The Moment: Mitt Romney’s Closing Message… See the video

  Bookmark and Share  This election is about something bigger than ourselves. This is our time to choose our nation’s future. With Mitt Romney’s leadership, America will come roaring back.  (See the video below)

That is one of the closing messages Mitt Romney is offering on this final day of campaigning in the 2012 presidential election.  It is a message of optimism and hope that offers a stark contrast to President Obama’s closing message of blame and “revenge

In 2008, Barack Obama sold most American’s on his promise of hope and change but four years later, most voters have seen that President Obama does not have a positive, optimistic vision for America.  His vision is a nation divided by class, envy, and blame.  And despite the evidence of the fact that Barack Obama’s blank checks and handouts have been doing more harm than good, his entire presidential campaign promised four more years of the same failed policies.

That is not the American way.  Americans do not stay down and they do not sustain failure.  They learn from their mistakes, and correct the wrongs of our past in order to create a better future.

That better future is not possible with four more years of a President who seeks to change the American way and to enact policies that create more problems than they solve.

Voting for Barack Obama is like praying for Hurricane Sandy to swing around and hit the East Coast again.  So the choice is clear, do you want a nation that remains under water, or do we want to take the high road and support a presidential ticket that seeks to preserve the American way, not destroy it.

Bookmark and Share

Change? Obama Worse than Bush

The verdict is in, and Barack Obama did not produce the change he promised.  In fact, as he blames all his ills on the last 8 years, it is interesting to compare the Bush years to the Obama years.  Consider the following:

Average Annual Increase in Public Debt (in millions):

Bush: $543,818        Obama: $1,497,601

Total Increase in Public Debt (in millions):

Bush (8 years): $4,217,261   Obama (4 years): $5,990,407

Average Annual Unemployment (Also see here):

Bush: 5.26%                    Obama: 9.2%

Median Household Incomes:

January, 2009: $55,198       August, 2012: $50,678

The Average Annual Price of Gas (not even including 2012):

Bush: $2.14                     Obama: $2.89

Cost of Higher Education (adj. for inflation, not even including 2012):

Bush 2008: $16,661     Obama 2011: $18,497

But isn’t health insurance cheaper now with Obamacare?  No.  In 2012 the amount a family with employer provided coverage pays in annual premiums has increased to about $16,000.  For families with private individual plans, the amount is up to $5,615.  And before you ask why families don’t all just switch to private individual plans, remember that Obamacare taxes medium-large businesses up to $3,000 per employee that they don’t cover.

But we know Obama has handled the economy terribly.  The other thing people elected Obama for was to end the wars.  Obama promised to close Gitmo, which didn’t happen, and to end the war in Iraq.  He ended the war in Iraq by sticking to Bush’s timeline, but that wasn’t the whole story.  Obama intended to continue the war and leave troops in Iraq, but Biden could not negotiate simple immunity for our troops.  Don’t look now, but the Afghanistan war isn’t ending in 2014.  The administration is already negotiating to keep up to 25,000 troops in Afghanistan after 2014.

Let’s look at war by the numbers.

Involvement in Major Foreign Conflicts:

Bush: 2 countries           Obama: 3 countries

Military Spending as % of GDP:

Bush, 2008: 4.4%          Obama, 2011: 4.7%

Average Annual War Spending:

Bush: $99.3 Billion       Obama: $155.1 Billion

Obama boasts of ending the war in Iraq, but how is the peace President doing in Afghanistan?

Average Annual Troop Deaths:

Bush: 606                        Obama: 445

Iraq:  528                         66

Afghanistan: 78              379

But what about Bush’s handling of Katrina?  Surely Obama has done better than that, right?  Former NYC Mayor Guiliani says no.

What about taxes?  Obama boasts about cutting people’s taxes, but most of the tax hikes he passed don’t go into effect until next year.  Obamacare has 20 different tax hikes in it, and many of those affect the poor and the sick.

But Obama saved the auto industry, right?  Actually, the only Detroit major that survived was Ford.  Ford didn’t take Obama’s bailout.  Chrysler did, and is now owned by an Italian company called Fiat.  GM took Obama’s bailout and is now owned by the taxpayers.  This was after Obama spent billions to bailout the unions before letting the two companies go through bankruptcy.  If that’s Obama saving the auto industry, I hope he doesn’t do me any favors.

Add these factors to Benghazi, Fast and Furious, the Black Panther polling case, Solyndra, and the other various scandals and overreaches of the Obama administration, and there is no reason to re-elect Obama.  Except of course if you got an Obama phone and are afraid of losing it.

How Obama Could Still Win:

Several states in play are ties or tossups in the latest polls.  In some, Obama is leading by 3-5%, but 3-5% are either undecided or going third party.  Obama can still win, even with his horrible statistics, if people vote third party or stay home.

I know many out there are voting third party or not voting to protest Romney.  I, like you, am a very libertarian leaning constitutionalist.  I’d love to see us out of the Middle East.  I’d love to see government spending cut in half.  I’d love to see us hold to our 10th amendment.  But Mitt Romney is NOT Barack Obama.

If anything, Mitt Romney is far closer to Reagan.  Despite being hailed as a conservative hero, Reagan is not as conservative as I would have preferred.  In fact, many Ron Paul and Gary Johnson voters would probably not vote for Reagan either.  But Mitt Romney is not the candidate you should be protesting.  You should be protesting Barack Obama.

Consider your goals and which candidate will get us there:

Less involvement in the Middle East: Mitt Romney has a comprehensive energy plan that gets America using its own resources to lower our dependence on OPEC.  Obama spent billions of your tax dollars on green energy companies that went bankrupt, and we are no closer to independence from foreign oil.

Simpler, fairer tax system: Romney’s plan reduces rates in order to remove loopholes and deductions based on the government’s definition of what a good citizen looks like without raising taxes.  Obama’s plan is higher taxes, more redistribution and a more complex tax system designed to pick winners and losers.

Foreign wars: Obama has proven himself to be an interventionalist.  He is not the peace President people hoped for.  He hasn’t closed Gitmo.  He only left Iraq because he was too incompetent to negotiate a way to stay there.  But he is already negotiating to keep 25,000 troops in Afghanistan.  Romney’s approach is to show the kind of strength Reagan did.  What major war did we fight when Reagan was President?  The Cold War, where we sat across the ocean from each other and didn’t pull the trigger for eight years.  Finally, the Soviet Union collapsed under their economic system.

More personal freedom and responsibility: Nothing took us backwards further as a nation than Obamacare.  Obamacare mandates that every American buy private health insurance or pay a tax.  Obamacare takes deciding power away from doctors and patients and gives it to the government.  If you protest Romney, Obamacare is here to stay.  If you vote to protest Obama, we have a shot at repealing this monstrous tax on the sick and the poor.

Does My Vote Count?

If you are thinking of voting third party or not voting because Romney is not as conservative as you’d like, you could be part of the margin that gives Obama four more years to take us down the path towards socialism at hyperspeed.  So where does Romney need your vote the most:

Virginia, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Florida, Nevada, Colorado, Indiana, Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, New Mexico, Arizona.

But believe it or not, he also needs you in Oregon, Minnesota, Connecticut, New Jersey, and Maine. If nothing else, vote to tell the liberals in your state that they do not have a mandate.  The country is changing and is leaning to the right.  You will never get the conservative, limited government you want if you let the country fall off the socialist cliff because the most conservative candidate who can win is not conservative enough for you.

When you walk into the voting booth, consider what you want America to look like in 2016.  Do you want to move forward the way Obama does?  Do you really want four more years of this?

The Pennsylvania Pivot: Closeness of Race in PA Proves President Obama is in Trouble

Bookmark and Share While many polls and the members of the media reading them have led us to believe that this Tuesday’s presidential election is going to be one of the closest in history, what we are witnessing is probably the most misleading narrative since the Chicago Daily Tribune got caught touting the headline “DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN” even though the results were actually the other way around.

Back in 1948, the tables were reversed though.  As that election approached, Newsweek polled 50 key political journalists on which candidate they thought would win.  That October 11th  issue of  Newsweek reported that all 50 of those journalist covering the election believed Dewey would win.

On Election Day, the polls indicated that President Truman had cut in to Dewey’s lead significantly.  Still though,  most all media sources continued to believe that second time Republican presidential nominee, New York Governor  Thomas Dewey, would win by a landslide.   Then came election night.

As results poured in, despite  the fact that Truman was ahead in the popular vote, broadcast journalists were still convinced that Governor Dewey was going to win the presidency in the Electoral College. It wasn’t until 4:00 am the next morning that Truman’s victory became an undeniable conclusion.  Then at 10:14 am, Governor Dewey conceded the election to President Truman.

64 years later a similar surprise is in the works and no place is that more evident than in Pennsylvania.

While White House 2012 continues to project that Barack Obama will ultimately win the Keystone State, the race in Pennsylvania is proving to be increasingly close.  A few weeks ago, Pennsylvania was not in play.  As was the case with much of  of the rest of the Northeast, Pennsylvania was so solidly behind the President  that neither President Obama that neither he nor Mitt Romney spent much time or money on campaigning in the state.  But ever since the first presidential debate, an undeniable tide started sweeping the nation.  For Barack Obama it is a receding tide that is sweeping his reelection hopes out to sea.  For Mitt Romney it’s a rising tide that is lifting his electoral boat high on the seas as a gentle breeze fills his sails and propels him to victory.  That tide is so high that now only hours before Election Day, the once dark blue state of Pennsylvania is purple with increasing flashes of red showing through.

Still, the Obama campaign would like us to believe that this is not true.  Instead they would rather we ignore the fact that a little more than a month ago President Obama held practically a ten pont percent lead over Mitt Romney but now, two days before the election, that lead is anywhere from 4 percentage points to non-existent as some polls have the race a tie in Pennsylvania.  To help convince us that this disappearance of the President’s lead is not real, Obama surrogates are calling Romney’s recent decision to campaign  in Pennsylvania an act of desperation.  Chief Obama strategist David Axelrod claims that it is a last ditch attempt by Romney to find electoral votes in Pennsylvania because he get find them in places like Ohio, Florida, or Virginia.

Other Obama surrogates claim that Romney’s campaign activity in Pennsylvania is all a head fake designed to force President Obama to waste time and money in a state in Pennsylvania instead of a state like Iowa or Wisconsin or Colorado.

Either way the Obama-Biden ticket wants to paint Romney’s new focus on Pennsylvania, they’re wrong.  If they were right, Mitt Romney would not be investing money in a new ad buy there and he would not be spending valuable and increasingly rare time campaigning there.  And if the Obama-Biden ticket was so sure that they were winning Pennsylvania, they would not be increasing their own ad buys in the state and they would not be have the campaign’s chief surrogate, former President Bill Clinton, making 4 campaign stops in Pennsylvania on the day before the election.

The truth is that Mitt Romney is not trying to get Pennsylvania’s electoral votes because he needs to make up for his inability to get them from other states.  He is campaigning in Pennsylvania because the polls show that his electoral map has expanded and that the opportunity to win more states have increased.  At the same time, just the opposite has occurred for President Obama.  In fact, President Obama’s shrinking electoral map has made Pennsylvania one of three state’s that he cannot win reelection without.

The other two must wins for the Obama-Biden ticket are Ohio and Michigan.

As shown in the chart below, White House 2012’s election projection finds that based upon the likely results in other states, President Obama has only 3 paths to victory and each of those 3 combinations requires winning Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan.

Unfortunately for the President, as Election Day approaches not only is he finding himself having to fight for Pennsylvania, he continues to see himself in a tight race in Ohio and in Michigan, the third state that is a must win for him, the Obama-Biden ticket is also seeing the race tighten up.

So despite claims to contrary by Team Obama, the pivot to Pennsylvania in the closing days of the election reflects a real shift in the election.  Mitt Romney is still unlikely to win the state, but the mere fact that President Obama is threatened there means that he is in trouble.  It also means that just as was the case in 1948, the potential for some big surprises in the form of an electoral landslide for Romney that few others aside from Dick Morris, Michael Barone, and White House 2012, have predicted.

Bookmark and Share

NY Daily News Endorsement of Romney is a Clear Sign that Obama’s Base Has Eroded

   “The presidential imperative of the times is to energize the economy and get  deficits under control to empower the working and middle classes to again enjoy  the fruits of an ascendant America. So The News is compelled to stand with Romney.”

Bookmark and Share   And with that, the traditionally liberal oriented Daily News which endorsed Barack Obama in 2008, endorsed Mitt Romney for President in 2012.

The endorsement is probably meaningless in terms of its effect on the final result in the election, especially the expected result in New York City which The Daily News covers. Few if any committed voters in the New York tri-state area will be changing their minds based upon this endorsement.  First of all, millions of people in this area are homeless, or without power and busy throwing their belongings in to garbage bags and dragging them to the curb as they try to salvage their flooded homes.  So many of them are not seeing or hearing about the endorsement and those that might, probably won’t be convinced to change their minds because of it.   But while the endorsement may not make a difference, it is still an important verdict.    It is further evidence of a national sentiment which is not being accurately measured in most state and national polls.

Polls which are basing their results on the 2008 turnout models are giving President Obama an overwhelming and undue edge by assuming that voters are as excited by and as enthusiastic with Barack Obama as they were in 2008.  That model does not accurately gauge the sentiments of voters who four years later are disappointed by Barack Obama and as seen in the opinion of the liberal editorial board of the Daily News, that disappointment even exists among the President’s base.

Ultimately, an incumbent can not run away from their record.  President Obama has done his very best to run away and hide from it, but like his own shadow, he has not been able to distance himself from it.  And it is that record which The Daily News based its decision on.

The Daily News dedicated more than half of their editorial outlining the failures in President Obama’s record, including his two centerpiece legislative agenda items… the economic stimulus packages and Obamacare.  And when it comes to the promised hope and change that Barack Obama rode to victory in 2008, The Daily News points out that very little changed and hope under Barack Obama has become a distant memory.  This point is made most apparent in their describing the process that Obama used to pass healthcare reform as a partisan mess.

The Daily News put it this way;

“R.I.P. and never to be resurrected — Obama’s promised bipartisanship.”

Meanwhile, the editorial board of the News did not base their decision entirely upon a desire to vote against Barack Obama.  In their editrorial they offered numerous reasons to vote for Mitt Romney.  They write;

“Critically, he has tailored his policies to create jobs, jobs, jobs.

The centerpieces of Romney’s plan call for spending restraint and rewriting  the Internal Revenue code to lower rates by 20%. He would make up much of the  lost revenue by eliminating deductions and loopholes that have made the tax  system a thicket of strangling complexities. On its own, paring the personal and  corporate rules to the basics would catalyze business and consumer spending.”

The endorsement goes on to praise Romney for his energy plan, Medicare proposals, immigration strategy.  In other words, even The Daily News sees Romney as candidate solid enough to vote for and not as a protest vote against Barack Obama.

No, the Daily News endorsement won’t change the minds of many voters and possibly not even any voters at all.  But with two days to go till the election, it doesn’t matter.  As demonstrated by the liberal Daily News, even the President’s base is finding it hard to honestly say that the last four years have been a success and they finding it even harder to say that another four years of the same will be any more succesful.   Most moderates, independents, Libertarians, Republicans and conservative have known that for quite some time now.  But it is becoming more and more obvious that even many Democrats and liberals are accepting that.  Such is not a recipe for victory for Barack Obama.  It is a winning formula for Mitt Romney

The polls are not picking up on those conclusions.  Instead the liberal hacks and leftist manipulators of numbers like Nate Silver over a the New York Times are trying to convince us that Mitt Romney has about an only 20% chance of winning.  If they truly believe that, than they are far less intelligent than I have until now known liberals to be.

More realistic indications of the national sentiment are reflected by those like Michael Barone, one of the most prominent and less partisan political analysts in the nation.  Barone projects a Romney win in the Electoral College with 315 electoral votes.   White House 2012’s own projection is close to Barone’s, with two exceptions.  While Barone projects Romney will take Pennsylvania and lose Nevada, White House 2012 believes Romney will take Nevada but lose Pennsylvania.  We will defer to Barone’s expertise on the issue but a more likely outcome is that the Romney-Ryan ticket will win neither Pennsylvania or Nevada.  But fear not.  Such a result would still produce a Romney victory in the Electoral College with 295 electors. Of course if this is the landslide that both Michael Barone and White House believe we are headed towards, Governor Romney could win both and seal the deal with a 321 to 217 Electoral College win.

Either way, the writing is on the wall.  The momentum remains behind Mitt Romney in these closing days of the campaign and as President Obama continues to wreak of desperation on the campaign trail, a cool and confident Mitt Romney is seeming more and more and presidential on the campaign trail as he continues to win over over undecided voters and energize his base.

So while The Daily News endorsement of Mitt Romney will not change the outcome of the election, it confirms that there exists a negative sentiment of President Obama that has even spilled over to liberal partisans who despite trying quite hard to find any excuse to support their ideological standardbearer, can’t find any.

Bookmark and Share

Critical Reminders Before You Vote

In a society that offers a 24/7/365 news cycle, four years is a long time. Indeed, for most of us, Obama’s first term has been an eternity. Before Tuesday’s epic election, all citizens should take some time and consider carefully the vote they will cast. With that in mind, and in hopes of sparking your memory, let’s take a quick trip down memory lane. Here are a few things that happened during Obama’s first term.

Let’s start where Obama started — healthcare. Remember the dirty deeds involved with the passage of Obamacare? It was truly a low in American politics. There was the Corn-husker Kickback. There was liberal demi-god, Dennis Kucinich, basically saying — even though I’m against it, I’m for it. Of course, political favors will change even a demi-god’s mind. The late Arlen Spector claimed he was promised increased political clout for his vote but after providing it, he got shafted. Think about that for a minute. Spector was a Republican that jumped to the Democrats. He was a turncoat. Yet once the liberals got his vote, they slit his throat. That’s how dirty this deal got.

Do you recall the stupid sales pitch that Obama-care made fiscal sense? The math wizards used 10 years of revenues versus just six years of expenses for that dandy. How about San Fran Nan’s insightful nugget about how Obama-care had to be passed before the people can see what’s in it? As if it was a present waiting under the tree. Crafty one, she is. Little did we know the pretty paper and ribbon was hiding incomparable tax hikes and bureaucratic death panels. Is it starting to come back you?

The Obamacare circus was an insanely partisan environment. Not one Republican in the Senate voted for it. The House of Representatives has had 33 votes to repeal it. The citizenry was so rip-shit when it passed, that numerous Democrats that supported the bill were voted out during the mid-term elections of 2010. By the way, demi-god Denny got changed out too – he lost his seat at the table earlier this year.

But politicians aren’t the only thing that has changed—so has the price tag. Obamacare was originally said to be a $900 billion pursuit. The last analysis came in at over $2.6 trillion. Ultimately, it is a massively huge tax hike. But we have to have a massively huge tax hike because the $700 billion Obama stole from Medicare just isn’t enough to fund it.

Obamacare is a bad law rammed through by liberal-progressive zealots and it is filled with political poison. Consider that retiring Democrats, as if giving their last confession, have spoken out against it. So bad is Obama-care, unions and businesses that support Democrats demanded exemptions from it. Which, of course, they were given because you can’t jeopardize those campaign contributions, now can you? Obamacare has forced businesses to stop hiring and halt expansion. Numerous states have revolted against it because they are revolted by it. All of this is not anti-Obamacare spin. This is documented reality. In June, Chief Justice Roberts’ ruling basically told us that to rid ourselves of Obamacare, we must rid ourselves of Obama. Well, that time has arrived.

But there are many more sweet memories to cherish from Obama’s first term. It’s well known that Obama has violated the constitution numerous times. Legal scholars have been crying foul almost from his inauguration day. He stands at the podium and talks of love of country but undermines or ignores his constitutional responsibilities. His two-faced behavior was never more evident than when, after blathering on and on about his grave concerns regarding the law, Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). As a reminder, this law allows the president, on just his say, to target American citizens for detention and hold them indefinitely or to actually have them killed. Incidentally, Obama signed this law under cover of New Year’s eve and a holiday. Political cowardice? You tell me.

This is a president that has made illegal appointments during congressional recess, granted amnesty to illegal immigrants and has directed the DOJ not to enforce laws on the books. If you do your research, you will find that some scholars rate George Bush’s constitutional behavior as quite poor. You will also find that others feel Obama’s record is worse. Combine these two presidential terms and we have twelve years of presidential government that routinely violates the constitution. If nothing else, Obama needs to be fired to send the message to future presidents that this will not stand. Dictators and tyrants be warned. The citizens have had enough of constitutional violations, unresponsive government and political corruption.

And speaking of corruption—we have Solyndra, Energy Conversion Devices, Raser Technologies and numerous other “green” businesses that have put us in the red. Obama gave political friends truck loads of cash that has ended in hundreds of billions in losses to American tax payers. There is also the on-going Delphi Pension scandal where, as part of the auto bailout, non-union workers lost huge chunks of their pensions while the pensions of union workers went untouched. Does Obama plays favorites?

And some of his favorites are dangerous. He grants government access to individuals and organizations that have been determined by a court of law to support terrorism. The propaganda press hides it from us. But it is true. What is also true is that scandals involving money and political favoritism are one thing. Scandals that result in the deaths of Americans are something else.

Operation Fast and Furious cost Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry his life. And the killing of ICE Special Agent Jaime Zapata is also suspected to be the result of a Fast and Furious gun. This scandal remains unresolved because the supreme ruler claimed executive privilege to stop the investigation. Could it have reached him? It seems likely. And of course we have the Benghazi consulate attack.

There were four Americans killed in Libya on September 11th when the US consulate was attacked by men armed with guns, rocket propelled grenades and mortars. These details were included in the very first news reports. Yet, instead of standing tall and assuming responsibility as a real leader would, Obama shunned accountability. He misled the American people by claiming the assault was the result of disgruntled protestors upset by an insignificant and amateurish anti-Muslim video.

The details continue to trickle in but to date we know the administration knew almost from the start that the attack was preplanned. We know that personnel within the consulate sent numerous requests for additional protection well in advance of the attack. All of these requests were denied. We also know some security personnel, as the attack was unfolding, were inexplicably ordered to stand down. They didn’t. They fought and ultimately gave their lives to protect others. Meanwhile, tucked safely away in Washington, Obama and his administration have displayed shameful behavior. Clearly, if Obama intentionally misled the public he should be fired. And if you negate malicious intent, then the incompetence displayed by Obama to protect Americans are the grounds for his dismissal.

But there are other gems that should be considered before you vote. For instance, the country’s credit rating was down-graded under Obama’s watch. The first and only time this has occurred. Recall the debt ceiling battles when House Speaker John Boehner said an agreement was reached but then fell apart because Obama moved the goal posts. And even after changing the game, it was Obama that walked from the table, like a spoiled child taking his ball and running home.

Obama has proven himself to be among the most, if not the most, anti-business president in the history of the country. Statements like you didn’t build that and the economy is doing fine are more demonstrative of his disdain for business and capitalism than they are verbal miscues.

It is no secret that the supreme ruler has decided that he—not private industry—should determine America’s energy future. He has created a militaristic EPA that takes more pride in shutting down power plants than working to plan out a realistic future for America. Contrary to his debate lies, he has severely restricted oil permits for drilling. He also rejected the Keystone pipeline. His “green” agenda has closed hundreds of coal plants. This has forced t he price of energy up but worse, it has destroyed the lives of thousands of citizens that rely on the coal industry. And as you know, when plants and coal mines close the restaurants, stores and other small businesses supported by them start to suffer. It is a Domino Effect that can destroy towns. West Virginia in particular has been hammered mercilessly. The pain within West Virginia is so acute and the bitterness is so severe they gave almost half of their Democratic primary votes to a convicted criminal rather than Obama. Hopefully, on November 6th, with your help, they will see a light at the end of a very dark tunnel.

But his wrath is not just directed at oil and coal. Any business is fair game. Recall the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) brought suit against Boeing because it wanted to build a “non-union” factory in South Carolina. It is just coincidence that after Boeing gave a machinists union a new four-year contract extension the NLRB dropped the case? Gibson Guitar Corp., a guitar manufacturer owned by a Republican contributor, was targeted, raided and its assets confiscated. After months of legal hearings and business interruption, the case was dropped. Gibson was fined $350,000 big ones and spent some $2 million defending itself. Who knows how much money they lost in sales. Lawsuits against businesses and states are a regular tactic used by Obama to get his way. You can look all this up.

His goal is to grow government, not business. His goal is to expand entitlements, not the American economy. He bad mouths the rich implying they all cheated to make their money. He is a classic tax and spend guy that will fund anything with other people’s money as long as it buys him a vote. His approach to leveling the playing field is not to raise people up. Rather, it is to force people down. Romney promotes the idea that he wants to help make everyone rich. Obama seeks a level playing field where everyone is poor. His spread the wealth philosophy is really spread the pain.

Every budget year credited to Obama has had a $1 trillion deficit. That is a staggering and horrifying situation. Try to name anyone working anywhere in any field that would retain his or her job after spending $1 trillion more than was brought in. Obama has done it year after year after year. Obama submitted a 2012 budget and it was rejected 97-0 in the Democrat-controlled Senate. In April, a proposal based upon an Obama 2013 budget plan lost in the House 414-0. His spending is out of control. Just for kicks, inform the government you can’t pay your taxes because you over-spent last year and see how it responds. And adding $6 trillion to the federal deficit in just one presidential term is an insult to each and every American citizen that will have to pay it back. And their kids. And their grandkids. And their great-grandkids.

But he cares not. American citizens are not his priority. But because we can stop him from meeting his priorities, he hides his socialist agenda as best he can. He spins stories and tells partial truths because if most of America knew what he was really up to, he would be out of a job faster than a West Virginia coal worker. And don’t think he doesn’t have an agenda. Remember, he got caught with an open-mic promising Russia “more flexibility” after he wins re-election. Ask yourself — if you have the courage — what else might he do after re-election? Another open mic incident let us know he true feelings toward Benjamin Netanyahu. Of course, we really didn’t need this dose of reality as he has stuck it to Israel regularly during his first term. But it’s nice to have it on record.

Let’s see, what else is there? Obama allowed Seal Team Six operational details to be leaked to try to glorify himself. Perhaps worse, he gave information to a movie crew about the bin-Laden operation so his hero narrative could be captured on film. Think of it, Obama’s daring and personal courage captured on celluloid. No doubt, because Hollywood worships him, it will be an Academy Award winner. But unearned admiration is nothing new for the anointed one. After being elected he earned a Nobel Peace Prize for — well, just because. Obama’s ego and pursuit of celebrity has few limits. His remembrance tribute at the passing of a real American hero, Neal Armstrong, included a picture of himself, not Armstrong.

But no matter how handsome the smile, or how “cool” the persona, it is a facade. Barack Obama is about himself, not the country. His first term and his re-election campaign have demonstrated that he is a small, petty and selfish man. It is now openly discussed within political circles that Obama is a square. He rarely meets with members in his own party and virtually never meets with Republicans. Even now, Democratic politicians across the country are livid because he refuses to support down-ballot campaigns. We know his jobs council hasn’t met since January 17th and that he skips out on his Presidential Daily Briefs (PDB). In September, Marc Thiessen at the Washington Post wrote, “Obama attended his PDB just 536 times — or 43.8 percent of the time. During 2011 and the first half of 2012, his attendance became even less frequent — falling to just over 38 percent.” Imagine going to your job, if you’re lucky enough to have one, and blowing off more than half your meetings. How long would you last? This man didn’t even take the time to prepare for his first debate. Is this the type of guy you want running the country?

What we need to remember about Obama before we vote is what we have learned about Obama during his first term. He is a skilled orator, a mediocre politician and a poor leader. He is a political provocateur, not a statesman. Please, do yourself, your loved ones, your neighbors and your country a favor, vote for Mitt Romney so we can toss the Obama administration on the trash heap of history where it belongs.

Follow I.M. Citizen at IMCitizen.net 

Obama’s Desperate Closing Argument: Vote For Revenge, Not For America

   Bookmark and Share   That’s the message failed President Barack Obama is sending supporters.  It is part of his class warfare election strategy that is designed to motivate his base and it is the focus of one of Mitt Romney’s latest ads.  (See the ad below)

For the last month, the closer we get to Election Day, the more desperate President Obama has gotten. In addition to the President’s noticeable lack of any references to his record and his total unwillingness to address any real issues, the President’s campaign has been interjecting nothing but meaningless juvenile jabs at Mitt Romney. From a focus on playing word games with Romney’s name, to his continued attempts to divide Americans along lines of class by trying to pit the poor against the rich, President Obama continues to look less and less presidential with the passage of each day.

His latest attempt to suggest that voters use their most basic civic responsibility to vote as a means for exacting revenge is just the latest, best example of how unpresidential Barack Obama has become. Revenge may appeal to the President’s greedy liberal base who can’t get their hands on enough taxpayer funded government handouts, but the majority of voters not in the President’s base are not seeking to use their vote as a tool for t Obama revenge. Most Americans are using their vote to preserve the principles that made our nation the greatest in the world and as a way to make it an even greater, more prosperous nation.

In the closing days of the campaign, Barack Obama’s attempt to make this election all about revenge proves that he has lost, not just the election but also the promise of hope that he rode to victory four years ago but four years later turned into hopelessness.

Bookmark and Share

Secretary of Business: Romney Takes Advantage of Obama’s Socialist Mentality

  Bookmark and Share   President Obama recently indicated that if he wins a second term he would appoint a Secretary of Business.  For anyone who understands the legitimate roles that government and the free markets have in our republic, the comment was one which should be enough to demonstrate to them that this President truly is a socialist.   And while Mitt Romney has avoided the use of such descriptions of the President, he did not let the President’s ignorant idea go unanswered.  On Thursday he released a sharp 30 second ad that hammered President Obama for his government-centric vision. (see ad below)

The ad may not play well with President Obama’s hand-out loving, government control seeking, dim-witted, liberal base but there is no need for it to.  Mitt Romney was right when he once told a group of campaign donors that his campaign will never be able to convince those people that he is the better candidate for them or the nation.  But what this ad does do is appeal to Romney’s base, the group of voters who in these closing days of the campaign he must make sure are energized to come out and vote for him and against the President.  This ad does that.  It gives freedom loving people who want less government control, another example of just how antithetical Barack Obama is to that goal.   But more important than even Romney’s base, are the independent voters whom this ad appeals to.

Independent voters tend to be open to good government but apprehensive about more government.   They tend to be more interested in government doing what it is suppose to do properly, than giving government more things to do incorrectly.  Romney’s new ad, entitled “Secretary of Business” helps drive home the point that Barack Obama does not share that view with them.

In addition to the new ad, Romney has also taken that message to the campaign trail where today in Roanoke, Va, Romney told the audience;

“We don’t need a Secretary of Business to understand business, we need a President who understands business “.

  He added “and I do”.

Bookmark and Share

Obama Finds the Writing on the Wall in the Sands of the Jersey Shore

Bookmark and Share  On Wednesday, as Barack Obama flew over the devastated coastal section of storm ravaged New Jersey , the White House Press pool released video of the truly heart wrenching images that the President saw.  But as he approached Point Pleasant, one of the locales hardest by Hurricane Sandy, he saw something that the White House advance team missed.  It was the oversized writing in the sand of the name “Romney”.

While the writing in the sands of New Jersey are not a likely indication of which way New Jersey’s electoral votes will go, what it is representative of is the the level of enthusiasm that Romney supporters have for their candidate.   It’s a level of enthusiasm and energy that just might prove to make the difference in the presidential election in several key states such as Ohio, Florida, Virginia, Iowa and Nevada, where the depth of support Romney’s supporters have for Mitt, runs deeper than the level of support and amount of energy and enthusiasm that Obama supporters have for President Obama.

The amount of enthusiasm that supporters have for their candidate is a key component behind the success of any campaign’s Get-Out-The-Vote operation.  GOTV efforts increase the number of the campaign’s supporters who will vote for their candidate in the election.  Typically, the more enthusiastic supporters are for their candidate, the more of them a campaign can “Get-Out-To-Vote” for its candidate.  In 2012, as demonstrated by the Romney voters behind this message for the President in Point Pleasant, Romney supporters are quite passionate in their support of Mitt.

So while the writing in the sand that President Obama saw may not turn back the tide when it comes to which way heavily Democratic New Jersey will vote on November 6th, it was a sign of the writing on the wall that awaits the President when it comes to the collective results of all the sates in the nation.

Meanwhile as the President took time to visit New Jersey as it was trying to recover from Hurricane Sandy, many New Jerseyans like myself are still wondering what good President Obama’s visit did for the Garden State.

Aside from consuming the time and energy of government resources that might have been better used on other pressing matters confronting the people of New Jersey, the visit really did nothing but cost taxpayers money. Yet President Obama decided to “act” presidential and visit the Garden State as New Jerseyans began to piece their lives back together.  From my vantage point here in New Jersey where life has just become much harder, the President’s visit served one purpose and one purpose only.  It allowed the President to act presidential, somenthing which is a change of pace for Obama, who in recent weeks has been acting anything but presidential on the campaign trail where his big issues have been Big Bird, bayonets, and binders, or in the Oval Office where on issues such as Benghazi instead of allowing the buck to stop with him, he has been passing the buck.

Which is why for me, the best part of President Obama’s P.R. stunt was the blunt New Jersey-style, in-your-face, message written for the President amid the ruins of the Jersey Shore.  It proved to me that if Romney supporters are willing to take the time to write Romney’s name in the sands savaged by a super-storm, than they will certainly be turning out to vote for Romney in the quiet calm of the voting booth.

Bookmark and Share

Romney Pulls Ahead of Obama in Ohio

   Bookmark and Share   President Obama’s failure to stop the continued momentum of Mitt Romney in the final days of the election has now allowed Romney to pull ahead of the President in the battleground state of Ohio where according to a new Rasmussen poll, Governor Romney now has a two-point advantage.

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely Ohio voters shows Romney with 50 percent support to President Obama’s 48 percent. According to the poll, 1 percent likes a third party candidate, while another one percent remains undecided.

Rasmussen also finds that among all Ohio voters, Romney now has a 12-point lead over the President in voter trust – 53 percent to 41 percent – when it comes to the economy. Last week, Romney had just a seven-point advantage among voters in the state when they were asked which candidate they trusted more to deal with the economy.

Romney’s also trusted more by eight points in the areas of job creation and energy policy but leads Obama by just two when it comes to housing
issues.  And when it comes to national security Governor Romney now has a 52 percent to 42 percent advantage on the issue.

All of this is evidence of the fact that Romney continues to ride a wave of momentum which is tipping the election in his favor more and more with the passage of each day.

While White House 2012 knows that Ohio is relatively close, our own analysis of polls, data, and circumstances on the ground in each state and nationally, has projected that Mitt Romney will in fact ultimately see Ohio’s 18 electoral votes go to Romney.  Interestingly, that same analysis produced evidence that upended the existing narrative that Mitt Romney can’t win the presidency without Ohio. WH12’s newest analysis showed just the opposite.

For President Obama, while he has three paths to victory two less than Romney, each of one them requires that to win the election, the President must win Ohio.

For Mitt Romney, of the five routes to victory available to him, only one of them requires that he wins Ohio, and as seen in the graphic below, that path is the one which he needs only if he losses each of the other remaining tossup states.

This latest Rasmussen poll is of course a mere snapshot of opinions at the moment and while there is room for error in the poll and the possibility for  voter sentiments to change within the next 7 days, existing evidence indicates that such a reversal of fortunes for Romney is unlikely.Bookmark and Share

The Liberal Des Moines Register Turns Its Back On Obama and Endorses Romney for President

   Bookmark and Share   Not since Richard Nixon was running for reelection in 1972 has the The Des Moines Register endorsed a Republican for President.  But on Sunday, Iowa’s largest paper did just that after it concluded that Mitt Romney “offers a fresh economic vision”.  The conclusion was essentially arrived because of the opinion that Romney’s business and executive background made him the best candidate to”unlock this nation’s economic potential.”

Despite endorsing the promise of Barack Obama’s hope and change in 2008, in their 2012 endorsement of Mitt Romney, the liberal leaning editorial staff of the Des Moines wrote;

“Voters should give Mitt Romney a chance to correct the nation’s fiscal course and to implode the partisan gridlock that has shackled Washington and the rest of America — with the understanding that he would face the same assessment in four years if he does not succeed,”

While I doubt that any newspaper endorsements actually changes the minds of any significant number of voters, the important element regarding the endorsement of Romney by a liberal based editorial board is that is shows clear evidence  of the fact that even a portion of the President’s liberal base recognize that there is no denying that President Obama’s  failed record and policies do not warrant him a second term in the White House.

From the endorsement:

Ten months ago this newspaper endorsed former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney for the Republican nomination for president. An overarching consideration was which of the party’s candidates could we see occupying the White House, and there was no question that Romney was qualified for the job.

Now, in the closing days of the general election campaign, the question is which of the two contenders deserves to be the next president of the United States.

Both President Barack Obama and Governor Romney are superbly qualified. Both are graduates of the Harvard University Law School who have distinguished themselves in government, in public service and in private life. Both are devoted husbands and fathers.

American voters are deeply divided about this race. The Register’s editorial board, as it should, had a vigorous debate over this endorsement. Our discussion repeatedly circled back to the nation’s single most important challenge: pulling the economy out of the doldrums, getting more Americans back in the workforce in meaningful jobs with promising futures, and getting the federal government on a track to balance the budget in a bipartisan manner that the country demands.

Meanwhile as The Des Moines Register broke it’s 40 year long streak of rubber stamping liberal presidents,  The New York Times unsurprisingly endorsed the President today, thereby extending their unbroken string of endorsements for Democratic candidates to 56 years.

Bookmark and Share

Big Change: Romney’s Major Address on The Economy (Full Speech and Transcript)

   Bookmark and Share  On Friday, as President Barack Obama sat down in the Blue Room of the White House to conduct an in-depth interview with MTV’s Sway, Mitt Romney used his campaign for President as an opportunity to discuss the economy.   (See complete video of the speech below and a transcript of the speech below that).  And as President Obama was telling “Sway” how he thought the most vibrant form of music right now is hip-hop, Mitt Romney stood before a crowd of 2,000 Americans in Ames Iowa, at the site of a construction company, and discussed something that might not have been quite as topical to MTV as the President’s musical tastes.  Romney chose to discuss the economy, an issue President Obama continues to try to avoid talking about.

With some 11 days to go before Election Day, the dichotomy between the topics the two men chose to focus on presented serious voters with evidence of there being a sharp contrast between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama when it comes to their priorities.  As Barack Obama chose to pander to the bubble gum blowing, pop-culture element of the electorate who is more concerned with voting for someone who spends most of their time debating who to vote for on American Idol, Mitt Romney was addressing concerned, responsible, educated voters who are more concerned with electing a President whose priorities include restoring America to greatness, not who the most popular Rap artists is.

Beyond anything else, the contrast is an embarrassing one for our President and for Americans in general.  It is an example not only of vastly different styles and priorities, it is evidence of just how while the Republican challenger for President is more willing to win this election on the issues important to our future, our incumbent President seeks to win this election by hammering together a plurality of voters that is comprised largely of people who have more knowledge about every word in Katy Perry’s latest song than they are of the words in our Constitution.  This should offend voters.  Furthermore; it is a clear indication of the President’s obvious awareness of the fact that he cannot win this election on the issues and on his record.  it is why he has spent most of time on the sofa’s of The View and every late night entertainment program that the mainstream media has to offer.

The Speech

Aside from the contrast between what the two men chose to speak about on Friday, is the content in Mitt Romney’s speech.  It was a speech that served two purposes for Romney.  It helped to remind people of the contrast in campaigns that has Barack Obama’s campaign talking about little things like Big Bird, binders, Mitt Romney is talking about the ideas worthy of a great nation.  In this case Romney addressed our economic future and it was speech worthy of a great future President.  It was a powerful, factual endictment of the President failed reocrd on the economy.   As Romney pointed out;

 “President Obama frequently reminds us that he inherited a troubled economy,” Romney said. But he also “inherited the most productive and innovative nation in history. He inherited the largest economy in the world…. What he inherited wasn’t the only problem; what he did with what he inherited made the problem worse.”

He added;

“Despite all that he inherited, President Obama did not repair our economy, he did not save Medicare and Social Security, he did not tame the spending and borrowing, he did not reach across the aisle to bring us together. Nor did he stand up to China’s trade practices, or deliver on his promise to re-make our relations with the Muslim world, where anti-American extremism is on the rise.”

But the speech was also an inspiring artiuclation of Romney’s economic vision for America, a vision that included concrete proposals to get the economic engine of our nation moving again.

If you have not taken the time to hear this speech, you should.  It may not be as scintilating as watching Mariah Carey and Nicki Minaj having a catfight on American Idol but it is far more imporatant and inspirational.

Complete Transcript of the Speech;

Thank you all.  It’s great to be back in Iowa. And don’t think that this is the last time you are going to see Paul Ryan and me, because you Iowans may well be the ones who decide what kind of America we will have, what kind of life our families will have.

The choice you make this November will shape great things, historic things, and those things will determine the most intimate and important aspects of every American life and every American family. This is an election about America, and it is an election about the American family.

All elections matter. This one matters a great deal. Over the years of our nation’s history, choices our fellow citizens have made have changed the country’s course–they were turning points of defining consequence.

We are at a turning point today. Our national debt and liabilities threaten to crush our future, our economy struggles under the weight of government and fails to create essential growth and employment.

At the same time, emerging powers seek to shape the world in their image–China with its model of authoritarianism and, in a very different way, Jihadists with Sharia, repression, and terror for the world.

This is an election of consequence.  Our campaign is about big things, because we happen to believe that America faces big challenges.  We recognize this is a year with a big choice, and the American people want to see big changes.  And together we can bring real change to this country.

Four years ago, candidate Obama spoke to the scale of the times. Today, he shrinks from it, trying instead to distract our attention from the biggest issues to the smallest–from characters on Sesame Street and silly word games to misdirected personal attacks he knows are false.

The President’s campaign falls far short of the magnitude of the times. And the presidency of the last four years has fallen far short of the promises of his last campaign. Four years ago, America voted for a post-partisan president, but they have seen the most political of presidents, and a Washington in gridlock because of it.

President Obama promised to bring us together, but at every turn, he has sought to divide and demonize. He promised to cut the deficit in half, but he doubled it. And his budget?  It failed to win a single vote, Republican or Democrat, in either the House or the Senate. He said he would reform Medicare and Social Security and save them from pending insolvency, but he shrunk from proposing any solution at all.

And then, where are the jobs?  Where are the 9 million more jobs that President Obama promised his stimulus would have created by now?  They are in China, Mexico, and Canada and in countries that have made themselves more attractive for entrepreneurs and business and investment, even as President Obama’s policies have made it less attractive for them here.

And so today, his campaign tries to deflect and detract, to minimize the failures, and to make this election about small shiny objects.

But this election matters more than that. It matters to your family.

It matters to the senior who needs to get an appointment with a medical specialist but is told by one receptionist after another that the doctor isn’t taking any new Medicare patients, because Medicare has been slashed to pay for Obamacare.

It matters to the man from Waukesha, Wisconsin I spoke with several days ago.  In what were supposed to be his best work years, he used to have a job at $25 an hour with benefits and now has one at $8 an hour, without benefits.

It matters to the college student, graduating this spring, with 10 to 20 thousand dollars in student debt, who now learns that she also will be paying for 50 thousand dollars in government debt, a burden that will put the American Dream beyond her reach.

It matters for the child in a failing school, unable to go to the school of his parent’s choosing, because the teacher’s union that funds the President’s campaign opposes school choice.

The President’s campaign has a slogan: it is “forward.” But to the 23 million Americans struggling to find a good job, these last four years feel a lot more like “backward.” We cannot afford four more years like the last four years.

This election is about big things–like the education of our children, the value of our homes, the take home pay from our jobs, the price of the gasoline we buy, and the choices we have in our healthcare. It is also about the big things that determine these things–like the growth of the economy, the strength of our military, our dependence on foreign oil, and America’s leadership in the world.

President Obama frequently reminds us that he inherited a troubled economy. But a troubled economy is not all that President Obama inherited. He inherited the greatest nation in the history of the earth. He inherited the most productive and innovative nation in history. He inherited the largest economy in the world. And he inherited a people who have always risen to the occasion, regardless of the challenges they faced, so long as we have been led by men and women who have brought us together, called on our patriotism, and guided the nation with vision and conviction.

Despite all that he inherited, President Obama did not repair our economy, he did not save Medicare and Social Security, he did not tame the spending and borrowing, he did not reach across the aisle to bring us together. Nor did he stand up to China’s trade practices, or deliver on his promise to re-make our relations with the Muslim world, where anti-American extremism is on the rise.

What he inherited wasn’t the only problem; what he did with what he inherited made the problem worse.

In just four short years, he borrowed nearly $6 trillion, adding almost as much debt held by the public as all prior American presidents in history.

He forced through Obamacare, frightening small business from hiring new employees and adding thousands of dollars to every family’s healthcare bill.

He launched an onslaught of new regulations, often to the delight of the biggest banks and corporations, but to the detriment of the small, growing businesses that create two-thirds of our jobs.

New business starts are at a 30-year low because entrepreneurs and investors are sitting on the sidelines, weary from the President’s staggering new regulations and proposed massive tax increases.

Many families can’t get mortgages and many entrepreneurs can’t get loans because of Dodd-Frank regulations that make it harder for banks to lend.

The president invested taxpayer money–your money–in green companies, now failed, that met his fancy, and sometimes were owned by his largest campaign contributors. He spent billions of taxpayer dollars on investments like Solyndra, Tesla, Fisker, and Ener1, which only added to our mounting federal debt.

Energy prices are up in part because energy production on federal lands is down.  He rejected the Keystone Pipeline from Canada, and cut in half drilling permits and leases, even as gasoline prices soared to new highs.

No, the problem with the Obama economy is not what he inherited; it is with the misguided policies that slowed the recovery, and caused millions of Americans to endure lengthy unemployment and poverty. That is why 15 million more of our fellow citizens are on food stamps than when President Obama was sworn into office. That is why 3 million more women are now living in poverty. That is why nearly 1 in 6 Americans today is poor.  That is why the economy is stagnant.

Today, we received the latest round of discouraging economic news:  Last quarter, our economy grew at just 2%.  After the stimulus was passed, the White House promised the economy would now be growing at 4.3%, over twice as fast.  Slow economic growth means slow job growth and declining take home pay. This is what four years of President Obama’s policies have produced. Americans are ready for change–for growth, for jobs, for more take home pay.

We have had four presidential and vice-presidential debates. And there is nothing in what the President proposed or defended that has any prospect of meeting the challenges of the times. Raising taxes will not grow jobs or ignite the economy–in fact, his tax plan has been calculated to destroy 700,000 jobs. A new stimulus, three years after the recession officially ended, may spare government, but it will not stimulate the private sector any better than did the stimulus of four years ago. And cutting one trillion dollars from the military will kill jobs and devastate our national defense.

This is not the time to double down on the trickle-down government policies that have failed us; it is time for new bold changes that measure up to the moment, that can bring America’s families the certainty that the future will be better than the past.

If Paul Ryan and I are elected as your president and vice president, we will endeavor with all our hearts and energy to restore America. Instead of more spending, more borrowing from China and higher taxes from Washington, we’ll renew our faith in the power of free people pursuing their dreams.  We’ll start with our plan for a stronger middle class, which has five elements:

One, we will act to put America on track to a balanced budget by eliminating unnecessary programs, by sending programs back to states where they can be managed with less abuse and less cost, and by shrinking the bureaucracy of Washington.

Two, we’ll produce more of the energy we need to heat our homes, fill our cars, and make our economy grow.  We will stop the Obama war on coal, the disdain for oil, and the effort to crimp natural gas by federal regulation of the very technology that produces it. We will support nuclear and renewables, but phase out subsidies once an industry is on its feet. And rather than investing in new electric auto and solar companies, we will invest in energy science and research to make discoveries that can actually change our energy world. And by 2020, we will achieve North American energy independence.

Three, we will make trade work for America.  We’ll open more markets to American agriculture, products, and services. And we will finally hold accountable any nation that doesn’t play by the rules.  I will stand up for the rights and interests of American workers and employers.

Four, we will grow jobs by making America the best possible place for job creators, for entrepreneurs, for small business, for innovators, for manufacturers. This we will do by updating and reshaping regulations to encourage growth, by lowering tax rates while lowering deductions and closing loopholes, and by making it clear from day one that unlike the current administration, we actually like business and the jobs business creates.

Finally, as we create more opportunity, we also will make sure that our citizens have the skills to succeed. Training programs will be shaped by the states where people live, and schools will put the interests of our kids, their parents, and their teachers above the interests of the teachers’ unions.

If we do those five things, our economy will come roaring back. We will create 12 million new jobs in just four years, raise take-home pay, and get the American economy growing at four percent a year—more than double this year’s rate. After all the false promises of recovery and all the waiting, we will finally see help for America’s middle class.

Paul and I won’t stop there. When we take office, we will take responsibility to solve the big problems that everyone agrees can’t wait any longer.

We will save and secure Medicare and Social Security, both for current and near retirees, and for the generation to come. We will restore the $716 billion President Obama has taken from Medicare to pay for his vaunted Obamacare.

We will reform healthcare to tame the growth in its cost, to provide for those with pre-existing conditions, and to assure that every American has access to healthcare. We will replace government choice with consumer choice, bringing the dynamics of the marketplace to a sector of our lives that has long been dominated by government.

These things among others we can only do if we work tirelessly to bridge the divide between the political parties. We will meet with Democrat and Republican leadership regularly, we will look for common ground and shared principles, and we will put the interests of the American people above the interests of the politicians.

I know something about leading because I’ve led before.  In business, at the Olympics, and in Massachusetts, I’ve brought people together to achieve real change.

I was elected as a Republican governor in a state with a legislature that was 85% Democrat. We were looking at a multi-billion dollar budget gap. But instead of fighting with one another, we came together to solve our problems. We actually cut spending–reduced it. We lowered taxes 19 times. We defended school choice. And we worked to make our state business friendly.

Our state moved up 20 places in job growth. Our schools were ranked number one in the nation.  And we turned a $3 billion budget deficit into a $2 billion rainy day fund.

I know it because I have seen it: Good Democrats can come together with good Republicans to solve big problems. What we need is leadership.

America is ready for that kind of leadership. Paul Ryan and I will provide it. Our plan for a stronger middle class will create jobs, stop the decline in take home pay, and put America back on the path of prosperity and opportunity. And this will enable us to fulfill our responsibility as the leader of the free world, to promote the principles of peace. We will help the Muslim world combat the spread of extremism; we will dissuade Iran from building a nuclear bomb; we will build enduring relationships throughout Latin America; and we will partner with China and other great nations to build a more stable and peaceful world.

We face big challenges. But we also have big opportunities. New doors are open for us to sell our ideas and our products to the entire world. New technologies offer the promise of unbounded information and limitless innovation. New ideas are changing lives and hearts in diverse nations and among diverse peoples. If we seize the moment and rise to the occasion, the century ahead will be an American Century.

Our children will graduate into jobs that are waiting for them. Our seniors will be confident that their retirement is secure. Our men and women will have good jobs and good pay and good benefits. And we will have every confidence that our lives are safe, and that our livelihoods are secure.

What this requires is change, change from the course of the last four years. It requires that we put aside the small and the petty, and demand the scale of change we deserve: we need real change, big change.

Our campaign is about that kind of change–confronting the problems that politicians have avoided for over a decade, revitalizing our competitive economy, modernizing our education, restoring our founding principles.

This is the kind of change that promises a better future, one shaped by men and women pursuing their dreams in their own unique ways.

This election is a choice between the status quo — going forward with the same policies of the last four years — or instead, choosing real change, change that offers promise, promise that the future will be better than the past.

If you are ready for that kind of change, if you want this to be a turning point in America’s course, join Paul Ryan and me, get your family and friends to join us, and vote now for the kind of leadership that these times demand.

God bless you. And God bless America.

Bookmark and Share

Is It Over for President Obama?

   Bookmark and Share  My years of awareness in regards to presidential politics goes back to Nixon when as I was all of 8 years old and remember Richard Nixon leaving the White House in disgrace.  From there I remember how Gerald Ford fought but failed to win his own full term in office as President.  And then came 1980 when Ronald Reagan sparked my political interest in a way that led to my own dedication to public policy and politics.  Since then I have seen President’s rise and plummet in the polls.  I remember seeing George H.W. Bush go from a popularity rating in the upper eighties in 1991, to losing the election in the Electoral College in a landslide in 1992.  I have witnessed Bill Clinton fall from grace and rise back to iconoclastic popularity.  But never before have I seen a presidential election where a supposedly very popular President saw his reelection unravel quite as quickly as Barack Obama’s has been seeing in the last month.

Evidence of this became overwhelmingly obvious as over the past few days we have seen polls show a decided shift to Mitt Romney among voters nationally.  Since the beginning of the month we have found that among military voters, Romney has a 2 to 1 margin over the President.  We also understand that the Jewish vote which traditionally supports Democrats is being won by Mitt Romney over the President.  New polls also show that Barack Obama’s once 18 point lead over Romneyamong womern has evaporated and today we learn that Mitt Romney has a 19% lead over Barack Obama among independents, the swing voters whose decisions usually determine the winner in any given election.

But in addition to signs of a tide against Barack Obama turning in to a tidal wave that threatens to drown any chance of his getting reelected, we are seeing a President who acts more and more desperate as we approach Election Day.

Instead of demonstrating how presidential he is, Barack Obama is doing an endless tour of late night talk shows from Jon Stewart to Jay Leno as  our President avoids any hard news outlets in favor of low brow, pop culture entertainment programs.   Then when he is not sitting aside TV personalities discussing his favorite color, he is on the campaign trail discussing little things such as Mitt Romney’s unwillingness to provide Big Bird with a taxpayer funded government handout.  And as we listen to his references to binders and Big Bird and hear about our President claiming to reporters that even six year old children can see Mitt Romney is a “bullshitter”, Americans can’t help but be struck by how truly unpresidential our President has become.

Meanwhile, as the pressure of the election continues to get to the President and reveal the flaws in this once messianic figure of the liberal lore, we are not hearing anything about the 24 million Americans out of work and how he will get them back to work.  We are not hearing anything about the national debt that is now so burdensome it is considered a national security risk.  And speaking of national security we are also not hearing anything about the national security scandal and coverup surrounding the tragic events in Benghazi, Libya.  No, the President refuses to honestly tell us what he knew or when knew it.  He refuses to explain to us why he tried to deny the events in Benghazi were terrorist attacks, even though the evidence shows he did know it was.  Our President refuses to even explain how he never knew that al Qaeda, the terrorist group the President has admitted is our greatest threat in thew world, was establishing itself in Libya after our Ambassador to Libya made the white House aware of that fact in messages sent for as long as two months.

Then this morning I heard from someone who is not running for President.  A man whose only real political activity consists of fulfilling his civic responsibility of making an educated vote.  His name is Charles Woods and he is the father of Tyrone Woods, one of the four Americans killed in the Benghazi terrorist attack. New evidence revealed that Tyrone Woods and the others in the consulate who were killed during the attack, had been pleading for help and the requests were denied.  To this issue Tyrone’s father spoke out.  Charles Woods wants answers.  The revelation did nothing to console the broken hear of father who lost his son. Instead it merely served as a more heartbreak as we are all left wondering who decided to not send in the troops who could have helped save his son and the three other assassinated Americans.  Instead Charles Woods son was left to defend our Ambassador and two other Americans on his own while fighting for his life.

Nothing else matters more than the answers to that right now.  Yet our President is now finishing up a an appearance on MTV after a 48 hour campaign tour that can only be described as a denial tour… denial of the failing economy, denial of no plan to create jobs or cutting our deficit.  Denial of all accountability for every aspect of the failed Obama record, including denials about the facts involving Benghazi.  It is time for our President to take a deep breath and get control of himself.  As our current Commander-In-Chief we need Benghazi explained and the mistakes that allowed Benghazi to come to fruition corrected so that it does not happen again.  We cannot go another day wondering if the pleas for help of another American serving their nation are falling on the deaf ears of a White House and President concerned more with getting virgins to vote for the President than he is with saving the lives of Americans.

So far our President is doing what he does best… avoiding the issue.  Our President refuses to explain any of this.  Instead we are being offered reasons to vote for him based upon sex, false accusations, and promises to deliver in the next four years what he couldn’t deliver in the past four.

While it is premature to suggest the election is over, based upon the more than obvious unravelling of the Obama presidency it is not premature to predict that President Obama is currently on a trajectory that is plummeting to ground faster than a rain drops pouring from the clouds.  And it is not too early to suspect that we are witnessing the makings of the most surprising landslide victory of any challenger to an incumbent President since Reagan overwhelmed Carter.  But more than four years ago, I did predict that Barack Obama was going to be the second coming of Jimmy Carter.  Unfortunately I was wrong.  While Carter’s was a failed presidency, he was not the evil, conniving, liar-in-chief that Barack Obama clearly is.

Bookmark and Share

Is Barack Obama Really a Good Friend to Israel? See the Video

   Bookmark and Share   While Mitt Romney did a good job in the last presidential debate, there was one thing I really think he was remiss in not pointing out.  When the topic of Israel came up, the Governor should have mentioned the unprecedented proposal that President Obama made in 2011 when he told Israel to adopt its 1967 borders. (See the video at the bottom of this post)

With all the attempts by President Obama to claim that he has established the strongest relationship with Israel of any previous President, there are many facts which contradict that claim. Between his refusal to ever visit Israel during his entire term in office, his recent refusal to meet Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu while Bebe was visiting the U.S. last month, and a history of Obama snubbing the Prime Minister on many occasions prior to that, it is clear that the American relationship with Israel is not as warm and close as it has been under previous presidents. But one of the most egregious acts against Israel committed by President Obama was his attempt to have Israel return to its indefensible 1967 borders.   It is a point which has not gotten the attention that it should in this election but for good reason, it must.

By trying to have Israel return it’s pre-1967 borders, President Obama was providing Arab states and the Palestinians with the ability to launch ground and missile attacks on the Jewish state with ease.  As explained in this video, a return to those borders would make it impossible for Israel to effectively defend itself against the enemies who surround them and have a great capacity to exploit added opportunities to launch ground and missile attacks.  Yet this is the position that Barack Obama proposed one of closest allies in the world to put themselves in.

During the last presidential debate, Mitt Romney had multiple chances to remind voters of this major Obama foreign policy initiative. And he should have.  At one point Romney reminded voters about Obama’s the apology tour to the Middle East he went on when first coming to office.  Governor Romney reminded us that while the President took the opportunity to fly to Egypt and to Saudi Arabia and to Turkey and Iraq, he skipped Israel, our closest friend in the region.  It was around then that Romney should have at some point pivoted to President Obama’s 1967 border proposal by adding that while he has apologized to audiences that consisted of our enemies, he has also asked our friends to make fatal concessions to our enemies.  In this case it was a concession that would have moved Israel closer to extinction.

Obama’s attempt to have Israel adopt indefensible borders is a major issue.  It is another sign of his bass ackwards policies.  Policies which seek to placate our enemies and offend our allies.  A policy that is more in the best interests of enemies than our own nation.

When it comes to the Middle East, Israel is the only nation in the region that the United States need not fear a terrorist attack from.  If it is not our only real friend in the Middle East, it is certainly our best.  For that reason alone, it should not have a so-called friend who makes it easier for Israel’s enemies to destroy them.  Yet that is a part of the Obama foreign policy which was not mentioned in any of the debates.  So I have prepared the following video to make the point that Mitt failed to and that others have forget to.

Bookmark and Share

Apology Tour: The New Romney Ad That Highlights Obama’s Bass Ackwards Foreign Policy

Bookmark and Share  In the wake of last night’s final presidential debate of the 2012 election cycle, Mitt Romney has released a new 30 second ad which powerfully explains why many people believe Barack Obama’s foreign policy priorities are as bass ackwards as his failed economic policies

In addition to making its obvious point about the President, the ad also goes a long way in reminding Jewish voters that Barack Obama is not exactly the close friend of Israel that he would like us to believe he is.  That is a critical message for Romney get across to Jewish voters in important battleground states such as Florida where the Jewish is significantly larger than it is in other states.

Bookmark and Share

Ronald Reagan vs George W. Bush

Obama screwed up.  Instead of portraying Romney as George W. Bush, which has been a major campaign goal of the left, he instead tied Romney to Ronald Reagan.  Oh, Obama was so clever.  “The 80s called, they want their foreign policy back”.  The modified version of the old high school punchline is backfiring.

The problem with tying Romney to 1980s foreign policy is that we didn’t fight any major wars during Reagan’s Presidency.  Instead, our greatest enemy sat across the ocean with thousands of nuclear warheads pointed at us, not daring to attack out of fear of mutual destruction, until eventually they just collapsed under the weight of their own oppressive economic system.  That’s a foreign policy I could live with.

Biden Smiling

The real reason we are out of Iraq

Contrast that with Obama, who defended the Bush doctrine with his surge in Afghanistan and his own foreign policy which came across as a comedy of errors.  Obama praised himself for getting us out of Iraq.  The truth is, he barely managed to keep to Bush’s timeline.  Then Obama tried to negotiate to keep some of our intelligence troops in Iraq, but he sent “Chuckles” Biden to secure the terms and we ended up getting kicked out of the country.  After all the work, and blood, we have little influence over the direction of Iraq and we share their friendship with Iran.  Great job, Mr. President.

Romney was no cowboy in the debate.  He was calm, collected, and unfortunately even pulled his punches.  But I would feel much more comfortable with Romney sitting across the table from our foreign leaders than Obama.  Obama’s cowboyish attacks and disrespect showed the greatest evidence for why his foreign policy is a trail of failure and disaster.  We can only pray that his meetings with foreign leaders didn’t follow the same tone.

And of course we saw arrogant Obama in the debate last night too.  When he talked about killingsmiling obama Bin Laden and having Bin Laden in his sites, I had to laugh.  I’m picturing Obama with a sniper rifle.  I wonder if it was just a Freudian slip when Bob Scheiffer accidentally said “Obama’s Bin Laden”.

Commentators can say what they want about Obama’s new found aggressiveness and ability to attack Romney with zingers, truth be damned.  But I think most American families watched last night and saw a clear choice between which candidate they would like to see sitting down with Assad’s replacement to discuss the future relationship between our country and Syria, or which candidate they would like to see negotiating how we end our involvement in Afghanistan.  Or perhaps which candidate they would like to see negotiating trade with China.  I think we would prefer Reagan-esque Romney to arrogant Obama and “Chuckles” Biden.  The 21st century called, and we could use a little 80s foreign policy.

Romney Stings Obama With “Apology Tour” Remark

During last night’s debate, Mitt Romney stung Obama when he stated that the president went on an apology tour and conveniently skipped Israel. You could tell immediately the comment hurt. And why wouldn’t it? It’s true. And as the cliche states — “the truth hurts.”

Attempting to ease the sting, Obama got a little bit uppity. He leaned in, elevated his voice and went into a denial and distort story about visiting Israel before he was the President of the United States. He rambled on, as he is prone to do, but ultimately skipped addressing the Israel slight or the numerous speeches he made about “America is bad and we’re sorry” during the apology tour.

Romney’s jab is significant because it showcases how Obama conducts his foreign policy — as an weakling.

Look at the Libya events that took place just last month. Obama and his administration spent numerous weeks stating the violence was sparked by an anti-Muhammad video and apologizing to the Middle East for it. During that time, not a word was mentioned about the concept of freedom of speech nor that Obama was intent on protecting it.

Authorities actually approached Google (the owner of You Tube) and requested they squash access to the video. Isn’t that censorship? Consider, too, that the video-maker was identified, detained, questioned and even forced to do the “perp-walk” in front of national media. All this because he made a video. But making amateurish videos is not against the law. Nor is criticism or making inflammatory remarks. Yet, as of today, more authority has come down upon our video-villain than on the militants that carried out the attack that killed four Americans.

And this is the problem with being an international weakling — you end up making America look bad by undermining our founding principles. The reality is those that hate us already see America as bad, depraved and evil. We are the Great Satan. Who would be so naive as to think that validating their outlook will change their minds? Erroneously acknowledge we are evil to those that portray us as evil and you re-enforce their outlook — you don’t alter it.

The sad reality is that Obama and his liberal-progressive, utopia-loving lunatics actually believe in the preposterous “we can all be friends” approach to foreign policy. And they’re so desperate to prove it correct that they have become blind to reality. As a result, when things go wrong they can’t blame the other party because that would be admitting we really can’t all be friends. This would invalidate their life view. So to perpetuate their adolescent outlook, they claim it must be something we did. In the case of Libya it is “that terrible video insulted people beyond their ability to be rational, that’s why they hurt us. Take away the video and we can still be friends.”

We just can’t make videos. Or openly critique Islam. Or call radical terrorists — radical terrorists. It is an immature and self-destructive outlook. America has a black president. It has a woman that runs the State Department. Americans believe in freedom of speech and equal rights. At the same time, there exist cultures in the world that shoot children for seeking an education, lock people in jail for bad-mouthing leaders and don’t allow women to drive. Yet, to the apologists, it is our values that create the problems of the world.

If you believe the Left, foreign policy was a feather in Obama’s cap. The “courageous” decision to kill Osama bin Laden and Obama’s “heroic” drone attacks were scenarios the Left could spin a narrative around as a reason for re-electing Obama. Better still, if the Right attacked his approach, the Left could counter by claiming apologies do work because Obama has kept us safe.

Unfortunately, the terror attack against the American consulate in Libya shows this narrative to be just another lie.

Do you think they will apologize?

Video — Some samples of Obama’s Apologies

Follow I.M. Citizen on Facebook or visit at IMCitizen.net 

The Unraveling Obama Foreign Policy That Has Failed To “Heal” the World

  Bookmark and Share  Ahead of tonight’s debate on foreign policy, the Romney-Ryan  campaign has released a new ad that sets the stage for this final face-to-face showdown between President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney.

The ad which is entitled “Healed” uses the words of Barack Obama who four years ago, promised to “heal” the planet.   The ad reminds us that  today, we see a very different picture. It’s a clear picture of a world that cannot afford four more years of President Obama.


Bookmark and Share

%d bloggers like this: