Reagan Conservative Daily

Post New Hampshire GOP Debate Wrap-Up

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Tue, 14 Jun 2011 02:15:00 +0000

Calm Stage Before the NH Debate
(Courtesy: AP)

My earliest reaction to tonight's debate is that Newt Gingrich was, without question, the winner. That begs the question, then, where would Gingrich be without his early missteps? Unfortunately, there is no good answer to the question.

So, why did Gingrich win the debate? As I noted in a previous post, Gingrich's flair for debating should never be taken lightly. It is clear that the man is highly intellectual, knows the issues, and is able to recall his knowledge at outstanding rate. For these reasons, Gingrich set himself apart from the rest of the crowd by coming up with original answers to questions. For example, off the top of my head, Gingrich answered that the first step in ensuring that all Americans have the right to work is to defund the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The other candidates mostly talked about right to work laws in the States. It should be noted that Cain did add an excellent point to Gingrich's by noting that the NLRB was really nothing more than a "back door" way for the government to regulate business.

Speaking of Cain, that really brings up the next set of debate winners. Just like I noted in my last post, Bachmann and Cain would be largely seen as competing against each other for the same base. At the end of the night, it seems as though the two came in tied for second. To be honest, that should be seen as a good sign for each of them. Dick Morris has noted throughout the night that he believes that Bachmann may have slightly edged Cain. Even so, I believe that the two each had their good moments. Cain scored a big win in discussing how he would reform both Medicare and Social Security. In particular, Cain noted that our commitment to elderly Americans who planned for Social Security can be met while the program is phased out overall. This can be done by allowing younger Americans to have private accounts--while still paying some into the system to support older Americans. Bachmann's greatest moment was her inspiring answer on abortion--noting her own five children and the more than twenty children she and her husband have taken in.

The next two were Ron Paul and Mitt Romney. Of course, everyone knows that Ron Paul is largely libertarian. This fact has gotten him in trouble with more mainstream Republicans in the past. Tonight, however, Paul's answers, for the most part, were impressive and on target. He very much clearly identified problems and noted how the government made the problems in the first place. Put differently, more government certainly wasn't the answer--it was what got us there! Mitt Romney, in typical frontrunner fashion, appeared to adequately defend is turf and not stray far from his jobs and economy message. This included him asking why they were even talking about Don't Ask Don't Tell when they should be talking about the economy. That didn't exactly instill confidence in social conservatives.

To discuss Tim Pawlenty and Rick Santorum at this point is not to say that they didn't do well. Instead, it is exactly as Herman Cain acknowledged--this is a very strong field of GOP candidates. Both Pawlenty and Santorum looked excellent at times. Pawlenty had some excellent answers--especially when he took Vice-President Biden to task for his lack of foreign policy leadership. This is despite the fact that Biden was supposedly well qualified in this area. To me, Santorum's best answer was when he discussed President Obama's lack of foreign policy leadership. As Santorum rightly noted, the president has turned his backs on our friends and has embraced our enemies. That is certainly something that cannot stand!

So, those are my early thoughts on tonight's debate? Don't agree with me--share your thoughts! Also, vote in the poll about who you think won tonight's debate.

As always, check back here for the latest commentary in all things political and newsworthy!

Watch New Hampshire GOP Primary Tonight

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Mon, 13 Jun 2011 21:45:00 +0000

Make sure to watch the 2012 GOP New Hampshire Debate on CNN at 8 PM Eastern. The players are largely the same as the previous GOP debate in South Carolina.

Former Godfather's Pizza CEO Herman Cain will attempt to build on his widely touted victory in the South Carolina debate. He will seemingly be battling against Rep. Michele Bachmann for the votes of social conservatives and tea party enthusiasts.

Except a stellar performance from former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich as he seeks to rebound from some early campaign stumbles. To be certain, his ability to debate should serve him well in this contest.

Both former Senator Rick Santorum and former Utah Governor and Ambassador to China Jon Huntsman will be looking to leave the debate tonight more well known than they came in. While Santorum seeks to reestablish voter confidence after his Senate defeat, Huntsman has to deal with having been a member of the Obama administration. This, of course, is not an enviable position in which to find yourself in this primary season.

Oddly enough, Tim Pawlenty has received little criticism up to now--except for his nice guy image. Sure, he has been mildly criticized for his early support of cap and trade, but his backtracking has seemed believable enough. On top of that, the fact that the GOP frontrunner, Mitt Romney, instituted a healthcare plan similar to ObamaCare in Massachusetts hardly makes Pawlenty's prior indiscretions noticeable in the field. Like it or not, Pawlenty has to prove that he is, in fact, more than just a nice guy.

Rep. Ron Paul is also likely to have a good showing in tonight's debate. Paul usually performs fairly well in debate and will have a vocal following as usual.

To be certain, all eyes will be on Mitt Romney as he tries to live up to his frontrunner status. Up to now, he has largely avoided social issues that slipped him up when he lost the 2008 GOP nomination fight. Due to his successful business experience, voters trust him on economics. However, it will be interesting to see how well he answers issues related to abortion and healthcare.

Make sure to watch the debate tonight! You won't want to miss it! You can watch the debate online here.

Recent Gallup Poll Reports Good News

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Fri, 10 Jun 2011 20:57:00 +0000

A recent, and oft discussed, Gallup poll purportedly reports that a plurality of Americans are now “pro-choice.” If one were to examine only the reported “pro-life” and “pro-choice” classification, he or she would falsely get the impression that the anti-life position now ranks supreme in the hearts and minds of most Americans.

To be certain, this poll potentially tells us a number of things; however, it cannot be said that it, in any definitive way, shows that the majority of Americans are “pro-choice.” Why is this? The simple answer—the margin of error.

Without going into an extremely technical explanation of what is a margin of error and how one calculates it, it should be pointed out that the margin of error statistic must be considered when examining any poll. A margin of error statistic is included in every poll because a polling firm cannot possibly poll every single voting-age adult in the United States. Instead, random sampling is used to obtain results close to the probable beliefs of the entire population—in this case all voting-age citizens of the United States.

Notice that near the bottom of the page on which Gallup reports its results, one finds the statement that “Results for this Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted May 5-8, 2011, with a random sample of 1,018 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.” Perhaps more importantly, Gallup reports that “For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is _±4 percentage points.”

So, in layman’s terms, what is the polling jargon trying to tell us? Largely, it reports that the methodology used by Gallup should have ensured the results are accurate within four percentage points either way. In this case, the percentage of “pro-choicers” could realistically be anywhere from 45% to 53%. Similarly, the percentage of “pro-lifers” could be anywhere from 41% to 49%.

With that being said, what the Gallup poll really tells us is something we have essentially known all along—that American adults are essentially split in half when it comes to considering themselves as either “pro-choice” or “pro-life.” What is interesting is the fact that the poll actually indicates that the American people, to a large extent, agree with the principle of life.

Regardless of how an individual decided to classify himself as either “pro-choice” or “pro-life,” the poll reports that 51% agreed that abortion was morally wrong. This is compared to only 39% who believed that abortion was morally acceptable. It is important to note that, unlike the “pro-life” or “pro-choice” classification, this result lies safely outside the margin of error.

Additionally, we find that 61% of adult Americans think that abortion should be legal in only a few or no circumstances. That breakdown is 50% believing that abortion should be allow in only a few cases and 22% who agreed that it should not be legal under any circumstance. Compare that to the 37% who argue that abortion should be legal in any, or almost any, situation.

In the end, Gallup’s recent poll reports exactly the opposite from what many would seemingly have the American people believe. Instead of proving, once and for all, that Americans really support abortion, a much different result is found when closely examining the poll.

Truly, Americans today are still mostly of the opinion that abortion should be greatly restricted, extremely rare, and is, at its very core, immoral. This would lend credence to the current movement to strip abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood of its taxpayer funding. Why would Americans want their tax dollars to go to a group who basically ensures that its values are trodden under foot?

We can take a stand to ensure that American values and the principle of life are upheld in our states and country. Let’s strip all public funding for abortion providers and referrers. Since most Americans believe that abortion is morally wrong, press elected officials to stop spending our money on something most of us consider morally reprehensible. Instead, tell them to, at the very least, redirect the money to groups who are actually striving to help women make the choice for life!

Defund Planned Parenthood...and AmeriCorps?

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Thu, 02 Jun 2011 14:08:00 +0000

In the debate over taxpayer funding of abortion providers and/or referrers, we have been largely focused on the actions taken by pro-life state legislators. On the federal level, H.R.3, or the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act, has also received a great deal of the nation’s attention.

Could it be that, in all the coverage of stripping Planned Parenthood of its public funding, we have actually overlooked other federal programs which, at least, marginally support anti-life groups? In this case, Planned Parenthood, once again, plays a role. However, it is AmeriCorps that now takes center stage.

As the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reports, two participants of New York’s AmeriCorps affiliate were pulled from their positions at Planned Parenthood of New York City. This action was taken because officials questioned whether or not the AmeriCorps participants had violated the requirements that they not attempt “to influence legislation” and organize or engage “in protests, petitions, boycotts, or strikes.”

In case it isn’t already clear, AmeriCorps was created in 1993 by the National and Community Service Trust Act signed into law by President Bill Clinton. As AmeriCorps’ website states, “The newly created AmeriCorps incorporated two existing national service programs: the longstanding VISTA (Volunteers in Service to America) program, created by President Lyndon Johnson in 1964 and the National Civilian Community Corps (NCCC).”

In 2008, AmeriCorps received $856,331 in federal funding. AmeriCorps saw its budget increased to $889,866 in 2009. With the addition of $201,000 in stimulus funds, AmeriCorps was the recipient of over $1.09 million of federal funding in 2009 alone. In 2010, their funding was raised to just under $1.5 million.

AmeriCorps participants receive a living allowance, health benefits, and, in some cases, housing. Put differently, taxpayer money is used to provide stipends, health care, and, sometimes, housing for individuals selected to participate in the program.

So, why is this recent event so important, and somewhat striking, for those of us concerned with taxpayer money being used to fund anti-life groups like Planned Parenthood?

The federal officials who forced the ouster of the two AmeriCorps participants made it clear that its participants are not allowed to provide “abortion services or referrals for such services.” Notice that the officials did not say that participants were not allowed to support, in anyway, an organization which provides abortion or abortion referral services.

Even if there are, as the WSJ notes, only 11 additional AmeriCorps participants left working at Planned Parenthood organizations across the country, why were they ever allowed to go there in the first place? How do we know that AmeriCorps is not placing other taxpayer funded participants in other anti-life groups?

While federal officials may believe the recent revelation that two participants could have broken the program’s rules to be a simple matter, pro-life citizens should be outraged that their hard earned money is being used, in yet another way, to aid anti-life groups.

Pro-life state legislators have been doing an excellent job across the country of cutting funding to Planned Parenthood. While these efforts must continue, it is clear that we can never become complacent. The battle is ongoing—we must demand that our representatives take action to stop AmeriCorps, and other government programs, from placing participants with organizations that provide any type of abortion related services!

Hilarity of the Day: Obama Gas Station

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Thu, 19 May 2011 17:00:00 +0000

Unlike many of the hilarity of the day videos, this video is real. Without question, this is a very interesting way to make a few bucks. Unlike other citizens, the president's image can be used by others without the president's permission.

So, whether you love the idea or hate it, you can't blame the gas station owner for coming up with an inventive way to make a few bucks!

Enjoy!

Morning News Nuggets

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Thu, 19 May 2011 13:00:00 +0000

Foreign Policy/National Security

On the Home Front

Video of the Day: Medicare Budget Must Be Reigned In

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Thu, 19 May 2011 01:30:00 +0000

Take a look at this video. It points out a lot of good information about things we should be thinking about as the debate over how to handle Medicare's ballooning costs continue.

Enjoy and be informed!

Dick Morris: Frontrunner Status for Romney

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Wed, 18 May 2011 22:28:00 +0000

As I reasoned before, the decisions by Trump and Huckabee not to seek the GOP presidential nomination has essentially placed a frontrunner status on Mitt Romney.

Make sure to watch this video as Dick Morris takes you through the most recent polling on how Romney is impacted by the dwindling GOP field. He also points out Romney two biggest weakness with voters. The first is his support for a healthcare system, RomneyCare, that is eerily similar to ObamaCare. The second is Romney's faith.

Voters do feel good about Romney's business background and believe that he could do a much better job at solving the economic problems facing the country than is President Obama. Morris also hypothesizes what will happen if Mitch Daniels and/or Michele Bachmann jump in the race.

Dick Morris ends his video by stating a very real truth: No matter how you feel about Mitt Romney, President Romney is much better than President Obama.

As far as I'm concerned, I'm not a big Romney fan. In fact, I'll do what I can to make sure he doesn't get the nomination. That being said, if Romney wins the nomination, I'll fully support his effort to become President Romney. That's because Dick was right--President Romney does have a much better ring to it than President Obama!

Morning News Nuggets

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Wed, 18 May 2011 13:51:00 +0000

National Security/Foreign Policy

On the Home Front

Hilarity of the Day: Obama Zombies After 2008 Campaign

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Wed, 18 May 2011 03:02:00 +0000

Do you remember how all of your Obama supporting friends were zombies after the 2008 election? Good, now I know I'm not the only one!

Enjoy the video, and get a good laugh!

Remember to vote in the poll!

Filling the Gap: Rick Perry for President?

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Wed, 18 May 2011 00:31:00 +0000


Courtesy: Real Clear Politics

The Texas governor has long denied any interest in pursuing the 2012 GOP presidential nomination. In fact, I was at CPAC where many of these denials took place.

Real Clear Politics (RCP) is reporting that a few Perry confidants are reaching out to other consultants and operatives--especially in states with early primaries. It seems that, at least in recent months, Perry's close associates have begun to say that the governor would not consider a run until after the end of the Texas legislature's term. Since that date is only a few weeks away, could it be that something is in the mix?

I've discussed how some speculate that Romney benefits from both Huckabee and Trump deciding not to run. A factor that hasn't been taken into consideration is what would happen if no Southern top tier GOP candidate entered the race. This is exactly what has happened--both Haley Barbour and Mike Huckabee passed. Newt Gingrich is generally considered a top tier candidate but has stumbled mightily in the last few days.

This leaves a chasm into which a strong candidate like Rick Perry could jump. Will he or won't he? That remains to be seen. There is no question, however, that Perry's entrance into the race could prove to be "game-changing."

Rick Perry has an excellent record as governor, is extremely likable, and has fought the Obama Administration tooth-and-nail every step of the way. Despite Romney's success in polls and fundraising, he would be amiss to take lightly Perry's potential candidacy.

Needless to say, Rick Perry brings a great deal to the table. Check out his statements below on ObamaCare and the 10th Amendment.

Morning News Nuggets

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Tue, 17 May 2011 14:48:00 +0000

National Security/Foreign Policy

On the Home Front

Video of the Day: Gingrich Gets Hit

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Tue, 17 May 2011 02:44:00 +0000

Take a look at this video. It gives a general overview of the most recent news surrounding the GOP nomination race.

Make sure to pay special attention at about 1:40 into the clip. This is where former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich is politely lambasted by a concerned citizen in a hotel lobby.

There is no question that Gingrich is trying to walk back his comments on Paul Ryan and the GOP plan. What are your thoughts?

He's Out Too: Trump Will Not Seek GOP Presidential Nomination

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Mon, 16 May 2011 22:15:00 +0000

GOP candidates seem to be falling like flies the last couple of days. The latest in the installment of "He's Out" is Donald Trump.

To be certain, Trump was doing quite well in the polls. Of course, his support had waned in the wake of Obama's birth certificate release. Even so, he was a consistent top tier choice among GOP voters who were polled.

So, the big question is, why did he bow out? The polls showed he had a much better chance to lock up the nomination than did many of his counterparts. By his own admission, he felt that he could win both the primary and the general election. He had even started to lineup campaign consultants and tour stops.

Again, it begs the question, why did Trump decide not to run? I suspect, and can confirm, that a great deal of it had to do with Trump and his "Apprentice" empire. Much like Huckabee's decision was tough because he would have to leave behind an important and lucrative media empire, Trump's was as well.

NBC executives had begun to apply extensive pressure on Trump asking him to make a decision soon. They were planning to air Trump's "Celebrity Apprentice" with or without Trump next season.

In the end, Trump noted the charitable work he was able to accomplish through his, and NBC's, highly popular "Apprentice" empire. Continuing in the work he started simply proved too much for Trump's presidential ambitions.

The question remains, who's the next to drop out? Share your thoughts!

Morning News Nuggets

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Mon, 16 May 2011 14:24:00 +0000

National Security/Foreign Policy

On the Home Front

Urgent: Newt Gingrich Supports "Variation" of Individual Mandate

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Mon, 16 May 2011 02:22:00 +0000


Courtesy: NBC/AP

This morning, on NBC's Meet the Press, Newt Gingrich took an ax to the base of the party from which he is seeking a 2012 presidential nomination.

Gingrich first criticized Paul Ryan and the GOP plans for healthcare. He then proceeded to detail how he and Mitt Romney were not that far apart on the issue of the individual mandate and healthcare overall. This, of course, makes neither of the two GOP candidates very far from President Obama and his plan.

This hurts Gingrich at a time when he could stand to gain at least some of Huckabee's supporters. It now looks as though any path to the nomination Gingrich may have had is gone.

Some might ask why has Romney's stance on healthcare not already sunk his nomination chances? To be certain, his nomination chances haven't been helped any. Even so, it seems that many simply believe he is the most electable. This could explain why he polls so highly despite the GOP electorate's general disdain for Obama's healthcare initiative.

Without question, this story is far from over. More on this subject will be coming in the following days. Check back for further updates, and don't forget to vote in the poll.

Also, take a look, below, at Huckabee's full announcement on his Fox News show.

He's Out: Huckabee Will Not Seek GOP Presidential Nomination

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Mon, 16 May 2011 00:16:00 +0000

If you haven't already heard, Mike Huckabee will not seek the 2012 GOP nomination for president. This is despite the fact that he is currently leading or placing second in the major polls.

Even before Huckabee made his announcement on his FoxNews program on Saturday night, many had speculated that he would not run. This was due largely to his inactivity in the realm of putting together a campaign staff. Many of his 2008 staff members and/or consultants had already signed up to work for other candidates.

Another one of Huckabee's considerations was his ever expanding media empire. Admittedly, it would be difficult for anyone to walk away from a position which allows him to have a sense of security. More importantly, Huckabee's television and radio programs allow him to have a very large say in issues of public policy.

Everyone is already wondering who will benefit most from Huckabee's dropping out of the race. This, of course, is still very up in the air. Many, for some reason, would suspect that Romney would benefit most since he is polling second. While Romney may pick up some "Huckabee votes," it is unlikely that he will get the lions-share of them.

For starters, you might recall that Huckabee and Romney did not have the greatest of relationships during the 2008 campaign. In his announcement, Huckabee even mentions the mildly bad blood between the two. Another reason is that many Huckabee voters are social conservatives and will likely look for a candidate with better social conservative credentials than Romney. Some have speculated that candidates, or potential candidates, like Santorum, Cain, or Palin would benefit most from Huckabee's decision not to run.

Whatever, the case, it is fairly clear that the most consistent early frontrunner has now taken himself out of the race. Only time and GOP voters will reveal the current frontrunner.

Huckabee to Announce Presidential Plans on His Fox Show Tonight

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Sat, 14 May 2011 20:03:00 +0000

Is he in or is he out? Nobody knows. What we do know is that everyone will know tonight after Huckabee's show of the Fox News Channel.

I has to be a tough decision for Huckabee. If he decides to run for president, he will have to give up, at least temporarily, his very successful news career. That, of course, is not to mention the incredible stress of the campaign for which he would be signing he and his family.

So, make sure you check out Huckabee's show tonight if you want to be among the first to know. Many of Huckabee's close friends don't even know what he has decided. Read, below, the e-mail he sent to many of the people close to him, and watch the show tonight!

Tomorrow night (Saturday) I will announce the next step in my plans for 2012 during my show on the Fox News Channel. I would like to be able to call you or email you personally and in advance of the announcement, but due to the fact that the decision was not finalized until today and that I committed to Fox that I will absolutely not release it prior to doing so on the channel, that became impractical.

A lot of information and speculation was already rampant in the press today, and it frankly isn't fair to you to tell you the details and then put you in the awkward position of saying you didn't know (which at that point wouldn't be true) or saying you did know, but couldn't reveal or discuss it.

It was this afternoon before I could even get word to all of my own children and even now, the executive producer of my show and the staff and crew of the show don't know and won't until I actually do the final preparation literally minutes before I share the decision live Saturday night.

I will look forward to speaking with you soon and once I fulfill my sworn obligation to Fox, I will be free to discuss things that I can't now due to promises to them and to some possible legal considerations of the announcement.

Many friends have said, "how can we help you in the decision?" My answer has consistently been, "Pray that I have clarity." I have it and will share it Saturday night during the show. Please be patient if I don't respond immediately to an email because I expect that once I pull the trigger Saturday night, things will get even crazier, as if that's possible.

My heartfelt thanks for your friendship, prayers, and support,

Mike Huckabee

Dick Morris: How We Can Win The Debt Limit Debate

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Sat, 14 May 2011 16:02:00 +0000

Let's face it, we lost the debate over the continuing resolution. Even if you thought it was pretty good, you have to admit that we didn't force anywhere near the level of cuts that were needed.

The Democrats held the pay for our troops hostage and forced Boehner and the Republicans to cave to avoid not paying the troops and supposedly shutting down the government. They are up to a similar trick on the debt limit debate as well.

The Democratic argument on the debt limit is akin to saying that the full faith and credit of the United States will be irreparably damaged by not raising the debt limit. They seem to think that by not raising the debt limiting we are choosing not to pay our debt. This doesn't have to be the case.

The same way that we could have paid the troops and still cut significant amounts of money in the continuing resolution, we can pay our creditors and and still not raise the debt ceiling. All that needs to be done is to pass a law saying that our creditors will be paid first--before anything else. In this way, we will meet our financial obligations by paying our creditors. Secondly, it will force significant cuts to occur in the budget. This is exactly what we want and need in order to ensure that our children and grandchildren inherit an America that is as good or better than the one we have loved.

So, watch Dick Morris discuss his strategy, and vote in the new poll which will be posted shortly!

Hilarity of the Day: Obama's Budget Plan

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Fri, 13 May 2011 16:46:00 +0000

I apologize for the lack of posts today and yesterday. Blogger has been having difficulties, and the website has been down until now.

Anyways, if you thought you understood Obama's budget plan, think again! Watch this amazing video where Ray Stevens explains Obama's budget plan to you!

Enjoy! Check back later tonight for the new poll!

News Update: Grover Norquist on Debt Limit Debate

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Thu, 12 May 2011 17:03:00 +0000

If you thought the healthcare debate was intense, you haven't seen anything yet. The debate over increasing the debt ceiling is potentially the most important and biggest debate we have seen yet.

President Obama has released some of his ideas on lowering the deficit. Of course, he and the Democrats have the same old ideas that liberal have always had--tax and spend. The Obama administration wants to eliminate tax credits, raise taxes, and that's pretty much it.

As far as eliminating tax credits is concerned, don't be fooled by the Democrat's "hard-line stance" against "Big Oil." The credits they really want to eliminate go to small companies who drill exploratory wells looking for new sources of oil. As Mark Levin explained on his program last night, these tax credits were put in place for the express purpose of encouraging businessmen to take risks to find new sources of energy.

Why would Congress do such a thing? Let's put it this way, it is an economic fact that the greater the supply of oil, the lower the price paid at the pump. So, Congress offered these tax incentives as a way to encourage individuals to increase the oil supply and, in turn, lower prices paid by consumers.

I guess the president and his Democratic colleagues aren't really doing anything that disappoints them. Certainly, they know the facts of simple economics. Simple economics and low gas prices for the American people isn't their primary concern. Instead, it is pursuing policies that punish America's success and redistributes wealth to other countries. For an example, think cap and trade. Also, recall that Obama said that under his plan energy prices would "necessarily skyrocket."

Whatever their intentions, it is safe to say that the Democrats are totally unwilling to give up their government largesse in order to reign in spending. In fact, this has been their whole plan all along--to greatly increase the size of government through ballooning bureaucracy and spending.

As Norquist, President of Americans for Tax Reform, points out, Republicans better hold the line on raising the debt ceiling. Normally, people say such things in relation to holding the line so one can be reelected. In this instance, the GOP should have more in mind that simply being reelected. They must keep in mind that we are in a fight for our future. Our debt and spending habits are simply unsustainable and must be controlled.

Now is the time for the fight! Draw a line in the sand and stand firm!

Morning News Nuggets

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Thu, 12 May 2011 04:16:00 +0000

National Security/Foreign Policy

On the Home Front

Hilarity of the Day: Treasury Department's Plan to Lower Budget Deficit

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Thu, 12 May 2011 01:42:00 +0000

Treasury Department Issues Emergency Recall Of All U.S. Dollars

In yesterday's "Hilarity of the Day" segment, we saw President Obama's plan to lower the budget deficit and national debt--some combination of card counting and befriending a rich elderly widow. You might find those plans to be far fetched. If so, you're really going to be blow away by the Treasury Department's latest plan.

I hope you got your bags in the mail to send all your money to the Treasury Department! If you haven't, you should check in to it! All of the ink in your money will become poisonous on Friday. Don't worry, the Treasury Department has a solution--it is recalling the entire money supply. That, of course, is why they sent you the money bag.

If you thought you could just destroy the poisonous money yourself, you better think again. The Treasury Department spokesman has warned that only the government is able to undertake this task. Also, he assures the American people that this recall is not at all related to the ever increasing deficit and national debt.

There are no other options; they've considered others and recalling the entire money supply is the only way!

Enjoy!

He's In: Newt Gingrich Announces Presidential Bid

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Thu, 12 May 2011 01:27:00 +0000

Today, Newt Gingrich officially announced he is seeking the Republican nomination for president. You might recall that Gingrich is the 67 year old former Speaker of the House. He led the Republican Revolution of 1994, when the GOP took control of the House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years.

On Monday, Gingrich announced he would soon announce his bid for the presidency. That day was, in fact, today. Take a few minutes to watch his announcement address, and see what you think.

Tomorrow, I will put up a poll asking you to consider who your favorite candidate for the GOP nomination. Unlike the current poll, your choices will include even those who are just being talked about in the media. Remember to vote in the current poll!

Obama Approval Now at 60%--Or Is It?

noreply@blogger.com (gop8189) — Wed, 11 May 2011 21:12:00 +0000


President Barack Obama (Courtesy: AP)

Could it be that Obama is now starting to see that bump in the polls everyone suspected after UBL's demise? Just yesterday, it was reported that Obama was only getting a three point approval bump. Now, today, we are told that polls show Obama with 60% job approval and and 53% believing he should be reelected. Which one is true?

The problem with polls are that the results can be misleading if you don't look closely at the details. It is not that AP necessarily did anything underhanded or shady. They rightly admit that their poll was a poll of adults. In other words, they did not take into account party identification when deciding whom to call. However, each adult who was called was asked to self-identify their partisan affiliation. The results of this question should tell us a great deal about the actual results.

If the breakdown in party identification comes out being similar to what turnout is expected to be, the results tell us a great deal. However, if the results are so skewed to one side that it isn't even feasible to assume that the turnout could ever be that way, we don't really come to understand that much.

Unfortunately, the results of this AP poll are in the latter category. 46% self-identified as a Democrat or Democrat leaner. That is compared to only 29% identifying Republican or Republican leaning. 4% were Independents and 20% didn't know.

So, unless the 2012 breakdown is expected to be 46% Democrat, 29% Republican, 4% Independent, and 20% Undecided, these poll numbers tell us absolutely nothing.

About the only thing we did learn from this poll is that people really approve of George W. Bush--including many Democrats. We know this because Bush's approval rating in this poll was 50% to 49%. We can learn something from this because the partisan makeup of the poll was very skewed against the former president yet he was still able to garner a positive result. This actually means that his approval is higher. Likewise, the skewed partisan affiliation in the poll likely means that President Obama's support is much lower.

Again, AP, through the poll itself, wasn't necessarily trying to fool the public. Even so, it could be said stories written by AP writers have done just that. Was that their intention? Who knows. What we do know is that the authors conveniently leave out the self-identified partisan breakdown of the respondents. So, was it a hatchet job--you decide!

You can check out the article put out by the AP here. Also, check out the National Review Online piece on debunking the AP poll.