Gingrich personifies the individual who would challenge the status qua, and shake things up in DC.

That is where the Tea Party and those who feel entrenched politico’s including those non-elected Party officials that plan who wins and who loses, need to meet Newt Gingrich. The strong oratorical skills shown in SC and in the speech last evening are what makes one want to see Gingrich take on the President – he shoots from the hip – and he manages to outperform expectations – whereby compared to Romney, who has two decent debate performances to date, and both in Florida, may have appeared strong, simply because he attacked Gingrich and Gingrich failed to show up – regardless of the fact that he may have been advised to tone down the rhetoric, or if he were road weary – there is no doubt that he lost Florida on the debate, and also on the fact that it was a closed Primary.

Where does that leave the GOP? This is a primary season unlike any other – watching CNN (by far superior to FOX for those who are not blinded by the GOP or any party), Political Analyst Donna Brazile said it best when she noted the Contests should go on, and mentioned popcorn. In addition, she also noted that Romney should not put his singing talents up against the President – although lighthearted, (and paraphrased), Ms. Brazile was spot on – this is a contest unlike any other in political history – where the public demands more action, debates are billed as “The Fight of the Century”, and where the average voter is thrilled to tune in. The fact that millions, depending on the network, anywhere from 5 to 7 million (approx.) viewers will tune into a Republican Debate, regardless of the fact that there have been dozens of debates so far – GOP Debates – who knew Republican candidates could be so entertaining?

Why didn’t Sarah Palin’s endorsement put Gingrich over the top?

Palin’s endorsement of Newt Gingrich (or, if I were in Florida I’d vote for Newt) most likely reached the right people (Tea Party, etc.), but they were not allowed to vote in the Florida primary – had this not been a closed primary – as the polls were based on “likely Republican voters”, including independents and Democrats”, the righteous indignation of one Sarah Palin fell on deaf ears.

Looking at CNN’s exist polls: Florida is less evangelical and/or religious, Florida Republicans are more moderate (think Massachusetts), and therefore, they do not depict those who, in November will actually cast ballots for the Republican Nominee – or, if the Republican ninnies is not to their liking, will a) stay home and not vote at all, or b) vote for the incumbent. It is the fact that Romney cannot connect with the base, something he desperately needs to do, and that leaves this race wide open.

Nevada, the next state on the agenda, will hold its Caucus on this Saturday and again, Romney is favored by the media and establishment to win – however, one must watch the Caucus State, where the Tea Party is stronger than the Republican Party and where Ron Paul and Santorum have been in place since last week. Gingrich flew directly there from Florida and will concentrate on that campaign rather than do the morning talk shows – what one does know is that none of these campaigns would be continuing if they felt that there was not an opening in which they could capitalize and possibly reach the nomination – therefore, given intelligence and internal polls in states that have Santorum and Paul appear set to go the distance, to Tampa if necessary.

Although anyone who has read this blog over a period of time understands that this blogger is no fan of the former Govenor of the Bay State (this blogger being a resident), for myriad reasons ranging from Fees (Note to Mitt, these are taxes no matter how one slices it), to Social Issues (specifically as regards the Catholic Church and its inability to promote adoptions in Massachusetts), and the facts about Robama Care and how it is not the best plan and never was. There is some resentment in Massachusetts, one might add, due to the many promises Romney made to GOP members and did not deliver (note to the FL AG), but more importantly, the rank and file conservatives (which include the 12% of the Republicans and the 51% of the Independents in part) who feel he abandoned the state to seek higher office, used the Governor’s office to do so, and then left the state with Deval Patrick a model for Barack Obama (literally), and a State Legislature chock full of like-minded progressive Democrats. In other words, hanging those who still held out a shred of hope that Massachusetts would, somehow not become the most taxes, highest cost of living, mandated Democrat controlled state in the Union. Perhaps it’s not fair to Romney; however, that’s how it appears. As Massachusetts is an Open Primary – it will be interesting to see how well Romney does in the State where he governed, against Gingrich and Paul who already have organizations on the ground, with Gingrich (PAC) running ads well ahead of the March 6 primary.

If Romney does end up the nominee by virtue of no help from his friends in high places, then so be it, it is, at this point, debatable (no pun intended) if he can best the incumbent, who has only prepared for a Romney victory. It would be a battle of billions in dollars spent – and to this point of view, the outcome is less certain, even though those same establishment voices continue to push the theory that Romney is the best candidate to beat Obama. One has to understand, (or reiterate) a closed Republican Parity in Florida where the voters think Mitt Romney is a stronger candidate is the Establishment of the GOP, whereas, the Open Primary in SC would be those most likely to vote be they independent, Republican or Democrat – and in that primary, Gingrich took the “most likely to best Obama vote. Again, only two states, out of 50, and only 4 having weighed in so far – it will be a long road, and as Romney said, the one who emerges from the ashes of the GOP 2012 primary season, will be battled hardened, and ready for Prime Time.

Last Florida Polls – Gingrich Polls Within Reach 45% of Romney Supporters May Jump Ship Romney’s Attack Ads - His Undoing – Again

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 11:46:00 +0000

Romney Constant Attacks on Newt Gingrich May Have Adverse Affect on - Romney -Image from The West Orlando News Online

As Floridian’s go to the polls this morning, a last poll conducted by the Insider Advantage Group showed the gap between Romney and Gingrich closing to a 5 point Romney Lead, there is no margin of error shown on the poll stats provided in PDF from Real Clear Politics.com. What is interesting in the marginals is that the poll reflects the make-up of voters in the state, more so than other polls taken. The biggest gap in “may change one’s mind” leading up to the final days comes from Public Policy Polling, where Romney leads by 9 points, however, and here’s the big if (see page 5 of the PDF from PPP Crosstabs: Committed to the Candidate: Romney, more than any other candidates see support that is willing to go to another candidate (even up to the last day) 45% of Romney voters may jump ship. Although Romney's leading in early balloting, it may be the only area in which he leads when polls begin to close this evening. At this point, and with polls this divisive, it will be difficult to say, at this point, who might win the Florida primary with Gingrich and Romney within 5 points, and variables that suggest Romney has not “sealed the deal” with the voters.

One reason may be his scored each attempt to destroy opponents, to the point where both right and left pundits are coming to the defense of Newt Gingrich – Romney has no problem playing fast and loose with the facts, something he is well known for from the 2008 campaign. In that campaign the negative ads were just almost but not quite as egregious as those used to date in this campaign, and it may well be that he has placed some serious doubts in voters’ minds regarding his stability when it comes to the national race – a candidate that will say or do anything to get elected, regardless of accuracy (mistakes here and there, can be attributed to the exhaustion of the campaign trail, however, Romney is on 24/7, and on Newt Gingrich.

Therefore, he is not taking time to talk about Mitt Romney and he is also not taking shots at Obama, but so over-focused on eliminating his chief competitor that he has lost sight of the “prize”, it is his usual undoing.

Florida may well end up being a Newt Gingrich win by the time the votes are tallied, and if so, it will be a hair breath win, not be a “blowout” for Romney as anticipated but a squeaker which, when all is said and done, will be similar to the Iowa vote – meaning nothing more, nor nothing less for the Romney Campaign. That applies should Romney win, with less of a commanding lead than South Carolina (which is traditionally the state that accurately predicts the nominee, and that state went to Gingrich). Should Romney leave Florida and somehow lose Nevada – then even with a win that would be a psychological blow, especially if Gingrich bests him in a state considered “Safe Romney”.

Of note: Gingrich ads are running in Massachusetts – which is interesting – a state that is a Super Tuesday State, and former home to the one-term Governor Romney.

Video’s below

Sarah Palin Weighs In.

Chris Matthews Weighs In!!

2012 GOP Florida Latest Poll: Gingrich Closes on Romney, Leads Double Digits in Hispanic Vote

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 02:16:00 +0000

The latest Insider Advantage Poll, conducted in Florida Sunday, shows the gap closing on Romney, who leads Gingrich by a mere 5 points (margin of error unknown, sample of 642 likely voters) - 9% undecided. The large Hispanic bloc is breaking for Gingrich by a margin of 42 to 29%.The blanace of the poll: Romney and Paul at 12% Each. (NewsMax).

As the FL Polls Turn – Media Touts Romney Lead, but 24% May Change Mind - Palin’s Friday Endorsement of Gingrich in FL Primary.

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 11:20:00 +0000

Sarah Palin, shown with Newt Gingrich, image - from the AP via slantright

The numbers on Florida polls are literally everywhere, from the Right centered, Rasmussen Reports, showing Mitt Romney with Double Digit leads to Quinnipiac polling which shows Romney with a lead, but 34% thinking of changing their minds before casting that vote.

The Florida Polls (Using Real Clear Politics, for reference: (includes national polling) shows Romney with an 8 to 9 point lead over Gingrich with all polls, except for Rasmussen – of those polls, Quinnipiac has the greatest amount of undecided’s 6%, and the larger number will to change their mind before the election 32%, none of that data appeared anywhere online – as if it is somehow insignificant that those who are about to cast a ballot are still seeking an option to Romney – The Rasmussen Poll of 750 Likely Florida Voters, shows that 21% are still likely to change their mind – as of the 28th, (subscriber link) something that is not noted in most releases and significant because the number one issues is Florida: national security, might not be Romney’s forte.

That hasn’t stopped the media from pushing the idea (and that is the Drudge Report, Fox and the rest of the media – in concert – (this should set off bells, whistles, sirens) Mitt Romney is the second Obama, someone who cannot be beat, which is – in a word ludicrous – the man did win the Governorship of Massachusetts, but truthfully not on his own merits, it was a remark made by Shannon O’Brien to the mothers of the State of Massachusetts, a week prior to the election, with Romney’s numbers taking a nosedive, that sent voters running in the direction of the man who would introduce fees, and mandated health care to the Commonwealth – the other race he lost to Ted Kennedy in the 1994’s, Teddy being more politically astute than poor Shannon.

Above political pundit and author Ann Coulter and Mitt Romney - image slanted right blog
Ann Coulter Appears to Trust Mitt Romney, or is just a moderates moderate, using conventional Washington think that only a candidate that is left of center can win - image slanted right blog

Therefore, there’s an issue of trust that has spanned decades, when it comes to Mitt Romney.

Someone had to step up and help the tiny voices out of the Bay State who are hoping someone pays atteniton to the Romney Tax increases, etc. before it's too late! Enter Sarah Palin, who, using her Facebook page offered the following note in regards to what is happening to Newt Gingrich. Frankly in a match-up vis a vis credibility between Romney surrogate Ann Coulter, and then Tea Party Leader and credible politico Sarah Palin, there is simply no contest. One can only hope in the last day before the remaining 50 % of the votes are cast (Florida votes early and by mail and possibly often – not unlike Massachusetts) those that have not cast their votes or had harbored doubts about Romney got a chance to read Sarah Palin’s note:

‘Cannibals in GOP Establishment Employ Tactics of the Left
by Sarah Palin on Friday, January 27, 2012 at 5:57pm
We have witnessed something very disturbing this week. The Republican establishment which fought Ronald Reagan in the 1970s and which continues to fight the grassroots Tea Party movement today has adopted the tactics of the left in using the media and the politics of personal destruction to attack an opponent.

We will look back on this week and realize that something changed. I have given numerous interviews wherein I espoused the benefits of thorough vetting during aggressive contested primary elections, but this week’s tactics aren’t what I meant. Those who claim allegiance to Ronald Reagan’s 11th Commandment should stop and think about where we are today. Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater, the fathers of the modern conservative movement, would be ashamed of us in this primary. Let me make clear that I have no problem with the routine rough and tumble of a heated campaign. As I said at the first Tea Party convention two years ago, I am in favor of contested primaries and healthy, pointed debate. They help focus candidates and the electorate. I have fought in tough and heated contested primaries myself. But what we have seen in Florida this week is beyond the pale. It was unprecedented in GOP primaries. I’ve seen it before – heck, I lived it before – but not in a GOP primary race.

I am sadly too familiar with these tactics because they were used against the GOP ticket in 2008. The left seeks to single someone out and destroy his or her record and reputation and family using the media as a channel to dump handpicked and half-baked campaign opposition research on the public. The difference in 2008 was that I was largely unknown to the American public, so they had no way of differentiating between the lies and the truth. All of it came at them at once as “facts” about me. But Newt Gingrich is known to us – both the good and the bad.

We know that Newt fought in the trenches during the Reagan Revolution. As Rush Limbaugh pointed out, Newt was among a handful of Republican Congressman who would regularly take to the House floor to defend Reagan at a time when conservatives didn’t have Fox News or talk radio or conservative blogs to give any balance to the liberal mainstream media. Newt actually came at Reagan’s administration “from the right” to remind Americans that freer markets and tougher national defense would win our future. But this week a few handpicked and selectively edited comments which Newt made during his 40-year career were used to claim that Newt was somehow anti-Reagan and isn’t conservative enough to go against the accepted moderate in the primary race. (I know, it makes no sense, and the GOP establishment hopes you won’t stop and think about this nonsense. Mark Levin and others have shown the ridiculousness of this.) To add insult to injury, this “anti-Reagan” claim was made by a candidate who admitted to not even supporting or voting for Reagan. He actually was against the Reagan movement, donated to liberal candidates, and said he didn’t want to go back to the Reagan days. You can’t change history. We know that Newt Gingrich brought the Reagan Revolution into the 1990s. We know it because none other than Nancy Reagan herself announced this when she presented Newt with an award, telling us, “The dramatic movement of 1995 is an outgrowth of a much earlier crusade that goes back half a century. Barry Goldwater handed the torch to Ronnie, and in turn Ronnie turned that torch over to Newt and the Republican members of Congress to keep that dream alive.” As Rush and others pointed out, if Nancy Reagan had ever thought that Newt was in any way an opponent of her beloved husband, she would never have even appeared on a stage with him, let alone presented him with an award and said such kind things about him. Nor would Reagan’s son, Michael Reagan, have chosen to endorse Newt in this primary race. There are no two greater keepers of the Reagan legacy than Nancy and Michael Reagan. What we saw with this ridiculous opposition dump on Newt was nothing short of Stalin-esque rewriting of history. It was Alinsky tactics at their worst.

But this whole thing isn’t really about Newt Gingrich vs. Mitt Romney. It is about the GOP establishment vs. the Tea Party grassroots and independent Americans who are sick of the politics of personal destruction used now by both parties’ operatives with a complicit media egging it on. In fact, the establishment has been just as dismissive of Ron Paul and Rick Santorum. Newt is an imperfect vessel for Tea Party support, but in South Carolina the Tea Party chose to get behind him instead of the old guard’s choice. In response, the GOP establishment voices denounced South Carolinian voters with the same vitriol we usually see from the left when they spew hatred at everyday Americans “bitterly clinging” to their faith and their Second Amendment rights. The Tea Party was once again told to sit down and shut up and listen to the “wisdom” of their betters. We were reminded of the litany of Tea Party endorsed candidates in 2010 who didn’t win. Well, here’s a little newsflash to the establishment: without the Tea Party there would have been no historic 2010 victory at all.

I spoke up before the South Carolina primary to urge voters there to keep this primary going because I have great concern about the GOP establishment trying to anoint a candidate without the blessing of the grassroots and all the needed energy and resources we as commonsense constitutional conservatives could bring to the general election in order to defeat President Obama. Now, I respect Governor Romney and his success. But there are serious concerns about his record and whether as a politician he consistently applied conservative principles and how this impacts the agenda moving forward. The questions need answers now. That is why this primary should not be rushed to an end. We need to vet this. Pundits in the Beltway are gleefully proclaiming that this primary race is over after Florida, despite 46 states still not having chimed in. Well, perhaps it’s possible that it will come to a speedy end in just four days; but with these questions left unanswered, it will not have come to a satisfactory conclusion. Without this necessary vetting process, the unanswered question of Governor Romney’s conservative bona fides and the unanswered and false attacks on Newt Gingrich will hang in the air to demoralize many in the electorate. The Tea Party grassroots will certainly feel disenfranchised and disenchanted with the perceived orchestrated outcome from self-proclaimed movers and shakers trying to sew this all up. And, trust me, during the general election, Governor Romney’s statements and record in the private sector will be relentlessly parsed over by the opposition in excruciating detail to frighten off swing voters. This is why we need a fair primary that is not prematurely cut short by the GOP establishment using Alinsky tactics to kneecap Governor Romney’s chief rival.

As I said in my speech in Iowa last September, the challenge of this election is not simply to replace President Obama. The real challenge is who and what we will replace him with. It’s not enough to just change up the uniform. If we don’t change the team and the game plan, we won’t save our country. We truly need sudden and relentless reform in Washington to defend our republic, though it’s becoming clearer that the old guard wants anything but that. That is why we should all be concerned by the tactics employed by the establishment this week. We will not save our country by becoming like the left. And I question whether the GOP establishment would ever employ the same harsh tactics they used on Newt against Obama. I didn’t see it in 2008. Many of these same characters sat on their thumbs in ‘08 and let Obama escape unvetted. Oddly, they’re now using every available microscope and endoscope – along with rewriting history – in attempts to character assassinate anyone challenging their chosen one in their own party’s primary. So, one must ask, who are they really running against?

- Sarah Palin

Gingrich is still besting Romney on a national basis, this despite, Romney’s continual assault, and the Republican Establishment firmly behind him, whether they are “entirely accurate or not”, it is a whole-hearted effort to Stop Newt! – Why? Simply because he has, in the past, failed to support, or knocked down the ludicrous ideas of some of the most powerful men in the beltway – they are, simply put, getting even. – At the expense of the nation.

Sarah Palin is spot on, and in this opinion (and having lived the history and knowing that one can access the Congressional Record and “Fact Check” these bozo’s, ) this is the best treatment of what can happen if a decent candidate, and qualified candidate, dares to run against the Beltways “chosen candidate).

At this point, with one day left and it is hoped that the people of Florida come to their senses – (and this is spoken as an individual who has lived under “Romney’s governorship”.), and vote for ABR (Anybody but Romney) – if not, there are only 46 states left to weigh in, of those half are proportional delegates and should Florida prove to be as moderate as say New Hampshire , then the contest will shortly move to less moderate states, where an opportunity exists to best Romney (especially in Nevada). It will help whoever the nominee is, in the end, (and that includes Romney’s debate coaches and his use of a teleprompter), (familiar) and his health care program (familiar) to do their best against Barack Obama in the fall. They will be battle hardened and much more capable of taking the heat that will be dished out by the other team. Well, hopefully, if the right candidate is chosen as the nominee, otherwise, if it is someone who so resembles the President, then independents and moderates (see blog title) may have to vote for the President – it’s an adage “Better the Devil you know that the Devil you don’t”.

Florida Attorney General Applauds Romney Care? Plans on Being on Romney's Health Care Advisory Board - Red Flag!

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Sun, 29 Jan 2012 21:51:00 +0000

The Florida Attorney General, in an interview with Fox News' "On The Record" (video below) compared Romney's Health Care Plan to Obama's and was extremely favorable about the plan - Frankly, it is hoped that the AG was not referring to the current Massachusetts Health Care Plan as the model - if she was, that's a problem - it is exactly the model for "Obama-care" - and with all due respect:

The Massachusetts Model takes up the majority of the budget (see the Mass 2011 Health Care Budget - and costs for health care reform (Commonwealth Care) at $1,781,800,000).

Taxes have been raised to cover the costs of "Romneycare" - ( See 25% Sales Tax Increase), and the Commonwealth lost population to the point where a Congressional seat was lost (in the silver lining column, Barney Frank did resign due to the redistricting.)

If one cannot afford Health Insurance in Massachusetts, one if forced to pay a fine (for a married couple who does not have health insurance that amounts to a fine comparable to a per month charge for a Commonwealth Care Plan - payable directly to the Massachusetts DOR) - it is less expensive to pay a fine in some instances than to purchase health insurance in Massachusetts. Massachusetts has a choice of three carriers, plus "Commonwealth Care" - which is run by the Commonwealth (or the State) - the costs and demand has been so high, they are no longer accepting new enrollee's. Also, it offers excemtpions if one cannot afford either the State Health Insurance or their Employers Health Insurance, leaving those families uninsured - and one can bet it is more than 2 percent of the population.

If this AG is referring to Mitt Romney's version of Mandated State Health Care - she's drinking Koolaid, or has been promised a position with a hefty bonus.

It has driven doctors out of the business (before this bloggers family doctor quit his practice, he spoke to the fact that between malpractice insurance and the costs of the Mandate, he could not longer afford to practice in the Commonwealth), and patient wait time is ridiculous.

A good health insurance program would allow more carriers to compete - Massachusetts did the smart thing when they opened the borders to Auto Insurance, and as a result, premiums were drastically reduced - however, that did not happen under Mitt Romney's watch.

Hopefully, Fox got it's heading on the video below dead wrong, otherwise, what this woman is suggesting is in way way, shape or form, a conservative ideal - although, to this point of view, Romney was never a conservative, as a moderate, he's to the left ideologically speaking (or as he governed). If not, and the good people of the State of Florida have several choices, and at this point, Newt Gingrich, Rick Sanotorum and Ron Paul are all better choices than the man who literally gave us Obamacare.

Video from You tube: Heading is correct if the Fox Sub-headings are to be taken literally

GOP 2012 National - Gingrich Leads, Florida- Romney plus 9, 32% May Change Mind – Romney’s Help from Washington Guard, False Attacks Helping Gingrich.

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 12:16:00 +0000

With latest Polling in FL - 34% subject to changing mind - Anyone's Guess as to the outcome on the 31st - image: skydandingblog

The latest national Gallup polling taken over a rolling period of January 22 -26 shows Newt Gingrich leading Romney by 32 to 24% - with Santorum and Paul Tied at approximately 15 percent each. The latest Florida polling out of Quinnipiac University shows Romney with a 9 point advantage, but – the kicker, 32% may change their mind, and 6% are undecided – welcome to Iowa and South Carolina.

In both instances Romney had been the favorite, only to squeak out a loss in Iowa to Rick Santorum and to get hammered in South Carolina by Newt Gingrich. To date it has been a 4 man race, although Ron Paul has yet to pick up a state “win” – he is picking up delegates in proportional states (Real Clear Politics), with only 4 states weighing in (including Florida) – there’s a long road ahead for the four candidates, and one cannot anticipate any of them dropping out of the race, especially with remaining primaries offering 24 proportional primary/caucuses, rather than “winner” take all delegates. This will allow the primary to play out beyond the usual Beltway’s dream of hurrying up and choosing an nominee – a tactic that did not work out so well in the 2008 election.

The concerted attack on Gingrich by the Old Guard, in support of Mitt Romney’s campaign, has done more damage to Romney than anticipated. The claims have proven to be false, and some, such as Tom Delay, is a former Speaker who left the Speakership with a moniker of “Toxic” (The Sacramento Bee). He has come out “against” Newt Gingrich, along with Bob Dole, former Presidential candidate, and a host of Washington Insiders – the barrage began with headline after headline on the The Drudge Report leading some to believe that Matt Drudge's news aggregate is in “in the tank” for the Republican Old Guard.

Of course, it took only twenty four hours for the facts to come out, noting that the claims made against Gingrich were just a wee bit false. Not unlike Romney’s ad, running in Florida in Spanish, which in Saturday’s Debate, he claimed no knowledge, until the moderator, Wolf Blitzer of CNN played the ad, where it clearly states Romney’s approval. This resulted with the usual Egg on the Face of Romney.

Gingrich, for his part, has been hammered incessantly for everything imaginable by Romney (sans the kitchen sink, but you can be that’s next) and the appearance is – desperation. No matter how one spins it, that’s the way it is playing out nationwide. Gingrich on the other hand, embraces his grandiose themes, and has solid Conservative Credentials that can be proven. He’s not alone on that stage, given his protégé, Rick Santorum’s outstanding performance in the last Florida debate.

Although there are only 3 days left before the Florida contest, with media nationwide (through a January 27th AP release) touting Republican Insiders Rise Up to Cut Newt Gingrich Down to Sizes, the article closes with those rank and file Republican’s choosing Gingrich as they “refused to be bullied” by Washington (The Herald).

What about the Florida debate performances? True, both Romney and Gingrich, from this perspective had back to back horrid debate nights, allowing Santorum to capitalize and win the debates. That said, Gingrich, who was attempting to be “dignified” (interview Fox Greta Van Susteren), came off as somewhat flabbergasted, while Romney hammered home his right to be successful – and specifically centered around the fact that both men had mutual funds which contained stock in the much maligned Freddie Mac and Fannie May. What Gingrich might had pointed out instead was the fact that Romney is surrounded by lobbyists for the same firm - (Daily Caller) which would have been, in this opinion, just as damning for Romney as his help from the Washington Insiders.

That aside, it’s anyone’s ballgame in Florida, and should those 34% of undecideds (or more accurately those who might change their minds) change them for Gingrich or Santorum, Romney may end up third, or second, to a Gingrich or Santorum win – the state, a “winner take all” will award the 50 delegates to the winner, even if it is by one vote.
From there it is off to Nevada, where Washington Logic dictates that Romney will handily win – however, again, that logic so far has won him New Hampshire only, and that is using the same scorched earth campaign tactics- a one out of three record, is not exactly the road to the White House.

The next debate is scheduled for February 26th on CNN, followed by the March debates prior to Super Tuesday: one in GA on the 1st (CNN), and one on the 5th (NBC) at the Reagan Library.

CNN 2012 GOP Florida Debate Winner – Rick Santorum – Paul Strong - Romney, Gingrich Battle – Romney Reality Check on Health Care

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 12:29:00 +0000

Rick Get's His Groove On - Best Personal Debate Performance of the 2012 GOP Contest - image WSJ Blogs

The last debate before the Florida GOP Primary was held last night on CNN – with applause and crowd reaction allowed, unlike the debates held on the non-cable networks. From the beginning of the debate, when Rick Santorum gave the “short introduction” he proudly pointed to the fact that his 93 year old mother was in the audience and lived in Jacksonville – he was on target the balance of the debate, looking the least flustered, the most informed – on both domestic and foreign policy issues. It was, however, a fluff question poised to all candidates by Wolf Blitzer: “Why they felt their wife would make the best first lady” – which would stand to endear Santorum to the crucial women’s vote in the Sunshine State - (paraphrased) – “She’s my hero” - he went on to speak of his wife, in terms of her intellectual accomplishments, personal sacrifices, and dedication to both family and country. (Ron Paul spoke about his wife in the terms of a man who values his partner, and one could tell he was just as pleased as punch that she authored “The Ron Paul Cookbook”, Gingrich was magnanimous in saying anyone of the women would make an excellent First Lady, followed by his obvious pride in Callistas' many accomplishments, especially in the area of the arts, and literature. Finally, Mitt Romney spoke of his wife’s dedication to family, and the illnesses she is faced with, something which, was heartfelt, however, came off as very “John Edwards”.)

After an extended and contentious back and forth between Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich over the ads running by PACS in their name as well as ads run directly by the campaign, Santorum stepped to the plate and scolded everyone, speaking to the time spent going over personal attacks, rather than allowing time for serious issues, he appeared at once Presidential and authoritative. He was the most effective in the debate attack, specifically when it came to Mitt Romney and the Massachusetts Health Care Model, which is, as Santorum said, a disaster and a mandate. It was from that point forward; one understood that Santorum had risen to the top of the heap, not from any push by any specific group, but by growth in strength in the debate forum. One could see Newt Gingrich, on more than one occasion, looking at Santorum with pride – it was Gingrich’s teachings and personal aid that brought Santorum to the political arena – and, although, at this point, Gingrich, (who obviously had a less than Gingrich night) remains the best in the debate forum, Santorum is closely on his heels, and if there is a win in Florida, and this is quite possible, it will only serve to make Santorum stronger.

Although CNN noted there was no clear winner in the debate, and suggests that Romney even benefited, it is difficult to buy into that line of reasoning, when one reviews the debate tapes.

Gingrich clearly has an off night, on the defense consistently due to an onslaught of attacks, not only by Mitt Romney’s PAC and Romney himself (of which they play fast and loose with the facts), but by former Washington DC foes, and members of the Elite who fear nothing more than a Gingrich nomination. Although Gingrich’s life is a public record, and the majority (personal life aside) that is absolutely defendable, it is to his credit that he continues to stand strong, given the continuous and most often false assertions made against the Speaker. Nancy Reagan, in an address in the mid-1990’s noted (paraphrased) that Goldwater, (who began the conservative movement,) passed the torch to Ronald Reagan, who then passed the torch to Newt Gingrich – Nancy Reagan would never have been so magnanimous to Gingrich had he not been held in high esteem – her reputation for cutting off ties to those who would speak ill of her husband, is legendary. Therefore, the obvious all-out assault on Gingrich by the Washington Elite, in order to further Mitt Romney, or perhaps Jeb Bush should Romney fail to get the nomination, would have made it difficult for a lesser man to withstand.

Romney was the attack dog, and sounded on the one hand petulant and on the other, consistently angry – as if overcompensating to reassert himself as front-runner, after having won the State of New Hampshire only.

Ron Paul’s performance in the debate has also improved, to the point, where is the most approachable of the candidates, and when one stays very clear of foreign policy (in a Republican debate) he does extremely well, last evening was one of his best performances as well.

Notes: Neither Santorum nor Paul invested in advertising in the Sunshine State, however, the two Debates alone, would have given them enough exposure, plus the grassroots work, to compensate for the negative ads run by both Gingrich and Romney – he is in a better position today to pull a surprise victory in Florida than he was in Iowa, where he was polling slightly lower, and came up within days to take the state from Mitt Romney.
Suggested: Watch the entire debate to gain one’s own perspective rather than the “talking points” offered by those who would form an opinion for each individual (and that includes this blog)

Notes on the debate and GOP race in general

As far as the Hispanic vote will go in Florida and the nation, of the two candidates running, Santorum and Gingrich have the most appeal, regardless of the “endorsements” that any one candidate may make, it is the candidate that speaks to the variety of situations and understands there are clear differences between the Cuban’s, the Puerto Rican’s, the Mexican’s, the Costa Rican’s, the Guatemalans, and so on. Without a well-grounded understanding of each group and the problems faced by each homeland – and a strong emphasis of family and faith- one cannot begin to seriously court this very crucial vote in Florida. Both Gingrich and Santorum appear to be the most heartfelt when it comes to immigration, with the most reasonable approach, as well as foreign policy. American’s of Spanish decent are, for the most part, conservative.

Santorum would be the first Italian-American, Catholic, to become the nominee of the GOP, and in winning the White House, would hold that Distinction. The great Geraldine Ferraro, to date, is the only Italian American to rise to the political height as a nominee in the general election (Vice Presidential Candidate).

On the absurdity of Newt Gingrich’s NASA Plan – Gingrich’s plan for NASA is neither as “crazy” nor a “burden on the taxpayer” as portrayed by his detractors. As bizarre as it may sound to build a colony on the moon, it sounded, in retrospect just as crazy in 1960 when one John F. Kennedy suggested that there would be a man on the moon! What is the twofold immediate result of the concept of NASA in conjunction with Private industry working on such a project: first, jobs, not only in Florida, but when one considers the aero-space industry, one must consider New England, given that from the very large, to the very small “mom and pop” machine shop would be hiring, those hundreds of thousands to millions of jobs, created, from the sciences to technology, would translate into taxpayers. At a proposed tax rate of 15% (just for example) and a government investment of 10% (just for example) it would be a win-win for both the United States, in terms of advancing technology and cutting the deficit while reducing the unemployment rolls, and raising the bar for those students who have no goals. In his outline in Florida, Speaker Gingrich was accused of bang off the wall, and many resent spending one red cent on this type of program, without clearly understanding the ramifications: large program, mostly funded by prevented industry, creates millions of jobs, and increases the revenue, thereby cutting down the deficit, and increasing education and technology. That is the realty; therefore, Gingrich remains, despite the attacks, despite the fear of technology and or misunderstanding by some, the most brilliant guy on the stage. Just to clarify one very salient point he mentioned that if he were elected, this would be something instituted in his second term. Therefore, he was not promising immediate results, rather, giving a sound solution for future job creative in an industry that has continued to deliver since the 1960’ (before if one considers the fledgling program under President Eisenhower.

Video:
Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6

Part 7

Part 8

Michael Steele: New GOP Entrant “Stupid”, Pollsters Asks The Question, People Answer – It’s That Simple

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 11:52:00 +0000

It’s the same old story, everyone wants a headline, and since there are so many polls, competition is getting tough, especially with a GOP field that is both contentious and solid – add to that mix, a Washington Elite fear of New Gingrich, and one gets the impression that those on the “right” including pollsters, who might take advantage of the situation, plant some doubt across the field and grab a headline. This is especially true of the Rasmussen Reports release yesterdayof a poll where 33% (34%) of “GOP voters say it would be good if new candidate enters the race”. Of course, when someone is asked a question, they tend to give an answer – it’s not a bad question, it’s just an odd question, considering the field began with eight candidate and has winnowed down to four. The problem with the four current candidates is obvious if one is in Washington and wants everything to remain the status quo.

Mitt Romney is imploding by now he should have been the front-runner, everyone said he would be the front-runner, from the pundits to the media, but that circumstance changed when Rick Santorum came out of nowhere to win Iowa by a handful of votes, (Romney at first was declared the winner), Romney won one of his home states (New Hampshire), and then Newt Gingrich, the most feared of all candidates by the same pundits, won by an historical margin in South Carolina. They are now in Florida where it appears the polls are either Romney or Gingrich neck and neck, or Gingrich leading Romney. It is the RNC’s worst nightmare, a candidate that will buck the system, and who is not perfect in the shinny, brand new toy at the age of 60, practically inhuman way one in that arena would expect. Perhaps that’s why Gingrich appeals to most of the electorate (even nationally), to Republican’s to Tea Party Leaner’s, to Independents and yes, to Democrats. Which, if one were rational and not so heavily vested in holding on to some “power”, would consider the perfect candidate?

Understandably, there are those who find the field weak, from the perspective of a Democrat operative, if one doesn’t’ say the most ridiculous things – then one isn’t doing one’s job.
Finally, someone with a bit of knowledge figured out that the four left standing, Paul, Gingrich, Romney and Santorum, are all just fine, and that any one of them (and by that this blog means any one of them) would be able to best the President and take back the White House. That individual may not sit well with country club Republican and pundits, but – in a word – tough.

In a piece by the Daily Caller Michael Steele, former Chair of the RNC, made some pretty smart points – (par usual), one, a late entrant would not be on the ballot in several states, (see Andrea Mitchell and insider knowledge that the Republican Elites will foist whoever they want on the rank and file at a brokered convention), and that the rank and file, would abandon the party if they felt that a candidate was being “foisted” on them.

No kidding, the Romney 24/7 shove down one’s throat coverage, has, if one wants to be realistic, pushed Romney down to a repeat performance of 2008 –which, those elites should have seen that coming – anyone with any sense of logistics understands that to win the White House, one must perform well in the South, and Romney just does not do it. If he somehow manages to squeak out a win in Florida, it is not predictive, due to the fact that a) it’s a big state with a 50% of the population from northern climes, and b) they have lost half their delegates in holding the primary earlier than allowed. Frankly, it might be, at this point, difficult for Romney to win Nevada.

That aside, the fact that the race continues is contrary to the notion that one must wrap it up early, get the nominee that’s approve by the Bush’s and the Coulter’s and the rest of whoever thinks they know better than the rank and file, is also outright stupid. The longer the race goes on, the more attention these nominees get, and if the battle goes on, it readies the eventual nominee for the assault coming from the left. To date, the one candidate that appears the least rattled by attacks and most sane when it comes to answering charges is one Newt Gingrich. Gingrich, by the way, is getting blamed for running ads (his super PAC) against poor Mittens Romney, when Romney’s PAC ads began in Iowa and decimated Gingrich – it’s the same scorched earth policy Romney employed in 2008 and was partially responsible for his campaign imploding by February of that year, and yet, the media ignores Romney and goes after Gingrich as if he were the anti-Christ of Republicans for answering false charges brought by an increasingly desperate Mitt Romney!

Therefore, let the chips fall where they may – for example this blog supports a Gingrich candidacy, for the following reasons: his baggage is old baggage, and it’s all public record, he is the smartest guy in the room, contrary to Matt Drudge and Ann Coulter, he hasn’t had a meltdown as predicted although they continue to try their best to help out Romney. Lastly, he got things done, in every field he choose, a Renaissance man, if one will, that was successful in Congress, until he bucked his own party, and then became so powerful that the Democrats had to trump up charges (all of which were dismissed, and he paid not a fine, but legal fees – he actually reimbursed the government then he fell on the sword and left the office (it is in the public record) Compare to Democrats Charles Rangles and Barney Frank – for how not to behave. Finally, someone who can literally unhinge the country club elitist of the RNC so badly has to be just right. It’s just an opinion of one conservative who has had to hold their nose and vote for candidates that were not perfect, in the sense that they were bound to lose the race – (Dole, McCain, perfect examples – who the Elites wanted versus anyone else who would have been a better choice.) One who wants someone who will turn on both parties when wrong, correct the media, reach across the aisle and get things done, and who's the smartest guy in the room. (This is worth repeating and repeating, and repeating)

Does this mean that if Rick Santorum or Ron Paul becomes the nominee that they will not have full support? Not one bit, however, coming from Massachusetts it may be difficult to cast a vote for the man who drove up the fees on every single service (from the DMV to fishing licenses to dog licenses), put into place a medical plan that drove personal premiums up over 60% in the last 5 years, and well, has positions that are not that much different than the current occupant – that vote may be hard to cast, if not impossible.
A third person entering the race, be it Jeb Bush, or pick anyone, would further drive the likely voter over the edge, and a third party candidate just might end up with a hefty amount of votes in protest.

Therefore, it’s not just stupid, it’s dangerous, as it would split the field and alienate the group that is not: the Beltway elites and pundits.

State of the Union – Obama Strong Delivery – More Government, Bigger Government, What Government Can Do For You. Analysis and Commentary on Full Text

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 11:26:00 +0000

Obama State of the Union 1 24 12 - image:iowarepublican.com

In what has to be one of the oddest State of the Union Addresses I have been privileged to either hear or see (yes radio then television) in the past 50 years, President Obama, to his credit, is able to deliver a lyrical and pointed speech, with a straight face, no less, that invites the listener to understand that the government will be doing everything and the private sector is just along for the rides. Jobs will be created, good union jobs, education needs to be expanded (again union jobs), and of course, the government is responsible for any successes in the business community since Obama took office, prior to that, it was Bush’s fault.

The fact that the Navy is investing in “green” industries might give one pause, as now one has the military vested in business at the behest of the President – does this differ from the usual civilian contractor – a bit – considering that a single industry, supported by the government, appears to be the sole resource for the Navy to invest. In the world of defense contracts, intense bidding (including underbidding) is the norm, with oftentimes a concern making billions (after all is it a government contract they are bidding on) and sometimes, pushing defense contract employees to play “MacGyver” in order to meet a slim budget.

It is the combination of government – invested in all phases of business, education, finance, and when one might be allowed to sneeze that may have set up the extremely tepid applause (with the exception of the hard-core progressive members of the Congress, who were extremely enthusiastic. It is a question of ideology – between those who feel that the Government must invest itself in every aspect of one’s life, or those who feel the Government should invest itself in the Constitution – returning power to the states and getting the heck out of the way – the later being the more popular at this point in time.

There has to be credit where credit is due – as the Republican “rebuttal” delivered by Governor Mitch McConnell of Indiana, noted: the President did get Bin Laden, and he also holds up an example of the family that is one to be applauded. (From a fashion perspective, the highlight of the evening was the arrival of the First Lady, who looked stunning, and has, for all intents and purposes, gone through a major transformation (as quite honestly, some first ladies are compelled - to change the hairstyle, style of dress, etc.), however, Michelle Obama, politics aside, made a grand entrance and looked lovely, a perfect complement to the President.) Then the Governor began to point out where the President left the track and took a sharp turn to the left, delivered in a monotone so uninspiring, it was difficult not to fall fast asleep and catch the balance on the 3 AM news.

(Note to Washington GOP Elite, who feel they should pick the GOP nominee: a) it won’t work, and b) it can’t be a Bush (won’t fly) or Mitch McConnell, in other words, regardless of who wins the nominee fairly and squarely, butt out, you’ll only screw it up out of some sense of entitlement and power that you can surely exercise somewhere else). The last thing the nation needs is yet another “national sleeping pill”.

As to the realty of the State of the Union, if things are getting better, then tell that to the millions of unemployed who do not have access to Union Jobs – (of course, there is the theory that one can more to a more balanced state – such as Texas!) –

The full text via CBS News, with areas in bold that refer to Government as the sole provider or “solution” and comments in parens.

“Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice President, members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow Americans:
Last month, I went to Andrews Air Force Base and welcomed home some of our last troops to serve in Iraq. Together, we offered a final, proud salute to the colors under which more than a million of our fellow citizens fought -- and several thousand gave their lives.
We gather tonight knowing that this generation of heroes has made the United States safer and more respected around the world. (Applause.) For the first time in nine years, there are no Americans fighting in Iraq. (Applause.) For the first time in two decades, Osama bin Laden is not a threat to this country. (Applause.) Most of al Qaeda's top lieutenants have been defeated. The Taliban's momentum has been broken, and some troops in Afghanistan have begun to come home.
These achievements are a testament to the courage, selflessness and teamwork of America's Armed Forces. At a time when too many of our institutions have let us down, they exceed all expectations. They're not consumed with personal ambition. They don't obsess over their differences. They focus on the mission at hand. They work together.
Imagine what we could accomplish if we followed their example. (Applause.) Think about the America within our reach: A country that leads the world in educating its people. An America that attracts a new generation of high-tech manufacturing and high-paying jobs. A future where we're in control of our own energy, and our security and prosperity aren't so tied to unstable parts of the world. An economy built to last, where hard work pays off, and responsibility is rewarded.

We can do this. I know we can, because we've done it before. At the end of World War II, when another generation of heroes returned home from combat, they built the strongest economy and middle class the world has ever known. (Applause.) My grandfather, a veteran of Patton's Army, got the chance to go to college on the GI Bill. My grandmother, who worked on a bomber assembly line, was part of a workforce that turned out the best products on Earth.
The two of them shared the optimism of a nation that had triumphed over a depression and fascism. They understood they were part of something larger; that they were contributing to a story of success that every American had a chance to share -- the basic American promise that if you worked hard, you could do well enough to raise a family, own a home, send your kids to college, and put a little away for retirement.
The defining issue of our time is how to keep that promise alive. No challenge is more urgent. No debate is more important. We can either settle for a country where a shrinking number of people do really well while a growing number of Americans barely get by, or we can restore an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, and everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules. (Applause.) What's at stake aren't Democratic values or Republican values, but American values. And we have to reclaim them.
Let's remember how we got here. Long before the recession, jobs and manufacturing began leaving our shores. Technology made businesses more efficient, but also made some jobs obsolete. Folks at the top saw their incomes rise like never before, but most hardworking Americans struggled with costs that were growing, paychecks that weren't, and personal debt that kept piling up.
In 2008, the house of cards collapsed. We learned that mortgages had been sold to people who couldn't afford or understand them. Banks had made huge bets and bonuses with other people's money. Regulators had looked the other way, or didn't have the authority to stop the bad behavior.
It was wrong. It was irresponsible. And it plunged our economy into a crisis that put millions out of work, saddled us with more debt, and left innocent, hardworking Americans holding the bag. In the six months before I took office, we lost nearly 4 million jobs. And we lost another 4 million before our policies were in full effect.

Those are the facts. But so are these: In the last 22 months, businesses have created more than 3 million jobs. (Applause.)
Last year, they created the most jobs since 2005. American manufacturers are hiring again, creating jobs for the first time since the late 1990s. Together, we've agreed to cut the deficit by more than $2 trillion. And we've put in place new rules to hold Wall Street accountable, so a crisis like this never happens again. (Applause.)
The state of our Union is getting stronger. And we've come too far to turn back now. As long as I'm President, I will work with anyone in this chamber to build on this momentum. But I intend to fight obstruction with action, and I will oppose any effort to return to the very same policies that brought on this economic crisis in the first place. (Applause.)
No, we will not go back to an economy weakened by outsourcing, bad debt, and phony financial profits. Tonight, I want to speak about how we move forward, and lay out a blueprint for an economy that's built to last -- an economy built on American manufacturing, American energy, skills for American workers, and a renewal of American values.
Now, this blueprint begins with American manufacturing.
On the day I took office, our auto industry was on the verge of collapse. Some even said we should let it die. With a million jobs at stake, I refused to let that happen. In exchange for help, we demanded responsibility. We got workers and automakers to settle their differences. We got the industry to retool and restructure. Today, General Motors is back on top as the world's number-one automaker. (Applause.) Chrysler has grown faster in the U.S. than any major car company. Ford is investing billions in U.S. plants and factories. And together, the entire industry added nearly 160,000 jobs. (Ford Alone took no U.S. Stimulus Money)
We bet on American workers. We bet on American ingenuity. And tonight, the American auto industry is back. (Applause.)
What's happening in Detroit can happen in other industries. It can happen in Cleveland and Pittsburgh and Raleigh. We can't bring every job back that's left our shore. But right now, it's getting more expensive to do business in places like China. Meanwhile, America is more productive. A few weeks ago, the CEO of Master Lock told me that it now makes business sense for him to bring jobs back home. (Applause.) Today, for the first time in 15 years, Master Lock's unionized plant in Milwaukee is running at full capacity. (Applause.)
So we have a huge opportunity, at this moment, to bring manufacturing back. But we have to seize it. Tonight, my message to business leaders is simple: Ask yourselves what you can do to bring jobs back to your country, and your country will do everything we can to help you succeed. (Applause.)
We should start with our tax code. Right now, companies get tax breaks for moving jobs and profits overseas. Meanwhile, companies that choose to stay in America get hit with one of the highest tax rates in the world. It makes no sense, and everyone knows it. So let's change it.
First, if you're a business that wants to outsource jobs, you shouldn't get a tax deduction for doing it. (Applause.) That money should be used to cover moving expenses for companies like Master Lock that decide to bring jobs home. (Applause.)
Second, no American company should be able to avoid paying its fair share of taxes by moving jobs and profits overseas. (Applause.) From now on, every multinational company should have to pay a basic minimum tax. And every penny should go towards lowering taxes for companies that choose to stay here and hire here in America. (Applause.)
Third, if you're an American manufacturer, you should get a bigger tax cut. If you're a high-tech manufacturer, we should double the tax deduction you get for making your products here. And if you want to relocate in a community that was hit hard when a factory left town, you should get help financing a new plant, equipment, or training for new workers. (Applause.)
So my message is simple. It is time to stop rewarding businesses that ship jobs overseas, and start rewarding companies that create jobs right here in America. Send me these tax reforms, and I will sign them right away. (Applause.)
We're also making it easier for American businesses to sell products all over the world. Two years ago, I set a goal of doubling U.S. exports over five years. With the bipartisan trade agreements we signed into law, we're on track to meet that goal ahead of schedule. (Applause.) And soon, there will be millions of new customers for American goods in Panama, Colombia, and South Korea. Soon, there will be new cars on the streets of Seoul imported from Detroit, and Toledo, and Chicago. (Applause.)
I will go anywhere in the world to open new markets for American products. And I will not stand by when our competitors don't play by the rules. We've brought trade cases against China at nearly twice the rate as the last administration -- and it's made a difference. (Applause.) Over a thousand Americans are working today because we stopped a surge in Chinese tires. But we need to do more. It's not right when another country lets our movies, music, and software be pirated. It's not fair when foreign manufacturers have a leg up on ours only because they're heavily subsidized. (COMMENT: The Green Industry, the Auto Industry, etc.)
Tonight, I'm announcing the creation of a Trade Enforcement Unit that will be charged with investigating unfair trading practices in countries like China. (Applause.) There will be more inspections to prevent counterfeit or unsafe goods from crossing our borders. And this Congress should make sure that no foreign company has an advantage over American manufacturing when it comes to accessing financing or new markets like Russia. Our workers are the most productive on Earth, and if the playing field is level, I promise you -- America will always win. (Applause.)
I also hear from many business leaders who want to hire in the United States but can't find workers with the right skills. Growing industries in science and technology have twice as many openings as we have workers who can do the job. Think about that -- openings at a time when millions of Americans are looking for work. It's inexcusable. And we know how to fix it.
Jackie Bray is a single mom from North Carolina who was laid off from her job as a mechanic. Then Siemens opened a gas turbine factory in Charlotte, and formed a partnership with Central Piedmont Community College. The company helped the college design courses in laser and robotics training. It paid Jackie's tuition, then hired her to help operate their plant.
I want every American looking for work to have the same opportunity as Jackie did. Join me in a national commitment to train 2 million Americans with skills that will lead directly to a job. (Applause.) My administration has already lined up more companies that want to help. Model partnerships between businesses like Siemens and community colleges in places like Charlotte, and Orlando, and Louisville are up and running. Now you need to give more community colleges the resources they need to become community career centers -- places that teach people skills that businesses are looking for right now, from data management to high-tech manufacturing.
And I want to cut through the maze of confusing training programs, so that from now on, people like Jackie have one program, one website, and one place to go for all the information and help that they need. It is time to turn our unemployment system into a reemployment system that puts people to work. (Applause.)
These reforms will help people get jobs that are open today. But to prepare for the jobs of tomorrow, our commitment to skills and education has to start earlier.
For less than 1 percent of what our nation spends on education each year, we've convinced nearly every state in the country to raise their standards for teaching and learning -- the first time that's happened in a generation.
But challenges remain. And we know how to solve them.
At a time when other countries are doubling down on education, tight budgets have forced states to lay off thousands of teachers. We know a good teacher can increase the lifetime income of a classroom by over $250,000. A great teacher can offer an escape from poverty to the child who dreams beyond his circumstance. Every person in this chamber can point to a teacher who changed the trajectory of their lives. Most teachers work tirelessly, with modest pay, sometimes digging into their own pocket for school supplies -- just to make a difference.
Teachers matter. So instead of bashing them, or defending the status quo, let's offer schools a deal. Give them the resources to keep good teachers on the job, and reward the best ones. (Applause.) And in return, grant schools flexibility: to teach with creativity and passion; to stop teaching to the test; and to replace teachers who just aren't helping kids learn. That's a bargain worth making. (Applause.)
We also know that when students don't walk away from their education, more of them walk the stage to get their diploma. When students are not allowed to drop out, they do better. So tonight, I am proposing that every state -- every state -- requires that all students stay in high school until they graduate or turn 18. (Applause.) (Comment: Arne Duncan, Secretary of Education does consider firing bad teachers, which is not popular with the two Teachers Unions, that said, students currently enrolled as seniors in High Schools are 18, and they are, in some instances, encouraged to drop out and take a standardized test (GED) in order to go directly to college)
When kids do graduate, the most daunting challenge can be the cost of college. At a time when Americans owe more in tuition debt than credit card debt, this Congress needs to stop the interest rates on student loans from doubling in July. (Applause.) (When the Omnibus Bill was passed, at the same time as the Health Care Act, the government inserted a slight paragraph taking over the Student Loan Industry, therefore, they could, since it is a government owned entity, actually raising the interest rate)
Extend the tuition tax credit we started that saves millions of middle-class families thousands of dollars, and give more young people the chance to earn their way through college by doubling the number of work-study jobs in the next five years. (Applause.)
Of course, it's not enough for us to increase student aid. We can't just keep subsidizing skyrocketing tuition; we'll run out of money. States also need to do their part, by making higher education a higher priority in their budgets. And colleges and universities have to do their part by working to keep costs down. Laying this mandate at the foot of states that are in bankruptcy, will increase state taxes on those same middle class – see Massachusetts as a shining example
Recently, I spoke with a group of college presidents who've done just that. Some schools redesign courses to help students finish more quickly. Some use better technology. The point is, it's possible. So let me put colleges and universities on notice: If you can't stop tuition from going up, the funding you get from taxpayers will go down. (Applause.) Higher education can't be a luxury -- it is an economic imperative that every family in America should be able to afford. (Find a college that in not unionized, good luck)
Let's also remember that hundreds of thousands of talented, hardworking students in this country face another challenge: the fact that they aren't yet American citizens. Many were brought here as small children, are American through and through, yet they live every day with the threat of deportation. Others came more recently, to study business and science and engineering, but as soon as they get their degree, we send them home to invent new products and create new jobs somewhere else.
That doesn't make sense.
I believe as strongly as ever that we should take on illegal immigration. That's why my administration has put more boots on the border than ever before. That's why there are fewer illegal crossings than when I took office. The opponents of action are out of excuses. We should be working on comprehensive immigration reform right now. (Applause.) (fact check, there are fewer crossing because there are no jobs)
But if election-year politics keeps Congress from acting on a comprehensive plan, let's at least agree to stop expelling responsible young people who want to staff our labs, start new businesses, defend this country. Send me a law that gives them the chance to earn their citizenship. I will sign it right away. (Applause.)
You see, an economy built to last is one where we encourage the talent and ingenuity of every person in this country. That means women should earn equal pay for equal work. (Applause.) It means we should support everyone who's willing to work, and every risk-taker and entrepreneur who aspires to become the next Steve Jobs. John F. Kennedy signed the equal pay act; of course, it has gone largely ignored by one entity in particular, the Federal Government
After all, innovation is what America has always been about. Most new jobs are created in start-ups and small businesses. So let's pass an agenda that helps them succeed.
Tear down regulations that prevent aspiring entrepreneurs from getting the financing to grow. (Applause.) Expand tax relief to small businesses that are raising wages and creating good jobs. Both parties agree on these ideas. So put them in a bill, and get it on my desk this year. (Applause.)
Innovation also demands basic research. Today, the discoveries taking place in our federally financed labs and universities could lead to new treatments that kill cancer cells but leave healthy ones untouched. New lightweight vests for cops and soldiers that can stop any bullet. Don't gut these investments in our budget. Don't let other countries win the race for the future. Support the same kind of research and innovation that led to the computer chip and the Internet; to new American jobs and new American industries.
And nowhere is the promise of innovation greater than in American-made energy. Over the last three years, we've opened millions of new acres for oil and gas exploration, and tonight, I'm directing my administration to open more than 75 percent of our potential offshore oil and gas resources. (Applause.) Right now -- right now -- American oil production is the highest that it's been in eight years. That's right -- eight years. Not only that -- last year, we relied less on foreign oil than in any of the past 16 years. (Applause.) (No mention of an immediate opportunity to build a pipeline with Canada?)
But with only 2 percent of the world's oil reserves, oil isn't enough. This country needs an all-out, all-of-the-above strategy that develops every available source of American energy. (Applause.) A strategy that's cleaner, cheaper, and full of new jobs.
We have a supply of natural gas that can last America nearly 100 years. (Applause.) And my administration will take every possible action to safely develop this energy. Experts believe this will support more than 600,000 jobs by the end of the decade. And I'm requiring all companies that drill for gas on public lands to disclose the chemicals they use. (Applause.) Because America will develop this resource without putting the health and safety of our citizens at risk. ( The EPA will stop these projects in their tracks)
The development of natural gas will create jobs and power trucks and factories that are cleaner and cheaper, proving that we don't have to choose between our environment and our economy. (Applause.) And by the way, it was public research dollars, over the course of 30 years, that helped develop the technologies to extract all this natural gas out of shale rock -- reminding us that government support is critical in helping businesses get new energy ideas off the ground. (Applause.)
Now, what's true for natural gas is just as true for clean energy. In three years, our partnership with the private sector has already positioned America to be the world's leading manufacturer of high-tech batteries. Because of federal investments, renewable energy use has nearly doubled, and thousands of Americans have jobs because of it. (Solyndra?)
When Bryan Ritterby was laid off from his job making furniture, he said he worried that at 55, no one would give him a second chance. But he found work at Energetx, a wind turbine manufacturer in Michigan. Before the recession, the factory only made luxury yachts. Today, it's hiring workers like Bryan, who said, "I'm proud to be working in the industry of the future."
Our experience with shale gas, our experience with natural gas, shows us that the payoffs on these public investments don't always come right away. Some technologies don't pan out; some companies fail. But I will not walk away from the promise of clean energy. I will not walk away from workers like Bryan. (Applause.) I will not cede the wind or solar or battery industry to China or Germany because we refuse to make the same commitment here.
We've subsidized oil companies for a century. That's long enough. (Applause.) It's time to end the taxpayer giveaways to an industry that rarely has been more profitable, and double-down on a clean energy industry that never has been more promising. Pass clean energy tax credits. Create these jobs. (Applause.)
We can also spur energy innovation with new incentives. The differences in this chamber may be too deep right now to pass a comprehensive plan to fight climate change. But there's no reason why Congress shouldn't at least set a clean energy standard that creates a market for innovation. So far, you haven't acted. Well, tonight, I will. I'm directing my administration to allow the development of clean energy on enough public land to power 3 million homes. And I'm proud to announce that the Department of Defense, working with us, the world's largest consumer of energy, will make one of the largest commitments to clean energy in history -- with the Navy purchasing enough capacity to power a quarter of a million homes a year. (Applause.)
Of course, the easiest way to save money is to waste less energy. So here's a proposal: Help manufacturers eliminate energy waste in their factories and give businesses incentives to upgrade their buildings. Their energy bills will be $100 billion lower over the next decade, and America will have less pollution, more manufacturing, more jobs for construction workers who need them. Send me a bill that creates these jobs. (Applause.) (i.e. more regulation)
Building this new energy future should be just one part of a broader agenda to repair America's infrastructure. So much of America needs to be rebuilt. We've got crumbling roads and bridges; a power grid that wastes too much energy; an incomplete high-speed broadband network that prevents a small business owner in rural America from selling her products all over the world.
During the Great Depression, America built the Hoover Dam and the Golden Gate Bridge. After World War II, we connected our states with a system of highways. Democratic and Republican administrations invested in great projects that benefited everybody, from the workers who built them to the businesses that still use them today.
In the next few weeks, I will sign an executive order clearing away the red tape that slows down too many construction projects. But you need to fund these projects. Take the money we're no longer spending at war, use half of it to pay down our debt, and use the rest to do some nation-building right here at home. (Applause.)
There's never been a better time to build, especially since the construction industry was one of the hardest hit when the housing bubble burst. Of course, construction workers weren't the only ones who were hurt. So were millions of innocent Americans who've seen their home values decline. And while government can't fix the problem on its own, responsible homeowners shouldn't have to sit and wait for the housing market to hit bottom to get some relief.
And that's why I'm sending this Congress a plan that gives every responsible homeowner the chance to save about $3,000 a year on their mortgage, by refinancing at historically low rates. (Applause.) No more red tape. No more runaround from the banks. A small fee on the largest financial institutions will ensure that it won't add to the deficit and will give those banks that were rescued by taxpayers a chance to repay a deficit of trust. (Applause.)
Let's never forget: Millions of Americans who work hard and play by the rules every day deserve a government and a financial system that do the same. It's time to apply the same rules from top to bottom. No bailouts, no handouts, and no copouts. An America built to last insists on responsibility from everybody.
We've all paid the price for lenders who sold mortgages to people who couldn't afford them, and buyers who knew they couldn't afford them. That's why we need smart regulations to prevent irresponsible behavior. (Applause.) Rules to prevent financial fraud or toxic dumping or faulty medical devices -- these don't destroy the free market. They make the free market work better.
There's no question that some regulations are outdated, unnecessary, or too costly. In fact, I've approved fewer regulations in the first three years of my presidency than my Republican predecessor did in his. (Applause.) I've ordered every federal agency to eliminate rules that don't make sense. We've already announced over 500 reforms, and just a fraction of them will save business and citizens more than $10 billion over the next five years. We got rid of one rule from 40 years ago that could have forced some dairy farmers to spend $10,000 a year proving that they could contain a spill -- because milk was somehow classified as an oil. With a rule like that, I guess it was worth crying over spilled milk. (Laughter and applause.)
Now, I'm confident a farmer can contain a milk spill without a federal agency looking over his shoulder. (Applause.) Absolutely. But I will not back down from making sure an oil company can contain the kind of oil spill we saw in the Gulf two years ago. (Applause.) I will not back down from protecting our kids from mercury poisoning, or making sure that our food is safe and our water is clean. I will not go back to the days when health insurance companies had unchecked power to cancel your policy, deny your coverage, or charge women differently than men. (Applause.)
And I will not go back to the days when Wall Street was allowed to play by its own set of rules. The new rules we passed restore what should be any financial system's core purpose: Getting funding to entrepreneurs with the best ideas, and getting loans to responsible families who want to buy a home, or start a business, or send their kids to college.
So if you are a big bank or financial institution, you're no longer allowed to make risky bets with your customers' deposits. You're required to write out a "living will" that details exactly how you'll pay the bills if you fail -- because the rest of us are not bailing you out ever again. (Applause.) And if you're a mortgage lender or a payday lender or a credit card company, the days of signing people up for products they can't afford with confusing forms and deceptive practices -- those days are over. Today, American consumers finally have a watchdog in Richard Cordray with one job: To look out for them. (Applause.)
We'll also establish a Financial Crimes Unit of highly trained investigators to crack down on large-scale fraud and protect people's investments. Some financial firms violate major anti-fraud laws because there's no real penalty for being a repeat offender. That's bad for consumers, and it's bad for the vast majority of bankers and financial service professionals who do the right thing. So pass legislation that makes the penalties for fraud count. (Government Oversight, more committees, etc.)
And tonight, I'm asking my Attorney General to create a special unit of federal prosecutors and leading state attorney general to expand our investigations into the abusive lending and packaging of risky mortgages that led to the housing crisis. (Applause.) This new unit will hold accountable those who broke the law, speed assistance to homeowners, and help turn the page on an era of recklessness that hurt so many Americans.
Now, a return to the American values of fair play and shared responsibility will help protect our people and our economy. But it should also guide us as we look to pay down our debt and invest in our future.
Right now, our most immediate priority is stopping a tax hike on 160 million working Americans while the recovery is still fragile. (Applause.) People cannot afford losing $40 out of each paycheck this year. There are plenty of ways to get this done. So let's agree right here, right now: No side issues. No drama. Pass the payroll tax cut without delay. Let's get it done. (Applause.) ( One might point out that he is either referring to the Bush Tax Cut or Obama’s Social Security Tax Cut – which had a 12 month approval in the Congress, but was shut down by Harry Reid and the President
When it comes to the deficit, we've already agreed to more than $2 trillion in cuts and savings. But we need to do more, and that means making choices. Right now, we're poised to spend nearly $1 trillion more on what was supposed to be a temporary tax break for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans. Right now, because of loopholes and shelters in the tax code, a quarter of all millionaires pay lower tax rates than millions of middle-class households. Right now, Warren Buffett pays a lower tax rate than his secretary. (and GE Paid Zero)
Do we want to keep these tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans? Or do we want to keep our investments in everything else -- like education and medical research; a strong military and care for our veterans? Because if we're serious about paying down our debt, we can't do both.
The American people know what the right choice is. So do I. As I told the Speaker this summer, I'm prepared to make more reforms that rein in the long-term costs of Medicare and Medicaid, and strengthen Social Security, so long as those programs remain a guarantee of security for seniors.
But in return, we need to change our tax code so that people like me, and an awful lot of members of Congress, pay our fair share of taxes. (Applause)
Tax reform should follow the Buffett Rule. If you make more than $1 million a year, you should not pay less than 30 percent in taxes. And my Republican friend Tom Coburn is right: Washington should stop subsidizing millionaires. In fact, if you're earning a million dollars a year, you shouldn't get special tax subsidies or deductions. On the other hand, if you make under $250,000 a year, like 98 percent of American families, your taxes shouldn't go up. (Applause.) You're the ones struggling with rising costs and stagnant wages. You're the ones who need relief. ( 2006, 2008, 2010 Revisited)
Now, you can call this class warfare all you want. But asking a billionaire to pay at least as much as his secretary in taxes? Most Americans would call that common sense.
We don't begrudge financial success in this country. We admire it. When Americans talk about folks like me paying my fair share of taxes, it's not because they envy the rich. It's because they understand that when I get a tax break I don't need and the country can't afford, it either adds to the deficit, or somebody else has to make up the difference -- like a senior on a fixed income, or a student trying to get through school, or a family trying to make ends meet. That's not right. Americans know that's not right. They know that this generation's success is only possible because past generations felt a responsibility to each other, and to the future of their country, and they know our way of life will only endure if we feel that same sense of shared responsibility. That's how we'll reduce our deficit. That's an America built to last. (Applause.)
Now, I recognize that people watching tonight have differing views about taxes and debt, energy and health care. But no matter what party they belong to, I bet most Americans are thinking the same thing right about now: Nothing will get done in Washington this year, or next year, or maybe even the year after that, because Washington is broken.
Can you blame them for feeling a little cynical?
The greatest blow to our confidence in our economy last year didn't come from events beyond our control. It came from a debate in Washington over whether the United States would pay its bills or not. Who benefited from that fiasco?
I've talked tonight about the deficit of trust between Main Street and Wall Street. But the divide between this city and the rest of the country is at least as bad -- and it seems to get worse every year.
Some of this has to do with the corrosive influence of money in politics. So together, let's take some steps to fix that. Send me a bill that bans insider trading by members of Congress; I will sign it tomorrow. (Applause.) Let's limit any elected official from owning stocks in industries they impact. Let's make sure people who bundle campaign contributions for Congress can't lobby Congress, and vice versa -- an idea that has bipartisan support, at least outside of Washington.
Some of what's broken has to do with the way Congress does its business these days. A simple majority is no longer enough to get anything -- even routine business -- passed through the Senate. (Applause.) Neither party has been blameless in these tactics. Now both parties should put an end to it. (Applause.) For starters, I ask the Senate to pass a simple rule that all judicial and public service nominations receive a simple up or down vote within 90 days. (Applause.)
The executive branch also needs to change. Too often, it's inefficient, outdated and remote. (Applause.) That's why I've asked this Congress to grant me the authority to consolidate the federal bureaucracy, so that our government is leaner, quicker, and more responsive to the needs of the American people. (Applause.)
Has he been listening to the Republican Debates? Especially Ron Paul?
Finally, none of this can happen unless we also lower the temperature in this town. We need to end the notion that the two parties must be locked in a perpetual campaign of mutual destruction; that politics is about clinging to rigid ideologies instead of building consensus around common-sense ideas.
I'm a Democrat. But I believe what Republican Abraham Lincoln believed: That government should do for people only what they cannot do better by themselves, and no more. (Applause.) That's why my education reform offers more competition, and more control for schools and states. That's why we're getting rid of regulations that don't work. That's why our health care law relies on a reformed private market, not a government program. Abraham Lincoln was, historically, the President who suspended the Constitution, jailed newspaper editors, etc.)
On the other hand, even my Republican friends who complain the most about government spending have supported federally financed roads, and clean energy projects, and federal offices for the folks back home.
The point is, we should all want a smarter, more effective government. And while we may not be able to bridge our biggest philosophical differences this year, we can make real progress. With or without this Congress, I will keep taking actions that help the economy grow. But I can do a whole lot more with your help. Because when we act together, there's nothing the United States of America can't achieve. (Applause.) That's the lesson we've learned from our actions abroad over the last few years.
Ending the Iraq war has allowed us to strike decisive blows against our enemies. From Pakistan to Yemen, the al Qaeda operatives who remain are scrambling, knowing that they can't escape the reach of the United States of America. (Applause.)
From this position of strength, we've begun to wind down the war in Afghanistan. Ten thousand of our troops have come home. Twenty-three thousand more will leave by the end of this summer. This transition to Afghan lead will continue, and we will build an enduring partnership with Afghanistan, so that it is never again a source of attacks against America. (Applause.)
As the tide of war recedes, a wave of change has washed across the Middle East and North Africa, from Tunis to Cairo; from Sana'a to Tripoli. A year ago, Qaddafi was one of the world's longest-serving dictators -- a murderer with American blood on his hands. Today, he is gone. And in Syria, I have no doubt that the Assad regime will soon discover that the forces of change cannot be reversed, and that human dignity cannot be denied. (Applause.)
How this incredible transformation will end remains uncertain. But we have a huge stake in the outcome. And while it's ultimately up to the people of the region to decide their fate, we will advocate for those values that have served our own country so well. We will stand against violence and intimidation. We will stand for the rights and dignity of all human beings -- men and women; Christians, Muslims and Jews. We will support policies that lead to strong and stable democracies and open markets, because tyranny is no match for liberty.
And we will safeguard America's own security against those who threaten our citizens, our friends, and our interests. Look at Iran. Through the power of our diplomacy, a world that was once divided about how to deal with Iran's nuclear program now stands as one. The regime is more isolated than ever before; its leaders are faced with crippling sanctions, and as long as they shirk their responsibilities, this pressure will not relent. Sounding very much like Ron Paul
Let there be no doubt: America is determined to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, and I will take no options off the table to achieve that goal. (Applause.)
But a peaceful resolution of this issue is still possible, and far better, and if Iran changes course and meets its obligations, it can rejoin the community of nations.
The renewal of American leadership can be felt across the globe. Our oldest alliances in Europe and Asia are stronger than ever. Our ties to the Americas are deeper. Our ironclad commitment -- and I mean ironclad -- to Israel's security has meant the closest military cooperation between our two countries in history. (Applause.)
We've made it clear that America is a Pacific power, and a new beginning in Burma has lit a new hope. From the coalitions we've built to secure nuclear materials, to the missions we've led against hunger and disease; from the blows we've dealt to our enemies, to the enduring power of our moral example, America is back.
Anyone who tells you otherwise, anyone who tells you that America is in decline or that our influence has waned, doesn't know what they're talking about. (Applause.) unless one reads newspapers and articles outside of the U.S.
That's not the message we get from leaders around the world who are eager to work with us. That's not how people feel from Tokyo to Berlin, from Cape Town to Rio, where opinions of America are higher than they've been in years. Yes, the world is changing. No, we can't control every event. But America remains the one indispensable nation in world affairs -- and as long as I'm President, I intend to keep it that way. (Applause.)
That's why, working with our military leaders, I've proposed a new defense strategy that ensures we maintain the finest military in the world, while saving nearly half a trillion dollars in our budget. To stay one step ahead of our adversaries, I've already sent this Congress legislation that will secure our country from the growing dangers of cyber-threats. (Applause.)
Above all, our freedom endures because of the men and women in uniform who defend it. (Applause.) As they come home, we must serve them as well as they've served us. That includes giving them the care and the benefits they have earned -- which is why we've increased annual VA spending every year I've been President. (Applause.) And it means enlisting our veterans in the work of rebuilding our nation.
With the bipartisan support of this Congress, we're providing new tax credits to companies that hire vets. Michelle and Jill Biden have worked with American businesses to secure a pledge of 135,000 jobs for veterans and their families. And tonight, I'm proposing a Veterans Jobs Corps that will help our communities hire veterans as cops and firefighters, so that America is as strong as those who defend her. (Applause.) (Cops and Firefighters? Government, Unionized jobs, what about Doctors, Lawyers, Chemists?)
Which brings me back to where I began. Those of us who've been sent here to serve can learn a thing or two from the service of our troops. When you put on that uniform, it doesn't matter if you're black or white; Asian, Latino, Native American; conservative, liberal; rich, poor; gay, straight. When you're marching into battle, you look out for the person next to you, or the mission fails. When you're in the thick of the fight, you rise or fall as one unit, serving one nation, leaving no one behind.
One of my proudest possessions is the flag that the SEAL Team took with them on the mission to get bin Laden. On it are each of their names. Some may be Democrats. Some may be Republicans. But that doesn't matter. Just like it didn't matter that day in the Situation Room, when I sat next to Bob Gates -- a man who was George Bush's defense secretary -- and Hillary Clinton -- a woman who ran against me for president.
All that mattered that day was the mission. No one thought about politics. No one thought about themselves. One of the young men involved in the raid later told me that he didn't deserve credit for the mission. It only succeeded, he said, because every single member of that unit did their job -- the pilot who landed the helicopter that spun out of control; the translator who kept others from entering the compound; the troops who separated the women and children from the fight; the SEALs who charged up the stairs. More than that, the mission only succeeded because every member of that unit trusted each other -- because you can't charge up those stairs, into darkness and danger, unless you know that there's somebody behind you, watching your back.
So it is with America. Each time I look at that flag, I'm reminded that our destiny is stitched together like those 50 stars and those 13 stripes. No one built this country on their own. This nation is great because we built it together. This nation is great because we worked as a team. This nation is great because we get each other's backs. And if we hold fast to that truth, in this moment of trial, there is no challenge too great; no mission too hard. As long as we are joined in common purpose, as long as we maintain our common resolve, our journey moves forward, and our future is hopeful, and the state of our Union will always be strong.
Thank you, God bless you, and God bless the United States of America. (Applause.)”

(Source: CBSNews.com)

To be fair, it is again, a question of differences in ideology, where on the one hand, the government takes credit for, and takes care of every single aspect of one’s life, without a way in which to pay for it, except increase the deficit. On the other hand, the overall applause was, for the most part tepid. If this is his opening salvo against his Republican Rivals, one can see why Ron Paul is besting the president in National polling.

Romney Tax Return (PDF) 2010 - Pays 6.2 Million Tax on $45 Million

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 14:45:00 +0000

There is certainly nothing wrong with Capitalism, nor the Free Market, and Mitt Romney, who claims to be a self-made man, has earned significant sums in order to pay significant taxes. The full tax return is available at Romney's Campaign Website. This is a 2010 release - there is also a 2011 estimated release available. What is not available are tax returns showing his income under his firm, Bain Capital. Romney is under no obligation to release his returns from Bain, however, it is that income that has comes under the most scrutiny during the campaign. Romney's tax state is not listed (or blocked) - if he had filed in Massachusetts, he would have had to provide proof of health insurance under the State's Mandated Health Care Program, and if he did not provide proof, would be assessed a fee equal to the state-run Commonwealth Care's policy, or for a family plan, approximately $400 per month. This fee is paid directly to the Massachusetts D.O.R., and if not paid, individuals face wage garnishment and or heavier fines. That would be his signature program from his Govenorship.

NBC FL 2012 Debate Winner: Santorum and Paul Steady, Gingrich Calm, Romney 2008 Redux, – NBC’s Mitchell: RNC will Not Allow Gingrich Win

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:55:00 +0000

The 2012 GOP Candidates - image the Daily Beast

The NBC 2012 Florida Debate was billed as a shootout between Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich – however, Gingrich did not shoot back – leaving those looking for “red meat” out of luck – the former Speaker, who to some appeared flustered by the Romney attacks (See: National Journal: Gingrich Lost His Crowd Pleasing Groove in Tampa” an article which belies the fact that the debate was held in a more controlled environment vis a vis NBC versus CNN) to Gingrich appearing more “Presidential” as a “Frontrunner” not “rising to the bait” and besting Romney (abridged see video below from NBC News Post Debate Analysis for exact verbiage).

From this perspective Gingrich appeared over cautious, professorial and not at all on the defensive, rather, almost bored with Romney, whose attacks were overlong as he hammered home Gingrich’s work with Freddie Mac (Gingrich released his contract with the mortgage giant yesterday), and charged him with “influence peddling”, which Gingrich, after a prolonged attack simply shook his head at Romney and noted that Romney had used the same tactics in 2008 with Huckabee and McCain and the American people saw through him. Gingrich brought up the fact that he is supported by former Congressman, J.C. Watts, who was the Conservative watchdog for both Freddie and Fannie during the time Romney refers to – and is a staunch supporter of Gingrich. To wit, Romney overstayed his attack, which is not unusual given his obvious frustration with his loss in Iowa to Santorum and his huge loss in S.C. to Gingrich – It was a panicked Romney that was on the podium last night.

Rick Santorum, however, calmly waited out both Romney’s long diatribe and Gingrich’s, short, pointed rebuttals, and came in with a focus on Obama – later in the debate he attacked both Romney and Gingrich, without either man answering the charges completely. Ron Paul, when given the time, was on point on economics, and to those who are more hawkish – “off the reservation” on national security. Case in point, both Paul and Santorum appeared as winners in the debate, along with Gingrich (depending, on if one is a moderate and or independent, or if one is seeking a “red-meat, rough and tumble” character in the office.”)

The fact that Gingrich is the smartest guy on the podium cannot be disputed, given the obvious attention paid to him by the post debate team at NBC, leaving one to believe they were watching an episode of the twilight zone, as the Republican Debate analysis gave Gingrich the nod as previously stated, and that included local NBC news affiliates airing footage that characterized Romney’s as a “billionaire who’s taxes will be released tomorrow, and Gingrich as one who was “calm” throughout, as if there was a cosmic shift in support of the speaker – not quite.

In the NBC post debate analysis, Andrea Mitchell brought up an interesting point, one which, if true, will mean the end of the modern Republican Party as it is known – an aid close to the Romney campaign indicated that the elite who control the party will not allow Gingrich to be the nominee. (he was credited with the failed bid for a second term by George H. Bush, hated by the moderate Bob Dole, who felt Gingrich was a competitor, and feel on the proverbial Republican Sword (he was not “ousted from the Speakership as implied), for not producing Congressional wins large enough to please those who would see an “insider” not Gingrich as Speaker.)

Apparently, the Republican elite plan to go to a brokered election should Romney fail in Florida and put up, of all people, Jeb Bush or a “Mitch Daniels”, going the route of the Democrats Super Delegate Convention that led to the election of Barack Obama. Therefore, those who run Washington and the GOP will throw a hissy fit if their chosen candidate “Mitt Romney” does not perform and will simply negate the votes of the people, and put in whomever they chose – a losing proposition no matter which way the wind blows and they know it. With no love lost on Republicans, Andrea Mitchell appears to know it as well, almost gleefully quoting the source.

As this blog is obviously supporting Speaker Gingrich, it was the “red meat” that was lacking, but with the knowledge that Gingrich is an astute politician and that he would appeal to the independent Florida vote, he would have been credited with a win, if it were not for the best debate performance to date by his protégé, Rick Santorum. Indeed, Ron Paul, who this blog strongly disagrees with on foreign policy issues, suggests that his performance outshone the speaker when, again, Paul was given a chance to weigh in – therefore a tie.

The next debate will be held on this Thursday, January 26t at 8PM on CNN The network offers an option to submit a question for a candidate in an on-site form here . the Florida primary will be held on January 31st, and Gingrich currently holds the lead in polling in both Florida and nationally (*See New York Times overview)

The Florida Primary - If Romney repeats his performance in this upcoming debate, one can be sure he will under perform in Florida and it is likely that given CNN in Jacksonville (on the Georgia Line), as the Debate arena, Gingrich should produce an even debate and will over- perform in the primary with the distinct possibility that Rick Santorum may pull second to Gingrich. (Given his debate performance) Ron Paul, made the decision not to heavily campaign in Florida, and will likely pull 4th – This depends on how much damage Romney’s debate performance, couple with the release of his tax returns, and his consistent negative campaigning, will do in the Sunshine State.

Final caveat, what one must understand is that this blog is centered in Massachusetts and as such, one might think that the blog should support Mitt Romney, however, one must be assured that after careful consideration, one has chosen to support the candidate that will best perform against the President, in both debates and with the general electorate, and one who has the history behind him to prove just that. One apparently little known tool available to all is the Library of Congress, where one can fact check all day long. It can be a slog, but it is worth knowing what the candidates supported, who they worked for and specifically what occurred during the time Gingrich was Speaker. The records are indisputable: the Speaker was under assault from the Democrats, who wanted (literally states) to “get even” with the Speaker, which was followed by Ethics charges, etc., all of which again, is available at The Library of Congress. During that time he worked in concert with the House and the White House, did indeed balance the budget, put forth the contract with America and reformed Welfare. One must look at the mettle of the man, regardless of the somewhat misleading charges brought by his opponents, (given facts), he had survived one of the most brutal assaults on a Speaker in the history of Congress, by both Democrats bitter over a loss, and Republican’s vying for power – he survived by accomplishing for the American people regardless of the personal loss he suffered. This not withstanding he is willing to do so again – which makes a tried, tested, and brilliant man this blogs choice. The chips should therefore, fall where they may, be it a Gingrich nominee, a Santorum Nominee, or a Paul nominee with no meddling from those in Washington or the GOP who think they know better than those who support them. (The rank and file).

NBC Post Debate Analysis

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The NBC Full Debate

Newt Gingrich Raises 1 Million in 24 Hours with Money bomb ups it to 2 Million. Mitt Romney is calling Massachusetts for Donations?

noreply@blogger.com (Tina Hemond) — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 11:50:00 +0000

According to Newt Gingrich’s Facebook Page, the 1 Million Dollar Money Bomb to help defray the costs of the battle for Florida, was so successful that they upped the amount to $2 Million (or the amount suggested necessary to advertise in all Florida markets). Meanwhile, Mitt Romney’s campaign is calling Massachusetts voters, several emails to this blog noted that this was the first time they had received calls for campaign donations from any Romney campaign, not in his quest for the Governor’s office, nor for the 2008 campaign. One individual, is not, however, supporting Romney rather Speaker Gingrich for the nomination, which is a rising sentiment among Massachusetts voters.

In addition, Romany as decided to release his 2010 income tax returns on Tuesday according to the National Journal Online After waffling this question in the debates prior to the South Carolina primary, it may behoove the former Massachusetts Governor to do what every candidate besides Ron Paul has done, release his returns.

This would put to bed any unanswered questions regarding Romney’s Tax returns and make it a non-issue – The real questions are his document dump upon leaving office in Massachusetts, something none of the campaigns left standing have, to date, brought to light.

There are two debates prior to the Florida primary on January 31st – via: 2012presidentialelectionnews.com

January 23, 20129pm ET/8pm CT and 9pm PT on NBC – Live Stream
Location: University of South Florida in Tampa, Florida
Sponsor: The Tampa Bay Times, NBC News, the National Journal and the Florida Council of 100
Participants: Romney, Gingrich, Santorum, Paul
January 26, 20128pm ET on CNN
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Sponsor: CNN, CNN en Español, The Hispanic Leadership Network and The Republican Party of Florida
Participants: TBD