The Next White House Press Secretary, If There is a Second Obama Term

  Bookmark and Share As we hypothesize over just how extreme and out of control a second Obama term might be if given a second chance at four years in the White House, WH12 can’t help but feel that the Administration might be willing to change gears and offer a more honest approach to their political agenda by replacing their current stream of spokespersons with more blunt, straight talking representatives.  For instance, take current White House Press Secretary Jay Carney.

Carney is doing his best with what he has to work with.  But his attempts to help his boss coverup the Administration’s ineptness which led to the death of four Americans at our consulate in Benghazi have been essentially digging a deeper and deeper hole for the President, the State Department, and the entire Obama-Biden reelection effort.  His most recent lies have been an attempt to deny the fact Carney himself refused to call the Benghazi attacks acts of terrorism.  He has also been trying to convince inquiring members of the White House Press Corps that he never claimed the attacks were a response to a stupid video that was made back in July and was still not being spoken about in Libya in September when the attack occurred.

It is a line of lies which has forced people to remind the White House and its Press Secretary that in today’s world there exists something called video and on it one can see and hear exactly what the President and his representatives say or even once said.

Which brings us to the next possible choice for White House Press Secretary if there is second Obama term.

Her name is Collandra  (see video of Collandra at the bottom of this post)No last names here.  It’s more hip and happening… like Madonna, Pink, and other one name wonders like Cher.  This will allow Obama 2.0 to try to get back some of that appeal it lost among younger voters since 2008 when many of those younger Obama fans thought they would at least be able to find some employment if he became President.

Collandra has no previous experience as a government spokesperson, but that matters little to an Obama 2.0 Administration.  Both their current Press Secretary and previous one, Joe Gibbs, had experience and both proved to be bumbling, stumbling failures.  But Collandra has experience with something that both Gibbs and Carney apparently are not familiar with… honesty.  With Collandra as White House Press Secretary, there will be no more Stephanie Cutter-like stupidity and false claims that distract people from the issues.  With Press Secretary Collandra there will be no more need for congressional hearings in to what the White House knew or didn’t know after after a crisis.  No, with Collandra at the helm information will flow freely and honestly without any of the politically correct, diplomatic terms that normally allow the White House to confuse people with meaningless jargon.

As Press Secretary, Collandra’s no hold barred approach to getting the White House’s message out will match the aggressive Obama 2.0 reform agenda that will seek to rid us of such constitutional inconveniences as religious liberty, and personal responsibility.  None of this will be good for the country but neither will any part of a second Obama term be good the country.  And with no opportunity to run for a third consecutive term leaving the President without a need to be held accountable in a third reelection attempt, the President may just decide to at least be honest about the direction he wants to take us in.  If so, as demonstrated in the video below, Collandra is the person for the job.


Bookmark and Share

The Dumbest and “Dirtiest” Liberal Attack Ad You’ve Ever Seen

  Bookmark and Share   This is one of those things that you have to see to believe but even after seeing it you will undoubtedly be finding yourself still wondering if the people who made this this commercial were serious.  The sad thing is that they are being quite serious. (See the video of this ad below this post)

The advertisement is a one minute attack ad brought to you by the dues paid to AFSCME, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, a union that does represent many hard working men and women but exploits its members for a liberal agenda that often holds entire cities hostage to the whims of the wealthy limousine liberal labor bosses who head up the union.  In  the ad, a gentleman by the name of Richard Hayes claims to be the man who picks up Mitt Romney’s garbage.

Hayes is a San Diego garbage man who apparently has a route that includes the area in San Diego where Mitt Romney has a house.   In this 1 minute long commercial Hayes is upset over the fact that Mitt Romney has never given him a bottle of Gatorade or water and that he has never hugged him for the good job he has done picking up all of the garbage that Mitt Romney put’s out in front of his house in San Diego.  According to Mr. Hayes, many people greet him this way as he picks up their garbage.

Hayes goes on to claim that because of the tons of garbage that he picks up, his body will break down by the time he is 55 or 60 years old and then he states “but Mitt Romney doesn’t care about that”.    The ad then quickly goes to the now infamous Mother Jones clip of Mitt Romney addressing financial donors where he discusses the 47% of voters who he knows his campaign will probably not persuade to vote for him.  The edited clip they use takes Romney out of context as you here him say “and so my job is not to worry about those people”.

Of course Romney’s words were meant in a strategic political context  that made the point that his campaign had to focus on those voters who could be persuaded to vote him.  Those words were not meant in the sense that the AFSCME ad suggests which is that Romney doesn’t have any regard for people like Richard Hayes.   However, according to the script read by Hayes, Romney doesn’t care because he hasn’t made the effort to hug him.

Tracy Morgan as Richard Hayes… the Garbage Man desperately seeking a hug from Mitt Romney

The mind-numbingly dumb perspective offered in this advertisement is so shockingly disturbing that you can’t help but have to rethink whether or not it was a serious attempt at political commentary or a Saturday Night Live-like parody intended to mock political ads with an overly dramatic and emotional character who takes viewers on an intended but surprising journey from the sublime to the ridiculous.  Unfortunately this is no parody but I almost wish I could give Tracy Morgan a call and ask him to do one for me.

This ad is so outrageously stupid that one can’t help but think less of AFSCME than one may have already thought of them.  It would be one thing if this big union had a reasonable argument to present based on some Romney inspired policy initiative that they believe would hurt their members but this ad doesn’t even attempt to pretend to deal with any real issues.  Instead it actually assumes that all voters are stupid bastards who will believe that because Mitt Romney hasn’t hugged his garbage man, he is unqualified to be President.

The ad is so silly that it is truly offensive.  It is so utterly ludicrous that members of AFSCME should be embarrassed beyond belief.  They should be mortified to know that their leadership is made up of a bunch of people who are so unintelligent and dim-witted that it is quite clear to the rest of us that their shoes sizes apparently reach a higher number than their IQ’s.   Not exactly the type of people who I would want to be in charge of any negotiations involving my line of work.

To make matters worse, the spastic brains behind this ad obviously failed to even attempt to do any research before they consulted a dictionary to come up with the words they try to use in it.  As was noted in Mitt Romney’s book “No Apology,”  Romney writes about how during his gubernatorial campaign in Massachusetts, he took on the jobs of various constituents and one of those jobs was collecting trash.   In his book, Romney writes;

“One day I gathered trash as a garbage collector. I stood on that little platform at the back of the truck, holding on as the driver navigated his way through the narrow streets of Boston. As we pulled up to traffic lights, I noticed that the shoppers and businesspeople who were standing only a few feet from me didn’t even see me. It was as if I was invisible.”

He then writes

“Perhaps it was because a lot of us don’t think garbage men are worthy of notice; I disagree – anyone who works that hard deserves our respect.”

The bottom-line here is that anyone who is persuaded to vote against Mitt Romney by this commercial, should seek serious psychiatric help.  As for the people who made and approved this ad, it’s too late.  Their minds are obviously so rotted, that they are beyond help.  All the money behind Obamacare would not able to save the minds of those fools.

Bookmark and Share

Illegals Debacle Shows The President Has No Clothes

Too true to be funny anymore?

The famous poem is inviting:

“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

Is this the spirit behind the president’s announcement of an immediate end to the deportation of illegal immigrants who came to the US as children? Obama thinks so, saying this is “the right thing to do,” just like everything else he decides.

The true spirit behind this action is the hubris of a President with no clothes. This announcement and the anger it has sparked gives an anatomy of how the president does things, to the point of obscuring the issues involved. Let’s look at the anatomy which is exposed:

 

First, Obama speaks objective truth which he then feels pragmatically he has to contradict.

It was only a year ago at a 2011 Univision Town Hall, President Obama admitted it is beyond his power to suspend deportations for anyone because there are laws he’d be breaking by doing that, and would be a breach of separation of powers. If he believed this then, then today he must believe he is violating the separation of powers. You can see the clip here: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/shock-video-obama-admits-he-cant-do-what-he-did-today/?utm_source=co2hog

Did the law change since? The jurisprudence? Of course, stupid me, last year was not election year. This year, Obama is naturally addressing a key Latino concern….in an election year.

 

Second, he ignores due process in an increasingly monarchical sense of self

As Charles Krauthammer explains: “He proposed the DREAM Act of which the executive order is a variation… He proposed a DREAM Act. The Congress said no. The Congress is the one who makes the laws. What the administration does is it administers law.” Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/15/krauthammer-new-obama-immigration-policy-out-and-out-lawlessness-video/#ixzz1xwzPGJip

The plan goes into effect immediately, affecting some 800,000 people, without discussion. He hath spoken, it is done.

Justification? Speaking at the White House, Obama said the initiative was “the right thing to do,” adding that “it makes no sense to expel talented young people” from the US. Is it me, cynicism, or are we really to believe there are 800,000 talented people out there, surely some of them are duds?

 

Third, a Machiavellian Prince who seeks to control and coerce rather than convince

Maybe the real story is the sense of visible shock when the President was interrupted by a Daily Caller reporter during his announcement. How dare anyone interrupt, that’s, well that’s like someone interrupting a monarch, just not done! The reporter ought to be expelled from the country!

The reporter, Neil Munro, explained Munro says open press events at the White House are “well designed by the president and his staff…He comes out of the Rose Garden, gives a short statement and then turns his back and walks away very quickly without taking questions,” he said. “Sometimes he takes questions. He took a question on Trayvon Martin in March. Sometimes these shouted questions at the end work — not today: He refused to answer an obvious and conventional question about the impact of his policy on American workers at a time of record unemployment.”

Munro said “Timing these things is a little awkward. He speaks very well, very smoothly — very nice delivery. It’s hard to know when he’s about to end. I thought he was going to end today. I asked my question too early. He rebuked me. Fair enough.”  In the future, Munro hopes the White House will “arrange events so the reporters can ask the president or his senior staff about the important policy changes.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/15/video-neil-munro-explains-his-exchange-with-president-obama-in-rose-garden/#ixzz1xx05KPCS

 

Finally, he sets himself up as a savior, but watch out for those “sell by “ dates folks!

In order to be eligible under the new initiative, illegal immigrants must:

  • have arrived in the US when they were under the age of 16
  • have lived continuously in the US for at least five years
  • be in school, or have graduated from high school or be honourably discharged veterans of the US military
  • have no criminal record
  • be under 30 years old.

If successful, applicants would receive a work permit for two years that can (note my italics) be renewed an unlimited number of times. In other words, they’re safe until after the election and the end of Obama’s long-running campaign for office and re-election.

 

In running for this office, Republican opponent Mitt Romney needs to highlight this shameful anatomy and he himself must be: consistent, truthful and make long-term commitments. His reaction to this latest move from the White House was a good one: “I believe the status of young people who come here through no fault of their own is an important matter to be considered and it should be solved on a long-term basis so they know what their future will be in this country….I think the action that the president took today makes it more difficult to reach that long-term solution.”

More of this please, Governor!

5 Reasons to Vote for President Obama

Image

Now, I didn’t say they are good reasons, did I? In case you’re wondering, I have been told I can be sarcastic from time to time.

Just think how refreshing a second term will be. President Obama can stop campaigning for re-election, so maybe he will focus on change without the pesky issue of being a one-term president. Maybe he will be able to pay the mortgage and fill the gas tank of the people who voted for change, and found they didn’t even get loose change.

You know those cash tills where they say “take a penny, leave a penny”? The Obama administration is more a “take everything, leave a debt” kind of cash till. But not to worry, there are five reasons why you might want to consider voting for President Obama to stay in the White House for a second term, and here they are:

1. You think America needs to change from a narrow-minded belief in exceptionalism to breaking open a six pack with your good ol’ buddies from Europe and the Middle East to toast a new era of Enlightenment.

2. You think Capitalism is inherently bad and needs government to grow in the public interest, while wealth needs to be redistributed and folks need to be told what they can buy and cannot buy; for instance, do not buy large volumes of soda.

3. You believe progressive causes should determine the future direction of America, because the Constitution does not suit the postmodern paradigm and ideally ought to be scrapped altogether.

4. You want the safety net to be for anyone who feels hard done by, so poverty is defined not by need but by entitlement to other people’s money.

5. You have ignored the evidence of the past three years and you want to see how badly everything can go in the two years Obama will get to do more of what he wants, because he won’t need to be campaigning from day one.

If Obama wins four more years in November, he will spend two years advancing as many of his ideas as possible in the hope of building his legacy, and then for two years will become the lamest of lame duck presidents.

So, go ahead, make your vote count in November!

(I did say I can be sarcastic….)

Romney needs to call Obama’s Bluffet….

 

We know that the Bluffet, sorry Buffet, rule is a motif for President’s class warfare, and more warning shots will be fired when Congress returns today from a two-week recess to a test vote on the rule, which would impose a minimum 30 percent tax rate on income over $1 million. The Bluffett tax targets wealthier Americans’ investments rather than salaries.

Today is the day when this issue of class warfare kicks off for November in earnest, now that we know it will be Romney for the GOP and Congress gets to have a say on the matter.

President Obama, who pays less tax than HIS secretary (he filed tax returns showing he paid an effective tax rate of 20.5 percent on income of about $800,000 in 2011) says the government needs the revenue from the Bluffett rule, estimated at $47 billion over 10 years, to cover “a broad range of goals.” He also says “This is not just about fairness.” Well, he got that right, it is very unfair, but not in the simplistic moralistic way he is peddling.

He says “This is also about growth. It’s about being able to make the investments we need to strengthen our economy and create jobs. And it’s about whether we as a country are willing to pay for those investments.” In other words, robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Fact is, do we really need government to do the investing, and where does the investment go? Into government black holes and deep pockets, rather than into businesses which create wealth. The Bluffet tax would not create wealth, it would merely enhance dependency. We would see a better rate of return on the $47 billion in business investment by the wealthy than we would from government. That is an awful lot of liquidity to take out of the markets, and I don’t see too many secretaries taking up the slack.

Of course, keeper of the Treasury keys Tim Geithner was out pushing the rule on Sunday, “Just because Republicans oppose this does not mean it’s not the right thing to do and not the right thing to push for,” he told NBC’s “Meet the Press” program. Double negatives aside, we can say that just because Democrats think it is the right thing to do doesn’t mean it even begins to make sense.

If we look at the paying side of this, we see the rich targeted for this end up paying more. Simple. But for what are they paying? Increased revenue means increased expenditure, and so the things for government to spend on expands to meet the expanded revenue. More programs, more dependency and less reward for effort. What does the payer get in return? They get little benefit, and the wealthier they are the less they need what they are paying for.

Which means the sole purpose of the Bluffet rule is twofold, increased state powers and redistribution of wealth. Conservatives who attack Romney or the rich for their wealth are playing with the same deck as Obama.

Obama says, “If you make more than $1 million every year, you should pay at least the same percentage of your income in taxes as middle-class families do… Most Americans support this idea. We just need some Republican politicians to get on board with where the country is.” Of course, Obama doesn’t have to worry too much about his investments, because after leaving office, which cannot come soon enough, he will make a ton of cash for the remainder of his days. He doesn’t have too much to worry about…The rest of us do.

The Republicans’ fading colours – The Spectator Magazine

Link to the original article:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/essays/all/7648068/web-exclusive-the-republicans-fading-colours.thtml

 

Web exclusive: The Republicans’ fading colours

11 February 2012

CPAC Review essay by White House 2012 writer David Cowan published on The Spectator magazine website

 

Growing up in the 1960s, my primary school in Cambridge had an outdoor roofless boy’s toilets, and we happily enjoyed urinating up the wall. It was a sign we were getting further up the school when one day we were able to urinate over the wall itself — much to the annoyance of people on the other side. This memory came to mind this week at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Washington DC over the weekend, the annual gathering of some ten thousand political activists. This year CPAC was a pissing contest to see who was the most conservative.

The three Republican frontrunners, Santorum, Romney and Gingrich, in that order, sought to reach the base and convince activists about their conservative qualities. The themes they all offered were: what’s wrong with the Obama administration; a shopping list of what conservative policies would work better; an appeal to American exceptionalism; and a return to the founding principles of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

The three candidates are looking for the right to fight an Obama administration seen as somewhat Carteresque, from failed election promises through to the ideological infighting. Obama, though personally liked (Ann Coulter joked he would make a nice neighbour, unless you’re Chinese, then he’d keep borrowing stuff), is seen as ineffective and evasive.

To reenergise America, the candidates laid claim to the mantle of Ronald Reagan, frequently invoking his name and sunny disposition. Yet herein lies the rub. Reagan defeated Carter with ideas for the economy and foreign policy, successfully combining a conservative vision and charm to appeal to swing voters. At CPAC 1974, Reagan gave his famous ‘bold colours, not pale pastels’ speech, asserting conservative principles. This weekend showed that some of the colours have long since faded.

Things were certainly off-colour last time I was here, back in 2009, as defeated activists sought to pick themselves up after Obama’s coronation. The biggest cheers then were for Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh, as they offered succour. Newt entered to his incongruous theme tune ‘Eye of the Tiger’, but instead of entering stage right he walked in through the crowd, parting them Moses-like, shaking hands and hugging supporters.

The danger three years on is, of course, an election that will see CPAC 2013 take place after a second Obama inauguration. Expect then a sinking sense of what might have been. For many American conservatives a Republican failure this year will exacerbate what they fear most: n irreversible dependency culture and Europeanisation. Daniel Hannan flew into DC to warn on just this point, expressing his amazement to rapt delegates that while Europe is driving off the cliff they can see America in their rear-view mirror, overtaking them.

Back in 2009 something else happened at CPAC. Sarah Palin was slated to speak, but failed to appear either in person or via a hastily announced satellite link. This was the signal that Sarah was taking the celebrity high road, rather than the political low road. This year, however, she did appear as closing speaker to offer the benediction — but not the one most people expected. She did not endorse Gingrich, as he himself alluded to in his own speech by quoting her husband Todd. She called for unity, but convoluted as ever, Palin said ‘whoever our nominee is we must work together to get him over the finishing line, and then next year we will have a true conservative in the Oval office’ — only to go on Fox news on Sunday afternoon to say she is still to be convinced Romney that is indeed a conservative.

Despite this, and despite the Santorum surge, Romney will see this conference as mission accomplished — reinforced by the CPAC Straw Poll narrowly backing his candidature. Out of the three candidates it looks seemed that Romney pissed the highest this weekend. And, while still divided, all the delegates would agree about who should be standing on the other side of the wall, on the receiving end.

CPAC and Sarah Palin mark a turn to unity

 

A vintage fiery performance: Palin told delegates we'll keep our guns, God and Constitution, and Obama can keep the change.

The most remarkable event of today’s CPAC was Sarah Palin endorsing unity. Instead of showing her support for any one candidate, she called for unity, saying that whoever the nominee is the GOP must defeat Obama. Whoever the nominee is conservatives must work together, she told an ecstatic audience, and the nation will have a true conservative in the White House.

The unity message, great!

It followed the announcement that Mitt Romney had narrowly won the CPAC Straw Poll, following his mission to the conference to prove his conservative credentials. It seems it may be mission accomplished. Certainly Romney will be feeling a lot better about his appeal to the conservative base after today.

The other remarkable performance came from the ever-popular Daniel Hannan, British Member for the European Parliament. Warning America not to go down the European road, he was amazed that while Europe is driving off the cliff they can see America in their rear-view mirror and overtaking them!

After his talk, I had a good conversation with him, as we walked through the hotel, including a detour through the kitchens! I asked him if he endorsed any candidates? He, just a little coyly, suggested it was difficult to choose, but stressed it was important for the party to unite behind a candidate and get Obama, who earlier in the day John Bolton called the “first post-American President”, out of the White House.

Daniel Hannan warns America not to follow Europe down a path and off a cliff

Hannan also urged me to write that the GOP must stop having so many debates, as it is only serving to divide the party. He also said Republicans need to focus on the budget, not all the side issues that divide conservatives. With that he headed for the airport, though many didn’t want him to leave and asked if he could be made an honorary American instead.

This has been an important few days for conservatives, and may finally signal the road to unity. Romney should start to pull firmly into the lead, and though Santorum and Gingrich will no doubt continue, they will see their numbers dwindle.

The New York Times carried a report ahead of Sarah Palin’s speech that she didn’t think a brokered RNC would be a problem. This is just a liberal wet dream. The reality is, Sarah Palin has signalled this important moment, and shown that there is less stomach for infighting.

I picked up my media credentials on Thursday at CPAC fearful of a divided party that would succeed only in rolling out the red carpet for President Obama. After three days, I happily left making my way through the handful of sorry-looking OWS protesters feeling that I can see November from here.

Mitt Flashes His Credentials with a Smile: See His CPAC Speech in its Entirety Here

Will Romney show his conservative rivals the door?

Bookmark and Share  A smiling Mitt Romney came to CPAC today with one thing on his mind, the need to prove his conservative credentials to the base of conservative activists. Telling the audience that he knew many of them came to conservatism via Hayek or Edmund Burke, Romney said his path to conservatism was paved by family, faith and his work.

Romney said he believes “we are poised for victory in November”, but beating Obama is only the first step to saving America, which has suffered from weak leadership and a bankrupt ideology. Obama has created so much unnecessary pain for Americans, he told the audience.

Romney reminded listeners that America is made exceptional by the people, before making the obligatory attack on Washington. He said Obama is the poster child for arrogant government.

It has always been clear that Romney’s kind of conservatism is fiscal, and he argued “if you are not fiscally conservative, you are bankrupt”. He told a cheering audience that he will finally get rid of the deficit, and “as the first step I will eliminate Obamacare.”

Referring to his competitors for the nomination, Romney said GOP nominees are not different in opposition to Obama or conservatism, but by experience and judgement. He also distinguished himself by saying “I have never worked a day in Washington.” He then joked “I served in government but didn’t inhale.” He said he wants to take his experience to Washington, ending his speech by declaring “I will come to Washington, I will change Washington, then I will go home to the family I love.”

After his speech, Romney joined the crowd, no doubt to judge just how much this crowd has embraced him as a conservative.

Is Washington alive to the Sound of Santorum?

Santorum after his speech walks by WhiteHouse12, will he walk into the White House?

Rick Santorum appeared on stage with his family, introducing them he said they were not the von Trapp family and they weren’t about to sing. However as he set out on his speech to offer sweet music to conservative ears, he seemed to stumble a little, the speakers version of being out of tune.

But, he did get warmed up. He hit a number of high notes:

We must trust in “the conservative vision of bottom up” and show “how Obama policies have failed” America. This is what wins the race, Santorum crooned.

But he struck a bum note when he said we are not going to win this election with the candidate with the most money to beat up his opponent. Who could he possibly mean?

A sweeter note was sounded when he explained how liberals use sentimental ideas of stewardship to advance radical environmental policies.

Then onto a higher set of notes, when he reminded delegates that our rights come from a higher authority than the government. He was as clear as a bell when he chimed in that he is in this race because Obamacare is a game changer.

Rick Santorum was introduced as the only chance of winning in November as a fresh face, but there was little fresh material in this show.

Karen Santorum makes plans to let Rick go to exhibit hall, will she be making plans to change the White House decor?

That said he ended on a high note with “You are blessed to live in a time when America needs you”. He called on delegates to live in honor, ending with “The ‘how’ we are of America is the Constitution, the ‘who’ we are of America is the Declaration.”

To those who support Santorum, this speech will have been music to their ears. Whether he can light up the election with the sound of his brand of music remains to be seen.

 

 

 

A Populist CPAC, but where are the ideas?

Bookmark and Share Meeting Donald Rumsfeld today, the man who knows his knowns from his unknowns, he saw my media badge saying WhiteHouse12 and asked me “You’re from the White House?” I explained I was not, and we are a website covering the election, but I can’t be sure whether he was disappointed or not.

Being an election year, you would expect CPAC 2012 to be a populist fest of election themes, peppered with attacks on the Obama administration, and today’s line-up did not disappoint on that front. The worrying thing is that the slate of speakers, while inspiring the crowd, did not have ideas to inspire the folks with outside the conference hall. The speakers were long on broad principles but short on specifics.

CPAC 2012 Kicked off with a populist energy, but are speakers offering enough?

Marco Rubio got the crowd all whipped up, ready to be severely unwhipped by a windbag speech from Mitch McConnell. The House Senate Majority leader did the math well when he said that if you lose your job in the Obama economy it will take you 40 weeks to find a new one. However, his math failed him when he exceeded his 10 minute slot by some 20 minutes. Some disciplined editing down to 10 minutes would have given him a better speech. When he got a cheer at the end I couldn’t work out whether it was for his message or the fact that he had finished.

The schedule ran 30 minutes late for the rest of the day, and Michele Bachmann followed. Her speech was probably the most detailed of the day, focused on the series of foreign policy failures by the Obama administration. The former candidate launched a sustained attack on the policy failures, and blasted the president for not backing Mubarak, saying “Obama failed to stand by Mubarak and that helped fuel the revolution in Egypt … The president spurned the President of Egypt when he took his first foreign trip to Cairo. In an absolutely shocking move, he invited the Muslim Brotherhood to hear his speech when Mubarak’s policy was to keep the Brotherhood at arm’s length.”

Bachmann attacked the president for not standing by Israel, “Before Obama was elected, no one had ever heard of a United States president saying to the world that the United States is not a judeo-christian nation.  I am here to say we are.” She concluded “The president’s foreign policy does change the history of the world, which is why Barack Obama cannot have a second term as president.”

Rick Perry got the crowd going as well, focusing on the economy he said “Success on Wall Street shouldn’t come at the expense of Main Street.” With the crash on the way, Perry said “Folks on Wall Street who saw it coming, they made millions; folks who didn’t see it coming, they got bailed out.” His parting shot was intended to strike an ominous note, saying “I’m fearful of what the score’s gonna be if we let the president start the second half as a quarterback.”

More populist notes were struck by Herman Cain, who told CPAC “A lot of people thought that after the character assassination that was launched against me that Herman was going to shut up and sit down and go away… Ain’t going to happen.” On his 9-9-9 plan, Cain told conservatives to press candidates for federal office to embrace his flat-tax solution before they are elected. He also invited “Joe The Plumber” Samuel Wurzelbacher, who is running for Congress in Ohio’s 9th District, to take a bow.

None of the main speakers offered endorsement messages for the 2012 GOP nominees, preferring instead to talk more generically about the need to stop a second Obama term. A late addition to the speaker slate was Rand Paul who arguably matched, perhaps exceeded, the rapturous applause received by Cain. Paul asked if the President hated rich people and poor people with jobs, but then went on to state “The president doesn’t really hate all rich people, just those who don’t contribute to his campaign.” He then rallied “If you’re a crony, if you’re a buddy, just stop by the White House.”

Paul rightly reminded attendees of Ronald Regan’s “optimism,” a president who he said “turned a whole generation of Democrats into Republicans.” His parting shot was “Who will be that next Ronald Reagan?” This gets to the heart of what folks are feeling, which ran though this whole first day, feeling the need for inspiration, the need for a positive approach, the need for American exceptionalism.

What was lacking was any real depth to the conservative messages today, and it will take more than the invocation of the name of Ronald Reagan and repeating the wrongs of the incumbent to put a conservative into the White House. Reagan brought more than sunny optimism to the White House, he brought some strong and deep ideas on the economy and foreign policy as well. I didn’t hear the equivalent depth of ideas today.

Tomorrow will see Gingrich, Romney and Santorum take the stage, but will they bring any more than today’s speakers? I may not know the knowns or unknowns of what tomorrow holds, but I know I won’t be holding my breath.

Bookmark and Share

Politics IS a Contact Sport

Newt hopes to land knock-out punch with attack ads, but is Mitt's mitt bigger and stronger?

So, Newt has launched an attack ad on Mitt, and no doubt the Democrats are watching with glee.  There are no doubt worries that attack ads damage the Republican Party, just as many worry that American politics is too divisive. Does all the “infighting” damage Republican chances?

Well, no.

Attack ads are part of politics. Politics is divisive. This is because folks disagree, and they rightly disagree on important points of principle and policy. Of course the candidates attack each other, and why not? The prize is big; these are passionate people who feel they deserve a run at the number 1 job on the planet. Otherwise, they might as well play paper and scissors for the right to run.

Cast your mind back to 2008, and the exchange of “shame” accusations by candidates Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton.

You can see her attack here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pPV1yd7sQg&feature=share and Obama’s response here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkR9kw81Cx8&feature=share. You can also see the Obama attack ad, comparing Hilary Clinton to Big Brother in Orwell’s 1984 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6h3G-lMZxjo, which is quite a laugh given that Democrats are the Orwellian nightmare party!

Both parties share the tactics of attack, and it goes a long way back. Hilary’s barb that Obama was following Karl Rove’s playbook was foolishness; it doesn’t take a village to work out that attacking the candidate, or in soccer parlance playing the man rather than the ball, goes back a lot further than Rove.

In fact, the earliest example of attack ads was launched by Lyndon B Johnson in 1964, in his attack on Barry Goldwater. Known as the “Daisy Spot”, it showed an innocent girl picking daisies followed by a countdown to nuclear catastrophe, which shocked audiences at the time. The idea was that Goldwater’s aggressive stance on the Cold War would lead to nuclear destruction. [You can view the ad here: http://www.lbjlib.utexas.edu/johnson/media/daisyspot/]This will be the same Johnson who thought escalating Vietnam was a good idea.

Hilary and Obama attacked each other without pulling their punches. She lost, Obama won, and despite all the punches Hilary laid on Obama he won the White House. Like Hilary’s husband said in 2008, “This is a contact sport, politics. You can’t complain about being attacked. It’s like Yao Ming complaining about being fouled playing basketball.”

The narrative that the attack by candidates is damaging is simply a way of attacking the Republicans, while President Obama as incumbent and the official nominee come September can stand serenely above the action and appear, well, presidential. That is, until his Republican opponent is selected and can turn his attention to attacking Obama’s record 100%.

For this reason ending the attacks is important, we need to see the main bout start. The chief result of Newt’s attacks on Mitt is to bring Mitt onto the canvas ready to land his punches. Newt’s attack ads are the last attempts to land some body blows on Mitt, but Mitt’s mitt appears to be the bigger and stronger of the two. Once the attacks are done, the choice is made, the Republican nominee can step onto the canvas and win the prize fight that will take him to the White House.

Bill Clinton was right, this is a contact sport. He was wrong to compare it to basketball though. This is a fight, and it is a fight to the end. Unlike Johnson’s Daisy ad the countdown is not to nuclear destruction, but losing to Obama will see more destruction of the American economy and the nation.

White House 2012: A Thanksgiving Ode To Liberty

Bookmark and Share  She was an older woman. Her face was etched with a history of struggles and her heart strengthened by a faith in a force that was the backbone of her survival. She was a bright lady, industrious and ingenious. Determined and strong willed, her fury could be unlike the scorn of no other, but compassion and fairness ruled her every action.
 
She was married to truth and loyal to justice. Her family was an unruly bunch and a large one too. It consisted of those born of her and those adopted into her arms. But all were embraced with equal amounts of love.
 
Each morning, she woke, without ever actually having fully slept, and prepared to fuel all those in her home with the energy to face the day ahead. Wheat from her heartlands was risen in dough. Corn from the fields she tilled, flavored the muffins in wicker baskets made with her own hands, and the bacon cured, and eggs laid on her farms, sizzled in the cast iron griddles milled from the iron mined out of her mountains.
 
When breakfast was done, the work had just begun. Every member of her family had to go out on their own. One by one, as each left, she reminded them of their bounty and of the future that could be theirs if they made the new day they embarked upon, more productive than the last.
 
Each of her loved ones did something different. They worked in auto factories, others in shipyards. Some worked as lawyers, others as teachers. Some kept financial records, tended bars, stocked supermarket shelves, sang beautiful songs and played beautiful music, prepared luscious meals, made haute couture, wrote for newspapers, provided protection and some cured the ill. What each one did, did not matter to her so much as did their doing it well. For sure, she knew that each one was as valuable as the other. She knew that without each one doing their part, her household would suffer. And suffering was not in her plan.
 
She herself had suffered many tough times. She had been faced with financial ruin, been battered and forced to face many violent confrontations. She had been stolen from, taken advantage of, beaten upon and endured mental anguish as she struggled with harsh decisions and extradoridnary moral and ethical questions. Her life was never easy and the assaults of time on her very being, often showed. Many adored her and looked up to her. Some were jealous of her, others were leery of her and a few often challenged her. But each challenge dropped in her lap and each hurdle crossed, made each of her many successes, all the more grand and incredibly more exhilarating. She took to the sky, crossed they sea, scaled over through and under mountains, created artificial light and virtual reality, wrote enduringly prophetic pieces of literature, invented life saving practices and products, bridged islands and even worlds and even gave birth to freedom, the force that she would eventually come to realize was the key to her being.
 
But she never basked too long in any glory.
 
Instead, she always looked forward and prepared herself for the next challenge ahead. The changing weather, the shifting earth, the roiling seas, the changing opinions and needs of her own family, and the influences of her neighbors, never allowed for a static day. And besides, she was too wise to ever sit on her laurels. The future offered too much promise to ever allow her to just be happy with what was and too many counted her own to make the most of what will be.
 
So she trudged ahead with the start of every new day. She knew that as tough as things may be, her freedoms enabled her, and all those in her family, to do their part so that each next challenge could be and would be overcome. By doing her part and insuring her household with freedom and also responsibilities, all those in her household could become increasingly strong and they in turn would keep the roof over their heads strong. She knew that as each member of her family did their part, in that which they were best at doing, the bounty of her existence would always be there.
 
Appreciative of all that bounty, as this day progressed, she prepared a meal for all to share as they came home from their missions.
 
She made sure that there was a place for everyone at her table, and as, one by one, they took their places, she placed atop the table a wealth of hearty riches that fed their hungry stomachs and fueled the hunger in their hearts for a better day tomorrow.
 
As they joined hands together as one family, they gave thanks for the wealth of the strong willed lady who provided and insured the freedom that allowed them to lead rich lives with endless opportunities.
 
Today Lady Liberty has set the table for a celebration of thanks for all that she has made available to us and all that she continues to offer us . . . So long as, we all always, do our part.
 
Happy Thanksgiving America and thank you Lady Liberty. We  love you.
 
Photobucket
 

The 2011 White House Thanksgiving Menu 

  • Sour Grapes

  • Lemons

  • Snake In Grass

  • Roasted Crow

  • A Fine Kettle of Fish

  • Toast

  • Humble Pie

  • Kool Aid

    Bookmark and Share

Where is America’s Fighting Spirit? Ending the Malaise Presidency

These days it seems Captain America has been overpowered by MalaiseMan. President Obama is MalaiseMan. He told a fundraiser on Tuesday, October 25 that America is in decline, which is the central theme of his presidency. People are buying it too, which is what the Occupy Wall Street movement and Tea Party is a symptom of; they are two sides of a coin that says America is in decline.

More MalaiseMan than Captain America

This takes us back to the evening of July 15, 1979. Gas prices had skyrocketed, there were severe shortages and the endless economic decline seemed much longer than the lineups at gas stations. Carter preached, “In a nation that was proud of hard work, strong families, close-knit communities and our faith in God, too many of us now tend to worship self-indulgence and consumption. Human identity is no longer defined by what one does but by what one owns.”

We have heard similar malaise from President Obama. In fact, where Carter spent hours and days at Camp David in what Reagan biographer Steven Hayward tagged “the most remarkable exercise in presidential navel-gazing in American history” and delivered his message in minutes, President Obama decided in minutes and is spending days and hours preaching malaise.

It is being believed on the streets. The Hill newspaper reports that over two-thirds of voters say the United States is declining, and the next generation will be worse off, with 83 percent of voters worried about the future of the nation. Their results conclude that Americans don’t view the country’s current economic and political troubles as temporary; they see this decline as stretching out for years.

President Obama’s policies tap into the malaise, which is why he has managed an economy of decline, failing on jobs, the deficit, healthcare, home foreclosures and rising gas prices.

However, there are signs of improvement. Economic growth in America picked up in the last quarter, showing signs of some recovery as the nation’s total output of goods and services grew at an annual rate of 2.5 percent from July to September, almost double the 1.3 percent rate in the previous quarter.

This is because the economy has its own laws of gravity: what goes down will get back up again. The economy does this, not the government. We have become so risk averse we want the nanny state to kiss us better every time the economy hurts us. The President Obama re-election campaign is one of kissing everyone better, what is the Republican message?

Ronald Reagan defeated Carter by offering Americans a vision that was so optimistic it cancelled out Carter’s pessimism. The economy will improve, and a Republican needs to get the message across that America will return to full strength with a gleam of defiance in its eye, not a tear of pity. Which candidate can do this? Which candidate can bring on Captain America to defeat MalaiseMan?

Trunkline 2012: Tuesday Tidbits From The Republican Presidential Race – 10/25/11

Bookmark and Share

Perry puts proposal on the table, Reince Priebus penalizes pushy states, Newt builds a firewall in South Carolina, Mitt gets flack for flipping before he flops on Ohio’s SB2, Barry beats Herman, Joe wants to investigate why reporters ask him questions and Fred Karger wonders about Marcus Bachmann………….all that and more in today’s tales from  the campaigen trail.

Gay Republican presidential candidate Fred Karger, recently passed on a message to White House 2012 that dealt with a White House 2012 post that had a little fun with Karger’s recent “UnDesicion 2012” interview on Comedy Central which ended with a casual reference to Michele Bachmann’s husband Marcus being gay. It came with the following pic and a note that read;

“Marcus and me form the Iowa Straw Poll. he gets you in a bear hug when posing for the pic……..”

When inititally writing the commentary on Karger’s Comdey Central interview, I mistook the program’s host reference to Michele’s husband to mean Michelle Obama. So I thought Fred Karger’s comment “he seems gay to me” referred to President Obama. That would have been a better story. But the he was talking about Marcus Bachmann, who by the way is White House 2012’s biggest loser of the 2012 presidential campaign so far.

Like her, love her, or hate her, you know that living with and being Michele Bachmann’s husband ain’t easy. But now the poor guy’s wife runs for President and what does he get for it? He gets a big closet with his name on it that the whole nation suspects he lives in. At least Marcus can be content with the fact that when it is all over, he won’t have to put up with jokes about him being the First “Lady” if his wife was elected President. That doesn’t seem likely to happen any time soon.

Bookmark and Share

Bush and the TEA Party Blamed for East Coast Earthquake

Conflicting determinations have President Obama blaming East Coast earthquake on Bush, but Congresswoman Maxine Waters and the Democratic National Committee blames it on the TEA Party.

Bookmark and Share

Hajmopolitan

Fini Goodman is a new addition to the WH12 team. She is an actress, comedian and stay at home Mom who will be offering White House 2012 readers a weekly dose of political humor. For more of her work visit http://finigoodman.com

Bookmark and Share I consider myself intelligent and well read. I voraciously read everything from Kant to Dostoyevsky to Spinoza. I make sure I am seen in coffeehouses reading them with the covers prominently displayed so that I look smart. I have a confession to make: behind closed doors, hidden in my bathroom away from any witnesses, I am a devout and prolific reader of Cosmopolitan and other womens magazines such as Marie Claire, Glamour and Vogue. I also love In Style and Elle. Oh, and Shape and Harpers Bazaar and W. I am an authority on such diverse subjects as Why my Thighs are Too Fat to What His Smile Means to 8 Ways to Wow Him in Bed. I have been greatly influenced to Dress to Get Noticed. -I apologize to everyone at Aunt Ednas funeral for the miniskirt without panties: I now know that there are times you should let others take center stage.

Womens magazines have influenced me greatly to change how I look, how I act, and most importantly, to never be satisfied with myself. They control my thoughts and my relationships with men. Which is why I am rather impressed with Al Qaedas understanding of a basic rule of the female psyche: that you can use womens magazines to control women. Armed with this knowledge, Al Qaeda is debuting a magazine to appeal to the female Jihaddist. It is based on Cosmopolitan and the first issue will have skincare tips and how to marry a suicide bomber. The second issue will have skin exfoliation tips, how to use social networking to recruit terrorists and how to marry a suicide bomber. The magazine is called Al-Shamikha or The Majestic Woman.

I have procured a translation of the Table of Contents:
Fashion/Beauty
  • Your Last Chance to Make a Good Impression: What to Wear to Your Stoning (Page 3).
  • Staying Inside and Other Ways to Keep Your Complexion Perfect (Page 4).
  • Is Black the New Black? How Black Eyes Have Become the Trend of the Year. (Page 6).
  • Burkha Woes: How to Stand Out in Your Facebook Profile Picture (Page 7).

Financial Advice

  • Your Husband Makes The Ultimate Sacrifice to Kill the Infidel Zionist: Susie Ormandaffi Gives Advice on What to Do With the $25,000 Payment Plus Tips on How to Find a Rich Suicide Bomber. (Page 9).

Food/Keeping a Home

  • How to Pick the Perfect Little Black Dress that No One Will See You In and Other Ways to Make Staying Inside the House Fun.(Page 11).
  • Making the Perfect Hummus: This Garlicky Take on an Old Treat Will Guarantee That Your Man will Force Sex on You and Not His Other Wives for Seven Days (Page 15).
  • This is the Will of Allah (And Other Affirmations While Your Husband is Beating You) (Page 17).

Profile

  • When Pain Doesnt Hurt Anymore: Forgetting Earthly Joys in Favor of the Koran: Special Guest Mufti Haj Jabbar Abdul Kareem. This Most Honorable Scholar of the Koran who has declared 5,000 Fatwas Against Infidels Gives Advice on Being a Good Muslim Woman. (Page 19).

Beefcake Section

  • Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Poses Without his Shirt: Exploring the Thousand-Year Werewolf Trend among Arab Men. (Page 423).

Sex/Love

  • Standing out Among 6 Wives: How to Wow Him in Bed Without Getting Beaten for Being a Whore (Page 425).
  • 6 Ways to Enjoy Your Clitoris Before Your Aunt Cuts it Off. (Page 427).
  • Making His Last Night Count: How to Make Sure He Comes to You Instead of a Western Strip Club His Last Night Alive Before He Kills himself while carrying out the suicide bombing against the Zionist Infidels. (Page 428).

Al-Shamikha is based on Cosmo: in it, there is advice that is reflective of the Jihaddi culture from advice on staying inside to which suicide bomber is the right suicide bomber to marry. Cosmo plies Western women with rules that reflect our culture: we have to worry about whether to tease or flat iron our hair before our quiet date at home wherein we cook the perfect Engagement Chicken Dinner while we Figure out What Hes Thinking so that we can Amaze Him With Our Conversation. Then later, take him to bed and Give Him the Perfect Blow Job while trying to effortlessly find the Secret Spot on His Testicles That Will Make Him Crazy. We have to do all of this while making sure the red gel we put on our lamp to Make Our Bedroom More Seductive supplies us with the perfect lighting as we try to Give Ourselves the Perfect Angle to Hide Our Unsightly Cellulite and Tummy Pooch. Then after we finish, we have to Think Like a Man and let him fall asleep and not expect cuddling or a commitment and remember Not to Text Him Too Much The Next Day. The list of rules for The Koran is shorter. It makes me wonder if Cosmo has become our Koran. Women in Islam enforce the culture like the dress codes to performing genital mutilations with pride to teaching the points of Islam to the next generation. Women edit and write Cosmo and are harsher on each other than men could ever be on women and it looks like Al-Shamikha is following in that vein. Perhaps both cultures would be less harsh to women if women would ease up on each other and their children. I for one am going to try: the next time my husband thinks a girl is hot and I look at her and only see her big nose and jiggling thighs and wonder how he can possibly find her attractive, I will ease up on her and look at her pretty smile and thin waist. Maybe I will even do the impossible: maybe I will ease up on myself.

For a link to the article about Al-Shamikha (lest you think Im such a genius Ive made all of this up)

http://6thfloor.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/16/al-qaedas-cosmo/

Bookmark and Share

*Editors Note:

This is Mrs. Goodman’s first post to WH12. We are so very happy to have the honorof her allowing WH12 toprovide you withher wit and humor and we look forward to sharingmany more weekly humor posts from her in the months ahead.

%d bloggers like this: