The year was 1994. Just a year into his presidency, William Jefferson Clinton was on the stump, promoting his health care reform plan, crafted by his wife, First Lady Hillary Clinton. At a town hall meeting, President Clinton took a question, via a live video stream, from a man by the name of Herman Cain. Mr. Cain challenged the President on how he'd be able to afford to keep his employees, as the then-CEO of a national pizza chain, Godfather's Pizza, while adhering to the proposed mandate. Mr. Clinton balked, offered to have Mr. Cain send his people his figures, and then moved on. History would prove this to be a pivotal moment in the destruction of Hillarycare.
Now, nearly 20 years later, Herman Cain is running for President himself. On May 21st, 2011, at an announcement in Atlanta, Georgia, the amiable, electrifying talk radio personality outlined the failures of the current administration, with a fervor that had the crowd in a raucous throughout. "Free at last....free at last.....thank G-d almighty......this nation, is free, at last, AGAIN!" he declared, predicting what the general public would declare upon the determination that a candidate-Cain would become President-elect Cain on the evening of the 1st Tuesday of November, 2012. Free from what? Free from excessive taxation, regulation, spending, and a foggy foreign policy which is crippling our nation. Free to pass a new tax reform, reducing the corporate tax rate to a maximum of 25%; free to end the taxes on capital gains, and repatriated profits; free to issue a REAL payroll tax holiday, for a year, at 6.2% for both employers AND employees; free to implement the Fair Tax, to end the punitive taxation on production; free to make these new tax rates PERMANENT.....and most importantly, FREE TO TAKE BACK THIS COUNTRY!
When President Obama declared that Israel ought to return to their pre-1967 borders, Herman Cain accused the President of throwing Israel under the bus, and said on both Your World with Neil Cavuto, and on Hannity, that "if you mess with Israel, you're messing with the United States of America!". Herman Cain understands who our friends are, and who our enemies are. He refuses to make promises he cannot keep, by refusing to engage in a foreign policy that doesn't take into account the information that only the President is privy to. During an appearance on the Today show on NBC, the morning of July 4th, 2011, Mr. Cain declared that he is meeting with foreign policy experts, so that he can determine the appropriate courses of action; this is in sharp contrast to President Obama, who avowed to pull all troops out of Afghanistan by the summer of 2011, and to close down Gitmo as one of his top priorities....how's THAT working out?
Mr. Cain believes that we are a nation of crises - we have a spending crisis, an entitlement crisis, an immigration crisis, a foggy foreign policy crisis, and a deficiency of leadership crisis. He's right! We spend too much, tax too much, regulate too much, give too many hand outs, allow millions of undocumented aliens into this country while giving them free education and free health care, embrace our enemies and shun our friends....and the rest is self explanatory.
There is only 1 candidate for President that embraces the constitution, knows how to create jobs, communicates his principles in a steadfast, simplistic manner, and embodies the literal interpretation of the American dream! The son of a limo driver and a domestic mother, Herman Cain attended Morehouse College, earning his Bachelor's degree; he earned his Master's degree at Purdue University, while simultaneously being employed by the Department of the Navy. He left the Navy and entered the Coca-Cola company, working as a business analyst. In 1977, as a strapping 32 year old, he joined Pillsbury, and became Vice President. He would later leave this position, and worked for Burger King, a subsidiary of the Pillsbury company. He managed over 400 chains, including the worst performing restaurants in the company - and he turned THEM ALL around! Due to his successes, Pillsbury placed him in charge of Godfather's Pizza, a failing company teetering on bankruptcy; all he did was reform their operations, and return them to profitability. In 1988, he and a group of investors purchased the company. In 1996, he resigned as CEO of Godfather's, to join the National Restaurant Association as their distinguished CEO.
Herman Cain has over 40 years of business experience, turning companies around, and creating jobs. He knows how to manage a budget, work with people, deal with adversity, and tackle seemingly impossible problems. As a cancer survivor, Mr. Cain has proven that he can handle anything. And as President of the United States, Mr. Cain WILL turn this country around. There is no finer example of passionate, constitutional conservatism than that which embodies this man. With the help of grassroots people like myself, he WILL be the 45th President of the United States!
Please visit http://hermancain.com/ or http://arealleader.com/ to pledge your support for Herman Cain today, to make a generous donation of whatever you can afford. Please also visit http://hermancain.com/ or http://electcain.com today to get involved, and become a volunteer. And always remember - it's NOT about us.....it's about THE FUTURE! May G-d bless you, and continue to bless the greatest nation on earth.....THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!
Monday, July 4, 2011
Monday, December 13, 2010
Bush Tax Cuts.....
Didn’t they lose?
As I write this, we are just 19 days away from the official expiration of the Bush tax cuts. Not only would taxes go up for all income earners above the quarter million dollar threshold, but taxes would ALSO go up for the middle class. Yet here we are, less than 3 weeks away from a potential economic Armageddon, and it’s politics as usual in Washington. President Obama, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell managed to come to a compromise to extend the Bush tax cuts for a period of 2 years (mighty convenient that that just so happens to be when Obama is up for reelection, hmm?), in exchange for a Republican concession to extend unemployment benefits by 13 additional months. This has angered BOTH sides of the aisle, as Republicans who campaigned on gutting the deficit now have to chose between breaking from party ranks, and breaking from their campaign promises. But in addition, the Progressive wing of the Democrat party is up in arms over Obama’s acceptance of breaking HIS 2008 campaign pledge to only give tax cuts to 98% of Americans; in other words, those earning under the $250,000 cap. And so, Washington is in a state of flux, and no one can confidently say what way is up, and what way is down. But wait just a moment….which side won the argument on November 2nd?
One would think, based off the tone coming from the left, that the historic election we witnessed last month overthrew the supply-siders. The reality of the situation is, however, that the exact opposite resulted. When was the last time that a party in power lost nearly 70 Congressional seats, 6 Governorships, and hundreds of state seats, and acted as though they still had the winning message? As Congressman Paul Ryan, the incoming chair of the House Budget Committee put it, only in Washington could maintaining the current tax rate be considered a tax cut; yet here we are, having to defend our position as Republicans that an extension of the current rates is merely avoiding the largest tax HIKE in United States history, and is NOT a tax cut. The Progressives in Congress (as last I knew, a total of 53 current Representatives) signed a letter essentially demanding that this compromise bill NOT be brought to a vote on the House floor. Congressman Anthony Weiner, Senator Bernie Sanders, Congressman Charlie Rangel, and Senator Richard Durbin all have decried the compromise, using the American people as a defense for such action. Apparently, these folks believe that what’s best for the American people, is NOT giving a tax cut to the wealthy. First of all, as Congressman Ryan correctly points out, this IS NOT a tax cut! Secondly, what have the Progressives done to prove that they have any idea what the American people want? They rammed health care reform down our throats, when every poll showed we didn’t want it, they rammed stimulus down our throats, they tried (and thanks to the Senate, they failed) to force cap and tax down our throats, they have been repudiated on EVERY overreach they’ve made in the last 2 years, and they STILL think they know what we want? And, in their haste to buck the rich, they are leading us down a path that would, as I said, lead to a tax hike for EVERYONE; but we’re to believe that the Progressives are for the middle class, even though they are willing to throw US under the bus, to maintain their class warfare.
In the face of growing adversity, our president went before the White House press after a secret meeting with former President Clinton, and managed to weasel his way out the door, and left Mr. Clinton at the podium to fight Obama’s battle for him. Now, maybe it’s me, but if you need a president that hasn’t been in power for 10 years to fight your battles for you, don’t you think MAYBE you’re not fighting the correct one? The sad reality is, as I watched the video of Clinton gesticulating at that podium, it reminded me of what true leadership is…and I don’t say that lightly, as I was NOT a fan of Clinton’s during his 8 years in office, OR his post presidency. I guess that’s what happens when you’ve experienced 2 years of a political novice wrecking everything good about the country you love. But enough of the bloviating. We need to get something through to the left wing - accept the fact that you lost the mid-terms, accept the fact that you were embarrassed and repudiated, and deal with it. Stop bickering and whining over the fact that you have to extend tax cuts to the rich. The Republicans don’t HAVE TO accept adding in an extension of unemployment benefits for 13 more months (something I don’t support); I’m certain that with the message we the people sent to Washington last month, it’s a safe assumption that there is more than requisite political capital on our side that it’s not a risky venture to just say “NO!”. Sure, taxes will go up for everyone on January 1, but once Pelosi hands Boehner the gavel, the Democrats will be powerless to stop us from cutting taxes, BACK to the Bush level. There is far more at stake by adding to the deficit by extending unemployment benefits backed by 0 dollars, than there is by temporarily letting taxes lapse.
As long as Republicans hold Obama and Harry Reid’s feet to the fire, we won’t risk losing favor with the American people. We know that the deficit is a mess. We know that the economic climate is toxic. We know that raising taxes on the highest income earners will hurt economic growth. But at a time where the deficit is a far greater crux than economic growth, and when we KNOW who will be calling the shots for the next 2 years, we can trust the House to fix the tax problem later. And perhaps in another 2 years, when the 2nd likely wave against the progressive movement hits, and we get rid of President Obama, put an end to Harry Reid’s reign as Majority Leader, and give the Progressives a taste of what being in the minority is REALLY like, the left will actually figure it out - YOU LOST! Deal with it.
As I write this, we are just 19 days away from the official expiration of the Bush tax cuts. Not only would taxes go up for all income earners above the quarter million dollar threshold, but taxes would ALSO go up for the middle class. Yet here we are, less than 3 weeks away from a potential economic Armageddon, and it’s politics as usual in Washington. President Obama, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell managed to come to a compromise to extend the Bush tax cuts for a period of 2 years (mighty convenient that that just so happens to be when Obama is up for reelection, hmm?), in exchange for a Republican concession to extend unemployment benefits by 13 additional months. This has angered BOTH sides of the aisle, as Republicans who campaigned on gutting the deficit now have to chose between breaking from party ranks, and breaking from their campaign promises. But in addition, the Progressive wing of the Democrat party is up in arms over Obama’s acceptance of breaking HIS 2008 campaign pledge to only give tax cuts to 98% of Americans; in other words, those earning under the $250,000 cap. And so, Washington is in a state of flux, and no one can confidently say what way is up, and what way is down. But wait just a moment….which side won the argument on November 2nd?
One would think, based off the tone coming from the left, that the historic election we witnessed last month overthrew the supply-siders. The reality of the situation is, however, that the exact opposite resulted. When was the last time that a party in power lost nearly 70 Congressional seats, 6 Governorships, and hundreds of state seats, and acted as though they still had the winning message? As Congressman Paul Ryan, the incoming chair of the House Budget Committee put it, only in Washington could maintaining the current tax rate be considered a tax cut; yet here we are, having to defend our position as Republicans that an extension of the current rates is merely avoiding the largest tax HIKE in United States history, and is NOT a tax cut. The Progressives in Congress (as last I knew, a total of 53 current Representatives) signed a letter essentially demanding that this compromise bill NOT be brought to a vote on the House floor. Congressman Anthony Weiner, Senator Bernie Sanders, Congressman Charlie Rangel, and Senator Richard Durbin all have decried the compromise, using the American people as a defense for such action. Apparently, these folks believe that what’s best for the American people, is NOT giving a tax cut to the wealthy. First of all, as Congressman Ryan correctly points out, this IS NOT a tax cut! Secondly, what have the Progressives done to prove that they have any idea what the American people want? They rammed health care reform down our throats, when every poll showed we didn’t want it, they rammed stimulus down our throats, they tried (and thanks to the Senate, they failed) to force cap and tax down our throats, they have been repudiated on EVERY overreach they’ve made in the last 2 years, and they STILL think they know what we want? And, in their haste to buck the rich, they are leading us down a path that would, as I said, lead to a tax hike for EVERYONE; but we’re to believe that the Progressives are for the middle class, even though they are willing to throw US under the bus, to maintain their class warfare.
In the face of growing adversity, our president went before the White House press after a secret meeting with former President Clinton, and managed to weasel his way out the door, and left Mr. Clinton at the podium to fight Obama’s battle for him. Now, maybe it’s me, but if you need a president that hasn’t been in power for 10 years to fight your battles for you, don’t you think MAYBE you’re not fighting the correct one? The sad reality is, as I watched the video of Clinton gesticulating at that podium, it reminded me of what true leadership is…and I don’t say that lightly, as I was NOT a fan of Clinton’s during his 8 years in office, OR his post presidency. I guess that’s what happens when you’ve experienced 2 years of a political novice wrecking everything good about the country you love. But enough of the bloviating. We need to get something through to the left wing - accept the fact that you lost the mid-terms, accept the fact that you were embarrassed and repudiated, and deal with it. Stop bickering and whining over the fact that you have to extend tax cuts to the rich. The Republicans don’t HAVE TO accept adding in an extension of unemployment benefits for 13 more months (something I don’t support); I’m certain that with the message we the people sent to Washington last month, it’s a safe assumption that there is more than requisite political capital on our side that it’s not a risky venture to just say “NO!”. Sure, taxes will go up for everyone on January 1, but once Pelosi hands Boehner the gavel, the Democrats will be powerless to stop us from cutting taxes, BACK to the Bush level. There is far more at stake by adding to the deficit by extending unemployment benefits backed by 0 dollars, than there is by temporarily letting taxes lapse.
As long as Republicans hold Obama and Harry Reid’s feet to the fire, we won’t risk losing favor with the American people. We know that the deficit is a mess. We know that the economic climate is toxic. We know that raising taxes on the highest income earners will hurt economic growth. But at a time where the deficit is a far greater crux than economic growth, and when we KNOW who will be calling the shots for the next 2 years, we can trust the House to fix the tax problem later. And perhaps in another 2 years, when the 2nd likely wave against the progressive movement hits, and we get rid of President Obama, put an end to Harry Reid’s reign as Majority Leader, and give the Progressives a taste of what being in the minority is REALLY like, the left will actually figure it out - YOU LOST! Deal with it.
Saturday, December 11, 2010
Why the Republican Party struggles with securing the Jewish vote
Why the Republican Party struggles with securing the Jewish vote
About a month ago, I had a conversation on Facebook with an individual whom I had met at an election night party I attended at my county’s Republican headquarters. This was not the first conversation I had with him, but it was the most contentious. He was visiting his sick, dying father back home in Vermont. He asked for me to pray for his father, which I was more than happy to oblige. The tide of the conversation turned significantly, however, when he said he needed me to help Jesus do his will onto his father. As I may or may not have mentioned in the past, I am Jewish. I politely told this man that that was something I could not do, but that I wished him and his family all the best. Unfortunately, it didn’t end there; he proceeded to quote bible verses in an attempt to convince me to abandon a lifetime of counter beliefs (in a brief flashback, for added context, let me add in that at the Hernando County First Republican Club meeting in November, I revealed to the chairman of the Hernando County Republican Executive Committee that I am Jewish, and this man was within earshot). I asked him on several occasions to cease, to which he neglected to renege. I eventually was forced to delete him from my page, and came very close to having to block him. I was told that he became a Republican because the Democrats “say you can believe whatever you want”, and the Republicans “believe in Jesus as our savior”.
Recently, I have found myself having more and more battles with Christian conservatives. It seems less and less likely to have a political discussion in any social network, without religion being injected into the conversation. A now former friend of mine on Facebook posted a link to a story detailing that 51% of registered voters polled (the name of the polling firm escapes me, at the moment) say they are now worse off than they were before Obama was inaugurated, compared to 35% who say their lives have improved. The dialogue was non-abrasive for the first portion, but turned when someone started quoting bible verses to explain our current state of affairs. As is typical of me, I chimed in with my thoughts, which led to, as usual, a controversy. I was asked what my religious beliefs were, and I revealed them. What ensued got me to really thinking deeply about the schism between the Jewish community, and the Republican party.
Prominent conservatives who I have had the pleasure of meeting, and who are aware of my religious affiliation, always ask me “Jason, why are almost all Jews Democrats?”. All I have been able to do, up until now, is stand there, look them straight in the face, and say “I don’t know”. The realities are quite evident - the Republican party has always stood for a strong national defense, a tough stance against terrorism, and a strong defense of Israel. Conversely, the Democrats have long stood for appeasement, tolerance, and strong criticism against Israel for it’s treatment of the Palestinian people. So naturally, one would think that Jewish Americans would be, by nature, supportive of the Republican party. But for generations, the Jewish vote has ALWAYS been a reliable base for the Democrats. My maternal grandparents voted Democrat all their lives, and my paternal grandmother was a bleeding heart liberal for as long as I knew her. Several other members of my family share these beliefs, and with nary an exception, my friends of the Jewish faith are no different. So, the question remains - WHY does the GOP struggle so greatly to appeal to the Jewish community?
As long as I have struggled to understand, I think it’s finally starting to dawn on me what the real answer is; Christian conservatives are all too happy to proselytize. Not one single time in my 26 years have I ever uttered the following words to a non-Jew “the only way to heaven is to accept the Torah, and to live a Jewish life”. Yet the older I get, and the more people I meet, the more I’m being subject to the opposite “the only way to heaven, the only way to be saved, is to accept Jesus Christ as your lord and savior”. This is not a blanket statement, and surely I don’t have this problem with every single non-Jew I meet. In fact, the chairman of the Hernando County Republican Executive Committee finds it equally as deplorable as I do; and he’s of the same brand of Christianity as the man I mentioned in the 1st part of this blog. The 1st amendment tends to be warped and twisted into being what individuals want it to be, with some who say it provides freedom OF religion, and other who believe it provides freedom FROM religion. I believe in the former, but I DON’T believe that freedom OF religion can ever be equal to “freedom to practice the religion I do”. And therein lies the true problem - allowing religious tolerance for each person, based on what he/she views G-d as, whom/what is G-d’s embodiment, and whom is the one true Messiah. The Republican party was founded in 1854, to be the party of rights and freedom; freedom to own property, vote, be successful, and perhaps most importantly, practice whatever religion suits you. Yet here we are, over 150 years after the founding of this grand party, and such a significant segment of the party believes that if you don’t accept Jesus, then you’ll be damned. Is this any way to treat non-Christians? Is this the most efficient way to increase your base, and convince others to join your cause? I am absolutely certain that there are many, many “blue dog” Democrats of the Jewish faith, who would be registered as Republicans if not for this persecution. Why would a group of people, who have discrimination and intolerance ingrained into their souls by centuries of hate spewed at them, find appeal in a political party which shows such favoritism for Christianity? There is no sense in faulting anyone for their religious beliefs, or their political beliefs; but there IS plenty of reason to fault those who condemn those beliefs, and shun anyone that doesn’t follow suit.
The dilemma, who’s solution has eluded many a Republican for decades, including myself, seems relatively simple to solve, if you use your experiences to guide you - Jews frown upon the Republican party not because of it’s support for fiscal conservatism, not because of it’s superiority on issues of national defense, and not for it’s support of Israel (though lesser religious Jews aren’t as pro-Zionism as more religious Jews are). The reality is, with the business savvy that Jews have adopted over the course of history, it’s theoretically counterintuitive to support a party who’s views are aligned with demand-side economics. All of this must lead one to draw the only logical, reasonable causation for the knee jerk Republican condemnation by the Jewish community - intolerance and bigotry.
By the way….wasn’t Jesus a Jew? :)
About a month ago, I had a conversation on Facebook with an individual whom I had met at an election night party I attended at my county’s Republican headquarters. This was not the first conversation I had with him, but it was the most contentious. He was visiting his sick, dying father back home in Vermont. He asked for me to pray for his father, which I was more than happy to oblige. The tide of the conversation turned significantly, however, when he said he needed me to help Jesus do his will onto his father. As I may or may not have mentioned in the past, I am Jewish. I politely told this man that that was something I could not do, but that I wished him and his family all the best. Unfortunately, it didn’t end there; he proceeded to quote bible verses in an attempt to convince me to abandon a lifetime of counter beliefs (in a brief flashback, for added context, let me add in that at the Hernando County First Republican Club meeting in November, I revealed to the chairman of the Hernando County Republican Executive Committee that I am Jewish, and this man was within earshot). I asked him on several occasions to cease, to which he neglected to renege. I eventually was forced to delete him from my page, and came very close to having to block him. I was told that he became a Republican because the Democrats “say you can believe whatever you want”, and the Republicans “believe in Jesus as our savior”.
Recently, I have found myself having more and more battles with Christian conservatives. It seems less and less likely to have a political discussion in any social network, without religion being injected into the conversation. A now former friend of mine on Facebook posted a link to a story detailing that 51% of registered voters polled (the name of the polling firm escapes me, at the moment) say they are now worse off than they were before Obama was inaugurated, compared to 35% who say their lives have improved. The dialogue was non-abrasive for the first portion, but turned when someone started quoting bible verses to explain our current state of affairs. As is typical of me, I chimed in with my thoughts, which led to, as usual, a controversy. I was asked what my religious beliefs were, and I revealed them. What ensued got me to really thinking deeply about the schism between the Jewish community, and the Republican party.
Prominent conservatives who I have had the pleasure of meeting, and who are aware of my religious affiliation, always ask me “Jason, why are almost all Jews Democrats?”. All I have been able to do, up until now, is stand there, look them straight in the face, and say “I don’t know”. The realities are quite evident - the Republican party has always stood for a strong national defense, a tough stance against terrorism, and a strong defense of Israel. Conversely, the Democrats have long stood for appeasement, tolerance, and strong criticism against Israel for it’s treatment of the Palestinian people. So naturally, one would think that Jewish Americans would be, by nature, supportive of the Republican party. But for generations, the Jewish vote has ALWAYS been a reliable base for the Democrats. My maternal grandparents voted Democrat all their lives, and my paternal grandmother was a bleeding heart liberal for as long as I knew her. Several other members of my family share these beliefs, and with nary an exception, my friends of the Jewish faith are no different. So, the question remains - WHY does the GOP struggle so greatly to appeal to the Jewish community?
As long as I have struggled to understand, I think it’s finally starting to dawn on me what the real answer is; Christian conservatives are all too happy to proselytize. Not one single time in my 26 years have I ever uttered the following words to a non-Jew “the only way to heaven is to accept the Torah, and to live a Jewish life”. Yet the older I get, and the more people I meet, the more I’m being subject to the opposite “the only way to heaven, the only way to be saved, is to accept Jesus Christ as your lord and savior”. This is not a blanket statement, and surely I don’t have this problem with every single non-Jew I meet. In fact, the chairman of the Hernando County Republican Executive Committee finds it equally as deplorable as I do; and he’s of the same brand of Christianity as the man I mentioned in the 1st part of this blog. The 1st amendment tends to be warped and twisted into being what individuals want it to be, with some who say it provides freedom OF religion, and other who believe it provides freedom FROM religion. I believe in the former, but I DON’T believe that freedom OF religion can ever be equal to “freedom to practice the religion I do”. And therein lies the true problem - allowing religious tolerance for each person, based on what he/she views G-d as, whom/what is G-d’s embodiment, and whom is the one true Messiah. The Republican party was founded in 1854, to be the party of rights and freedom; freedom to own property, vote, be successful, and perhaps most importantly, practice whatever religion suits you. Yet here we are, over 150 years after the founding of this grand party, and such a significant segment of the party believes that if you don’t accept Jesus, then you’ll be damned. Is this any way to treat non-Christians? Is this the most efficient way to increase your base, and convince others to join your cause? I am absolutely certain that there are many, many “blue dog” Democrats of the Jewish faith, who would be registered as Republicans if not for this persecution. Why would a group of people, who have discrimination and intolerance ingrained into their souls by centuries of hate spewed at them, find appeal in a political party which shows such favoritism for Christianity? There is no sense in faulting anyone for their religious beliefs, or their political beliefs; but there IS plenty of reason to fault those who condemn those beliefs, and shun anyone that doesn’t follow suit.
The dilemma, who’s solution has eluded many a Republican for decades, including myself, seems relatively simple to solve, if you use your experiences to guide you - Jews frown upon the Republican party not because of it’s support for fiscal conservatism, not because of it’s superiority on issues of national defense, and not for it’s support of Israel (though lesser religious Jews aren’t as pro-Zionism as more religious Jews are). The reality is, with the business savvy that Jews have adopted over the course of history, it’s theoretically counterintuitive to support a party who’s views are aligned with demand-side economics. All of this must lead one to draw the only logical, reasonable causation for the knee jerk Republican condemnation by the Jewish community - intolerance and bigotry.
By the way….wasn’t Jesus a Jew? :)
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
DebateCorner
As we gear up for candidate recruitment in 2011, many discounting imperfect candidates, much to their detriment
So, here we are, heading into turkey day, 3+ weeks removed from an earthquake election. Each side has had it’s chance to spin the election in the way one would expect - Republicans calling for Obama to moderate to the will of the people; Obama acting tone deaf and defiant. We now know who the next Speaker of the House will be, and who the next Minority Leader will be (hey Democrats, you do know what the definition of insanity is, don’t ya?). As freshman orientation has taken place, transition teams are in place for transfers of power at the state level, and the end of another tumultuous year nears it’s end, many speculative polls are surfacing with potential 2012 match-ups. Questions abound whether Obama will receive a primary challenge from the left (Hillary, Russ Feingold, Dennis Kucinich, Uncle Jerry), and who will comprise the slate on the GOP side. There are many options on the right, ranging from northeast Republicans Chris Christie and Mitt Romney, to southern gentlemen Haley Barbour and Rick Perry. Each individual has fine qualifications, as well as shaky skeletons in their proverbial closets. There’s Governor Mitch Daniels (R-IN), former Budget Director in the Bush administration; Governor Rick Perry (R-TX), who took over, following the election of then-Governor George W. Bush and has since been elected to a 3rd term; Governor Bobby Jindal (R-LA) who showed earnest leadership in the Deepwater disaster; Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, who would represent a chance for Republicans to take Minnesota for the first time since Reagan; Governor Haley Barbour (R-MS), the outgoing chair of the Republican Governor’s Association; Governor Chris Christie (R-NJ), the bombastic Garden State leader who ‘s anti-union fervor has spiced up Republican interest nationally; former Governor Mike Huckabee (R-AR), a former Minister and current Fox personality; former Governor Mitt Romney (R-MA), who saved the 2002 Olympics; Congressman Mike Pence (R-IN); Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC); even newly elected Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL). All of these men have varying degrees of qualifications that would make him suitable for the presidency. However, the real cog in this whole ordeal could be brought about by former Governor of Alaska, and current fundraiser extraordinaire, Sarah Palin. The once-Governor, who famously was Senator John McCain’s running mate during the 2008 presidential campaign, and who quit her only term as Governor prematurely, represents a possible out for our current president.
Many Republicans are pushing a Palin nomination very strongly, touting her support for the Tea Party, her strong conservative roots, and her take charge attitude as supporting reasons to draft her, and propel her. Lets get 1 thing straight - Sarah Palin’s disapproval rating, as found in a Gallup poll released this month, was found to be 52%. That’s higher than President Obama’s disapproval rating, according to almost every poll. This same president destroyed the aspirations of our current Secretary of State, who was all but certain to become the next president of the United States 3 years ago; that is, until a certain freshman Senator from Illinois strutted his hopey-changey schpiel. By most accounts, Hillary Clinton is viewed more popular from New York to California than Ms. Palin, so why would conservatives be so gallant about supporting her? As you can grasp from the general tone of this piece, I am no fan of the former Governor. I did like her during the 2008 RNC, loved what she had to say, and thought she was great. Then I saw her debate against our veep, and started to wonder. Then, amidst controversy in her home state, she up and quit. Tell me something….did G.W. quit at any point during his 8 years? Was not his entire administration plagued by controversy and criticism? Were there not millions of people nationally that wanted him impeached, tarred, feathered? The man’s approval rating dropped below that of Obama’s, yet he stayed. If Ms. Palin is incapable of weathering a storm in her own state, how on EARTH will she manage in Washington? Not to mention the verbal bomb throwing she’s mastered as a lightning rod…don’t we already have someone of that caliber in the White House?
Arguably the top contender for the Republicans, at present, is Mitt Romney. The slick talking, touch-of-gray, blue state Republican has a strong business acumen…but has the baggage of Romneycare, the oft-criticized health care system he passed as Governor. His socially conservative values of pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, and anti-gun control have all been questioned. Then there’s Mike Huckabee, who is very likable, but has a shady record from his time in Arkansas; raising taxes and spending, and legislating morality. And there’s Chris Christie, who’s been attacked for being a cap and tax supporter, in favor of funding alternative energy production, and gun control. But lets just take a minute, and analyze all 3 in contrast to Ms. Palin:
Mitt Romney. 1 term Governor of a blue state. Campaigned with Senator-Elect Marco Rubio. Condemns everything President Obama has done. Ms. Palin - ½ term Governor, accomplished nothing, calls people that don’t like her “bastards”.
Mike Huckabee. 2 term Governor. Supported Senator-Elect Marco Rubio. Condemns everything President Obama has done. Ms. Palin - still a ½ term Governor, with no accomplishments.
Chris Christie - 1 term Governor of a blue state. Has taken teachers union to task, and has blown up his state’s budget. Ms. Palin - still a ½ term Governor, with no accomplishments.
Getting the picture? No matter how great Sarah Palin’s rhetoric sounds….what has she done? No really, WHAT HAS SHE DONE? She was a Mayor in a small town. She was in the city council. Annnd…she was a ½ term Governor. Who quit. WHY is this not a big deal? We can attack and criticize our president for being a less-than-1-term Senator from Illinois, who did nothing but community organize, but we can’t attack and criticize Palin for quitting? People, lets get serious…if we want President Obama to be a 1 term president, if we want to repeal Obamacare BEFORE it destroys the system, if we want to end the wasteful spending, if we want to make lower taxes PERMANENT, we have to GET RID of Obama. The term RINO gets tossed around an awful lot, and it shouldn’t. Ultra conservatives love to use the term on politicians who don’t agree with them 100%. Well, I have news for them - I’m a Republican who voted for Marco Rubio, and Rick Scott, and for George Bush in 2004. That means I voted AGAINST Obama liberal Alex Sink, AGAINST flip-flopper CharLIE Crist, Obama liberal Kendrick Meek, and the traitorous, slimy John Kerry. Am I a RINO because I voted for Rudy Giuliani in 2008? Am I a RINO because I like Chris Christie and Mitt Romney?
Republicans have a beautiful opportunity to gain a nearly indestructible mandate from coast to coast, that can last the next 25 years. They will squander that opportunity if they alienate the segment of the party that chooses electability and pragmatism, in favor of lightning rod characters that are great at gaining a buck, but not great at governing. Give me a 1 term Governor who accomplished something, over a ½ term quitter who couldn’t take the heat. Each day that passes, our president becomes more and more vulnerable to defeat. If the Republican party chooses a candidate like Sarah Palin in 2 years, it will be squandering more than just an opportunity to bring the kind of change that this country needs (not the fundamental transformation that was promised); it will be squandering an opportunity to bring REAL leadership to this country. Riding the coat tails of a movement that would have picked up steam without her, makes not a true leader. Republicans, the choice is ours - lets NOT rescue defeat from the jaws of victory.
So, here we are, heading into turkey day, 3+ weeks removed from an earthquake election. Each side has had it’s chance to spin the election in the way one would expect - Republicans calling for Obama to moderate to the will of the people; Obama acting tone deaf and defiant. We now know who the next Speaker of the House will be, and who the next Minority Leader will be (hey Democrats, you do know what the definition of insanity is, don’t ya?). As freshman orientation has taken place, transition teams are in place for transfers of power at the state level, and the end of another tumultuous year nears it’s end, many speculative polls are surfacing with potential 2012 match-ups. Questions abound whether Obama will receive a primary challenge from the left (Hillary, Russ Feingold, Dennis Kucinich, Uncle Jerry), and who will comprise the slate on the GOP side. There are many options on the right, ranging from northeast Republicans Chris Christie and Mitt Romney, to southern gentlemen Haley Barbour and Rick Perry. Each individual has fine qualifications, as well as shaky skeletons in their proverbial closets. There’s Governor Mitch Daniels (R-IN), former Budget Director in the Bush administration; Governor Rick Perry (R-TX), who took over, following the election of then-Governor George W. Bush and has since been elected to a 3rd term; Governor Bobby Jindal (R-LA) who showed earnest leadership in the Deepwater disaster; Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, who would represent a chance for Republicans to take Minnesota for the first time since Reagan; Governor Haley Barbour (R-MS), the outgoing chair of the Republican Governor’s Association; Governor Chris Christie (R-NJ), the bombastic Garden State leader who ‘s anti-union fervor has spiced up Republican interest nationally; former Governor Mike Huckabee (R-AR), a former Minister and current Fox personality; former Governor Mitt Romney (R-MA), who saved the 2002 Olympics; Congressman Mike Pence (R-IN); Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC); even newly elected Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL). All of these men have varying degrees of qualifications that would make him suitable for the presidency. However, the real cog in this whole ordeal could be brought about by former Governor of Alaska, and current fundraiser extraordinaire, Sarah Palin. The once-Governor, who famously was Senator John McCain’s running mate during the 2008 presidential campaign, and who quit her only term as Governor prematurely, represents a possible out for our current president.
Many Republicans are pushing a Palin nomination very strongly, touting her support for the Tea Party, her strong conservative roots, and her take charge attitude as supporting reasons to draft her, and propel her. Lets get 1 thing straight - Sarah Palin’s disapproval rating, as found in a Gallup poll released this month, was found to be 52%. That’s higher than President Obama’s disapproval rating, according to almost every poll. This same president destroyed the aspirations of our current Secretary of State, who was all but certain to become the next president of the United States 3 years ago; that is, until a certain freshman Senator from Illinois strutted his hopey-changey schpiel. By most accounts, Hillary Clinton is viewed more popular from New York to California than Ms. Palin, so why would conservatives be so gallant about supporting her? As you can grasp from the general tone of this piece, I am no fan of the former Governor. I did like her during the 2008 RNC, loved what she had to say, and thought she was great. Then I saw her debate against our veep, and started to wonder. Then, amidst controversy in her home state, she up and quit. Tell me something….did G.W. quit at any point during his 8 years? Was not his entire administration plagued by controversy and criticism? Were there not millions of people nationally that wanted him impeached, tarred, feathered? The man’s approval rating dropped below that of Obama’s, yet he stayed. If Ms. Palin is incapable of weathering a storm in her own state, how on EARTH will she manage in Washington? Not to mention the verbal bomb throwing she’s mastered as a lightning rod…don’t we already have someone of that caliber in the White House?
Arguably the top contender for the Republicans, at present, is Mitt Romney. The slick talking, touch-of-gray, blue state Republican has a strong business acumen…but has the baggage of Romneycare, the oft-criticized health care system he passed as Governor. His socially conservative values of pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, and anti-gun control have all been questioned. Then there’s Mike Huckabee, who is very likable, but has a shady record from his time in Arkansas; raising taxes and spending, and legislating morality. And there’s Chris Christie, who’s been attacked for being a cap and tax supporter, in favor of funding alternative energy production, and gun control. But lets just take a minute, and analyze all 3 in contrast to Ms. Palin:
Mitt Romney. 1 term Governor of a blue state. Campaigned with Senator-Elect Marco Rubio. Condemns everything President Obama has done. Ms. Palin - ½ term Governor, accomplished nothing, calls people that don’t like her “bastards”.
Mike Huckabee. 2 term Governor. Supported Senator-Elect Marco Rubio. Condemns everything President Obama has done. Ms. Palin - still a ½ term Governor, with no accomplishments.
Chris Christie - 1 term Governor of a blue state. Has taken teachers union to task, and has blown up his state’s budget. Ms. Palin - still a ½ term Governor, with no accomplishments.
Getting the picture? No matter how great Sarah Palin’s rhetoric sounds….what has she done? No really, WHAT HAS SHE DONE? She was a Mayor in a small town. She was in the city council. Annnd…she was a ½ term Governor. Who quit. WHY is this not a big deal? We can attack and criticize our president for being a less-than-1-term Senator from Illinois, who did nothing but community organize, but we can’t attack and criticize Palin for quitting? People, lets get serious…if we want President Obama to be a 1 term president, if we want to repeal Obamacare BEFORE it destroys the system, if we want to end the wasteful spending, if we want to make lower taxes PERMANENT, we have to GET RID of Obama. The term RINO gets tossed around an awful lot, and it shouldn’t. Ultra conservatives love to use the term on politicians who don’t agree with them 100%. Well, I have news for them - I’m a Republican who voted for Marco Rubio, and Rick Scott, and for George Bush in 2004. That means I voted AGAINST Obama liberal Alex Sink, AGAINST flip-flopper CharLIE Crist, Obama liberal Kendrick Meek, and the traitorous, slimy John Kerry. Am I a RINO because I voted for Rudy Giuliani in 2008? Am I a RINO because I like Chris Christie and Mitt Romney?
Republicans have a beautiful opportunity to gain a nearly indestructible mandate from coast to coast, that can last the next 25 years. They will squander that opportunity if they alienate the segment of the party that chooses electability and pragmatism, in favor of lightning rod characters that are great at gaining a buck, but not great at governing. Give me a 1 term Governor who accomplished something, over a ½ term quitter who couldn’t take the heat. Each day that passes, our president becomes more and more vulnerable to defeat. If the Republican party chooses a candidate like Sarah Palin in 2 years, it will be squandering more than just an opportunity to bring the kind of change that this country needs (not the fundamental transformation that was promised); it will be squandering an opportunity to bring REAL leadership to this country. Riding the coat tails of a movement that would have picked up steam without her, makes not a true leader. Republicans, the choice is ours - lets NOT rescue defeat from the jaws of victory.
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
DebateCorner
In wake of mid-term elections, GOP and progressive left draw battle lines in the sand
A week removed from the most sweeping election in at least the last 75 years, the true realities of what has resulted are becoming more and more clear by the day - change is coming to Washington, and some are not too thrilled. Much has been made about comments uttered by Senate Minority Leader McConnell (R-KY), in which he declared the number 1 priority of the Republican party over the next 2 years is to “defeat President Obama”. MSNBC talking head (and one could argue, blithering fool) Ed Schultz lambasted Mr. McConnell. But, lets get real…is it THAT much of a shock that the Republican leader in the Senate believes his goal, and the goal of other Republicans in Congress, ought to be to ensure a Republican takes over residence in the house that Ronald Reagan called home for 8 years? Of course the leader wants to get Obama out of office. Senate Majority Leader Reid (D-NV) has already declared that the Republicans better not block legislation he brings to the floor, and that we better not get in Obama’s way. The most efficient way to derail the Obama agenda, and implement conservative policies, is to pave the way for political leaders who will further the cause.
Republicans swept Speaker Pelosi out with the rest of the filth clogging up the Capitol building, riding the coattails of an absolute repudiation of the politics of the last 2 years. But really, it goes even beyond that. Republicans lost control of the House following the 2006 mid-terms, for much the same reason that the Democrats lost control following the latest mid-terms: a failing president, who’s popularity slithered away, and a group of tenants who failed to live up to what they campaigned on. When you provide a rubber stamp for an agenda which is egregiously to the left of mainstream USA, and the people flock in droves into the streets under the Tea Party label, to protest the takeover of 1/5 of the American economy, you have no reason to NOT expect to be rebuked. Several Democrats in the House had the brass to stand up to Pelosi, and came away with a campaign victory as a result (Jason Altmire, I’m talking about you). And several others, who under normal circumstances would have cruised to re-election, surely had to have been sweating for some time last Tuesday evening (or, if you’re Ike Skelton or John Spratt…well….adios). Yet despite the Democrats having little to no pull in the House beyond December, despite Nancy Pelosi becoming irrelevant, and despite Republicans pulling to within 6 in the Senate, delusional Harry Reid has the gall to threaten us? REALLY?
Lets get some things straight. First of all, Harry Reid has 2 years left to be Majority Leader. Close to 3 dozen Senate seats are up for grabs in 2012, and half a dozen come to mind automatically as being quite vulnerable (Bill Nelson in Florida, Ben Nelson in Nebraska, Claire McCaskill in Missouri, Jim Webb in Virginia, Bob Casey in Pennsylvania, Joe Manchin in West Virginia). Among the other seats that will be vulnerable:
Jon Tester - Montana
Kent Conrad - North Dakota
Jeff Bingaman - New Mexico
Sherrod Brown - Ohio
Herb Kohl - Wisconsin
North Dakota has already gone red with John Hoeven. New Mexico just elected a Republican Governor to replace Bill Richardson. Ohio just rejected progressive liberalism, outright. Wisconsin gave Russ Feingold the boot, and after 8 years of Jim Doyle, rejected Tom Barrett. Florida said no to Obama liberal, Alex Sink, and gave total control of the state to the Republicans. One would think, in the face of total backlash, Nebraska will send Ben Nelson packing, especially after folding on Obamacare. Virginia sounded the first shots against the progressive cause by electing Bob McDonnell, and suing the federal government in the wake of Obamacare’s passage. Pennsylvania followed Ohio’s salvo, and Bob Casey is likely next.
The moral of the story is this, folks - while the perceived cunning competence of former DCCC chair Rahm Emmanuel led to the overthrowing of the Republican majority in the House; and while former DSCC chair Chuck Schumer was successful in crowning Prince Harry in 2007...the sobering reality is that both majorities were built on, to use a fitting analogy as a resident of a town built on sand, one gigantic sink hole that was activated by the most polarizing, controversial president, likely in United States history. When you develop your majorities using mainly “blue dog” Democrats, and they carry out an agenda rooted in Marxism, it makes little sense to a common man to NOT expect this result. But, that’s the sad state of politics in this country right now. The sad state that leads to elected officials, in a representative democracy, who are sent to Washington to vote with the consent of the governed, and end up governing with the consent of the thugs who are better off behind bars. When you lack the integrity to stand on principle, and instead cower to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, you get what you deserve. When nearly 50% of the electorate identifies themselves as conservative, and a mere 1 in 5 identify themselves as liberal, you get what you deserve. A repudiation of the prior administration is not an equivalent to the romanticizing of the “other side”. Nowhere is this more evident than in the historic lead by Republicans in the generic Gallup polling, despite less than stellar approval ratings.
The party of Abraham Lincoln, Dwight Eisenhower, and Ronald Reagan has been returned, at least in part, to power. Not because of brilliant success, but because it stood with the people, against the progressive agenda. Progressives can attempt to insult us as being the “party of no” all they want, because in this particular instance, it happens to be the ultimate compliment. The Republicans have netted 5 governorships, a slew of state legislatures, the House of Representatives, and have essentially ensured GOP dominance for the next decade. 4 years might have convinced Prince Harry that he still has the final say, and 2 years might have convinced Mr. Obama that he has a mandate…but the results speak for themselves. The ripples of the 2010 mid-terms could roll right into 2012; and if that happens, Mr. McConnell could get his wish. The battle lines have been drawn, and if last week was any indication of the future…well, lets just say that there will no orders for drapes from ANY Democrat for a long, long time.
A week removed from the most sweeping election in at least the last 75 years, the true realities of what has resulted are becoming more and more clear by the day - change is coming to Washington, and some are not too thrilled. Much has been made about comments uttered by Senate Minority Leader McConnell (R-KY), in which he declared the number 1 priority of the Republican party over the next 2 years is to “defeat President Obama”. MSNBC talking head (and one could argue, blithering fool) Ed Schultz lambasted Mr. McConnell. But, lets get real…is it THAT much of a shock that the Republican leader in the Senate believes his goal, and the goal of other Republicans in Congress, ought to be to ensure a Republican takes over residence in the house that Ronald Reagan called home for 8 years? Of course the leader wants to get Obama out of office. Senate Majority Leader Reid (D-NV) has already declared that the Republicans better not block legislation he brings to the floor, and that we better not get in Obama’s way. The most efficient way to derail the Obama agenda, and implement conservative policies, is to pave the way for political leaders who will further the cause.
Republicans swept Speaker Pelosi out with the rest of the filth clogging up the Capitol building, riding the coattails of an absolute repudiation of the politics of the last 2 years. But really, it goes even beyond that. Republicans lost control of the House following the 2006 mid-terms, for much the same reason that the Democrats lost control following the latest mid-terms: a failing president, who’s popularity slithered away, and a group of tenants who failed to live up to what they campaigned on. When you provide a rubber stamp for an agenda which is egregiously to the left of mainstream USA, and the people flock in droves into the streets under the Tea Party label, to protest the takeover of 1/5 of the American economy, you have no reason to NOT expect to be rebuked. Several Democrats in the House had the brass to stand up to Pelosi, and came away with a campaign victory as a result (Jason Altmire, I’m talking about you). And several others, who under normal circumstances would have cruised to re-election, surely had to have been sweating for some time last Tuesday evening (or, if you’re Ike Skelton or John Spratt…well….adios). Yet despite the Democrats having little to no pull in the House beyond December, despite Nancy Pelosi becoming irrelevant, and despite Republicans pulling to within 6 in the Senate, delusional Harry Reid has the gall to threaten us? REALLY?
Lets get some things straight. First of all, Harry Reid has 2 years left to be Majority Leader. Close to 3 dozen Senate seats are up for grabs in 2012, and half a dozen come to mind automatically as being quite vulnerable (Bill Nelson in Florida, Ben Nelson in Nebraska, Claire McCaskill in Missouri, Jim Webb in Virginia, Bob Casey in Pennsylvania, Joe Manchin in West Virginia). Among the other seats that will be vulnerable:
Jon Tester - Montana
Kent Conrad - North Dakota
Jeff Bingaman - New Mexico
Sherrod Brown - Ohio
Herb Kohl - Wisconsin
North Dakota has already gone red with John Hoeven. New Mexico just elected a Republican Governor to replace Bill Richardson. Ohio just rejected progressive liberalism, outright. Wisconsin gave Russ Feingold the boot, and after 8 years of Jim Doyle, rejected Tom Barrett. Florida said no to Obama liberal, Alex Sink, and gave total control of the state to the Republicans. One would think, in the face of total backlash, Nebraska will send Ben Nelson packing, especially after folding on Obamacare. Virginia sounded the first shots against the progressive cause by electing Bob McDonnell, and suing the federal government in the wake of Obamacare’s passage. Pennsylvania followed Ohio’s salvo, and Bob Casey is likely next.
The moral of the story is this, folks - while the perceived cunning competence of former DCCC chair Rahm Emmanuel led to the overthrowing of the Republican majority in the House; and while former DSCC chair Chuck Schumer was successful in crowning Prince Harry in 2007...the sobering reality is that both majorities were built on, to use a fitting analogy as a resident of a town built on sand, one gigantic sink hole that was activated by the most polarizing, controversial president, likely in United States history. When you develop your majorities using mainly “blue dog” Democrats, and they carry out an agenda rooted in Marxism, it makes little sense to a common man to NOT expect this result. But, that’s the sad state of politics in this country right now. The sad state that leads to elected officials, in a representative democracy, who are sent to Washington to vote with the consent of the governed, and end up governing with the consent of the thugs who are better off behind bars. When you lack the integrity to stand on principle, and instead cower to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, you get what you deserve. When nearly 50% of the electorate identifies themselves as conservative, and a mere 1 in 5 identify themselves as liberal, you get what you deserve. A repudiation of the prior administration is not an equivalent to the romanticizing of the “other side”. Nowhere is this more evident than in the historic lead by Republicans in the generic Gallup polling, despite less than stellar approval ratings.
The party of Abraham Lincoln, Dwight Eisenhower, and Ronald Reagan has been returned, at least in part, to power. Not because of brilliant success, but because it stood with the people, against the progressive agenda. Progressives can attempt to insult us as being the “party of no” all they want, because in this particular instance, it happens to be the ultimate compliment. The Republicans have netted 5 governorships, a slew of state legislatures, the House of Representatives, and have essentially ensured GOP dominance for the next decade. 4 years might have convinced Prince Harry that he still has the final say, and 2 years might have convinced Mr. Obama that he has a mandate…but the results speak for themselves. The ripples of the 2010 mid-terms could roll right into 2012; and if that happens, Mr. McConnell could get his wish. The battle lines have been drawn, and if last week was any indication of the future…well, lets just say that there will no orders for drapes from ANY Democrat for a long, long time.
Sunday, October 10, 2010
DebateCorner
Florida candidates for United States Senate face off in ABC debate
On Thursday night, October 7th, Marco Rubio, Charlie Crist and Kendrick Meek took part in a round table debate for 1 hour on ABC News. Topics during this debate ranged from health care, to social security, to gay adoptions, to the deficit, to the stimulus bill passed by President Obama and the left-wing congress at the commencement of his term. I found this debate to be a true snapshot of what this campaign has been about:
Charlie Crist misrepresenting Marco’s position on social security
Kendrick Meek repeating ad nauseam that he is “the only candidate in this race” to “fill in the blank here”
Marco Rubio drawing clear distinctions between himself and the 2 Democrats (because, lets face it folks…Charlie Crist is a Democrat posing as an Independent) on the ticket
Charlie Crist’s failure to portray himself as a middle-of-the-road, common sense type of guy who sees good in both the major political parties
Kendrick Meek demonizing the rich, and accusing both Crist and Rubio of making their careers out of being opponents of the middle class
It would seem that the best way to fix the social security system as we know it, is to legalize 12-14 million illegal immigrants, give them access to jobs, and let them pay into the system in order to save it. That’s right! Charlie Crist considers this to be a sound, common sense solution. Has anyone ever told Mr. Crist that eventually, those people will retire too? D’OH! Sorry, Charlie. You see, using this as a realistic, logical solution makes absolutely NO sense. Why? Well, it’s simple really - the reason why we have a serious problem with the system at present, is because there is an inverse relationship between retirees, and employees. The baby boomer generation is reaching retirement age, and the facts are pretty simple: estimates are that between now and 2017, social security will be paying out more than it takes in. By 2037, when I turn 53, it will be no more. Yet Democrats, including Charlie Crist, conclude that social security MUST be saved, and that ANY attempts to privatize it (such as the attempt by former President Bush 43) would adversely effect seniors. Charlie would also have you believe that Marco wants to raise the retirement age for EVERYONE. This is nothing short of a scare tactic by the left, to protect government power. Marco’s plan, and a plan that we really have no choice BUT to back, is to phase out social security, so that MY generation (and really anyone born after 1972) has a real hope to see retirement. Current day seniors, and those entering retirement age in the next 10 years, would see no change to their retirement. But folks like good ole Charlie and Mr. Meek would leave you to believe that Marco is an evil Republican who wants grandma in Boca Raton to be SOL (sh*t outta luck). Does ANYONE buy that?
Apparently, the answer is a resounding “NO!”: as of the most recent Rasmussen Reports poll, which surfaced post-debate, Marco now enjoys a very comfy 50%-25% lead over Charlie (who’s better off fending off Kendrick Meek with table scraps before he ends up sinking into last place). Charlie’s attempts to paint Marco as anti-social security, anti-health care, anti-teachers, anti-women, and as this extreme right-wing Tea Partier, have failed. He’d have you believe that the 20,000 teacher jobs that were saved by Florida’s cut of the stimulus money would have been lost if Marco had his way, and that his support for the State Senate bill tying a teacher’s salary to student performance was evil. He’d have you believe that Marco’s interest in total repeal of Obamacare is irresponsible, and wrong. He’d have you believe that Marco’s support for ultra-sounds prior to the decision to abort a fetus is heartless. He’d have you believe that the Tea Party is full of wackjobs. Kind of hilarious coming from a man who idolized Ronald Reagan 4 years ago, and now can’t run away from his conservative image fast enough. It’s a source of amusement to watch a man who ran as a fiscal and social conservative for governor, running as a pro-gay adoptions, pro-gay marriage candidate who accuses the Republican party of being “extreme and radical”. Amusing, yet somehow sad and pathetic.
The Florida senate race is really about 3 things - 1. An Obama/Pelosi lackey who paints himself as a supporter of the middle class who hates big oil and the rich and believes the stimulus worked (yet claims he’d support a leaner, meaner government), 2. An Obama lackey who paints himself as a good guy who’s running as an independent because he sees both parties at fault (NOT because he couldn’t win the nomination…*jab jab, wink wink*, and 3. A true conservative who wishes to be a roadblock against the Obama agenda, and who wants to save this nation from a Greece-like reckoning.
Common sense people in the state of Florida are making their decision more and more obvious by the day…sorry Charlie, St. Petersburg is calling. Not Washington, D.C.
On Thursday night, October 7th, Marco Rubio, Charlie Crist and Kendrick Meek took part in a round table debate for 1 hour on ABC News. Topics during this debate ranged from health care, to social security, to gay adoptions, to the deficit, to the stimulus bill passed by President Obama and the left-wing congress at the commencement of his term. I found this debate to be a true snapshot of what this campaign has been about:
Charlie Crist misrepresenting Marco’s position on social security
Kendrick Meek repeating ad nauseam that he is “the only candidate in this race” to “fill in the blank here”
Marco Rubio drawing clear distinctions between himself and the 2 Democrats (because, lets face it folks…Charlie Crist is a Democrat posing as an Independent) on the ticket
Charlie Crist’s failure to portray himself as a middle-of-the-road, common sense type of guy who sees good in both the major political parties
Kendrick Meek demonizing the rich, and accusing both Crist and Rubio of making their careers out of being opponents of the middle class
It would seem that the best way to fix the social security system as we know it, is to legalize 12-14 million illegal immigrants, give them access to jobs, and let them pay into the system in order to save it. That’s right! Charlie Crist considers this to be a sound, common sense solution. Has anyone ever told Mr. Crist that eventually, those people will retire too? D’OH! Sorry, Charlie. You see, using this as a realistic, logical solution makes absolutely NO sense. Why? Well, it’s simple really - the reason why we have a serious problem with the system at present, is because there is an inverse relationship between retirees, and employees. The baby boomer generation is reaching retirement age, and the facts are pretty simple: estimates are that between now and 2017, social security will be paying out more than it takes in. By 2037, when I turn 53, it will be no more. Yet Democrats, including Charlie Crist, conclude that social security MUST be saved, and that ANY attempts to privatize it (such as the attempt by former President Bush 43) would adversely effect seniors. Charlie would also have you believe that Marco wants to raise the retirement age for EVERYONE. This is nothing short of a scare tactic by the left, to protect government power. Marco’s plan, and a plan that we really have no choice BUT to back, is to phase out social security, so that MY generation (and really anyone born after 1972) has a real hope to see retirement. Current day seniors, and those entering retirement age in the next 10 years, would see no change to their retirement. But folks like good ole Charlie and Mr. Meek would leave you to believe that Marco is an evil Republican who wants grandma in Boca Raton to be SOL (sh*t outta luck). Does ANYONE buy that?
Apparently, the answer is a resounding “NO!”: as of the most recent Rasmussen Reports poll, which surfaced post-debate, Marco now enjoys a very comfy 50%-25% lead over Charlie (who’s better off fending off Kendrick Meek with table scraps before he ends up sinking into last place). Charlie’s attempts to paint Marco as anti-social security, anti-health care, anti-teachers, anti-women, and as this extreme right-wing Tea Partier, have failed. He’d have you believe that the 20,000 teacher jobs that were saved by Florida’s cut of the stimulus money would have been lost if Marco had his way, and that his support for the State Senate bill tying a teacher’s salary to student performance was evil. He’d have you believe that Marco’s interest in total repeal of Obamacare is irresponsible, and wrong. He’d have you believe that Marco’s support for ultra-sounds prior to the decision to abort a fetus is heartless. He’d have you believe that the Tea Party is full of wackjobs. Kind of hilarious coming from a man who idolized Ronald Reagan 4 years ago, and now can’t run away from his conservative image fast enough. It’s a source of amusement to watch a man who ran as a fiscal and social conservative for governor, running as a pro-gay adoptions, pro-gay marriage candidate who accuses the Republican party of being “extreme and radical”. Amusing, yet somehow sad and pathetic.
The Florida senate race is really about 3 things - 1. An Obama/Pelosi lackey who paints himself as a supporter of the middle class who hates big oil and the rich and believes the stimulus worked (yet claims he’d support a leaner, meaner government), 2. An Obama lackey who paints himself as a good guy who’s running as an independent because he sees both parties at fault (NOT because he couldn’t win the nomination…*jab jab, wink wink*, and 3. A true conservative who wishes to be a roadblock against the Obama agenda, and who wants to save this nation from a Greece-like reckoning.
Common sense people in the state of Florida are making their decision more and more obvious by the day…sorry Charlie, St. Petersburg is calling. Not Washington, D.C.
Friday, October 8, 2010
DebateCorner
With just 24 days to go, Republicans have the lead in 10 states for the senate, and in the House
Ideologically, our president portrayed himself as an agent of change. He denied the seemingly inevitable ascension of the former First Lady, to the position of “leader of the free world”. He doctored his speeches to conceal the evident phraseology favoring Marxist governance, and plowed through the American people who decried his calls for socialized medicine, Keynesian fiscal policy, federal takeover of private entities, and further destruction of our dollar. Now, we stand a mere 3+ weeks from REAL change.
Here are the latest RealClearPolitics.com polling averages of the 10 key states that Republicans must win, to unseat Prince Harry:
Colorado - Ken Buck - 48%, Michael Bennet (incumbent) - 44%
Illinois - Mark Kirk - 41%, Alexi Giannoulias - 39.8%
Nevada - Sharron Angle - 43.8%, Harry Reid (incumbent) - 43.5%
West Virginia - John Raese - 48%, Joe Manchin - 43.5%
Pennsylvania - Pat Toomey - 47%, Joe Sestak - 40.4%
Wisconsin - Ron Johnson - 52.3%, Russ Feingold (incumbent) - 42.3%
Indiana - Dan Coats - 50.5%, Brad Ellsworth - 33.5%
Arkansas - John Boozman - 54.7%, Blanche Lincoln (incumbent) - 35%
North Dakota - John Hoeven - 69.7%, Tracy Potter - 23.2%
Connecticut - Richard Blumenthal - 52.4%, Linda McMahon - 43.2%
In the states that the Republican candidate has the lead in, 6 of them have a lead of greater than 5 percentage points. In California and Washington the incumbent Democrats (Barbara Boxer and Patti Murray), are under 50%. If Dino Rossi or Carly Fiorina can get a late surge, the Republicans will return to power. Astoundingly, Joe Manchin, governor of West Virginia, has a solid approval rating, yet trails in his senate bid. Clearly, a sign of absolute repudiation of this president.
On the House side, all signs point to a GOP takeover there, too. Current projections have the Republicans with 210 seats, and the Democrats with just 181. Incumbents who have spent a generation in power, are either trailing, or hanging on for dear life. Recently, Nancy Pelosi was quoted as saying that for every dollar a person receives in food stamps, $1.79 gets put back into the economy, and "It is the biggest bang for the buck when you do food stamps and unemployment insurance. The biggest bang for the buck”. It is extraordinarily clear that the powers that be in our legislature…moreover, the “elites” who concern themselves more with inventing new ways to consolidate their power, care more about enslaving the American people into federal welfare programs, than empowering us as a people to be independent. From cap and tax, to universal health care, to laws regulating what we can and cannot eat, to violating the 2nd amendment, to appointing Czars to carry out tasks with NO foresight from elected officials who directly represent the people, the promises of this president of transparency and accountable government were blatant, horrific lies. He rode a tidal wave of anti-Republican feelings, and fed off of fear of President Bush. Aided by the liberal media in covering up his radical agenda, the American people entrusted him to clean up Washington. He promised to “fundamentally transform America”, and he’s done a good job.
November 4th, 2008 was a day where America sacrificed it’s collective freedom, in hopes that our newfound savior would swoop in, undue 8 years of hell from the Bush administration, and return us to the promised land. What we have gotten is crippling debt which threatens our treasury bonds, a tax code which our Democrat-led congress left town without clarifying, a health care system which focuses more on government bureaucracy and loss of personal freedom than cutting costs and ensuring top quality, and an energy path to ruin.
Keep your change, Obama. And I WILL have hope.
Ideologically, our president portrayed himself as an agent of change. He denied the seemingly inevitable ascension of the former First Lady, to the position of “leader of the free world”. He doctored his speeches to conceal the evident phraseology favoring Marxist governance, and plowed through the American people who decried his calls for socialized medicine, Keynesian fiscal policy, federal takeover of private entities, and further destruction of our dollar. Now, we stand a mere 3+ weeks from REAL change.
Here are the latest RealClearPolitics.com polling averages of the 10 key states that Republicans must win, to unseat Prince Harry:
Colorado - Ken Buck - 48%, Michael Bennet (incumbent) - 44%
Illinois - Mark Kirk - 41%, Alexi Giannoulias - 39.8%
Nevada - Sharron Angle - 43.8%, Harry Reid (incumbent) - 43.5%
West Virginia - John Raese - 48%, Joe Manchin - 43.5%
Pennsylvania - Pat Toomey - 47%, Joe Sestak - 40.4%
Wisconsin - Ron Johnson - 52.3%, Russ Feingold (incumbent) - 42.3%
Indiana - Dan Coats - 50.5%, Brad Ellsworth - 33.5%
Arkansas - John Boozman - 54.7%, Blanche Lincoln (incumbent) - 35%
North Dakota - John Hoeven - 69.7%, Tracy Potter - 23.2%
Connecticut - Richard Blumenthal - 52.4%, Linda McMahon - 43.2%
In the states that the Republican candidate has the lead in, 6 of them have a lead of greater than 5 percentage points. In California and Washington the incumbent Democrats (Barbara Boxer and Patti Murray), are under 50%. If Dino Rossi or Carly Fiorina can get a late surge, the Republicans will return to power. Astoundingly, Joe Manchin, governor of West Virginia, has a solid approval rating, yet trails in his senate bid. Clearly, a sign of absolute repudiation of this president.
On the House side, all signs point to a GOP takeover there, too. Current projections have the Republicans with 210 seats, and the Democrats with just 181. Incumbents who have spent a generation in power, are either trailing, or hanging on for dear life. Recently, Nancy Pelosi was quoted as saying that for every dollar a person receives in food stamps, $1.79 gets put back into the economy, and "It is the biggest bang for the buck when you do food stamps and unemployment insurance. The biggest bang for the buck”. It is extraordinarily clear that the powers that be in our legislature…moreover, the “elites” who concern themselves more with inventing new ways to consolidate their power, care more about enslaving the American people into federal welfare programs, than empowering us as a people to be independent. From cap and tax, to universal health care, to laws regulating what we can and cannot eat, to violating the 2nd amendment, to appointing Czars to carry out tasks with NO foresight from elected officials who directly represent the people, the promises of this president of transparency and accountable government were blatant, horrific lies. He rode a tidal wave of anti-Republican feelings, and fed off of fear of President Bush. Aided by the liberal media in covering up his radical agenda, the American people entrusted him to clean up Washington. He promised to “fundamentally transform America”, and he’s done a good job.
November 4th, 2008 was a day where America sacrificed it’s collective freedom, in hopes that our newfound savior would swoop in, undue 8 years of hell from the Bush administration, and return us to the promised land. What we have gotten is crippling debt which threatens our treasury bonds, a tax code which our Democrat-led congress left town without clarifying, a health care system which focuses more on government bureaucracy and loss of personal freedom than cutting costs and ensuring top quality, and an energy path to ruin.
Keep your change, Obama. And I WILL have hope.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)