G.O.P. Unviels the Stage for Romney’s Nomination at the Republican National Convention

   Bookmark and Share   Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus and convention Chief Executive Officer William Harris today unveiled the final stage for the Republican National Convention at the Tampa Bay Times Forum.  This stage is a first of its kind for political conventions that utilizes 13 LED Screens with high pixel counts that will collectively create a large-scale backdrop with video capabilities.

Chairman Priebus said,

“I am proud to present you a stage that is fitting of the historic event that will kick off right here just one week from today. Our convention will connect with people across America and around the world from right here on this stage – through speakers and these incredible screens behind me. On any given night almost 40 million people will be joining us through television but we are also making an unprecedented effort to connect with millions more through our ‘convention without walls’ – a pioneering digital program focused on engaging people, building a strong community and amplifying convention messages.

“I am excited. The convention team is excited. Our party is excited, and America is excited. We are excited because we are ready for a new direction in our country. This isn’t just an election we have coming up. Nominating Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan here in Tampa at the 2012 Republican National Convention is the first step we are taking toward a better future for generations of Americans.”

Republican National Convention CEO William Harris said, “The stage is really incredible. We are using technology and digital capabilities that have never been used at a convention before. The high-tech stage brings this event to a whole new level and it will help people at home watching TV or watching us through YouTube online to be a part of the energizing experience here in Tampa.”

“A Better Future” Stage/Podium Facts & Figures

  • Approximately 318 production staff and crew built the podium totaling more than 30,000 man hours, 20,000 man-hours from the local production crew alone.
  • Some on the crew worked 16-hour days, and the main staff will work around the clock during convention
  • The team comes from 22 states.
  • The base crew began planning 1.5 years ago.
  • Set pieces are not made from disposable material like normal rock concertsthis set has all the highest quality material, incorporating the most advanced safety precautions.
  • Some set elements are so heavy that they had to be rigged from the ceiling to barely touch the rest of the set to keep the weight from crushing the podium.

PODIUM SCREENS

  • The Republican Convention is showcasing XL Video’s newest Pixled F-6 LED panels on world stage for the first time.
  • There are almost NINE MILLION total pixels in the screens and arena ribbons.
  • Screens are the backbone of the set. There are 15 LED screens total, 13 of which are on the stage. Screens are stacked in the space to create sense of depth.
  • They can form an unbroken panoramic image or be used individually to crate a collage effect.
  • The podium has a total of 2,402 square feet of LED screens, compared to standard 40’’ TV of 6.3 square feet.
  • The screens range in size from 8’6’’x 8’6’’ to 28’8’’x12’4’’. The largest screen is 381 square feet.
  • The stage/set uses three LED products:
  • Six center stage screens with 4 MM technology
  • Four screens with 6 MM technology
  • Canopy screens with 11 MM technology & Side screens with 11 MM technology
  • The set also includes live HD video feeds. The magnitude of this project required a 3-week installation
  • Screens are framed in 6’’ wood frames to keep screens from merging into one flat visual plane.
  • “Control Freak Systems” will be used to control the live HD video feed by combining TV truck feeds, cameras, video playback, graphics, social media streams onto screens. This includes 36 channels of HD Playback.

PODIUM DESIGN

  • The podium was designed with sense of “America’s Living Room.”
  • The design is based on a warm but modern approachtraditional American Prairie style architecture merged with modern technology.
  • The challenge was making a large-scale set that was also warm and inviting.
  • There are three canopy screens above the stage to frame it and contribute to its sense of intimacy. Mullions (vertical elements that form a division between units of a window) give the screens a feeling of skylight windows.  Angled side screens reinforce the design and showcase happenings to box seat guests.
  • Open frames and horizontal beams create a sense of architecture and balanced composition.
  • There are four tones of wood on the podium proper to provide texture and balance:
  • Frames: cherry wood faces with mahogany bevels
  • Steps: warm mahogany and threads of lighter cherry
  • Banding around stage: walnut and mahogany
  • Center of deck: warm light cherry

PODIUM LIGHTING

  • A custom-built gigabit fiber optic system is used to distribute data from the control panel to the individual lights using 14.79 miles of cabling and approximately 25,662 pounds of lights the  approximate weight of a U.S. Navy jet-powered drone.
  • There are 950 total lights including 267 incandescent lights and 390 arc lights.
  • The lighting system uses a color-mixing technology that creates an impression of texture.
  • State of the art fixtures include varillite, 30k, 3500k, 3500 spots, 3500 washes, PRG Best Boys, and Clay Paky Alpha Spot 700’s which produce the most crisp, clear lights.
  • The crew focused all of this lighting in the Times Forum in just six hours.

PODIUM SOUND

The convention acoustically treated 100% of the Times Forum ceilingthese are permanent improvements that will remain in the Tampa Bay Times Forum and allow for high-volume concerts, helping to attract future entertainment, business, and energy to Tampa.

The sound system contains 1.36 MILLION watts of amplifier power – compared to 300 watts used in a standard home stereo.

Total light and sound cabling equals 20.39 miles.

Sound system is made of:

  1. 159 JBL Line Array Speakers
  2. 22 Stage Monitor Speakers
  3. 202 Media Speakers
  4. 6 Digital mixing consoles
  5. 12 wireless microphones
  6. 80 standard microphones
  7. 348 press audio outputs

RIGGING

Certified rope access teams were hired to climb high beams and rig points to the highest parts of the Times Forum.

  • They rigged a total of 2,500 feet of trussalmost half mile.
  • 250,000 lbs. of lighting, audio and video gear are now suspended from the building’s roof.
  • There are 275 chain motors (rigging points).
  • The Times Forum’s 1,000 lb. Lightening Tesla coil suspended from the ceiling had to be moved to load
  • any materials onto the catwalk.

Bookmark and Share

View Marco Rubio’s CPAC 2012 Speech in its Entirety

Bookmark and Share   As one of the opening speakers at the 2012 CPAC event, Florida Senator Marco Rubio demonstrated why he is the future of the G.O.P. and the nation.  He offered a speech that marked with a wonderful mix of  humor, sharp criticism and hard facts that highlighted the differences between the left and right and the exceptionalism of our nation which stems from the conservative ideology that founded it.

One of the best lines comes when Rubio related to the crowd in telling of how as a freshman in the Senate, he was initially floored by being in the presence of so many respected, prominent, national leaders and at times could not believe he was there, in the presence of all of these powerful people.  He then recalled how six months later he couldn’t help but wonder how those same people ever got there.

Rubio’s speech was hard-hitting and accurate and he delivered it so fluidly and naturally that one could not help but tell that they were listening to a future President of our nation.

Video from Rightscoop.com Bookmark and Share

 

Click Here to Join White House 2012 at CPAC Via Our Official Livestream of the Conference

Bookmark and Share    Today is CPAC and as an official CPAC Blog, White House 2012 is proud to have our own David  Cowan reporting to us from CPAC.

We are also proud to provide you with a White House 2012 livestream of the event provided to us by CPAC.  To join this gala conservative extravaganza live, simply click on the live feed at the following link http://videosrvr.com/player/1328470235957283072


Click here for a schedule of events and to find out when your favorite leader will be speaking.

Bookmark and Share

Rick Santorum’s Triumphant Trifecta Turns the Political Tables Yet Again

Bookmark and Share   In what proved to be another stunning turn of events in the ongoing Republican race for President, underdog Rick Santorum pulled off a truly stunning victory in not one, but three separate electoral contests across the nation.  Tuesday’s non-binding primaries and caucuses in Colorado, Minnesota, and Missouri were essentially beauty contests.  Quirky state Party rules do not allow for these contests to actually award any of each state’s delegates to the Republican National Convention.  That is left to a series of other events in each of the three state’s unique presidential electoral nominating process.

Nevertheless, all three of Tuesday’s election contests do bode well for Santorum’s chances of receiving a sizeable number of delegates when the final stages of the allocation process does take place and in the mean time, his clean sweep of Colorado, Minnesota, and Missouri have provided voters with another tremor in the 2012 election cycle.  It certifies this election as one which has broken the traditional mold created by past elections which usually allow Republicans to have a clear frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination at this stage of the game.  Even more astounding about the results of yesterday’s contests  were a number of factors that also include geography, money, and timing.

After big back to back wins for Mitt Romney in Florida almost two weeks ago, and another big win in Nevada this past Saturday, Romney should have established  a degree of momentum that added to a sense of inevitability regarding his becoming the eventual nominee.  Add to that the undeniably sizeable, professional, and well financed organization that Romney has and you had no reason to believe that Romney could lose one , let alone three, nomination contests that took place hundreds of miles away from one another on the same day.  The mere fact that Romney’s abundant resources provided him with the perfect opportunity to dominate in three different races in three different regions of the country at the same time, should have made it much more difficult for his underfinanced Republican rivals to compete against him in all three states very effectively.  Yet despite being out-organized, out-campaigned, and outspent by Romney, Rick Santorum who has not won a contest since Iowa back in January, not only beat Mitt, in one state, he did so in all three states and even more dramatic than that, he did so by wide margins that would seem to indicate that Romney was not even competitive. That inludes Colorado where Sanotrum won by anywhere from 5 to six percent of the vote.  Technically, a win by more than 5% in any election is considered a landslide.

The results were so stunning and such a boondoggle for Santorum that it left the rest of the field with absolutely no ability to put a positive spin on the results.

Ron Paul:

Aside from a second place showing in Minnesota, Ron Paul underperformed and remains a true non-entity in his plight to capture enough delegates to have some relevance at the Republican National Convention.  Of course I could be forced to eat my words if a very close brokered convention allows Ron Paul’s handful of delegates to adopt some sort of dangerous foreign policy or national security plank in the G.O.P. platform or to even determine who takes both the top spot and second slot on the Republican ticket in September.  Until then though,  Ron Paul has once again become a sidenote in another presidential election and will remain so until he can win a state, something which seems to be totally impossible for him to do.

Newt Gingrich:

Tuesday’s results were nothing but embarrassing for Gingrich.  He went from establishing himself as a comeback king and giant slayer in South Carolina, to being about as successful as the Hindenburg.  Being beaten by Romney would have been bad enough for Newt but to be beaten by Mitt and overtaken by Sanotrum and even losing to Ron Paul in one case, makes it hard for Newt to to try to maintain some staying power as the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney.  It also makes it nearly impossible for Newt to raise the kind of money that he will need to compete effectively during the three weeks leading up to the Michigan and Arizona primaries, not to mention the all important Super Tuesday gaggle of contests that follows soon after that.   Newt’s pathetic performance in Colorado, Missouri, and Minnesota  now leaves him in the middle of an electoral desert and while I will not write him off, I will admit that any roadmap out of the desert for Newt must include some major stumbles and wrong turns by his opponents.

Mitt Romney:

There was absolutely no reason for Mitt Romney’s poor showing in all three state’s on Tuesday.  Unless of course voters just don’t like him and unfortunately for him, the evidence would seem to indicate that that is indeed the case.   While Romney had everything working for him in Colorado, Missouri, and Minnesota, his rivals had everything working against them.  Yet Mitt Romney failed to move closer to the nomination and ceded valuable ground to what is a very sizeable sector of the Republican electorate that seems to be more interested in denying Romney the nomination than they are in  accepting a clear alternative to Romney.  This now puts Romney closer to his moment truth.  He can either forge ahead by aiming his fully loaded negative guns on Rick Santorum, as he did with Newt Gingrich, in an attempt to win the nomination by default, or he can finally stop trying to play it safe and be a leader who puts forth a number of bold reforms in a concise conservative agenda that addresses the desires of the conservative electorate whose shoulders he wants to be raised to victory upon.  This means no more singing of  the national anthem to waste time that could be used to address the policies that support the meaning behind our anthem.  It means no more platitudes about policies and conservativism, or attempts to impress the nation with his wife and sons standing loyally behind him.  It means now is the time for him to step up and show us exactly why and how he can be the leader we are looking for instead of trying to convince us of why everyone else is not the leader we are looking for.

As for Santorum, the former Pennsylvania Senator has been given his own Newt Gingrich-like opportunity for a second comeback.  I am not certain if the opportunity was because he has actually been impressing voters with his policies and leadership potential, or if he is simply the beneficiary of a vote that is protesting the perceived inevitability of Romney’s nomination.  Either way, it is most definitely another chance for Santorum to establish the type of momentum that could catapult him to the nomination.

Doing so though will be an uphill battle.  Santorum’s newfound opportunity will be riddled with a barrage of assaults upon his record, a record that can easily be distorted and challenge his image as a consistent conservative.  Romney, Gingrich, and Paul will almost certainly transform Santorum’s prolific return of earmarks to the people or Pennsylvania whom he represented in the United States Senate into the record of big spending, big government liberal.   Santorum’s conservative credentials will also be challenged based upon his one time support for liberal Republican Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter in a primary against the more conservative Pat Toomey.

None of this will be impossible for Santorum to overcome, but it will help prevent him from gaining the head of steam that will be required for him to capture any sense of inevitability regarding the nomination for himself.  But at the same time, Santorum’s string of victories make it certain that inevitability still eludes Mitt Romney too.

Bookmark and Share

The CPAC 2012 Blogger of the Year Award: Who Should Receive It?

 Bookmark and Share   It’s that time of year again.  It’s the time when activist conservative Americans make an annual pilgrimage to Washington, D.C. for what has become a political ritual of sorts.  It’s the American Conservative Union’s annual Conservative Political Action Conference.  And at this event the CPAC Blogger of the Year Award is given to a practicing blogger for their distinguished service to the Conservative Movement throughout their career.

Each year, this now prestigious honor is presented to a conservative member of the online universe who has advanced conservative principles, provoked thought and influenced countless opinion leaders, peers and fellow conservatives.  Past recipients have included Ace of Spades, Steve Gilbert, Ed Morrissey and Javier Manjarres of The Shark Tank.  This year, there is no shortage of deserving contenders but for me, there exists one blogger who deserves the honor more than most.  It is Maggie Thornton of the blog, Maggie’s Notebook.

Maggie’s Notebook is a wonderfully entertaining mix of social and political news that has a way of sourcing everything back to the conservative principles that lie at the heart of CPAC.

The CPAC event itself is comprised of  some of the conservative movement’s most influential thinkers, leaders, and opinion shapers,  each of which offer, workshops, presentations, and speeches that inspire truly dedicated conservatives in a way that reinforces their faith in their ideology and renews their committment to advancing its cause.  The event is one part battle cry, one part planning, and another part patriotism.  It involves a call to arms of sorts.   Here, right leaning activists are united with the Constitution in their head and a sledgehammer in their heart and the thinking behind the Constitution inspires them to take a passionate swing of that sledgehammer in an attempt to dismantle aspects of the behemoth federal bureaucracy that have exceeded their constitutional authority and in many cases have authority that is not even allowed by the Constitution of the United States.

As is the case with all things political, not everyone always agrees on exactly what is the right course of action on every issue. However,  as speech after speech is made and issue after issue is discussed, the light shed upon the political ideologies behind the policies of our government, reinforces the belief of those gathered together, that any conservative roadmap to prosperity for our nation and its people, does not involve any left turns.

But when all is said and done, after the speeches have ended, the discussions have been exhausted, the conservative cause has been reinvigorated , and the forces are fired up, there remains a unique battalion of conservative commandos whose job it is to make sure that the words spoken at CPAC continue to echo across the nation.  They are conservatives bloggers.

Bloggers have become an integral part of the political infrastructure that develops and communicates political ideas and trends.  These dedicated thinkers help shed light on that which the mainstream media is not willing to publicize because it either is not sensational enough to meet their “if it bleeds it reads standards”, or because it conflicts with their own interests or the interests of the media moguls and barons behind the writers who serve at their discretion.  Yet in the close-knit community known as the blogosphere, word travels fast and so when one little known blogger reports on their small town’s policy to pay their schools superintendent a whopping three quarter of million dollar severance pay settlement in addition to a $120,000 salary in annual retirement  benefits, it has a way of rapidly becoming an infuriating example of outrageous liberal excess and wasteful spending that gets held up as evidence everywhere from Keansburg, New Jersey to Bell, California.

Bloggers not only help influence opinions, in many ways they have taken control of the agenda.

Today, being a journalist who makes a living by writing for the major daily papers or television, cable, and radio outlets, means starting the day by checking blogs  for a story or an angle that their mainstream competitors have not already dissected and disseminated with enough repetition to prompt widespread spontaneous public regurgitation of the facts and the myriad of conclusions that can be drawn from it.

Then there is another aspect of control the blogosphere has been able to take credit for.  When the media is unwilling to police itself, the blogosphere is there to it do for them.

Thanks to the blogosphere, when a New York Times reporter named Jayson Blair fabricated stories and sources in order to sensationalize true events, several independent bloggers relentlessly reported about the scandal.  Other bloggers picked up on it and soon an undercurrent of internet information created a firestorm which the mainstream media could not ignore and soon the Jayson Blair incident became a widely recognized scandal that ended with the ousting of New york Times editor-in-chief, Howell Raines.

So bloggers make a big difference.  Collectively, if armed with the facts and with well articulated arguments, responsible bloggers can achieve just about any political change they desire.  If the conservative blogosphere saw fit to make sure that John  Boehner was not reelected to another term as Speaker of the House, you could count on the next President of the United States  having to contend with Speaker Eric Cantor.

Which is why the Blogger of the Year Award is a very important highlight of the CPAC gala and why Maggie Thornton deserves the honor .

While there is a countless number of dedicated conservative bloggers, there are numerous factors that limit the number of individual blogs and bloggers who are truly worthy of being distinguished with this honor.  Some of those factors include accuracy, support of the facts, style, and the ability to take real events and articulate them in a way that makes it clear why conservative thinking is superior to that of the left.  All of this makes a conservative blog good, and the better the blog, the more readers it attracts.  The more readers it attracts, the more widespread the dissemination of the opinions articulated in that blog become.  And when it comes to Maggie’s Notebook, the conservative opinion is advanced by leaps and bounds.

In addition to providing links to everything from our founding documents and votes on specific legislation as well as such things Essential Sources, data on the elections for   President/VP 2012U.S. Senate 2012, and  US House of Representatives 2012,  along with links relating to Primary and  Caucus Debates, and even a special heading for the growing Fast & Furious scandal, Maggie Thornton provides readers with a myriad of topical tales relating to society and politics, that consistently ties everything back to a presentation of evidence that supports how conservative thinking lifts all boats.

Through her writing, Maggie Thornton consistently illustrates how conservatism is that which represents the fundamentals which make us a constitutional republic and how liberal ideology retards our nation and holds back our people.  And she does so in a way that holds both conservatives and liberals accountable to our founding principles.  She encapsulates an overriding message of liberty that is designed to point out the type of nation that America is meant to be, and the type of nation which it will become if we continue to adopt watered-down Republican conservatism and full-blown liberal-socialism.

For these reasons, I have proudly nominated Maggie Thornton for CPAC Blogger of the Year.  Through Maggie’s Notebook, Ms. Thornton epitomizes the best of America as an individual and the best of the blogosphere with her blog.  She proves that in America, the power can rest with the people, for here is one woman who armed with knowledge, a keyboard, and a passion for civic responsibility, can make a difference.  And Maggie has made a difference.   A difference that requires a steady stream of committment to her site that accounts for a steady flow of new, daily content that is timely and topical.  Such committment requires sacrifice and dedication and for Maggie it pays off.  According to Alexa, the leading provider of free, global web metrics which provides analytics for competitive analysis, benchmarking, market research, or business development, Maggiesnotebook.com has a three-month global Alexa traffic rank of 160,578 but in the United States is ranked #41,626.  That may not seem like much but using White House 2012 as an example of an average blog, the Alexa rating system used for Maggie’s Notebook gives White House 2012 a worldwide ranking of 3,442,023, and a U.S. traffic rank of 394,665.

Ordinarily, those numbers would make me want to close up shop on White House 2012, but our stats are really not that bad when you consider how prolific blogging has become.

According to several internet tracking outlets more tha 196 million people “have started a blog” and last year over 368 million people have read blogs.  One source cited figures showing that “nine blogs are created every minute and 2.3 content updates are posted every second”.   Of course more than a quarter of those blogging ventures go abandoned in a matter of weeks and more than half go dormant within six months.  However, they still remain lumped in  with thew global and national internet ranking systems as they continue to be stumbled upon in cyberspace.    So those statistics provide some solace for me when it comes to White House 2012’s traffic, but it says all the more for success of Maggie’s Notebook.  Clearly the ranking of Maggie Thornton’s conservative blog is a great measure of success and evidence that not only is she getting the conservative message out, but people keep coming back for more.

So if you happen to be a certified CPAC blogger at this week’s conference in D.C., do us all a favor and cast your vote for Maggie’s Notebook.  Not only is it an outstanding blog, it is a source of inspiration for bloggers everywhere who hope to someday be able to look back and say, “I made a difference through my writing.”.  Maggie Thornton certainly has!

Bookmark and Share

State By State Approval Ratings Spell Disaster For Obama Relection Bid

Bookmark and Share   Gallup recently released their annual state-by-state presidential approval numbers and the results paint several pretty dismal pictures for the President, pictures that reflects the overall dismal economic condition that that the nation is in.
According to the analysis the President received a plurality of approval  from residents of only the District of Columbia and 10 states, while his job approval was below 50% in the remaining forty states.   Furthermore; in a majority of them, his approval was well below 45%.

This analysis is particularly troublesome given that while the President’s job approval rating nationally is below the 50% mark, the President’s reelection rests not within the national opinion as much as it does within the collective electoral college results that arrived at through the opinions reflected in each individual state.  And while a Real Clear Politics average of national polls put the Presidents approval rating at 46.5% and his disapproval rating is at 47.9%, what the Gallup state-by-state analysis shows is that the President’s challenge is actually tougher than the national polls indicate.

Gallup points out that President Obama received a 44% job approval rating in his third year in office, which is down from 47% in his second year. If that trend were to continue, Ron Paul could be nominated by the G.O.P. and probably defeat President Obama handily.  But reality dictates that Ron Paul will never see the light of day as a Republican presidential nominee, and that President Obama’s numbers are not likely to trend downward as he embarks upon a billion dollar campaign that will seek to rehabilitate his own image while eviscerating the image of his Republican opponent.

However, if the President finds his reelection effort failing to reverse the trend of his existing numbers and change the opinions that voters have of him now, he is doomed. Based upon the current trend,  If the President were to only carry those states in the Gallup poll which he he had a net positive approval rating in 2011, he  would lose the 2012 election  with 215 electoral votes, to the Republican nominee’s 323 electoral votes.

A White House 2012 breakdown of the Gallup study demonstrates how daunting a challenge lies ahead for President Obama.

Based upon his current state-by-state approval ratings, if we give President Obama each state where his rating is at 50% or above, he would lose the election by winning 159 electoral college votes from D.C., California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Vermont.  The Republican nominee would receive 379 electoral votes, 109 more than needed.

But White House 2012 tried to be a bit more realistic and decided to breakdown these numbers down by giving President Obama the benefit of the doubt by assuming he can turn his numbers around in all those states where his approval was as low as 45%.

That was not only generous, it was also responsible for a fairly more accurate picture of things.

Regardless of the numbers, there are some states that will not likely vote Republican regardless of how bad a job President Obama is doing or who the Republican presidential nominee is.  States like Washington and Oregon on the West Coast will probably remain dark blue and the president may easily turn around his downward trending approval ratings among the liberal sympathisers of those states. That accounts for 19 more electoral votes.  Then you can easily see the President take Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan in the Midwest.  That’s 36 more electoral votes. Then because his numbers are barely above 45% in Iowa, let’s say he can pull off some magic there, a state which he won in 2008.  That’s 6 more. Then on the East Coast, you’ll find Maine, and Rhode Island remaining true blue.  That’s another 8 electoral votes.  And throw in Pennsylvania too if for no other than reason than the Southeast portion of the state may still be strongly under the President’s spell.  That’s 20 more for a total shift of 89 electoral votes which gives President Obama 248 to the G.O.P.’s 290, a figure that still gives the win to the Republican nominee with 20 more electoral votes than needed.

With 29 electoral votes, this would make Florida the key to the President’s winning reelection.  Without it he needs Ohio with 18 electoral votes and at least one of the following other states; Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, or North Carolina.

Those four states are not goof for him right now, but he has better numbers in  them than he does in other states like New Hampshire or Arizona.

But even these state’s will be hard for Obama.  Currently his job approval is 40.4% in Colorado, 41.7% in New Mexico, 41.3% in  Nevada, and 43.7% in North Carolina.  Meanwhile his approval numbers in Florida and Ohio are at 43.6% and 42.1% respectively.

While turning these numbers around will not be impossible in the course of the lifetime that politically speaking, exists between now and November, doing so will be quite a dramatic achievement.  One that may require not just a well run campaign on the President’s part, but also a badly managed campaign on the part of whoever his Republican opponent is.

On a sidenote, I can not figure out for the life of me how the President’s job approval rating went up in a place like Wyoming.  It went up slightly in Connecticut and Maine, but those two states are known for the lunacy of their liberalism and in many cases their socialism.  But Wyoming?

As for the final outcome, no one can honestly say they know how the election will end.  But based upon a bit of instinct, the issues that will play out during the campaign, and the existing numbers, I offer my own following projections.

 It should be noted that if this scenario does come to fruition, there is the potential for an Electoral College crisis, for it offers the possibility of a tie in the Electoral College:

However I do not suspect that such a tie will occur because of the battleground states that I believe this will come down to, I foresee Republicans winning Pennsylvania, Colorado, and New Mexico.

Bookmark and Share

Florida Makes History Again. Now What?

Bookmark and Share   As is the norm for Florida, the Sunshine State has again made electoral history.  For the first time, the Republican winner of the South Carolina primary, lost the Florida primary.  What it means in the long term is uncertain, but what it means in the short term is quite apparent.  Nationally, Republicans have no real clear favorite for President yet.

Still,  Mitt Romney’s win was significant and he deserve credit for orchestrating it.  He spent $17 million to do it, but he did it and in the end, especially with 50 delegates now in his column, that is all that matters.  However, while Romney once again becomes the frontrunner for the nomination, you will have to forgive me if do not declare this race over yet.

With little more than 5% of the delegates allocated so far, there is no denying that the race is not over yet, but it was made even more obvious to me after hearing Romney deliver his victory speech, and after Gingrich and Santorum gave their concession speeches.

In his speech, Mitt Romney rose to the occasion and sounded enthusiastic, but humble, and most of all, he sounded presidential.  He delivered a speech that allowed people to truly begin to get comfortable with the idea of him being the candidate who can take the fight to President Barack Obama and beat him.  He didn’t seal the deal, but his Florida victory speech helped make people more willing to accept the now almost inevitability of his being nominated for president.  And now back in the frontrunner position, Romney offered not only a brief glimpse of the potential that exists in his carrying the Republican banner,  he even took some steps to put the ugliness of the intraparty battle for the nomination behind him by eloquently making the point that “a competitive primary does not divide us, it prepares us.”

But in his facing the fact that he came in second place to Romney with at least 15% less of the vote than Romney, Newt Gingrich offered a speech which oozed of defiance and held a true thirst for not just beating Barack Obama, but for bringing about the type of reforms that Americans want, but as of late, have not often come to see in either Republicans or Democrats.  He also provided some of the best reasons for his candidacy to date.

While limiting his negative attacks to calling Romney a Massachusetts moderate, Newt introduced what was seemingly a very heartfelt, personal contract with the American people, a spin on the now famous 1994 Contract With America that he spearheaded and guided through Congress.

Newt’s personal  contract consists of two parts.  The first part is conditional and it requires that the people elect conservatives to Congress.  If they do that, Newt promises that before he takes office, he will request that on January 3rd, 2013, the new Congress stays in session and immediately repeals Obamacare, Dodd-Franks, and Sarbanes Oxley, three bills that are being viewed as among  the most  detrimental legislative initiatives effecting our economy.  Gingrich vows that if the American people elect strong conservative majorities to Congress, those three measures can be repealed by Congress and on the day of his inauguration, he will sign the legislation to rid us of those massive government burdens.  The problem there is that unless it is veto proof majority, President Obama will have the opportunity to veto it before Gingrich has the opportunity to sign it.  So Newt might want to hold back on his request for january 3rd vote on those issues.

The rest of Newt’s personal contract is a promise to promptly enact a series of constitutional executive orders that will consist of immediately abolishing the existence of all White House czars, an  immediate order to commence construction of the Keystone Pipeline project, an executive order opening the American embassy in Jerusalem and essentially acknowledging that divided city as Israel’s capital, another executive order which would reinstate the Reagan policy that did not allow  federal money to fund any abortions, anywhere in the world, and last but not least, he promised to enact an order that repeals any and all of the anti-religious acts enacted by the Obama Administration in what Newt described as the President’s war on religion.

Newt’s speech was far from a concession speech, but what it did do was offer voters some good reasons for why Newt should not give up.  With a room full of supporters waving signs that reminded voters that there are 46 more states which have yet to vote, Newt demonstrated that he still has what it takes to continue contesting this election.

The other speech of note came from third place finisher Senator Rick Santorum.

Even though Santorum placed a very distant third with only 13% of the vote in Florida, his speech actually provided a good rationale for his own continued participation in this race.

Knowing full well that he was not going to have a strong showing in Florida, Santorum elected to make his primary night remarks from Nevada, where he is campaigning in advance of that state’s Caucus which takes place this Saturday.

Taking advantage of the very rarely traveled high road in their primary contest, Santorum exploited the bitter battle between Romney and Gingrich by looking like the adult in the room who had his eye on the real prize…….defeating President Obama.

He stated that he was not going to criticize the personal and public successes achieved by both Gingrich and Romney as they have done to one another.  Instead he declared that republicans deserve better, and that he was going to focus on the issues important to the American people.  However, Santorum did argue that Newt failed at taking the momentum he had coming out South Carolina and converting it in to establishing himself as the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney.  According to Santorum, Newt proved to make himself the issue and the American people do not need a President who is the issue, but rather a President who can address the issues and solve the problems surrounding them.

All three speeches were actually quite good and they all provided a solid foundation and legitimate reasons for this nomination contest to remain competitive.  The problem is that Santorum and Gingrich will still have to find the resources it takes to convince voters that it really isn’t over.  If Newt can finally stick to the themes he struck in his speech in Florida, themes based on his being the anti-establishment candidate and a true conservative leader capable of achieving very real and very bold reforms, he can survive long enough to see another victory, but it may not happen for another month or more and the longer he goes without a victory, the harder it will be for him to achieve one.

Right now, the only thing we can be certain of is that Mitt Romney is the one in the catbird seat tonight.  The real problem I see here though is that Romney is still the candidate which for numerous reasons, many Republicans seem to be settling for.  Such uninspired support makes it quite possible for someone like Newt to turn things around by actually inspiring people and causing voters say, you know what?  I don’t have to settle for Mitt. We can do better.”

Until Mitt Romney is willing to stop playing it safe, and proves that he too can be a bold leader, he will remain vulnerable to being overshadowed by the boldness of Newt Gingrich’s vision and red meat agenda.  For Mitt it is now a judgement call and a gamble.  Does he continue to play it safe and rely on his giant campaign war chest to suppress the amount of support Gingrich and  risk the possibility of Newt turning things around again?  Or  does he step out of his safety zone and make an attempt to prove that he is more than just a wealthy Republican establishment candidate?

My experience with Romney leads me to believe that he will continue to play it safe with the expectation that Newt will be do just the opposite and a loss it all by taking one too many risks.

On a final note, yes I know that I did not mention Ron Paul and that I did not include his concession speech.  And no it is not because I am afraid that if I give him any ink, people will flock to his side and elect him President.  The reason I did not include Ron Paul is because he has yet to become a significant factor in this election and because he said absolutely nothing new in his speech following his single digit, last place showing in Florida.

Bookmark and Share

Gingrich Campaign Makes Desperate Calls to Jewish Florida Senior Citizens

Bookmark and Share   In what has got to be one of the most desperate attempts to target a message to a critical voting bloc an election, Newt Gingrich’s campaign approved a robocall that went out to Florida’s large Jewish vote.

The call went specifically to elderly Jewish senior citizens which is a smart move, Senior citizens are the most reliable voters in the nation and they show up to polls in percentages than larger all other demographics.

However, the Gingrich call was an uttrerly shameful pitch to Jewish senior citizens that essentially chose to exploit the Holocaust and make a comparison that suggests even the Nazi’s didn’t force Jews to eat non-kosher food, but Mitt Romney did.

The allegation is based on a measure which Romney vetoed as the Governor of Massachusetts but the truth is the bill never actually prevented kosher food from being served to Jewish residents in various facilities, and Romney’s veto did not cut any funding for kosher food services have but merely vetoed additional funds. The ultimate decision not serve kosher food certain nursing homes was actually made by individual nursing homes which did have a substantial enough Jewish population in their facilities.

As a supporter of Newt, even I must admit that this robocall was in extremely poor taste and in many ways, even offensive.

The Holocaust is too significant a tragedy in world history to exploit and trivialize by introducing it in to shallow politics with distortions, lies, and such sheer maliciousness.

After South Carolina, I was confident that Newt needed to go after the Jewish vote in Florida.  One reason was because he has an incredible record on Israel that could have greatly appealed to the Jewish community.  But I never meant for him to go after the Jewish vote by angering senior citizens over the Holocaust and comparing Mitt Romney to Nazi’s.

Bookmark and Share

Realigning the American Political Psyche Estblished by the Liberal Paradigm

Bookmark and Share   I have spent a lot of time listening to Democrats and President Obama in particular, preach about fairness and making people pay their fair share.  I have listened to an endless stream of liberals position themselves as federal cherubs who are trying to be little government sponsored guardian angels who just want to make sure that everyone is treated equally and that everyone gets what they deserve.    Sometimes I swear I am listening to Tinkerbell talking to Peter freaking Pan, or listening to Glinda, the Good Witch of the North, tell me that if I click the heels of my ruby red slippers together, I will suddenly find a magical rainbow that will lead me to a government provided pot of gold.

What bothers me the most is not that these liberal leprechaun would try to convince people that their American version of socialism would make everything better,  but that there are actually Americans who are really dumb enough to believe them.

But it is evidence of the fact that since the days of FDR, Democrats have come to believe not in strong economic policies for America, but rather in the kind of politics that can keep them in power by offering voters a choice between the truth of reality represented by the self determination which Republicans believe in, and the government fantasy version of reality that the left promotes.  It is the kind of politics that is rooted in dependency and it is comprised of a formula which seeks to make people believe that things can be easier if they keep Democrats in power because Democrats will give the people a litany of wonderful things by declaring them rights.

They will give you government provided health care, education, food, salaries, and services, and all these gifts will make our lives easier, and better.

It is a vicious cycle which all began by exploiting dependency,  a negative which Democrats now try to perpetuate.  For Democrats, their formula for electoral success relies mainly upon making more people, more dependent on government goodies so that come Election Day, the voters will embrace rather than bite the liberals hands that the people have literally come to expect to feed them.

Pursuit of this political formula for electoral success has unfortunately had a big impact on many Americans.  Without realizing it, many Americans have been brainwashed and come to embrace the liberal mindset which has successfully change the dynamics of American thinking.

Today, thanks to the left, the American constitutional paradigm which was a citizenry that granted limited powers to a federal government, has been forgotten and replaced with the thinking that starts from the premiss which has us now question how much power the government can give the people.  It is really all quite insane.

Today we take taxes for granted so much that the debate is not how much the government should take.  It is how much of what we earn  can we keep.  In this day an age we are grateful when a leader like Chris Christie comes along and proposes an across the board state income of 10%.  Thanks to liberal propaganda and decades of liberal training, we actually believe that politicians are doing us a favor by lowering our taxes.  But the truth is, that it is no favor!  It is the only decent thing to do!  Yet we have all fallen victim to a liberal agenda which has forced us to think backwards.  Whether we realize it or not, liberal thinking has shifted our mindset and so today we thank a politician for allowing us to keep more of our own money, when what we should actually be doing is reprimanding them for not giving us back more of our own money.

It’s time for people to wake up and realize that in America, the people do not exist because of government, government exists because of the people.  Americans need to realize that we should not be grateful for how much the government lets us keep, it is the government that should be grateful for what we the people are willing to give to it.   Until we all realize that,  we will all remain slaves to our government, and nothing more than the real servants to those who are suppose to be the government servants………the elected officials who we thank for allowing us to keep more of our money, and appreciate for giving us the permit and permission s to build a deck on our own private property or to go fishing or camping.

I recently listened to the elf-like liberal Congressman from Ohio, Dennis Kucinich.

Dennis was discussing President Obama’s State of the Union address and he told the listening audience that he believed “the rich should pay more”.  Other liberals phrase it differently.  President Obama likes to say that “the rich should be forced to pay their fair share”.  But what I need to know is what is fair and beyond that, who the hell has the right to tell us what is fair?  Is Dennis Kucinich the Fairness Fairy?

Fairness is arbitrary and our Constitution did not address fairness.  And as far as I known there is no twenty eighth amendment of the Constitution which defines fairness and articulates how government is suppose to legislate fairness.   But the Constitution of the United States does address government’s place in our lives and in doing so, it clearly states that we are granted our rights from our creator.   And just to make this clear, I need to tell you that the federal government did not create you or I.  Barack Obama can not take credit for me.  Nor can he legally take my rights away, even though several of his policies already have.

Another thing he should not be able to do is tell me how much I can earn, what I must do with my money, and who I must share it with.

Yet that is what the left has essentially lived for since the days of FDR.

They have lived for the opportunity to make me as good as the next guy by making sure that if the next guy is doing well, the government can redistribute his wealth to me.  Is that a definition of fairness?  Is it fair for me to profit from the work, ingenuity, work ethic, and committment of someone else?

These are the questions that President Obama and his Party have brought to the forefront in this election, more than any election we have seen in generations.

And while the economy is and should be one of the most important issues of the 2012 cycle, what America needs to really do is look at the dynamics behind the economy.  Then they must decide if we want to fully invest ourselves in to reconstructing our national foundation in to one that is the world’s preeminent government sponsored welfare state, a state which is the key element to the survival of each individual American.  Or do we want to strengthen the founding principles which were designed to get government and the federal bureaucracy out of the way so that we can practice the rights that we were endowed with by our creator and be free to dream well beyond the limits of the government bureaucracy?

That is the framework that this election must waged in. It is the question which the Republican nominee for President needs to condense every interpretation of each of their policies down to.

In 2012, the G.O.P. needs to remind people that dependency is not the American way and that our government was never meant to be the largest source of jobs in America.  In fact the purpose of our government is not to create jobs, it was designed to make sure that American people could create jobs.

People must be made to once again learn how things really work in America.

They must be retrained to understand that government created jobs do not generate profits that sustain the costs of the salaries paid to each government employee.  They need to understand that an employee of the EPA does not do create wealth, they consume wealth.  The American people must be made to once again realize that when the government creates a job, the salary for that job comes not from any federal profit…..it comes from the taxpayers, and in order to keep raising the money required to pay that government salary, the government will need to continue taking taxpayers money.

However, in the free market, profits create salaries and the more profits there are, the more salaries there are.

But there is even more to it than that basic fact.

Voters need to be made aware of the fact  that according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, civilian workers employed through the federal government have  an average wage of $81,258.  Yet at the same time, the average wage of the nation’s approximate 101 million private-sector workers  is $50,462.

This means that taxpayers, the people who are making money through jobs that generate profits, are paying federal workers 25% more than they make.  Meanwhile, President Barack Obama is increasing federal spending through so-called economic stimulus dollars, that is creating an even larger federal workforce, one that for a while was outpacing private sector job growth.  And that is a formula for further disaster.

Paying federal salaries, and more of them, that are higher than the salaries which provide the taxes that pay for those federal pay checks, is  a formula that leads to paying out more than we take in.  And that is just on government jobs.  It has nothing to do with the other more traditional forms of federal deficit spending based on entitlements and federal dependency programs.

All of this presents the next Republican presidential nominee a with a multifaceted challenge.

They must not just provide solutions and frame them in a way that wins people over, they must also educate people.  The next Republican presidential nominee must educate people on how America is suppose to work and they must teach them the reasons why the socialist model of contemporary liberal-progressivism does not work and how it is a system designed to keep the powerbrokers in power by making them the people we are dependent for our own survival.

In 2012 we make people understand that government is not a supernatural entity which can wave a magic wand over a problem and solve it without accountability and without there being future repercussions as Peter finally has to Paul.

Once people can be made to realize that, I mean really realize that, half the battle will be won.

Once that is achieved we then need to confront Democrats and tell them that if they want change the purpose of government, they, like President, should come right out and admit it.

When he was running for President in 2008, then Senator Obama declared that he wanted to “fundamentally change America”.  But few took him at his word.  And those that did, didn’t think he really meant he wanted to fundamentally change the constitutional responsibilities of government.  But now it is quite obvious that that is exactly what he meant.

In 2012 we must challenge Democrats to be truthful to the American people and force them to come before voters and admit that they want the federal government to have more control over our lives.  We must challenge them to be honest and admit that they do not like the fact that some people can be financially wealthier than others.  We must make the left come before the American electorate and let them know the America that liberals envision, is one in which everyone is made equal by lowering the overall quality of life rather than providing the type of environment which creates more opportunities for people to improve their quality of life.

We know for certain that class warfare is the name of the liberal game in 2012.  It’s nothing new.  But what Republicans must do now is reeducate the American people and make them realize why it is class warfare.  And we must then ask the American people to decide once for all, if they believe dependency on the federal bureaucracy is the best foundation for them to build their lives upon and for our nation to grow on, or is the independence behind our reason for being the more solid choice for the future of our nation and its people.

Bookmark and Share

Newt’s No Strategy Stragey Is Playing Right In To His Rivals Hands

Bookmark and Share   As I have said over and over again, I am fully prepared to enthusiastically get behind Mitt Romney as our nominee, but when given the choice between Mitt’s meager tweaking of policies that steer things slightly more to the right of the liberal establishment, and Newt’s bold solutions that rewrite and reform policies, I am supporting Newt.  I believe that in this election, Republicans are at a crossroads.  We either commit ourselves to being like Democrats and affirm ourselves as being defenders of the status quo or we establish ourselves as the Party of reform.

In a race between Newt and Mitt, for me the issue is not so much which man is more conservative but which man is more representative of the status quo and the establishment and which one is more representative of reform and the anti-establishment sentiments that gave birth to a whole movement that was based in part on a an extraordinary anti-establishment sentiment.  Of the two, given that criteria, Newt wins hands down.  Which is why I have become so utterly disappointed in  Newt Gingrich’s campaign.

While I understand how much pride Newt takes in running an untradition campaign that does not focus on fundraising and consultant rich decision making that forces one to produce poll driven policy positions, I am incredibly frustrated by Newt’s unwillingness to accept the fact that any effective campaign requires a degree of proper planning and strategizing.  It does not necessarily have to be traditional planning and strategizing but it has to be at least a semi coordinated effort that covers some of the most basic aspects of the purpose behind any campaign.  One such purpose is that of delivering a message.

What is Newt’s message?

Well he has had quite a few and most all of them have been good.  But when asked that question, voters should not have to decide what a candidate’s message is.  They should clearly know one carefully crafted message that is clear and immediately resonates.  Unfortunately,  Newt’s message has not been clear.  For that to happen, Gingrich needs to strike a theme or a string of theme’s that easily tie together to form one message.  A smart campaign will use themes that creates a message which not only advance the candidate’s cause, but also takes the sting out of their rivals attacks.  In Newt’s case a perfect string of theme’s that create just the right message for him would consist of his being a reform minded, anti-establishment, leader.

Let’s look at each of these areas individually:

Leadership;

As Speaker of the House, Newt established himself as a true leader and America is yearning for one that can take them in the right direction.  Do they want the type of leader who can create a Contract With America that led America in to a Republican revolution that changed the way Congress does business and led to some of the most conservative reforms in generations while working with Democrats?  Or do they want the type of leadership that worked with Democrats to  create such things as RomneyCare and ObamaCare?

That is a theme not only works for Newt, it works against Mitt Romney?

Reform;

Here again, one can turn one of Romney’s weaknesses in to a Gingrich strength.

Do we we want the type of Gingrich reforms which led to the greatest reform of the last 30 years…..welfare reform, or do they want the type of Romney reforms which created Romney and Obama style government-centric healthcare?

This theme is probably the most fertile for Gingrich.

It allows him to remind people that when Newt became Speaker, he reformed the House and made many changes that forced its members to live by the same rules they create for others.  The scandal which saw members of Congress involved The House banking scandal when it was revealed that the United States House of Representatives allowed members to overdraw their House checking accounts without any penalties, prompted Newt to enforce rules that made it harder for legislators to live above the law.

But there is much more to point to when it comes to Gingrich’s proven record of reform.  Some of the most dramatic include:

All of these major changes offer Newt a wealth of issues to introduce in  to the election and provide all the evidence people need to establish just how reform driven he is and each one of them strike chords among the electorate that are just as important and topical today as they were yesterday and will be tomorrow.

The Anti-Establishment Candidate;

In this anti-establishment, TEA movement environment, the status quo is out and the defenders of the status quo are the enemy.  People do not trust the establishment of either Party.  They believe that each Party has betrayed the ideologies they represent and have forgotten that the people are in charge in government and not the government which is in charge of the people. At this point in time, it seems that the people are having to answer to government, far more than government does to the people.

Meanwhile scores of establishment Governors, Senators, Congressman are coming out and endorsing Mitt Romney.  They are making it clear that the Mitt Romney is the establishment candidate………the defender of the status quo.  Meanwhile those members of the establishment are attacking Newt.  From Bob Dole on down, the establishment has soundly rejected Newt and if that is not enough to convince anti-establishment voters that Newt is one of them, than nothing is.

Add to that Newt’s willingness to stray from Party orthodoxy on occasion, and his instinctual desire to question traditional political thinking and approaches to problems and what you have is a candidate who represents anything but the status quo.

Combined together, all three of these qualities could provide Gingrich with the keys to the Republican presidential nomination.  In many cases,  despite poor messaging by Gingrich’s campaign, they have already been responsible for what success Gingrich has had.  But until and unless he can run a campaign that reinforces these themes with clear, consistent messages, the opportunity to exploit them will be lost.  And right now, Newt is losing.

In his desire to be unconventional, Newt is unwilling to be scripted.  And while there is a degree of political attractiveness to that, it also makes it impossible for Newt to stay on message and drive it home and the result is sometimes disastrous.

It is what led to his hurting himself a few weeks ago when he offended supporters of capitalism by going to far with an improper assault on Mitt Romney for his work as a venture capitalist.  It is also what led to Newt’s most recent blunder, claiming that he could not focus because the audience in the most recent debate was a distraction.

That off-the-cuff remark was so wrong on so many levels that it could very well cost him the winner-take-all, victory in Florida’s Primary.

That statement allowed Mitt Romney to undermine Newt by him seem week and it also allowed Romney to undermine Newt’s greatest strength, his superb debating skills.

Such results are bound to happen when a candidate is unwilling to stay on message and when they fail to settle upon a winning theme that they can build on.

Whatever the result in Florida, if Newt intends to remain in this contest to win, he better get his act together and admit to himself that he needs a competent organization that coordinates his ground game, and does things such as spearhead an aggressive absentee ballot operation in key states, and he must succumb to the fact that if he wants to win, he needs to focus on developing a winning strategy.

Bookmark and Share

John McCain Wants the Presidential Candidates to Stop All These Silly Debates

Bookmark and Share   While defending Mitt Romney, his choice for President, in an interview on NBC’s Meet the Press,  failed 2008 Republican presidential nominee John McCain told host David Gregory that he wishes the Republican presidential candidates would stop participating in all the presidential debates that are taking place.

According to McCain, the debates “are driving down our candidates favorable ratings” and are making it harder whoever the nominee is to defeat President Obama in November.

The statement begs the question, is John McCain losing his mind, or has he already lost it?

McCain’s objection to the presidential candidates having as many as 19 debates in the last 8 months is both dumb and a quintessential example of establishment thinking.  Only a true established member of the political class would take issue with politicians having to discuss the issues and defend their records and policies in front of an audience comprised of the American electorate.  The political elite may not like being held accountable in a forum that is not scripted so tightly that it allows for a one way conversation of the candidate telling the voters what they think the voters want to hear, but voters do appreciate having the opportunity to see their potential President have to think on their feet.

Furthermore; even if John McCain is correct in his assertion that all the debates are responsible for driving down the favorability numbers of the G.O.P. candidates, then so be it.  If it is true that the more the candidates seeking the Republican presidential nomination talk, the more they less people like them, then we do not deserve to win the presidency in November.  If we as a Party can not find a true leader based upon the realistic expectation that they can effectively articulate our cause and the solutions to our problems, than we deserve to lose.

But what it comes down to is that John McCain can’t actually believe his own words.  He can’t really be suggesting that debates are a bad thing.

What McCain is really suggesting is that Newt Gingrich survived this campaign and surged in it because of he outperformed the man that McCain is supporting……Mitt Romney.  And it is clear to McCain that had there not been 19 debates, Mitt would not have been dominated by Newt on 19 different occasions.    So here is Senator McCain actually calling for fewer debates because they are not helping his hand picked choice for President win voters over.

What it comes down to is this.

McCain’s call for the debates to stop is offensive and counterproductive.  It is typical establishment, inside-the-beltway, thinking that is designed to shelter the political class from those whom they seek to govern and it is quite arrogant and antithetical to democratic process.  It is the type of thinking that could only come out the mouth of a from a person who has spent over thirty years in the bubble that is Washington.  They are certainly not the words or thoughts of a so-called “Maverick”.

I will concede that it is quite unfortunate that Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich have resorted to attacking one another with distortions that are absolutely over the top.  I feel it is a shame that Newt Gingrich saw fit to travel down the same low road that Mitt Romney and the establishment led us down and that Mitt Romney finds it impossible to build himself up without first tearing down everyone else down.  However I will not go so far as to say that the answer is to stop the debates and limit the discussion to sanitized forums which do not allow candidates to raise and debate legitimate issues before the American people.

To his credit, Mitt Romney has not taken the same position as his establishment surrogate, Senator John McCain.  So while I will not hold McCain’s ignorant and offensive comments against him, but as someone who can easily support Romney if he is the nominee, I would like to suggest to him that he stop trying to embrace the political establishment so tightly.  Instead of using the Dole’s, McCain’s, and Tom DeLay’s of the political world as a ladder to which he can climb to power with, Mitt Romney should be running away from the establishment and building himself up as a candidate of independent, conservative thought, who brings to the table something that the establishment doesn’t……real life and business experience.

Whether Mitt realizes it or not, the establishment support he is receiving is not helping him among the voters he needs most.  The anti-establishment voters who are far removed from the political class and who are disdainful of Beltway politics.  Another thing that Mitt should realize is that the more the political establishment attacks Newt Gingrich, the more the anti-establishment coalesces around Gingrich.

In other words, Mitt Romney should tell surrogates like McCain to shut the hell up.

While he might think that the public pitches that Washington insiders are making on Romney’s behalf are helping him in places like Florida, he should realize that every time the establishment wins, the voters rally behind the anti-establishment candidates.  So even if Romney does wins Florida, if he does so through a strategy that employs tactics designed at assassinating the character of Newt Gingrich through the political class, then the voting class will lash out against him somewhere else, primarily in Minnesota, Missouri, and Arizona, which hold their nominating contests in late february and early March.

Bookmark and Share

President Obama Uses a Backdrop of Screws for the Economy. Screw You Too President Obama!

Bookmark and Share   Today President Obama followed up his State of the Campaign Kickoff address with a visit to Conveyor Engineering & Manufacturing in  Cedar Rapids, Iowa.

Conveyor Engineering & Manufacturing manufactures stainless steel screws like the one pictured to the left. They are screws that are used to run conveyor belts  and screw  presses used in wet corn milling, ethanol production, and manure and fertilizer manufacturing. Its customers include Cargill, Kellogg, Hormel Foods and  Georgia Pacific and it is truly an American business to be proud of.

So pardon me for making a natural connection here, but while Conveyor Engineering & Manufacturing is a serious unsung hero in American life, on so many levels including agriculture, jobs, and the economy, I can’t help but see a remarkable symbolic connection between the screws they make and how President Obama has screwed America.

Despite his rhetoric regarding his three day, five-state tour of battlegrounds that are filled with electoral college votes that the Presidents badly needs, and in which officials say the President will  use to lay out his vision for a “new era of American manufacturing with more great jobs and  more products made in the USA”, what the President will not be admitting is that his policies have actually screwed America, its people, and the manufacturing industry he is trying to become a hero of.

President Obama will not be addressing the 30 jobs bills that Republicans in the House passed but thanks to the President and his Party,  are still sitting over in the United States Senate.  The President will not be mentioning that many of those Republican initiatives were endorsed last week by his own jobs council.  And, he will not admit that for three years now, all he has done is regurgitate the same failed past policies of more spending, more taxes, and more regulations.

The President will not be pointing out how his policies have held back economic growth and stymied the ability of manufacturers to broaden their base and ability to increase production, which in turn would normally increases profits, and the hiring of new employees.

You will not hear about how President Obama’s decision to impose 35% tariffs on Chinese tire imports resulted in job losses for U.S. downstream industries, higher prices for U.S. consumers and led to an avalanche of similar trade case filings and other demands for protectionist measures, or how killing the Keystone Pipeline cost hundreds of thousands of jobs and diminished any immediate hope to alleviate our reliance on foreign oil and to lower the cost to for manufacturers to do business in our nation.

President Obama will not be admitting that the inability for him and his Party to present a budget in what is now more than 1,001 days, has helped to create an air of uncertainty that hangs over our economy like a sword of Damocles.  Nor will he speak about how his policies to bailout out all his buddies in  GM and in Fannie and Freddie Mac have burdened Americans and American manufactures with a driving need for the federal government to generate more tax dollars in order to pay for these bailouts.  And you will not hear President Obama campaigning on the fact that his overspending, debt busting, crony capitalism, government depency promoting, pro-poverty policies, led to the first downgrading of the American bond rating in our nation’s history….a downgrade that made it even riskier to do or grow businesses in America.

You will not hear about any of these facts as President Obama tries to blame his destruction of the free market and stagnation of the economy on others.  But I am grateful for the fact that the President chose the backdrop that he did to launch his financial fiction and fantasy tour of America.  The backdrop of the giant screws which Conveyor Engineering & Manufacturing produces is much more fitting than the infamous Greek columns he used as a backdrop when he accepted his party’s presidential nomination three years ago.  The backdrop of a big screw is much more appropriate for this President, a President who has screwed America more than any other President since Democrat Jimmy Carter compelled Americans to fumigate the White House with a dose of Ronald Reagan conservatism.

So as President Obama leaves the screw factory, all I can really say is thank you Mr. President, and screw you too.

Bookmark and Share

Trent Lott Endorses Mitt Romney and Establishes Mitt as The Estasblishment Candidate

Bookmark and Share   CBS News recently posted an interview with former Republican Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott in which he stated that he supports Mitt Romney over Newt Gingrich  because the former Governor of Massachusetts has a much better chance at defeating President Obama than Newt does [see the interview below this post]

According to Lott;

“I think we would be better off with Mitt Romney as our president.”

He added;

“We don’t need a good speech. We don’t need a good debater. We don’t need rhetorical passion, What we need is leadership and direction for our country.”

Last year Lott stated that he was backing  Romney, but he declined to openly criticize Gingrich.  But with Newt’s surge in the polls comes a new approach by Trent Lott who now aggressively seeks the opportunity to denounce Gingrich.

In addition to telling CBS that he just doesn’t think that’s what we need in a President, when asked if Gingrich could beat President Obama in the election Lott bluntly states;

“I’m sure he wouldn’t, frankly,”

The former Senate leader also went sfter Newtt for a reprimand rewgarding a ethics charge and says;

“It raises questions about management style, and it raises questions about why did he wind up with the result where you get punished by your ethics committee and wind up having to step aside,”.

He added

“People want to know what ended up happening there.”

Lott said the Ethics Committee wouldn’t have acted against him “if there weren’t some real problems.” He said the allegations and subsequent investigation gutted whatever hope Gingrich had to lead.

“We all make mistakes when you’re in leadership, we’re human beings,” Lott said.

“That was a very serious result and one that clearly undermined his ability to lead the House. “

Lott also accused Gingrich of taking too much credit for some of those things which were achieved during his four years as Speaker of the House, one of them being the balanced budgets that were passed.  According to Trent Lott, those balanced budgets were more the doing of former Ohio Congressman John Kasich and New Mexico Senator Pete Domenici.

The former G.O.P. Senate leader also claimed that the now infamous government shutdown during Newt’s Speakership, was a big mistake and that it was based on the political goal of beating President Clinton, not the policy goal of getting the buf=dget under control.

“He was the leader. He was really pushing it. He said, ‘We’re going to do it. We can take Clinton on and we can beat him on this,'”

Lott recalled.

“To me it wasn’t about beating Clinton, it was about getting things done without causing an uproar and a chaotic situation that was very unsettling to a lot of people. We could have gotten it done without that.”

Trent Lott’s assessment of the Gingrich years is certainly worthy of consideration.  I mean Lott was there and he was a part of the events which he speaks about.  But at the same time, as leaders of two different chambers of Congress, what Lott says needs to be taken with a grain of salt.  Furthermore, while he may have been their when Newt was in charge and established that he did not like what he saw, Lott was not their with Mitt Romney when he was Governor of Massachusetts, so it is a little hard for Trent Lott to judge Mitt Romney the same way he does Newt Gingrich.  If Lott were sitting in a leadership post within the Massachusetts state legislature, he might not have liked what he saw in Mitt Romney either.

Ultimately though, Lott’s endorsement of Romney does little to either help Romney or hurt Gingrich.

Trent Lott is seen as a former member of the establishment, and the establishment is not really appreciated by most voters.  In fact, what many anti-establishment voters conclude from Lott’s remarks is that Newt Gingrich is a fighter who unlike the establishment, doesn’t just go with the flow.  And they like that.  So if anything, Lott actually helps Newt Gingrich, because by endorsing Mitt Romney, Trent Lott simply reinforces the negative impression that Mitt Romney is forced to combat,……the negative impression of being the establishment choice for President.

Ultimately, Newt might want to actually send a little thank you note to Trent Lott.  By helping to put the establishment seal of approval on Romney, Lott did a lot of good for Newt.

Bookmark and Share

Ron Paul Responds to President Obama’s State of the Union Speech

Bookmark and Share  Following President Obama’s third State of the Union address, three time presidential candidate Ron Paul issues a scathing assessment which accused the President offering rhetoric that contradicts with his policies.

In his statement Paul also criticized President Obama for perpetuating what he called establishment Republican policies and for neglecting to address balancing g the federal budget and bringing transparency to the federal reserve.

Ron Paul’s Rebutal to the President’s SOTU

“Tonight, President Obama once again showed that he does not represent the fundamental change this country needs. Instead of offering solutions to the problems our country faces, the President was intent on delivering a campaign speech, further dealing in the typical Washington political gamesmanship that has gotten us exactly nowhere close to improving the lives of the American people.

In a speech where much of the rhetoric was devoted to job creation, it was strange that President Obama would brag about his job-destroying national health care plan, Obamacare, and the Dodd-Frank bill, which, contrary to the President’s claims, guarantees future taxpayer bailouts of large institutions. Unfortunately, President Obama’s ‘job creation’ policies amount to little more than continuing to allow government bureaucrats to pick winners and losers, which is a recipe for continued economic stagnation.

President Obama claims to want an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules. Yet he remains committed to the same old system of debt, deficits, bailouts, and cronyism that created our economic problems. The President speaks of giving us energy independence from unstable nations, yet he refuses to allow the type of development needed to achieve this goal, while at the same time his administration hands out favors to the politically connected – those given to the likes of Solyndra, who fail to produce jobs or energy but succeed in ripping off the taxpayers.

Of course, President Obama refuses to even mention the role the Federal Reserve plays in creating an economic system where some are denied a fair shot or even to support my efforts at bringing transparency to the Federal Reserve. Also not mentioned by President Obama is the very crucial need for reining in spending and balancing the federal budget. What is called by some ‘the greatest threat to our national security’ seems not to be of great importance to this President, although I, like many Americans, believe it to be cause for immediate measures, like the $1 trillion in spending cuts that would take place in my first year as President under my Plan to Restore America.

In the area of foreign policy and civil liberties, President Obama’s rhetoric may be different, but the substance of his polices – as shown by his administration’s defense of the TSA’s treatment of my son, Senator Rand Paul, is hardly ‘change we can believe in.’ No wonder more and more Americans, especially young people, are rejecting the phony alternatives of Obama and establishment Republicans and embracing my campaign to Restore America Now.”

Bookmark and Share

Rick Santorum Responds to President Obama’s State of the Union Address

Bookmark and Share  Republican Presidential candidate Rick Santorum made the following comments in reaction to President Obama’s State of the Union Address.

Rick Santorum said: “Tonight Barack Obama transformed the President’s annual State of the Union address into the kick-off of his re-election campaign. From beginning to end, the American people heard more of the same – empty promises and grand platitudes that will do nothing to help the millions of Americans who are unemployed or under employed find a good paying job.

Rather than call for decisive action in allowing projects like the Keystone Pipeline or reducing the regulatory burden his Administration has imposed, the President declared war on those who are most successful in our society. Barack Obama should realize he’s the President of all Americans, but sadly, he has instead chosen to govern and campaign as the Divider-in-Chief.

We need to unite America and create an environment that rewards hard work and success, allowing people the opportunity to rise in society. We need a President who will rebuild the sector that built American economic greatness – manufacturing. My plan is diametrically opposed to that of the President’s. Barack Obama speaks of raising taxes and imposing barriers to growth, my plan would eliminate the corporate taxes on manufacturers, eliminate the burdensome regulations of this Administration, and free our market to explore for the energy necessary to grow our economy.

Our Party needs to provide a clear contrast with Barack Obama in the general election.  Our campaign does just that by focusing a positive message of a resurgent American manufacturing sector, an Administration that will believe in American exceptionalism again, and valuing the dignity of each and every human life. America deserves better than what they heard from Barack Obama tonight. ”

Bookmark and Share

Newt Gingrich Issues A Response to President Obama’s State of the Union Address

Bookmark and Share  Shortly after the President delivered his 65 minute long, third State of the Union Address and set the stage for his reelection campaign, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, issued a rebuttal to the President’s remarks.

In his response, Gingrich aggressively characterized the President’s stated vision as one of big government, bureaucratic control, and as one strives to create a food stamp economy designed to make Americans dependent upon government.

Newt Gingrich’s SOTU Response

“We have a crisis of work in this country and tonight President Obama proposed nothing in the way of policy changes that will get us to robust job creation and dramatic economic growth. Instead, the president described his conviction that his big government is built to last and should be paid for with higher taxes. But bigger government and higher taxes will not lead to jobs and growth.

Bigger government and higher taxes will instead lead to more people on food stamps, a situation which the President and his party defend as a fair outcome. Here we have to confront the truth about President Obama.  Economic growth and prosperity is not really at the top of his agenda. He will always prefer a food stamp economy to a paycheck economy and call it fair. For the president and a large part of the political class, it’s about their power, their right to rule.  They just want to take money from Joe the Plumber – the small business people who makes over 90 per cent of the new jobs — and redistribute it to the government bureaucracy and their political friends and allies. 

That’s why so much of that nearly trillion-dollar stimulus didn’t create jobs but just went into the pockets of special interests who support President Obama and the leadership of the Democratic Party. No better example of this exists than in the crisis of American energy. President Obama and his political allies – not of few of whom love living in energy inefficient houses or driving gas-guzzling luxury vehicles – openly admit they want gas prices to remain high so that the rest of America will learn to live more modestly.

They think it’s good for rest of us.  Only recently, the president canceled the Keystone XL Pipeline that would have created countless new jobs and helped America on the way to energy independence because he wanted to appease the far left of his party.  And yet not a single word on the Keystone XL pipeline tonight. To create jobs and growth in this country, we must start with dramatic tax reform that lowers taxes and maximizes capital investment and job creation. We must return to a dollar as good as gold whose purchasing power is the same in thirty years as it is today.  We must dramatically expand American energy production. We must have smarter regulation at the same time we abolish destructive and costly regulatory systems beginning with Obamacare, Dodd-Franks, and Sarbanes-Oxley.

And finally, unlike the current administration, we must have faith in job creators.  With these policies the state of the union will be much better.  They will create an explosion in job creation and lead to robust economic growth and a return to prosperity.  Furthermore, a paycheck economy will put us on a path to balanced budgets and paying down our national debt.”

Bookmark and Share

Does Newt Really Have The Momentum to Keep Winning?

Bookmark and Share  If one were to look at Florida, the answer is yes.

Since his exceptionally strong, first place, landslide victory in the South Carolina Republican presidential primary, Newt Gingrich has at least temporarily established himself as the only candidate with momentum on his side.

Ron Paul, and his supposed ever growing massive number of supporters doesn’t seem to be quite as massive or as rapidly growing as once thought, since his last place showing in South Carolina, and he has all but conceited the election and admitted that he is just in this thing not win, but to pick up enough delegates to finally become politically relevant.

Rick Santorum, has gone from being the surprise underdog winner of the Iowa Caucus to being the man who many question why he is still running.  And Mitt Romney has seen himself gone from a frontrunner and the inevitable nominee, to being the candidate who many are  beginning to feel that if he hasn’t locked up the nomination yet, he may never do it.

But Newt Gingrich’s recent resurrection, from political death which propelled him to become the winner of the first in the South Primary has clearly set the stage for him to finally hit a stride that will make this a two man race between himself and Mitt Romney.

In less than 24 hours of his winning South Carolina, Newt raised a million dollars and since than he has more than doubled that total. Furthermore; in Florida, Gingrich has opened seven  offices with two more yet to be opened, hired 14 paid staffers and signed up 5,000.  By contrast, Romney’s campaign had just five staffers and three offices in Florida by early this week. And on top of that, when it concerns the polls, Gingrich has gone from 27% last week, to 35% this week, a swing of eight percent which now finds Romney falling two percent and in to second place.  Such dramatic numbers would certainly indicate that Newt has the wind at his back, while Romney and the others are now encountering strong headwinds in Florida.

Normally, even though these are solid signs for Newt, I would not be very confident in his ability to keep this recent turn of events moving in his direction.  In the past Newt’s proclivity for the untraditional has forced him to rely on instincts which motivate him to go with unconventional strategies, strategies which, like his previous attempt to attack Mitt Romney from the left and go off the deep end by distorting Mitt’s record of success in the free market, have hurt him.  However after Monday night’s debate, Newt demonstrated a degree of political maturity which he has not often displayed prior to now.  He carried himself as a humble frontrunner and held back any desire he may have had to respond to Mitt Romney’s own distortions with any exaggerated flare that could have undermined Newt’s credibility.  Instead it was Mitt Romney who appeared to be desperate and stretching to find any fatal flaws in Newt Gingrich’s record.

In addition to that, up to now, Newt has not had the type of financial resources that permitted him to to take proper advantage of media advertising which helps to carry his message beyond the audiences that may sit and watch the debates which he typically excels in.  And at the same time, even though Mitt Romney has already spent upwards of $10.5 million on Florida advertising,  he is losing ground.  This bodes quite well for Newt who with his coffers filling up, and with the aid a $5 million single donation to a Gingrich Super PAC in Florida, can now chip away at the dominance of Romney’s campaign in the Sunshine State.

But that’s not the only reason I remain optimistic for Newt at least in Florida.

In his attempt to stop the newtmentum, Romney seems to be making some of his first strategic stumbles.  In the most recent debate, while hoping to paint Newt as a Washington insider and influence peddler, he brought up the issue of Medicaid Part D and claimed that Newt was paid by health companies that could benefit from a piece of legislation, to lobby Congress Medicaid Part D’s passage.  During Monday’s debate he said to Gingrich;

“If you’re getting paid by health companies, if your  entities are getting paid by, and you then meet with Republican congressmen and  encourage them to support that legislation, you can call it whatever you  like. I call it influence peddling” .

The argument could potentially have legs, but not in Florida, where the nation’s largest population of senior citizens benefitted from the program and where Gingrich successfully dismissed Romney’s claims and accused Mitt of being a serial twister of the truth.   Gingrich countered Mitt’s charge in part by stating

 “I think it’s pretty clear to say that I have never,  ever gone and done any lobbying,”

 He also added that he was  proud of the fact that he publicly, openly advocated the prescription drug program.

That last statement was essentially the punch that ended and won that round for Newt.  It successfully appealed to the very large senior citizen voting bloc in Florida, the voters who when it’s time to cast their ballots, happen to turn out in the largest numbers .

Additionally, Romney seems to be counting on tieing Newt Gingrich to the tide of foreclosures in Florida.

Florida took a hit second only to Nevada in the housing crisis and by claiming Newt made money from Freddie Mac which essentially oversaw the creation and bursting of the housing bubble, he is hoping that Floridians who lost their homes will see Newt Gingrich as the villain who profited from their losses.  The problem is that Republicans are not buying what Mitt is trying to sell in that area of political campaigning.  And another thing to note is that those individuals who lost their homes because they provided mortgages that they were not qualified for in the first place, are not voting for either Newt or Mitt.  So clearly, Mitt Romney is throwing a wildly wrong  pitch and throwing it to the wrong people.

Then there is something else working against Mitt in Florida.

Unlike the previous three contests, Florida is a closed primary.

In a closed primary or caucus, only registered members of a Party may vote in that Party’s primary and Independents, those not registered with either major Party, are not permitted to vote in either major Party’s primary. Democrats who may like Mitt Romney’s moderate image, will not be able to influence who Republicans nominate as their Party’s candidate.  This is the way I believe it should be.  It is also one of the reasons why Ron Paul has written Florida off.  Since his hero worshippers from outside of the G.O.P. and within the sphere of liberal-tarian lunacy, can not sabotage the Republican process, they are picking up their toys and not playing in the Sunshine State.  All of this is good news for Newt, who if he keeps it together, just might be able to extend his good fortune into the forseeable future.

But even if he does hold it together in Florida, he will still forced to confront some very rough seas.

Following Florida will be two contests that Mitt Romney so far looks unbetable in….Nevada and Michigan.  This will provide at least a psychological sense of momentum that swings back towards Mitt  and away from Newt.  When that time comes, Newt will have to confront his challenge, a challenge that will force him to prove he has the staying power to comeback, and put Romney back on the ropes.  So far Newt has proven that he has considerable political stamina, but if he wins Florida, he will have to turn that stamina in to a knockout punch that he can land sometime after Nevada and Michigan.  If he can’t land such a punch, Republicans could very easily end up seeing this race last longer than the 2008 Democrat nomination between President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, or worse…….maybe even the first brokered convention since 1976 when President Gerald Ford was almost dumped by the Party in exchange for future President Ronald Reagan.

Bookmark and Share
%d bloggers like this: