New Romney Ad Ties Obama to Pelosi and Middle Class Tax Hikes

   Bookmark and Share                A new 30 second commercial being run by the Romney-Ryan ticket finally begins to interject a narrative into the presidential race that can effectively counter the Obama class warfare strategy being aimed at middle class Americans.  (see ad below this post)

While the ad is far from groundbreaking what it does do is cast a large shadow of doubt over President Obama’s policies by pointing out that not only will they lead to higher taxes on the middle class… they ‘already have’ raised taxes on the middle class.

The ad which is aptly titled “Already Has” bases the claim on a very reliable and non-partisan report issued by the Congressional Budget Office back in July.  The report essentially concludes that between Obamacare and Obama economic policies the federal government will spend more money, raise more tax revenue, and reduce the deficit by much less than the President claims.

According to the C.B.O. revenue increases built into in the Obamacare law would essentially lead to a trillion dollars in higher taxes.  These taxes include revenues from Obamacare-driven individual and employer mandates, combined with a so-called “Cadillac tax” on high-cost benefits and additional taxes on drugmakers, medical device manufacturers and insurers.   All of which in addition to raising medical costs will also place direct and indirect tax increases on middle class taxpayers and their families.  The report also concludes that this would all result in  a net increase in federal budget deficits of $109 billion over the 2013–2022 period.

All of this spells disaster for taxpayers and the American economy and none of it should provide thinking Americans with  good reason to reelect President Obama but to really drive the point home, the ad goes a step further by featuring a picture of the President with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.  The image is a politically damaging reminder of just how ideologically close Obama and Pelosi.  It is a point that can only help to turn the stomachs of any fiscally responsible voter.

Unfortunately, most casual observers will not want to get into the nuts and bolts that explain the charges in Romney’s new ad.  However, by just bringing it to the attention of the 6% or so of the independent voters out there in the six swing states that will determine who the next President is, Romney is finally on track to establishing a narrative in this campaign that could provide him with the momentum he needs to turn those currently uncommitted voters in to committed Romney voters.

Bookmark and Share

#BarackWasSoPoor: Michelle Obama’s Speech Gives Birth to a Whole New Category of Jokes

Bookmark and Share  The first night of the Democratic National Convention provided liberals with a lot of Obam-like false hope for the reelection of their earth healing, sea slaying messiah.  From Newark Mayor Corey Booker, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick and Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, diehard Democrats were given plenty of red meat as they offered statistical half truths and downright distortions of history and the Obama record.  Then there was the Lilith Fair section of the night where a cavalcade of hypocritical liberal women took to the stage to deliver a hypocritically  anti-feminist message that essentially argued women are helpless without government in control of their lives and the lives of their families.

Then came the competitions.

While Republicans served up Hispanic speakers such as New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez, Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval, Texas Senate candidate Ted Cruz, Florida Senator Marco and other rising stars in their Party, Democrats did their best to upstage the G.O.P. with an even longer list of liberal Hispanic speakers.  In addition to Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa who chairs the convention, the DNC featured the young Hispanic Mayor of San Antonio, Texas, Julian Castro.

On it’s own Castro’s speech was a solid statement of Democratic dogma which nailed the left’s dependency on government by mixing it with the American dream and making big government the source of that dream.  For those on the left it was an inspiring articulation of their principles.  But for those of us who believe that the American dream is based not upon government but rather upon personal freedom and liberty and an opportunity society, Castro’s speech was a watered down version of the speech Marco Rubio delivered last week when he introduced Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney at the G.O.P. convention in Tampa.

Both men focussed on the plight of their immigrant parents and grandparents but coming after Marco Rubio’s speech, Castro’s keynote seemed to simply mimic Rubio’s.  The most notable occasion came when Julian Castro remarked that his mother held a mop so that someday he could hold the microphone that he was addressing convention goers from.  On Thursday night Marco Rubio put it this way;  “My father stood behind that bar in the back of room so that someday I could stand behind this podium at the front of the room.”

But after the DNC turned the night into a competition of which Party had leaders who came from poorer immigrant roots than the other, Michelle Obama took to the stage to deliver a speech that tried to take control on the market on which Party had the presidential candidate who was raised under the poorest conditions.

Last Tuesday, Ann Romney told listeners about how when she and Mitt were married they moved in to a small basement apartment where they ate off an ironing board that doubled as their kitchen table and how they sat at a desk that was a door which straddled atop two saw horses.  Last night Michelle Obama told listeners a story about how when she was first married, Barack Obama’s best pair of shoes were half a size too small, and how in their first apartment the two of them sat in front of a coffee table which Barack found in the dump.  She spoke of the two having a crushing college tuition debt and how in trheir first car she could see the tar  of the road pass beneath them.

From the onset it became quite obvious that the Obama’s did not want people to think that the Romney’s were ever poorer than them.  For the Romney’s the telling of the humble beginnings of their marriage was designed to convey a sense of a man who is self-made and who understands how people struggle with the responsibilities of life.  It was a necessary move to humanize Mitt Romney in the face of a liberal class warfare strategy being waged by the President and his supporters.  But the Obama’s were obviously threatened by Ann’s ability to portray Romney as a man who created his own wealth.  So Michelle told Americans a story about an impoverished young man who picked himself up by his own bootstraps to become a champion of the poor.

In the wake of Ann Romney’s speech, the rekindled Obama narrative was so pronounced that it sparked a new hashtag specifically for jokes about how Barack Obama was.  A visit to #BarackWasSoPoor on Twitter now show tens of thousands tweets mocking Michelle’s attempt to lay the groundwork for her husband’s next round of class warfare.  There you will find  such gems as #BarackWasSoPoor  He could only afford to date composite women”, and #BarackWasSoPoor that he is making up for it now spending your money”.  Another example of the creative spin on the theme came from LiberalsRdouchebags who wrote; #BarackWasSoPoor he wants to turn America into a 3rd world country so he feels at home”.

The reaction which led to this new line of political humor was a direct response to the utterly ridiculous premise that Michelle tried to create for her husband regarding his background.  Contrary to the Dickens-like portrayal we saw from the First Lady on Monday, both Barack and Michelle Obama were actually raised in conditions that were far from what could be described as impoverished.  Michelle attended a magnate school for Chicago’s rich and famous called Whitney Young.  At the same time, young master Barack was not exactly running around in the tough poverty riddled streets of Hawaii.  Instead, back when his mother was earning a $160,000 a year salary, he was hidden behind the sheltered walls of Punahou,  a private preparatory school comprised of Hawaii’s blue blooded elitists.    That is hardly a convincing argument when trying to demonstrate how in touch with the average middle class American the President is.  But they were also facts which were deleted from the First Lady’s speech last night.

Meanwhile as the spontaneous flow of the internet’s maze of social networks began to flood the web with a mix of negative and positive reactions to the introductory night of the Democratic National Convention, the mainstream media mainly gushed with praise of the entire first night of the convention.  Few if any news outlets produced true news stories that lacked any spin or featured “fact check” headlines which clarified the First Lady’s mischaracterizations of some kind of less than humble beginnings that she and her husband shared.  Instead what we saw from the lamestream media was unequivocal high praise for every word, distortion, and misleading message the left fed to voters.

The liberal dominated pre-fabricated news media even saw fit to attempt to proclaim that Democrats in Charlotte were much more enthusiastic and energized by their convention than Republicans who attended their own convention in Tampa.

CNN political reporter Peter Hamby, tweeted the following;

To which I replied ;

Other media outlets ranging from MSNBC and their merry masters of misinformation including Ed Schultz, Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow echoed similar sentiments and so did those at Al Gore’s dyeing cable station Current, where disgraced former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer claimed the energy at the DNC far surpassed the energy level he believed that Republicans had at the RNC.   No one is quite certain what those assertions were based upon other than the wishful thinking of demoralized leftists who are in desperate search of good news for the President’s reelection effort.  But the truth flies in the face of wishful Democrats who would like us to believe that Republicans are not very enthusiastic about their presidential ticket.  As usual the fact indicate just the opposite of what liberals propose to be true.  Poll after poll has shown that Republicans are more enthusiastic about their presidential ticket than are Democrats with the Obama/Biden ticket.

And to add insult to injury for Obama boosters, political analyst Charlie Cook has demonstrated that Democrats are suffering from multiple enthusiasm gaps.  The two most noticeable manifestations of this problem for the President exists among Hispanic and young voters, two of the groups most responsible for President Obama’s 7% margin of victory in the popular vote during the 2008 election. That spells trouble for Democrats and it also explains the need for leftists media mouthpieces to argue that Republicans are not as supportive of Romney as Democrats are of President Obama.

Bookmark and Share

The Dumb Blond Joke Behind the Democratic National Convention

“Why don’t women wear a watch?

“Because there’s a clock on the stove.”

Tell a joke like that and you can rest assured that the person who told it will not be a winning candidate for dog catcher, no less than President of the United States.  And with good reason.  It suggests that a woman’s place is in the home where she plays a subordinate, supportive role to her husband and family.  In this day and age, women have stepped out of the shadow of such untrue and degrading gender based assumptions.  They were assumptions which women from Joan of Arc, to Florence Nightingale proved wrong in days of yore and whose examples which contemporary women from Golda Mier, to more recently Margaret Thatcher and Condoleezza Rice continue to prove wrong today.  These are all women who defied attempts by others to define them as helpless damsels in distress and stewards of the kitchen.  They are women who didn’t even rely on men to achieve their own greatness.  Thatcher, and Rice did not marry into power.  They are proud self-made women who shattered the sick sexism of society without parlaying their husband’s last names and political careers into their own careers. They are perfect examples of strong women who have proven the shameful stereotypes perpetuated by the tasteless badinage of the aforementioned wisecrack to be utterly false and sublimely ignorant notions.

The recent Republican National Convention went to great and not so subtle, but natural lengths to demonstrate just how false those outdated stereotypes of women are.  They featured women in their natural roles as leaders, self-made leaders who rose to power thanks to their own determination, talent and ingenuity.  From Cathy McMorris Rodgers to Mia Love and Governors Susana Martinez and Nikki Haley, Senator Kelly Ayote , Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and dozens of others, the G.O.P. convention allowed women to be themselves and make the case not just for those of their own gender, but for all Americans.  But as Democrats gather to hold their convention in North Carolina, they are about to use women to exploit the very stereotypes they have fought so hard against.  At their convention, Democrats will depict woman in a way that should make militant liberal feminazis like Gloria Steinem so violently ill that it causes them to burst into spontaneous episodes of painful, involuntary, heaving that produces dangerously powerful projectile vomiting.

Much like the Republican National Convention, women will be front and center at the Democratic National Convention.  Well some women will be.  The most powerful woman in the Obama Administration, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will be out of the country and even out of the hemisphere as she embarks upon an apparently critical mission to the string of 15 small islands in the Pacific known as that Cook Islands.  From there the President is sending her to Siberia. Really, he is.

But Clinton’s politically timed exile from the convention to the far reaches of Siberia aside, Democrats are gearing up to feature liberal women like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Democratic National Committee Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz… two people who argue that unless the government finances the interests of women, woman can’t succeed.  Other women they will feature include women’s rights activist Lilly Ledbetter, President of Planned Parenthood Action Fund Cecile Richards, National Abortion Rights Action League Pro-Choice America President Nancy Keenan, and the highly accomplished and well-known Georgetown Law School Graduate Sandra “Who”  Fluke.

All of these women will try to have you believe that Republicans are trying to kill women.  They will try to offer up tear jerking tales that depict women as helpless victims who are at the mercy of the hands of government… the big hands of big government.

Lilly Ledbetter will try to claim that the G.O.P. opposes a woman’s right to equal pay for equal work.  She will highlight the bill named after her which was the first legislation President Obama signed into law.   Ledbetter will claim that while it assured women the right to equal pay, Republicans opposed it.  She will not mention that the bill actually simply extended the amount of time a woman had to sue an employer if they believed they were a victim of pay discrimination.  She will not mention that it does not guarantee women anything ant that the whole Lilly Ledbetter law was merely a symbolic political  attempt to make it look like Democrats were focused on helping women.

Cecile Richards will argue that Republican attempts to ban the tearing off of limbs of infants during late term abortions, or to ban the termination of a life because of its sex are cruel examples of some sort of Republican hatred of women.

Nancy Keenan will argue women want a President who believes that the only way they can make the personal, private medical decisions that are best for them and their families is if the federal government takes charge and makes those decision for them by increasing the size, scope, scope and cost of government.

And in what will perhaps be the most amusing argument of the entire liberal convention, Sandra Fluke, a truly inconsequential personality whose greatest accomplishment is that she graduated from law school without getting pregnant, will try to convince Americans that if the evil and heartless heartless Republican Party and its candidates had their way and stopped Americans from seeing their taxes pay for her birth control, she would be barefoot, pregnant and without a law degree.

Then on Thursday night President Obama will portray himself as a princely knight in shining armor who rushes in to save the stereotypically helpless fair maidens of America.

It’s a message that should have all women truly doubtful of how much respect Democrats have for them.  Their characterization of women as a monolithic bloc of one issue voters who will support the failed liberals policies that we are all suffering under because of the liberal promise to hand out free birth control, is a narrative that should insult all women but especially the left wingers behind such liberal entities as Emily’s List.

Traditionally, liberal women’s rights groups like  Emily’s List and similar organizations have touted the strength of women and celebrated their independence and endless abilities.  But today, Democrat groups like those are hypocritically going out of their way to paint a much different picture of women.  They are portraying women as helpless, lost souls with no self-control or capacity to stand on their own without a federal government that mandates their healthcare treatment and like a good husband, gives the little lady an allowance. In this case, a taxpayer subsidized federal allowance.

Gone from the liberal lexicon are the portrayals of women as leaders who have taken control of their own destiny and led themselves, their families, their towns, cities, states, and nation to a better life.  Gone from the Democratic Party are the days when women had their own voice because according to today’s Democrat Party, government provides them with a stronger voice than their own.

The whole liberal inspired election strategy that claims Republicans are waging a war on women is akin to the telling of a bad joke about blonds.  Their claim that women are helpless without government in control of their lives and the lives of their families, is as offensive as the President standing before the nation and quipping;

“How do you make a blonde laugh on Monday?”
“Tell her a joke on Friday?”

It is a mocking and odious approach that does not address the real problems facing women; it simply operates under the false premise that women are gullible enough to believe they need someone to provide for them.   And it is ultimately based on the real question that President Obama has been asking advisors…  “How do I get women to vote for me and fellow Democrats on Election Day?”

For Democrats the answer to that question is “lie to them and hope that they don’t realize the truth till at least the day after the election.”

And the truth they hope that women will be too slow to understand in time for Election Day is that under President Obama, women have lost much of the parity in society that they have fought for over the past four decades.  Under President Obama women have had to endure their highest rate of unemployment in over 17 years as they account for 92.3% of the jobs lost since he took office, an accomplishment that distinguishes President Obama’s record on women’s participation in the labor force as the worst ever.

These are not points you will hear Democrats talking about at their quadrennial celebration of liberalism.  In fact at the Democrat’s convention there will be few if any direct and turthful references to things the President has actually done “for” women.  The overwhelming result of his record on women is one which has done more to them than for them.  But with the women’s vote in several key swing states being critical to Obama’s reelection, Democrats will continue to exploit women as helpless and reliant citizens married to the trough of government and they will continue to pray that their attempt to make women believe that Mitt Romney is The Boston Strangler and that Paul Ryan is Jack the Ripper takes hold.

Bookmark and Share

Second Night of the Republican Convention Offers a Powerful Schedule of Speakers

   Bookmark and Share   After a successful first night, the 2012 Republican National Convention gears up for a second try at winning over the hearts and minds of those voters who have not yet decided who to vote for in November.  (See the schedule of speakers below this post)

While the last night’s focus was placed mainly on the speeches given by Mitt Romney’s wife Ann and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie who closed the evening with his rousing keynote address, Wednesday night will be largely consumed by Congressman Paul Ryan’s acceptance of the Republican vice presidential nomination.    But look for some exceptional performances in the lead up to Ryan’s acceptance speech from people such as Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and most of all, former National Security Advisor and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.  On Tuesday, several speakers gave presentations that helped to establish them as rising national stars.  One such speaker was Mia Love, a young Utah congressional candidate who is currently the Mayor of Colorado Springs, Utah.  Another memorable speech was given by diehard conservative, Texas U.S. Senate candidate Ted Cruz, a popular T.E.A. movement figure. On Wednesday, expect Florida’s Pam Bondi, who has already established a solid reputation for herself, to catapult her rising star much further nationally.  And while I fully expect Condoleezza Rice to deliver a speech that will have some pondering how good a vice presidential nominee she could have been, I suspect that New Mexico’s Governor Susana Martinez will deliver a speech that will make her political stock rise sharply.

Other notable prime time speakers on the docket who could surprise us with powerful performances include South Dakota Senator John Thune and former Minnesota Governor and candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, Tim Pawlenty.   The remarkable Marco Rubio will also appearing tonight but his main speech will be offered on Thursday night, prior to Mitt Romney’s acceptance speech.

But regardless of who may soak up the limelight earlier in the night, it will be Paul Ryan who quickly reclaim s the headlines for himself and the Republican presidential ticket that he will lead with Mitt Romney.  As the most important speech of his political career, Paul Ryan will not disappoint.  He will sum up the importance of this election in a way that will make it impossible for voters to avoid the legislative larceny of the current spend-more-than-we-have tax and spend liberal policies that are bankrupting our nation’s treasury and our personal prosperity.  paul Ryan will explain the fiscal free fall we are experiencing in a way that will allow Americans to understand the urgent need for an immediate change of command in America and he will do so in a way that will make significant inroads with the all important independent voters who will ultimately determine who the next President will be.

To view tonight’s program, tune in to White House 2012’s livestream of the convention here.

Photobucket

Wednesday Night Convention Schedule

7:30 p.m.: Convention convenes

  • Call to order
  • Introduction of Colors
  • Pledge of Allegiance
  • National Anthem
  • Invocation
  • Remarks by Senate Republican Leader and Convention Temporary Chairman Mitch McConnell (KY)
  • Performance by Beau Davidson
  • Segment to be announced
  • Remarks by Senator John McCain (AZ)
  • Video
  • Remarks by Attorney General Pam Bondi (FL) and Attorney General Sam Olens (GA)
  • Remarks by Senator John Thune (SD)
  • Remarks by Governor Jeb Bush (FL)
  • Remarks by Senator Rob Portman (OH)
  • Remarks by Steve Cohen, Screen Machine
  • Remarks by Governor Luis Fortuño (PR)
  • Remarks by Governor Tim Pawlenty (MN)
  • Remarks by Condoleezza Rice
  • Video
  • Remarks by vice presidential nominee Rep. Paul Ryan
  • Benediction by Archbishop Demetrios
  • Adjournment

Bookmark and Share

Chris Wallace’s One-On-One Interview With Mitt Romney: Complete Video

  Bookmark and Share  A day ahead of the scheduled beginning of the Republican National Convention, Fox News Sunday anchor Chris Wallace aired a one-on-one interview with Mitt Romney, the soon to be official presidential nominee of the G.O.P.

The approximately 13 minute interview (see the complete interview below) provided viewers with a side of Mitt Romney that is not often seen…his more hard hitting side.  In this interview, Mitt Romney was quite direct in his answers, specifically in the areas concerning such things as the President’s attempts to distract voters from the real issues in this campaign.  Romney also offered very blunt but genuine responses to such questions as the practices used by those who have been in control of Romney’s blind trusts.

Bookmark and Share

Obama’s Medicare Hypocrisy. “It Ain’t Right”.

New Romney Ad Continues to Put Democrats on The Defensive Among Senior Citizens

   Bookmark and Share  As Democrats continue to try to turn Medicare into Medi-Scare, a liberal tactic designed to make senior citizens fear the Romney-Ryan economic plan,   Mitt Romney has put out a new ad that continues to turn the tables on President Obama.

The newest ad called “It Ain’t Right”, (see ad below) uses President Obama’s own words to demonstrate how President Obama is the ultimate hypocrite.  The thirty second spot takes a statement that Obama often repeated when he was campaigning for President in 2008, and compares it to the actions he carried out as President.

In 2008, then Senator Obama criticized Republican presidential nominee Senator John  McCain for an economic plan that the left claimed would have cut $882 billion out of Medicare.  Whether that figure and that characterization of McCain’s plan was true or not, Obama declared that making such cuts to Medicare “ain’t right“.

The newest Romney ad on this issue points out once again that as President, through the creation of Obamacare, his massive government takeover of healthcare in America, President Obama cut over $716 billion out of Medicare.  The Romney commercial then goes on to ask what would candidate Obama say about President Obama’s cuts to Medicare?  The answer is exactly what Senator Obama said about such cuts in 2008…..”It Ain’t Right“.

This Romney-Ryan commercial is just the newest one in a string of ads on the Obama Medicare cuts that the Romney campaign has aired ever since Paul Ryan was added to the Republican presidential ticket over two weeks ago.  It is part of a successful strategy that has helped inoculate the G.O.P. from the traditional fear mongering that Democrats resort to in elections when they try to scare senior citizens in to believing that the G.O.P. will push Grandma off the cliff or force Grandpa to live on a steady diet of cat food.

But the newest ad also highlights the hypocrisy of the President and it does so in a way which slowly tries to set the stage for the Romney’s campaign’s ability to counter the future attempts by the Obama campaign to portray Mitt Romney as a flip-flopper.

The left will undoubtedly try to revive both Romney’s 1990’s conversion from being an abortion rights liberal Republican to a right-to-life conservative Republican and his opposition to the national Obamacare plan after creating Romneycare for Massachusetts.  Ahead of those future accusations, the Romney campaign is  offering their own examples of President Obama’s own flipping and flopping on the national agenda.

The President’s opposition to Medicare before making deep Medicare cuts of his own will be just one example of that.  Another example will be based upon a 2008 quote made by then Senator Obama which White House 2012 stumbled upon and highlighted in the video below.

In that video, we see how President Obama claimed that the President Bush or his policies were “unpatriotic and irresponsible” because of the large debt that he accumulated.  Four years later and President Obama is now in the position of having to explain to voters why his doubling of the debt accumulated by George Bush is not also “unpatriotic and irresponsible”.

No matter what excuse President Obama may try to offer in his defense, he has demonstrated a level of hypocrisy and a propensity for flip-flopping that gives voters good reason to doubt how deserving of a second term President Obama is.  The new Romney ad on Medicare is just a two pronged attack that drives that point home while also turning the tables on the traditional liberal fear mongering of senior citizens who are now being forced to realize that it is President Obama and Democrats who are taking away their saftey net.

Bookmark and Share

What Theme Should Democrats Choose For Their Convention?

    Bookmark and Share  Under the theme of “A Brighter Future”, Republicans are preparing to participate in a national celebration of their conservative principles that will culminate in the nomination of Mitt Romney for President but as Democrats prepare to respond with their convention the following week, an effective reelection theme seems to elude them.  Afterall, what appropriate themes could there possibly be for an effort to reelect a President whose Administration has cast a shroud of doubt and despair over the nation that is second only to the days of malaise brought upon us by Jimmy Carter in the late 70’s?

While Republicans prepare to dedicate an entire night of their convention to contradict the President’s “You didn’t build that…. Government built that” ideology, Democrats are left with having to come up with a competing theme that tries to reconcile President Obama’s past record of failures with a pitch for a better future that is based on forging ahead with the same failed policies that got to where we are today.

Currently the Obama campaign has adopted the slogan “Forward.” as their tagline.  The unoriginal and intentionally ambiguous tag line is a very uninspiring rehash of the theme Democrats tried to adopt in 2010, right before they suffered landside defeats at the ballot box.  Below is an ad in which Democrats briefly used the “moving forward” theme in August of that historic election cycle. 

It didn’t work.

Following that ad American’s rejected Democrats in historic numbers and gave control of the House of Representatives to Republicans by wide a margin.  In 2010 Americans did not want to move “forward” with Barack Obama’s policies and they made that quite clear.  So why Democrats believe that two years later, Americans would want to move “forward” with Barack Obama is a little hard to understand it makes it quite clear that with their convention fast approaching, Democrats need some help.

So we at White House 2012 would like to give them some help by having you offer your own suggestions regarding the theme that Democrats should adopt for their convention.  Just pass along your suggested theme in the comments sections of this post or post it on Twitter @ #DEMTHEME  .

We will put the 5 best proposed Democrat convention themes will be put up for a vote in a public poll here on White House on Thursday, August 30th, once the Republican National Convention has concluded.  And the creator of the winning theme will receive a free gift from the White House 2012 Campaign Store.

Bookmark and Share

1 Year Ago Today, Paul Ryan Announced He Would Not Run for President

  Bookmark and Share  What a difference a year makes.

About a year ago the G.O.P. seemed to be in an endless and desperate search for a presidential nominee that had many wondering if Republicans would ever be able to find someone they could enthusiastically get behind.   The political world was still a buzz over Michele Bachmann’s victory in the Ames Straw Poll  which resulted in Tim Pawlenty ending his candidacy and withdrawing from the race.  We were also talking about the potential of Texas Governor Rick Perry who announced his candidthe presidential the day before Pawlenty dropped out of it.

Yet many Republicans were still holding out for someone else to surprise us with their candidacy and win us over.  The media’s talking points were that Bachmann was too nuts, Santorum and Cain were too dangerous,  Romney would not be able to overcome his creation of Romneycare, Newt Gingrich was too extreme and undisciplined, Perry was to closely associated to George W. Bush, and the others were just not known or liked enough to be in serious contention.  So many Republicans were looking for a White Knight.  We had urged people like John  Thune and Mike Pence to run but Thune decided to forego the race and Pence decided to run for Governor of Indiana.   Some were urging names like Sarah Palin, Mitch Daniels, Haley Barbour, and Chris Christie to come forward and save the day.  Others, including myself, were urging House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan to run.

Then suddenly exactly one year ago today, Congressman Ryan released the following statement;

“I sincerely appreciate the support from those eager to chart a brighter future for the next generation. While humbled by the encouragement, I have not changed my mind, and therefore I am not seeking our party’s nomination for President. I remain hopeful that our party will nominate a candidate committed to a pro-growth agenda of reform that restores the promise and prosperity of our exceptional nation. I remain grateful to those I serve in Southern Wisconsin for the unique opportunity to advance this effort in Congress.”

Just days before this announcement, word was out that Ryan had been giving a run for President some serious consideration and many fiscal conservatives were buoyed by the prospects.  In one post entitled ” Heavy Hitters Urge Paul Ryan to Run for President“, White House 2012 detailed the high praise being offered for Paul Ryan’s potential candidacy from such political luminaries as Mitch Daniels,  Jeb Bush, Bill Bennett and Scott Walker.  And in that same post I wrote;

“If Paul Ryan were to be our Republican presidential nominee, he will begin a national dialogue that will consist of tough truths and sellable solutions, not bumper sticker slogans and hapless hyperbole. If Paul Ryan runs, the question will not be is he ready to do the job, the question will be is America ready for Paul Ryan. We already know that the guy who currently has the job was not ready for it. But I know Paul Ryan is.”

On this day a year ago, Paul Ryan released an announcement that put an end to all the speculation.  He would not be a candidate for President.  But a year later even though Ryan is not not running for President, his vice presidential candidacy is doing exactly what I indicated his presidential candidacy would do.  He has changed the narrative of this election by getting us away from the dialogue of distractions perpetuated by the left and President Obama, and thanks to his expertise, and credibility on matters of fiscal responsibility, Paul Ryan has gotten us to talk instead about those sellable solutions on the economy that he is now promoting on the campaign trail quite well.

In just one year the road to the White House has seen more twists and turns than  England’s famous Longleat Hedge Maze.  Names like Huntsman, Gingrich, and Bachman have become faded footnotes of a nomination contest that few remember with great detail.  Few recall the promise of the Perry candidacy that petered out within a moment of his momentary memory lapse.  Faded memories of the derailment of the Cain train over unproven sexual harassment charges have left most Americans asking “Herman who?”  And the past’s surpise surge of Santorum which was rolled back by the consolidation of support for the slow but steady momentum of the Romney campaign has people now wondering if the nomination contest was ever really close.  Now, one year ago to the day that Paul Ryan declared he would not be a candidate for President, Mitt Romney has taken that momentum he had in the primaries and increased its pace by getting Paul Ryan to run for Vice President.

Bookmark and Share

Paul Ryan Tackles Medicare Reform Head On at The Villages

See Ryan’s Complete Speech at The Villages in the Video Below This Post.

  Bookmark and Share  With no limits to the depths that Democrats will go in an attempt to maintain control of the behemoth federal bureaucracy that they seek to transform our nation with, the left has made the use of scare tactics a signature part of their election efforts.  Liberals have targeted the elderly since the 1980’s when they tried to campaign against Ronald Reagan and Republicans by trying to convince older voters that Reagan and the G.O.P. were going to destroy Social Security .  According to liberal’s the policies of Reagan and his fellow evil Republicans were going to force granny into such economic dire straits that she she would be placed on a steady diet of cat food.  The same attacks were used against George H.W. Bush in 1988 and ’92, Bob Dole in ’96, George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004 , and now Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan in 2012.

On many occasions Democrats experienced varying degrees of success with that strategy.  In 1982 and agin in 1986, they did exceptionally well among seniors by exploiting the fear of our oldest and most vulnerable goldenagers.  But that success was in part due to the G.O.P.’s poor political responses to those scare tactics.  But in 2012, that doesn’t seem to be the case.  Some thirty years after liberals began warning us that Republicans were going to kill our grandparents, people of my age have seen Grandma and Grandpa survive the Reagan  years and the Administration’s of both Bush presidencies and not once was Fluffy forced to share her can of 9 Lives with them.  That real life experience alone has taken  a bit of the edge off the sword of lies leveled by liberals regarding senior citizens but in 2012, what really hurts the left is the addition of Paul Ryan to the Republican presidential ticket.  With Ryan onboard and upfront,  the G.O.P. and Mitt Romney have a silver bullet that is aimed right at the heart of this now old and tired liberal line of attack.

Ryan’s mastery of economics and matters of budget combined with his Kemp-like passion for conservative economic theory and principles makes him the preeminent voice for fiscal responsibility in the nation.  When discussing his economic beliefs, Paul Ryan demonstrates an innate enthusiasm for his ideas that conveys a wonderful sense of vitality for our nation’s future.  And no one can explain those ideas as well as Paul Ryan can.

Whereas Jack Kemp, the conservative giant who actually sold Reaganomics to Ronald Reagan, often spoke about conservative economic policies in technical terms that seemed to make his audience’s eyes glaze over, Paul Ryan’s approach to explaining economic growth and fiscal responsibility tends to generate the same type of enthusiasm for those ideas that he conveys when discussing them.    This makes it hard for the left to discount Paul Ryan’s strengths on the issue but making it even harder for them this is Paul Ryan’s personality and image.

For Democrats the problem with trying to make senior citizens fear Paul Ryan and the ideas of the Romney-Ryan Team is that when senior citizens look at and listen to Paul Ryan, they have a hard time visualizing Paul Ryan as the demonic figure whose hands are pushing Grandma off the cliff in her wheelchair.  When seniors see and hear Paul Ryan they don’t quite see him as the kid kicking their walker out from under them before running away and laughing.  Instead what they see is a smart, respectful, thoughtful, well spoken, humble, handsome, young man with a beautiful young family, and some pretty good ideas.  What they see in Paul Ryan is their own grandson, or at least what they wished their grandsons was more like.

That unavoidable impression makes it impossible for Democrats to find any success in the application of their now traditional senior citizen scare tactics.  In fact, this time around, their fear mongering will likely backfire.

Today’s senior citizens are not the same ones that Democrats tried to make fearful of Ronald Reagan.  The senior citizens who were voting during the Reagan and George H.W. Bush years, were of a generation that once voted in big numbers for Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a political hero of their generation.  But the senior citizens voting in 2012 are of a different generation.  An increasingly large number of today’s seniors are the same people who voted in big numbers for Ronald Reagan, the political hero of their generation.   That also dilutes the left’s attempt to scare today’s senior citizens.

And it is part of the reason why the Romney/Ryan team’s bold decision to make many of the budget problems that lie at the heart of our national economic crisis, a main focus of the presidential campaign  is being well received.  The Republican ticket’s willingness to address the entitlement programs which under their current structures require more to be paid out than the government takes in, strikes at the heart of  the issue that should be in the forefront of this campaign….fiscal responsibility.  And instead of  resorting to fear tactics and the pursuit of a political strategy of distractions and shallow political platitudes,  Romney and Ryan have decided to elevate the campaign and its dialogue to that of a substantive, adult conversion that forces Americans to confronts our problems.   In doing so, this past Saturday, the Republican presidential ticket sent Paul Ryan to discuss the issue of Medicare at The Villages in Florida.

The Villages is an age-restricted, master-planned, retirement community that sprawls across the counties of Sumter , Lake, and Marion in the battleground state of Florida.  The Villages is a retirement community for people 55 years of age or older and according to the 2010 census figures, it boasts a population of 51,442  residents.  Given the demographics of that community, sending the liberal’s poster boy for senior genocide to The Villages to discuss aggressive reforms on Medicare might seem to be more like throwing Daniel in to the lion’s den than a campaign stop, but as seen in the video below, Paul Ryan proved that today’s senior citizens are driven more by a desire for changes that lead to real solutions than they are by some fictitious fear of the solutions that Democrats are hoping for.

In what can only be described as a well received explanation for both the need of Medicare reform and the reforms proposed by the Romney/Ryan ticket, Paul Ryan went to The Villages and offered an inspirational call to arms that demonstrated his generation’s need to preserve Medicare for the generations that precede it and follow it .   His speech also ushered in the end of an era, the end of the era of successful fear mongering of senior citizens by Democrats.  Paul Ryan’s ability to have American’s rationally discuss the issue of entitlements reforms actually takes that particular liberal scare tactic away from Democrats and finally forces them to be held accountability for their unwillingness to deal with such issues effectively.   As a result,  where liberals once may have been successful at scaring old people, with the seniors of today when people like Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden and even President Obama, jump out of the bushes to scream “boo”, all they will succeed at doing is making themselves look foolish.

Bookmark and Share

Doc Barack And His Medical Assault On Seniors

Paul Ryan deserves a high-five. Why? Oh, by simply pointing out that Obama cuts $700 billion from Medicare. That, of course, changes Medicare into a positive for the Republicans. That’s right, Medicare is now an attack issue for Republicans.

Can it be? After all, how many decades have Democrats relied on the Medicare-hammer to pound Republicans like nails?  Two? Three? Perhaps more? Whatever the answer, it’s been a long time with plenty of bruises.

So, take a moment, let it sink in. It’s not everyday politics changes this dramatically.

Say it. Come on, you can do it. Ready — Obama cuts $700 billion from Medicare to fund Obama-care.

Feels good, yes?

Republican Connie Mack IV, a recent primary winner in Florida, got in on the act. “In the state of Florida you’re gonna have the presidential election … and you’re gonna have a Senate election. There’s only two people in those races that have voted to gut Medicare, and that’s Barack Obama and Senator Nelson. They took $700 billion out of Medicare to pay for Obama-care.”
Doc Barack cuts Medicare for Obama-care. Mm, mm, delicious.

Say it again, you might as well, it helps the cause. If word gets out — and it better — Democrats may never get another senior vote. They can’t say it nor can they defend it. Obama cuts $700 billion from Medicare to fund Obama-care. We can pile on, too. Let us not forget, Obama-care is the largest tax increase in the history of history, too.

Mack continued, “I think President Obama and Sen. Nelson are kind of living in glass houses right now and playing catch with rocks.”

Think back to the ugly days during the Obama-care debates, Democrats sensing they were losing the fight, claimed Obama-care wouldn’t be a monstrosity. Do you recall the accounting trick of collecting Obama-care taxes (revenues) for a decade but providing services (expenses) for just six years and Democrats saying ‘see, it saves money’? Do you recall the double-talk — ‘it’s a tax, oops, sorry, it’s a penalty, no it’s a tax, no it’s a penalty’.

The gimmicks and word-play are coming back to haunt Democrats now.

The Romney/Ryan plan makes no changes to Medicare for people 55 years of age or older. Meanwhile, Obama and the Democrats are stealing $700 billion from Medicare to fund Obama-care.

We know Obama-care is a bad thing for myriad reasons. And we know with his controversial ruling, Chief Justice Roberts told us to solve our own problem. He tied Obama and Obama-care to the same fate. If you want to rid yourself — and your children and their children — from Obama-care, you must do away with Obama. It is that simple.

And now we know something else.

If you want to explore this further, there’s a good article at the National Review.

And you can watch Rich Lowry engage liberal commentator Rachel Maddow regarding the reality of the Medicare cuts. She’s left stammering and stuttering.

Doc Barack steals $700 billion from Medicare to fund Obama-care.

It’s got a nice ring to it, yes? And the best part is, it’s true.

Bookmark and Share

Follow I.M. Citizen at IMCitizen.net

Democrats Run On Empty As Gas Prices Reach Historic Highs

  Bookmark and Share  Today marks another historic milestone in the presidency of Barack Obama.  After more than three years of prices at the fuel pump steadily rising, this past month saw prices spike a whopping 9% and bring the national average of a gallon of gasoline up to $3.61 a gallon for the year, 10 cents more a gallon than it cost in 2011. All of this adds up to what will be the most expensive year for drivers in history.

Now to be fair, the truth is that Presidents and Congresses have only a certain amount of control over the price.  But they could have a a dramatic effect on stabilizing costs.  Fuel prices are largely established through the price set for crude oil on the world market.  Oil, regardless of what nation it comes from is thrown into one big economic bucket and stamped with one price throughout the world.  That is something which many, including Republicans often ignore when they argue for the need for the United States to increase domestic drilling.

While augmented domestic drilling is certainly a wise policy, it would not necessarily solve all our problems or drastically reduce the price of gas.  However; by tapping into the vast wealth of natural, domestic, energy sources like crude oil, the United States would certainly have a stabilizing effect on the energy market and the price of oil.

The high price that we are seeing at the pump now is, despite a sluggish and troubled economy, a direct result of the fact that worldwide demand is up and supplies are coming from increasingly unstable and even dangerous locations of the world; i.e.: the Middle East.  This means that if the United States which consumes most of the world’s oil supply, happened to increase its  production of domestic oil it would help to stabilize the world oil market by increasing the number of stable, secure, and reliable locations that are contributing to the world market, thereby adding a boost to the supply side of the supply and demand dynamic that is causing the unsettling run-up in fuel costs that we are now experiencing.

But President Obama and the liberal lock that Democrats have on Congress through their majority in the U.S. Senate, refuse to take advantage of our ability to exploit domestic natural resources.  It is a policy that not only continues to put undue pressure on the world oil market, it also denies Americans jobs, something which more rational political leaders would see as a necessary initiative at a time when our nation is experiencing its 40th consecutive month of unemployment in excess of 8%.

In this tough economy, while our federal government should be doing everything that is possible to get the economic engine of our nation moving again, it is clear that President Obama and his fellow liberals will be of no help on this issue.  Since coming to power, the only discernible efforts they have taken in the area of energy have been on the mishandling of the 2009 Gulf oil disaster that saw hundreds of millions of gallons of oil gush into the Gulf of Mexico for several months, and feeble attempts to prop up misguided alternative energy efforts such as the one involving the unfolding Solyndra scandal.

And as the average price of a gallon gas is predicted to reach as high as $3.90 a gallon by year’s end, Democrats, including President Obama happen to be missing in action on the issue.

As Democrats gear up to re-nominate their messiah for President, a deafening silence has fallen over the liberal lala land that the left occupies.

There are no complaints from limousine liberals over the price of gas or even the high unemployment rates which could be reduced by incorporating an all-of-the-above strategy into our national energy policy.   This newfound silence of the left offers a stark contrast to the reaction that liberals had to the high cost of gas in 2006 when it briefly spiked to point in excess of $3.00.

At one point, as Democrats were gearing up for the 2006 midterm elections and gas prices were reaching their highest of the Bush years, Chuck Schumer held a press conference and stated;

“Well, we knew this was going to happen.  Prices are now back up to over $3.00 a gallon again.  If we do nothing, within all too short a time prices they’re going to be at $4.00 a gallon and $5.00 a gallon.  And there’s going to be a giant hole getting bigger, and bigger, and bigger, in every consumer’s pocketbook or wallet.

Back then, The New York Times, the now tarnished, Gray Lady of liberal propaganda, proudly extolled;

“Democrats running for Congress are moving quickly to use the most recent surge in oil and gasoline prices to bash Republicans over energy policy, and more broadly, the direction of the country.”

Six years later and the soaring price of gas is something the left is now seemingly trying to keep a secret.  But in the words of Harry Reid, “the word is out”.

That genie is out of the bottle and at the moment, Democrats don’t seem to have any way to put her back in the bottle or to explain her escape.  No matter how many distractions the left concoct, no matter how much President Obama and his campaign henchmen try to defame Mitt Romney, and despite all the attempts to divide Americans and then piece together a majority of the vote for the President’s reelection, far too many Americans are uniting together under what are becoming very negative campaign ads for Democrats —- the signs which contain the high price for gas that the Obama energy policy is forcing Americans to pay.

Back in 2006, under the direction of Senator Schumer who was the Chairman of Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and in charge of getting liberals elected to the Senate, made bashing Bush on the high price of gas a mandatory theme for candidates to run on.  Fast forward to 2012 and Democrats are not running on the price of gas, they are trying to run as far away from those prices as many Democrats who are up for reelection are running as far away from the democratic National Convention as they possibly can.

It’s just another sign of the liberal hypocrisy that forms the foundation of liberal logic but in the meantime, our President has once again made history.  In addition to making history as the first President to win a Nobel Peace Prize for simply getting elected, other historic firsts include his success in putting nearly a third of the U.S. economy under government controlling by delivering socialized healthcare to our shores, the accumulation of a total debt that greater than the sum total of all previous presidents, his capping of salaries in the private sector, the first downgrade of the U.S credit rating, and the longest sustained period of unemployment in excess of 8%.  Now he has achieved the historic honor of presiding over the most expensive year for motorists ever.   The problem is, I am not sure how much more of the President’s historic achievements Americans afford?

Bookmark and Share

Barack Obama’s “Irresponsible” and “Unpatriotic” Presidency

  Bookmark and Share  Together, the Romney/Ryan ticket’s concentration on their proposals to put our nation on a path to prosperity will force voters to have a national discussion on the economic crisis we are currently struggling through and the cataclysmic economic cliff we are close to falling off of.  As seen in the video below, that discussion will make it impossible for President Obama to avoid being held accountable for his actions and his words.

The message in that video  focuses on several incontrovertible points;

  1. In 2008, Senator Barack Obama called George W. Bush “irresponsible” and “unpatriotic” for accumulating a debt of nearly 4 trillion dollars.
  2. In 2008 that debt amounted to $30,000.00 owed for every man, woman & child in the nation.
  3. In 2012, President Obama has accumulated more debt than all 43 Presidents before him, combined.
  4. Now, in 2012, president Obama’s accelerated creation of debt  places a tax burden of more than $50,000.00 for every man, woman and child in the nation. That’s $20,000.00 more than under Bush.

Those undeniable points must force every voter to ask themselves whether or not they truly believe that in the next four years, President Obama’s liberal tax and spend  policies will produce results that are any different than the results they achieved during the past four years.

It also forces President Obama to have to explain whether or not he holds himself  to the same standards that he holds other to and if he does, can he explain exactly why voters should not conclude that his reckless accumulation of more debt than any President in history is anything but “irresponsible” and “unpatriotic”?

And while he’s at it, could President Obama please tell us exactly why in the name of all that is decent and good, Americans should reelect a President who is “irresponsible” and “unpatriotic?

Bookmark and Share

Complete Video of Paul Ryan’s First One-On-One Interview as Mitt Romney’s Vice Presidential Running Mate

  Bookmark and Share   In his first one-on-one televised interview as Mitt Romney’s vice presidential running mate, Congressman Paul Ryan demonstrated just why Romney’s first major decision of his potential presidency was a home run. (see the complete interview in the video below)

In naming Paul Ryan his running mate, Mitt Romney made a statement that was far louder than any words could be. It was statement that made it clear that as President, Romney will be focused on addressing the issues that up to now, Republicans and Democrats alike have ignored, our nation’s debt and the entitlement reforms which tend to be responsible for the largest portion of our debt.

In the interview conducted by Britt Hume for Fox News, Congressman Ryan directly addressed the controversial issues of Medicare reform, Obamacare, budget balancing, tax cuts and everything which the left is preparing to demonize the Romney-Ryan ticket for. And in addressing those issues, Ryan proved to be an artful master of the economic crisis confronting our nation.

Ryan successfully put Democrats on the defensive and made it clear that while President Obama and his Party are exacerbating our problems, he and Mitt Romney are proposing actions that will lead to solutions to our problems.

According to Ryan;

“We’re the ones who are offering a plan to save Medicare, to protect Medicare, to strengthen Medicare. We’re the ones who are not raiding Medicare to pay for Obamacare. We’re the ones who are repealing President Obama’s 15-person bureaucratic board that will put price controls on Medicare that will lead to denied care for current seniors. We’re the ones continuing the guarantee of Medicare for people in or near retirement. And you have to reform it for the younger generation in order tomake the commitment stick for the current generation. President Obama is actually damaging Medicare for current seniors. It’s irrefutable. And that’s why I think this is a debate we want to have, and that’s a debate we’re going to win.”

While the interview was filled with enlightening answers on a host of issues, the last sentence of the above response was probably the most telling.

It was an indication of the Romney-Ryan ticket’s decision to put their money on the American people’s ability and desire to finally deal with the devils that are in the details of our economic woes. It was a sign that Mitt Romney might actually be serious and courageous enough to touch the third rails in politics that most politicians have spent more than 3 decades dancing around.  As such, Romney and Ryan are taking a gamble on whether or not the American voter is willing to admit that harsh decisions must be made and that fundamental reforms have to be applied to a broken federal bureaucracy that is steering our economy in a dangerously erroneous direction. It is an electoral gamble that indicates Romney and Ryan are courageous enough to be politically and intellectually honest with the America and provide them with bona fide choices in this election. And the interview with Ryan verified that if anyone can explain those choices to the people and lay out the case for what needs to be done, it is Paul Ryan.

Throughout Ryan’s televised discussion he displayed an incomparable command of the issues, a command of the issues that came off as being so natural to Ryan that it helped instill in viewers a level of confidence and trust in him and his proposals that few other politicians could establish in such a small amount of time. Between Ryan’s non-abrasive demeanor and the innate enthusiasm that emanated from him when addressing the ability to implement real solutions to reverse our nation’s downward spiral into debt, one couldn’t help but sense a degree of sincerity from Paul Ryan that Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and as hard as it is to admit, even Mitt Romney, fail to convey when they are addressing the same issues. While all three of those men come across as politicians, Ryan comes across as a problem solver and that is what America is looking for in 2012. This interview provided evidence that Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan  may actually be those problems solvers.

Bookmark and Share

Condoleezza Rice Offers No Reaction to Paul Ryan’s Nomination

  Bookmark and Share  As speculation about who Mitt Romney was going to select as his running mate ran rampant, one name that consistently popped up was former National Security Advisor and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.  In a decision making process that must consider everything from the electoral benefits of race, religion, ethnicity, and gender, to experience, demeanor, and expertise on the major issues of the day, Condoleezza Rice was a compelling and attractive candidate for Mitt Romney.  She offered a perfect sense of balance to the Romney ticket. While Romney is white, Rice is an African-American.  While Romney is a man, Rice is a woman.  While Romney lacks any pronounced expertise in foreign affairs, Condoleezza Rice is a foreign affairs expert.

Combined with Rice’s well mannered, diplomatic demeanor and unparalleled expertise on world affairs, Rice would have made an excellent choice for both the shallow electoral benefits that could have been realized because of her race and gender and because of her being probably more prepared to step in to the presidency of the United States at moment’s notice, than any other name that was considered.  Many independent polls even indicated that among voters, Rice was their most popular choice Romney could make.

The obvious value of Rice’s potential placement on the G.O.P. presidential ticket forced her name on to almost all vice presidential short lists.  If she was ever on Romney’s short list though is another question.  Being what she calls “moderately pro-choice” probably denied Romney the chance to give Rice serious consideration for the number two slot on the ticket.  Had he picked her, Romney would have surely offended many factions of the conservative base which was already uninspired by his candidacy and doubtful about his committment to the right-to-life cause.

As for Condoleezza Rice herself, all the speculation forced her to repeatedly state that she had no desire to reenter politics, or at least electoral politics.  But many, including myself had some doubt as to how sincere Rice was in those claims.  In the weeks leading up to Romney’s announcement, although they were unrelated to the Romney campaign, Condoleezza Rice made several high profile appearances and even wrote a superb editorial for the Financial Times that seemed like a foreign affairs manifesto for a future presidential Administration to adhere to.   In the months leading up to Romney’s decision on a running mate, some had openly suggested that Rice was “quietly campaigning”to be tapped for Vice President on the Republican presidential ticket.

In April of 2008, ABC News reported that Republican strategist Dan Senor made the same claim.

ABC reported;

“Condi Rice has been actively, actually in recent weeks, campaigning for this,” Senor said this morning on “This Week with George Stephanopoulos.”

According to Senor, Rice has been cozying up to the Republican elite.

“There’s this ritual in Washington: The Americans for Tax Reform, which is headed by Grover Norquist, he holds a weekly meeting of conservative leaders — about 100, 150 people, sort of inside, chattering, class types,” Senor said. “They all typically get briefings from political conservative leaders. Ten days ago, they had an interesting visit — Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice — the first time a secretary of state has visited the Wednesday meeting.”

Of course all of that is just speculation and unless we choose to believe Condoleezza Rice’s own claim of having not desire to get back into politics. we will never know for sure how accurate or inaccurate the conjecture and assumptions of political talking heads were.  But in the two days since Paul Ryan became the VP pick, Condoleezza Rice’s alway’s active online social media activity has been filled with messages about her thoughts on a few different topics but one topic has not been addressed at all ——- her thoughts on the selection of Paul Ryan for Vice President.

Since Romney made the announcement on Saturday morning , Rice posted two comments on her Facebook page and she tweeted the same two comments on her Twitter feed.   The first comment  offered kinds words to the organizers of the Olympics and Team USA;

                    Congrats to London & the people of Great Britain on a GREAT #Olympics!  Congrats & thanks to Team #USA for an inspiring two weeks!

Her most recent comment, more than 48 hours after the Ryan announcement, was a quote indicating her support for the NFL along with a photo which displayed her “passion” for the Cleveland Browns.

Like all the talk about Rice being a potential Romney running mate, the meaning of her lack of a reaction to Paul Ryan’s addition to the G.O.P. ticket is also speculation, but so far her silence is deafening.

In a few weeks, Condi who has been given a coveted primetime speaking slot at the Republican National Convention in a couple of weeks, will certainly be praising Romney, and Ryan too, but so far there is no indication of how genuine he glowing words will will be.  Especially since her initial reaction has been not to react at all.

Did Condi really want the job or is it true that she really can’t care less about her future role in public service?

Regardless of Rice’s feeling’s though, it is clear that most conservatives are quite happy with the choice of Paul Ryan and with good reason.

While Condoleezza Rice would have certainly brought an incredible amount of dignity, class, superior intelligence, and invaluable experience to the ticket, she would have also a brought up the opportunity for the left to distract Americans voters even more than they are currently are by rehashing Rice’s ties to former President George W. Bush.  Such a strategy could have been easily addressed by both Rice and Romney but it still would have been an unnecessary distraction.  But by picking Paul Ryan instead of Condi Rice, Mitt Romney  forces this election to be about the economy and the federal budget that Paul Ryan is an expert in.   And those are the issues which just so happen to be the Achille’s heels that weaken  both of  feet that the President is trying to stand on.

Bookmark and Share

Why Ryan Is A Strong Choice For VP

Saturday morning, Romney announced his VP pick to be Ryan — no, not Ryan Seacrest — Paul Ryan, budget wizard and Wisconsin representative. Ryan is arguably the most prominent Republican in the House. He is young (42), personable and energetic and has over a decade in Congress. He knows how Washington works and why it doesn’t.

Also, like Romney, he appears to be clean. Everyone has skeletons, especially politicians, but as far as anyone knows to date, the Romney-Ryan ticket may be the cleanest duo since Batman and Robin. It would be a surprise if a real scandal related to either man was uncovered. This may not win them an election but it should win them some fence-sitters.

Ryan is considered the go-to-guy regarding the budget. Nobody in Congress possesses the detailed knowledge he does which is why he chairs the House Budget Committee.

Ryan also knows how to campaign, in fact, he’s never lost an election. He’s 7-0. He has successfully defended his seat against both Democrats and Libertarians. During his first campaign Ryan received 57% of the vote. This is the lowest of his career. Since, he has never dipped below 63%, typically pulling in 67-68% range. In 2010 he earned 68% of the vote.

He is one of the three co-founders of the Young Guns Program, an electoral recruitment and campaign effort by House Republicans. He, along with Rubio, Walker, and other young conservatives is symbolic of the future for the Republican party.

But like all of us, Ryan is not perfect.

He has been on Romney’s short list for months so there’s no doubt the Left has a dossier and media packet on Ryan already prepared for shipping. The Left will also unroll articles comparing Ryan to other short-list folks like Portman (much more “real” experience) or Rubio (could have delivered Florida) to make Ryan appear a weaker pick than he is.

A lack of foreign policy experience will be something the Left tries to exploit. This will create a few headlines but Republicans should be capable of over-coming the criticism by pointing out this election is more about getting our house in order than world affairs. Besides, Obama had no foreign policy credentials a few years back and he was running for the top spot, not VP.

Ryan has proposed an aggressive plan that includes substantial changes to entitlements. Obama mocked it on live television — with Ryan seated in the front row — and the Democrats have already sliced and diced it. Now, with Ryan directly involved in the election, this plan will become a prominent issue. Already distorted, the Left will continue to have at it. To his credit, Ryan is a communicator, so if anyone can effectively walk the common folk through some of the plan details, it’s him.

He’s also likely to be labeled extreme or a hard-Right tea-bagger with draconian outlooks. This is a heavy distortion as Ryan’s “yes” votes on the bank bailouts and on Medicare expansion program prove. But it fits in well with the Left’s tired rhetoric — ‘Republicans want dirty water, polluted air and will abandon the old and poor’.

Many will ask if Ryan on the ticket will put Wisconsin in play? Except it already is. Sure, Obama won Wisconsin by 14% in 2008. That’s huge. But today, that has been trimmed down to about 6%. And don’t forget the message Wisconsin sent during the Walker recall. The better question is — can Ryan deliver Wisconsin? That is unknown but what is known is that Obama and the Democrats, still black and blue from the beating they took during the recall, will now be compelled to spend time and money in Wisconsin, perhaps to the detriment of a different swing state.

Because Ryan is a communicator he should hold his own during the VP debate. Ryan is not a punch-line kind of guy so Biden may score a jab or two. But if properly prepped, Ryan should be able to counter. And if the debate actually delves into issues of substance, Ryan is likely to badly embarrass Biden and show him as the buffoon he is. Ryan’s expertise on budget matters should help bring Romney up to speed, too.

Romney’s selection of Ryan has, intentionally or unintentionally, changed the nature of election. Probably not as much as most pundits think. The economy will remain the primary issue but now political ideology has been introduced. Team Romney must be confident the common folk want to hear about fiscal responsibility and changes to entitlements — complete with fine details. Ryan offers this. Obama wins here also as he now has ideological distortions to exploit. Both sides, particularly the super PACs, will play to this — do you want the anti-America radical Left or the rich loving polluters on the Right — but the reality is voters that answer to strict ideology have already made their decision. Independents aren’t likely to be swayed by the well worn cliches. It is likely to boil down to who the voters feel can get us out of this mess.

People vote for president not VP. But if there is one politician in America currently capable of explaining America’s nasty financial situation, in painful detail, it is Ryan. The Left, by pushing ideology, will guarantee Ryan has to break out the charts. But that’s a Ryan strength.

Like every candidate, Ryan has some shortcomings. But his positives far out distance his negatives. And compared to Biden as a VP, he’s gold. Ryan is informed, intelligent, and a proven leader. He isn’t an elite live audience orator but there are few better with television interviews and presentations. Romney definitely could have made a worse choice. He may not have been able to make a better one.

Follow I.M. Citizen at IMCitizen.net

Bookmark and Share

The Comeback Team: Romney Runs First Ad Introducing Paul Ryan

   Bookmark and Share    Hours after Mitt Romney announced his decision to nominate Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan to be his vice presidential running mate, the Romney campaign released the following introductory web ad on Ryan.  It uses segments of the speech which Ryan made on Saturday, August in Norfolk, Virgina after Mitt Romney officially announced Ryan as his running mate.
Bookmark and Share

%d bloggers like this: