Positively Entertainment?

Earlier this election season, Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain sat down in a one on one debate that displayed Newt’s intellectualism and fast thinking, and Cain’s graciousness.  It’s starting to look like Newt will have a shot at another one on one debate as only he and Rick Santorum have agreed to The Donald’s debate on Ion Television, sponsored by Newsmax. 

Mitt Romney politely declined, Paul said no and Huntsman inferred that the whole thing was about Trump’s ratings.  George Will has also infamously declared that the Trump debate is below Presidential politics.  Perry and Bachmann have not confirmed, although Bachmann said she believes Trump will be biased because he is already leaning towards a candidate.  How that makes this debate different from any MSNBC or CNN debate where the moderators are already in the bag for Obama, I’m not sure.

Who is going to be hurt from backing out of the Trump debate? Trump has already declared his position on many things.  Huntsman and Paul would both find themselves on opposite sides from Trump.  Romney probably won’t be hurt by snubbing Trump.

Will Santorum or Gingrich be hurt by accepting the debate?  For Newt, probably not.  For Santorum, the possibility for damage to his campaign is pretty big.  While he will be getting a great deal of facetime, Santorum will be answering questions from a very strong willed and strongly opinionated Trump while going up against Newt one on one.  It is a very risky move.  The risk will be compounded if Trump then endorses Newt.

Bachmann and Perry’s non-committal stance currently is only making them more irrelevant. It also comes across as indecisive.

Or is it helping to make Trump more irrelevant?  Trump has said that if the candidate he wants doesn’t get in the race, he will run as a third party candidate.  Is it better to cater to the crybaby?  Or ignore him?  And honestly, would Trump get any votes as a third party candidate, when four more years of Obama is on the line?

Advertisements

Democrat Ad Highlights Class Warfare Through Romney Meeting with Trump

Bookmark and Share    Today, as Mitt Romney becomes the latest Republican presidential candidate to kiss Donald Trump’s ring, the Democratic National Committee took the opportunity to reinforce their pathetic attempts to wage class warfare in the 2012 election.  In an ad entitled “Trump, Romney; You’re Fired[see ad below this post], Democrats attack both individuals as privileged rich men who merely victimize the middleclass in an attempt to gain more wealth.

In the first opening lines, the ad charges that both Romney and Trump have done well for themselves.

Stop! Stop right there.

Let’s analyze that.

Is it not un-American to attack someone because they have done well for themselves?  Or is it that ideology the and Party that believes in that ideology which are un-American because both seek to demonize individuals for being successful and because both try to make others dislike people because of this success?  Perhaps the DNC does not remember that 6 of the ten richest members of Congress are Democrats.  Maybe they forget that people like former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, former Democrat presidential nominee John Kerry, as well as Senators Jay Rockerfeller, Diane Feinstien, Frank Lautenberg, and Richard Blumenthal, are just some of those who are the richest.  But as we will see, wealth is not a bad thing if you’re a liberal.  Only if you’re a Republican.

President Obama recently accused Republicans of charging him with waging class warfare.  His response was that he is not waging war, he is actually just a warrior for the middleclass.  Well the truth is, this ad makes it clear that the President and his Party are indeed waging class warfare.  The first three lines of his Party’s new ad makes this painfully obvious.  And as for being a “warrior for the middleclass”,  President Obama is not fighting for the middleclass, he’s destroying the middleclass.  Under his Administration, America’s poverty rate has increased to extraordinary highs that we haven’t seen in decades.  Under his Administration, the middle class is seeing the longest recession in history and one of the highest long-term unemployment rates in our history.  Under the Obama Administration, the middle class is seeing prices rise faster than the salaries of those who are lucky to have a job.  And under leadership of President Obama, the middleclass has seen their interest on the national debt multiplied many times and while our national economy is growing by a painfully low rate of 1.7%, our national debt is growing at a rate of 15.21%.  Is it any wonder why our credit rating has been downgraded?

With the points about President Obama and the left waging class war fare and who is really the middleclasses’s enemy,  made clear, let’s go on with the rest of the ad.

With images of limousines and private jets, President Obama and his Party claim that the G.O.P. is promoting policies to help only the rich and corporations, and they resort to their typical scare tactics of senior citizens by claiming Republicans are trying to kill Social Security and Medicare.  The DNC attack ad goes on to blame Republicans for cutting funds to schools, research development, and healthcare, and of eliminating investments that can help cretae jobs and keep America competitive.

 These arguments may sound good on the surface.  But unfortunately for the left and the President, they only sound good to the left, not mainstream America.  Mainstream America has come to understand that the left is waging class warfare, scaring senior citizens, and creating policies that are making America less competitive in the world and preventing investment, economic growth, and job creation.  Simply put, most Americans have come to accept that the Obama economy and the liberal policies that account for the Obama economy, are not working.

Americans have come to understand that when liberals mention a buzzword like “investment”, what they really mean is more stimulus spending and higher taxes.  They understand that when the left talks about jobs, they mean government spending and when they throw out phrases like “save Social Social Security and Medicare, they mean deficit spending and an array of tax increases ranging from payroll taxes to death taxes and higher rates that no matter who they are raised on, are passed on to consumers.

Many have come to understand that Republicans seek not destroy Medicare or Social Security, but they do seek to insure that it is solvent for those who are on it now and that there is way for a form of the two to exist for future generations not yet paying in to those sytems yet.  They realize that when Republicans talk about jobs, they are referring to self-sustaining private sector jobs that are created by private sector investment, and sustainable econmomic growth, while at the same time, trying to get government under control so that our economy is growing at a rate faster than our national debt.

So this new atack ad is preaching to the liberal choir.  Like Jeremiah Wright preaching hatred to his flock, the DNC is preaching hate inspired rhetoric to its audience, an audience of liberals who they want to insure do not sit home on Election Day 2012 because they are embarrased by their Party’s performance.

The new liberal attack ad takes this opportunity to preach to their choir, by trying to tie Mitt Romney together with Donald Trump.

There are some negatives that do go with such a meeting.  Personally, I despise Donald Trump.  As I have written before, I believe he is an assclown.  I believe he hurts the conservative cause more than helps it and given his record of business scandals and failures, I believe he is the very last person in the world that the United States should call upon to lead it.  Ultimately, I would appreciate a Republican presidential candidate who stands up and makes that point.  I would even be more appreciative of them if they refused to feed Trump’s ego by kissing his ring.  But Trump has vowed to make his opinion known in 2012. He has even claimed that if he doesn’t like the Republican nominee, he will run for President himself.  My opinion of Trump aside, many Americans are driven by the pop culture mentality that is ruled by reality TV programs such Trump’s The Apprentice (and let us not respect the despicable lowlifes of the Jersey Shore).  So the reality is that between his money and popularity, no matter how I feel about Trump, he could be a factor in the 2012 election.  Therefore, there is a line of candidates waiting to meet with Trump.  Mitt Romney is merely the latest.

However, the Democratic National Committee sponsored web ad does not raise any of  my concerns.  It simply focusses on trying to associate Mitt Romney, a top contender for the Republican presidential nomination, not so much with Trump, but with rich people in general.  In other words, they are trying desperatley to wage class warfare. This new ad merely uses Donald Trump, not for any of the positions that they may disagree with him on.  They don’t use Trump because they want to focus on the issues or his record.  They merely use him because he is rich and because his meeting with Mitt Romney provides the DNC with the opportunity to advance their class warfare campaign against a potential opponent by demonizing the wealthy and highlighting Romney’s wealth through guilt by association ad.

Yet as I told you earlier in this article, demonizig the rich or those who are well off becuase they have been successful is only bad if you are Republican.  Need proof?  Do you think the D.N.C. will be running an ad featuring Warren Buffett as the speaker at a Chicago-area fundraiser benefitting President Barack Obama’s re-election bid on October 27th?  I doubt it.

Bookmark and Share

Trump Has His Way With Obama

In Obama’s birth certificate speech, where he called on others to not be divisive and then called birthers a bunch of circus barkers, Obama claimed that he was releasing his birth certificate because that story was overshadowing the budget debate. But according to ABC’s Jake Tapper, a Pew Research study showed that the budget still outplayed the birther story in the media even over the past week.

So that leaves us with two very important questions. Why did Obama release his birth certificate yesterday, and of course the big one: why did Obama wait until yesterday to release his birth certificate?

Trump Did It (?)

Trump did not view the birth certificate release as a defeat. Instead, he took credit for it, claiming to be honored that he was able to do what others had not. While this may be Trump’s ego talking, he has a point. Trump gave this story legs and legitimacy that it had not enjoyed before. Trump even got the media to start scratching their heads and wonder why Obama wouldn’t simply release it.

Trump may not end up being a serious candidate for President, but he has a charisma that most deep intellectual GOP candidates lack. Romney, Gingrich, and Pawlenty may know that Obama is dead wrong in his policies, but they haven’t stood up like Chris Rock in Head of State and shouted “That ain’t right!” to a wildly cheering crowd who doesn’t really care if he knows what IS “right”.

The other question is why wait until yesterday? Let me offer this suggestion: the birthers provided Obama with a clear extreme to campaign against. Having that issue outstanding, and the ace up his sleeve, gave Obama the chance to paint the TEA Party and conservatives as lunatic fringe. Between that and the race card, this President and his supporters have already prepared their 2012 answers to the question of “why am I not better off than I was four years ago”. What the “last eight years” did for Obama in 2008, the title racist birther was going to do the same in 2012. Now the birther card is played. One less distraction, as the President himself called it, is laid to rest. We are getting dangerously closer to having to focus on issues in 2012.

Love or hate Trump, and whether this was for his ego’s sake or dumb luck, Donald Trump has done the GOP a huge favor by gambling on the birther issue. And perhaps Trump lost this gamble, but Obama has one less ace up his sleeve.

Is it me?

Donald Trump is on to something. Trump was on the Rush Limbaugh radio show today during Rush’s annual Leukemia Lymphoma fundraiser, and Rush mentioned that the most recent poll has Trump in the lead. That’s when Trump said this: “I don’t know if it’s me or the message…”

The Donald may recognize that many consider him to be about as serious a candidate as Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, or Ron Paul. On the other hand, conservatives are eating up Trumps no nonsense, pro-America, anti-Obama message.

It is the same

Do people love Trump? Or what he stands for?

message that brings tens of thousands of people to Palin rallies and has conservatives who don’t take Paul seriously as a Presidential candidate standing and applauding when he speaks and admitting great respect for him. It’s a message of a strong country, low taxes, low spending, limited government, and free markets. But is it electable?

“Mainstream” candidates tend to temper their rhetoric and take veiled jabs at one another while punctuating their sentences with political buzzwords like compromise, bipartisan, together, and of course, both sides are equally to blame.

But besides TEA Party favorite Republicans, there is another candidate in 2012 who has taken a no non-sense, partisan approach to elections. In fact, while giving only minimal lip service to bipartisan togetherness, the Democrat’s sole 2012 candidate has given us such phrases as “if they bring a knife, we’ll bring a gun” and has filled his campaigns and Presidency with partisan rhetoric. Barack Obama, even while being portrayed as a sort of political messiah who would unite our country, took no issue with blaming the nation’s problems on Bush, even as he continued many of Bush’s policies.

We may all wish that the nation was united and that politicians could just magically work together and fix things the right way, but in all honesty there are incredibly clear lines of demarcation between the left and right. This leaves the right with a serious question: do we campaign the way we have been told to and pretend the next President can unite the country? Or do we show the kind of confidence in conservatism that Trump, Palin, Bachmann, Paul, and other popular, not serious candidates are using to draw the masses and win polls?

The Democrat in 2012 has found his confidence in extreme liberalism.

Trumped

In the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, Donald Trump ties Mike Huckabee for second place.

Trump has developed an early reputation in this race as a hard hitting, brutally honest, hawk with a plan to restore respect for America on the world stage. He has already promised the ability to whip our enemies, and allies, into shape through tough foreign policy.

Could he be a contender?

There is a grass roots website set up now to recruit supporters for Trump called Should Trump Run. This website has video from the desk of the Donald, along with his interviews with various news organizations. Trump has also found easy access among conservative radio and tv hosts.

With Trump’s outspoken campaign thusfar, many Republicans may be hoping he runs, even if they don’t plan on voting for him themselves. Trump is the only candidate with the clout, confidence, and sufficient lack of political reputation to question Obama’s birth certificate and get away with it.

I view Trump more as a bull in a china shop. They may draw a crowd, and can do a great deal of damage. But in the end, they never actually end up buying anything. My hope is that Trump can keep his focus on Obama and his brutal honesty where it will do conservatism the most good; not sniping at other potential GOP’ers.

And before Trumpites get too excited, Romney still came in a comfortable first in this poll.

Trump Scheduled to Headline Iowa Republican Dinner

Bookmark and Share Two weeks after dispatching a top aide to meet with Iowa State Republican Chairman Matt Strawn, Donald Trump has been invited by Strawn to headline the state’s annual Lincoln Day Dinner as the keynote speaker. Strawn stated that the invitation was extended in order to give Trump the opportunity to introduce himself to the activists within the Party.

It is highly unlikely that the Republican Chairman of the state with the first in the nation caucus would extend such an opportunity to someone who is not leaning towards a run for President.

Trump has himself stated that because of FEC laws, he will wait to make a final decision on a run for President until the season end of The Apprentice, his reality television show. But he has not held back on making it known that he believes the country will be in big if we don’t get the right kind of leadership that it needs. He has also reveals that many people have been wanting him to run for President for years now.

The Trump Factor

If “The Donald” does run, in addition to a degree of comic relief and Palin-like bluntness, he will certainly inject an unmatched level of interest and attention into the Republican presidential race. He will also prove to be a factor that will upend election predictions. Many states have open primaries which allow Independents to vote in their primaries or caucuses. Some even allow Democrats to participate. It is in these states that Donald Trump will confound pollsters and make it harder for the establishment candidates to focus their campaigns on the traditional Republican base alone. Trump will surely attract many independent and even Democrat voters to voting for him in these open primaries. As such, he could easily offset a split vote among the more traditional Republican candidates with a substantial Independent and Democrat vote.

The candidate who will probably be most hurt by a Donald Trump candidacy is Mitt Romney. One of Romney’s most attractive attributes is his private sector experience as a successful businessman. The Trump brand and empire will naturally force a comparison that could dilute Romney’s positive lock on that attribute.

Bookmark and Share

Is Trump Trustworthy?

We’ve heard it before. In fact, our current President stood before the nation and told us that he believed that marriage was a union between one man and one woman. Since then, Obama has stirred controversy by refusing to defend the current law on the books that defines marriage that way. In fact, before the ink was dry on the administration’s statement that they would no longer defend DOMA in court, prop 8 opponents in California had quotes from the statement prepared in a lengthy legal document requesting a stay in the implementation of Prop 8.

Pandering is the ancient art of politics. John Kerry supported the war before he was against it. Many have accused Mitt Romney of pandering. After all, he ran on a pro-choice platform in Massachusetts and then wrote Romneycare. He may have excuses and explanations, but in the end conservatives will have to decide if they are willing to trust Romney on social issues and healthcare.

Conservatives will have to make the same decision with Donald Trump. Trump recently came out in opposition both of gay marriage and civil union benefits. Already he is getting a lot of flack for the choice. One gay activist called him “an extreme bigot” for his marriage position.

Trump has also changed his stance on abortion, now choosing to go pro-life.

So can social conservatives trust Donald Trump? As noted in previous posts, Trump has supported Democrats like Rahm Emanuel financially. Trump’s daughter was recently seen at a pro-gay marriage reception in New York.

Trump knows whose palms to grease and who to support to be successful in his business. That makes an easy explanation for his history. But it should also be a warning sign to social conservatives. Is Trump truly a social right winger? Or is the social right wing his latest acquisition?

Trump’s move may be genuine, but the 2012 Republican electorate is turning out to be one of the most cynical, untrusting and judgmental crowd the right has seen in a long time. And justly so. George W. Bush’s last couple years in office ruined his conservative legacy, and McCain was no Reagan.

My prediction: Trump is not going to convince the social conservative base of the Republican party.

%d bloggers like this: