Don’t Buy the Lies

Just in case any of you out there are getting skittish – a few words to the wise.  First off,  here’s a headline from September, 1980:

“Campaign Kickoff; Has Reagan Dropped the Ball?” – U.S. News and World Report, 9/9/1980

In what shapes up as a tight contest for the White House, even associates of Ronald Reagan conceded that the Republican nominee got off to a sputtering start in his attempt to replace President Jimmy Carter…

Reagan, of course, went on to win by 10.

Coming out of the convention what Obama wants – and thus the MSM will do – is play up every negative aspect for the GOP and every positive aspect for Obama (even if they have to make up things to fit both narratives).  Remember, 90% of the MSM is in the tank for Obama – always has been, always will be.  They will not tell the truth.  Now, readers here know that I’ve been confident of a Romney victory:  I remain confident.  Can Obama win?  Sure he can.  Lots of things can happen in an election – maybe the American people in a majority will want to continue Obama’s destructive rule.  So be it.

But I don’t think it will happen – if it does happen it just means that we’ve allowed socialism to go too far and it will have to get massively worse before a majority are fully awake to the necessary revolution.  Fortunately – if I may use that word – the re-election of Obama will make things rapidly get massively worse so we’ll have a good shot of winning in 2016 if not in 2012.  But I don’t believe a majority of my fellow Americans are that far gone – at least 40% of them are (and thus that is the ultimate floor for the Obama vote – when he shouldn’t get more than 10%, representing the people who really profit of our corrupt system) – but not a majority.  November 6th will either prove or disprove my view – but my view of where the majority is doesn’t depend on polls (hasn’t at all this election cycle) because the polls are simply over-sampling Democrats.  My view is based upon cold, hard, facts on the ground – and all of those (such as, for instance, Romney’s 22 campaign offices in Michigan – a State Obama won by more than 16 percentage points) show, at a minimum, that Romney is even with Obama, and I think he’s actually ahead.

UPDATE:  Hot Air reports on a new poll showing Obama up by 7 over Romney in New Jersey.  Yes, New Jersey.  The State Obama won by 15 points in 2008.

Does it stand to reason that Obama can lose that much support in heavily blue New Jersey and yet not lose it in purple Ohio and Florida?  I’m telling ya – any State that Obama won by less than 5 is gone, any State won by less than 10 is “tossup”.

RNC Open Thread

I was very much impressed by Mrs. Romney’s speech – didn’t know that they had started that far down the economic totem poll.  Which, by the way, just shows the decency of Mitt Romney:  his life is not a talking point.  This is in stark contrast to Obama who has scripted himself to obtain maximum personal advantage from whatever situation he’s in.

Christie’s speech was also very good – a challenge to America to hear the truth and act upon it.  As a theme for the campaign, it is right on the money.  I do believe that the broad majority is done with the old politics and is ready for the revolution.  That Mitt might lead it is weird, but no stranger than the fact that we elected an exactly unqualified man as President in 2008.

What do you think of it all?

UPDATE:  “Mr. President, I’m here to tell you that the American people are awake, and we’re not buying what you’re selling in 2012.”  See the Mia Love video – if she wins her House seat, then she’s the next TEA Party political rock star.

UPDATE II:  Forgive me if I’m wrong, but methinks that was Rice’s “I’m going to run for governor of California in 2014” speech…

UPDATE III:  A Democracy Corps poll with a D+6 advantage shows Romney up by 15 points among Independents. Hot Air has the story.

UPDATE IV:  With all the GOPalooza going on  if you feel the need for some quality, Obama Time, then Suitably Flip has the torture implement ready.

Anyone Else See A Disconnect Here?

Barack Hussein Obama:

  • Voted three times to allow a child who survived an abortion to die on a gurney.
  • Allowed the trafficking of guns into the hands of Mexican drug lords via Operation Fast and Furious, knowing they would be utilized in the commission of crimes and murders, sending hundreds of people to their deaths, including U.S. Border Agent Brian Terry.
  • Forced Catholic and other Christian institutions to violate their consciences by attempting to force them to fund birth control and abortifacients.
  • Imprisoned a Marine for speaking his mind on Facebook
  • Shut down hundreds (1000s?) of GM dealerships and put thousands out of work.
  • Prevented tens of thousands of United States workers from finding gainful employment during the worst recession since the Great Depression- by blocking the Keystone Pipeline Project.
  • Is the consummate narcissist, assigning credit to no one but himself, assigning blame to EVERYONE but himself.
Now, can you please tell me again why you think he’s a “nice guy?”

Hit the Road, Barack

Bill O’Reilly was a guest on Glenn Beck’s radio show this morning, and in response to Beck’s question of who he thought was going to win the election, O’Reilly said, according to confidential sources of his, internal polls in BOTH campaigns indicate that, if the election were tomorrow, Romney would win.  One of the main reasons for that could well be Niall Ferguson’s article in Newsweek, which is raising a lot of eyebrows this week.  As Ronald Kessler noted at NewsMax yesterday, Ferguson’s devastating article could be the turning point in the campaign.

The financial crisis a few weeks before the last presidential election was enough to push Barack Obama over the top. This week’s Newsweek cover slamming President Obama could have almost as much impact.

“Hit the Road, Barack — Why We Need a New President” the cover says. “Obama’s Gotta Go” the article inside says.

Journalists are not idiots. They recognize that Obama, as the Newsweek cover story documents, has been a failure. But they are also lemmings who will not depart from their traditional support of Democrats unless given permission by their peers. The cover story in Newsweek, one of the most liberal-leaning publications in the country, does just that.

Because of support by the press, Obama became president in the first place and has held his own against Mitt Romney in polls.

Three months before the story of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr.’s connection to Obama finally broke in the mainstream media, I began writing stories as chief Washington correspondent of Newsmax.com about Obama’s close association with his America-bashing minister.

The media, which had known generally about Wright since Obama announced his candidacy in February 2007, ignored the stories. If the media had picked them up then, Obama likely would not be president today.

According to pollsters, largely as a result of the stories the press finally ran about Wright, Obama’s double-digit lead over Hillary Clinton vanished. At the same time, John McCain shot up in the polls, and Hillary began winning the primaries. But by then, Obama was ahead, and it was too late for her to overcome his previous lead.

Indeed, David Remnick’s “The Ridge: The Life and Rise of Barack Obama” quotes an unidentified Clinton aide as saying, “If Jeremiah Wright had dropped in January [2008], it [Obama’s candidacy] would have been over.”

Today, the media largely ignore Obama’s daily distortions and record of failure, all documented in the Newsweek article. In contrast, after President Bush gave his 2003 State of the Union address, the press attacked him mercilessly for weeks over his 16-word statement that the British government had learned that Saddam Hussein sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.

In fact, the statement was true. After the British House of Commons Intelligence and Security Committee reviewed the MI6 intelligence about the claim involving Niger, it concluded in September 2003 that the British intelligence service was justified in continuing to say that Hussein had tried to obtain uranium from that country. The press then ignored the report showing that Bush’s statement was indeed accurate.

But when Obama says the private sector of the economy is doing fine, belittles success, claims the Supreme Court cannot overrule a law passed by Congress, says he is not divisive even as he attacks Republicans, gratuitously injects race into his comments, or claims Romney and Paul Ryan would end Medicare as we know it, the press gives the president a pass.

None of this is lost on the public.

A recent Rasmussen poll found that 59 percent of likely U.S. voters believe Obama has received the best treatment from the media so far. Just 18 percent think Mitt Romney has been treated better.

Having been a reporter for the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal, I know how susceptible journalists are to the herd instinct. The Newsweek cover story in effect tells journalists it’s OK to begin telling the truth about Obama and expose his presidency as the failure Newsweek says it is. For that reason, it could be a turning point in the election.

One of the biggest problems the Obama campaign has (actually two related problems) is the inability to dig up some really harmful dirt on either Romney or Ryan coupled with the inability to portray either of them as the bad guys.  And the more the Dems try, the nastier they come off.  Say what you will about the American people, they just really don’t like “nasty”.

The Ryan Plan and Catholic Social Teaching

Our liberals have been running with a meme which goes “Ryan’s budget plan is anti-Catholic” – the basis of the liberal argument is that a letter was written under the letter head of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops which condemned the Ryan plan when it was first presented.  Without getting in to the intra-Catholic weeds on this, the mere existence of such a letter does not either indicate Catholic doctrine nor how the Bishops, if pressed on the matter, would rule.  Lots of liberals reside on the staff of the USCCB and they do take their opportunities to help liberal Democrats.

The letter, itself, held that the alleged cuts to social spending in the Ryan plan violated Catholic teaching as it relates to helping the poor.  Of course, Catholic teaching is that the poor have an absolute moral claim upon the wealthy for sufficient housing, clothing, food and health care – there can be and is no argument about that.  If you’ve got the means, you are morally obligated to help out the less fortunate.  On the other hand, how you are to help out is not set out with precision – because it can’t be.  Circumstances are so varied among both the haves and the have-nots that no one person can figure out exactly what one person should do for another in all circumstances.  The bottom line is that there can be a great deal of different opinion on the best means to the end – and Ryan’s bishop, Robert C. Morlino, has written an article clarifying the Catholic view – first laying out what is required:

…It is the role of bishops and priests to teach principles of our faith, such that those who seek elected offices, if they are Catholics, are to form their consciences according to these principles about particular policy issues.

However, the formation of conscience regarding particular policy issues is different depending on how fundamental to the ecology of human nature or the Catholic faith a particular issue is. Some of the most fundamental issues for the formation of a Catholic conscience are as follows: sacredness of human life from conception to natural death, marriage, religious freedom and freedom of conscience, and a right to private property.

Violations of the above involve intrinsic evil — that is, an evil which cannot be justified by any circumstances whatsoever. These evils are examples of direct pollution of the ecology of human nature and can be discerned as such by human reason alone. Thus, all people of good will who wish to follow human reason should deplore any and all violations in the above areas, without exception. The violations would be: abortion, euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, same-sex marriage, government-coerced secularism, and socialism…

So, we can say, “politician A is in favor of elective abortion and as that is an intrinsic evil, I must not vote for politician A”.  But outside of the area of intrinsic evil, there is a lot more flexibility – and it becomes a matter of prudential judgement on the part of Catholics (and, indeed, everybody) to decide as best they can.

Continue reading

The Ryan Rally and Romney’s Taxes

It’s been a week, but I am sure the Democrats feel like it has been quite a bit longer, as Paul Ryan has completely changed the course of the campaign and possibly the election by coalescing the conservatives. Ryan is a solid conservative, and is not afraid to take on the once unspeakable entitlement reform issue which has Democrats in a panic because not only is he openly talking about reform, he is winning the conversation. In fact Obama has had to distort and lie about Romney and Ryan’s plan while at the same time trying to deflect the issue back to Romney’s taxes.

Let’s take a quick look at each individual issue and how the Democrats are trying to spin it. The fact is, the Medicare reform that Romney and Ryan are calling for DOES NOT impact anyone over 55 years of age. One more time for the liberals out there – the Romney/Ryan plan does not affect anyone over the age of 55 – got that? For those under 55, the reform plan offers a CHOICE. Liberals always pride themselves on being pro choice, so here’s a big moment for them. People under 55 will have the choice to remain on the current medicare program, or receive a voucher to use those funds in helping them buy other private insurance. That’s it – it’s pretty simple, and nothing like the big scary reform Obama and the Democrats are trying to paint it as, so keep that in mind the next time you see that smarmy David Axlerod on TV lying through his teeth.

Now on to Romney’s taxes. Mitt and Ann Romney have released the legally required tax returns and financial disclosures which have proven to be above board and in compliance with every tax obligation. There is no reason why they should be required to release any more, and further calls for them to do so, are tantamount to a witch hunt. If the Democrats and Obama were concerned that the Romney’s evaded taxes, or failed to submit in any given year, well then that can be found out quite easily by one phone call to Douglas Shulman, Commissioner of the IRS, who reports to Timothy Geitnner, who is ironically an admitted tax evader. If any irregularities are found in Romney’s tax returns, and no action is taken, well then we have much larger issues to concern ourselves with, but as it stands now, Romney does not have any “secret” tax returns as recently described by the aforementioned smarmy Axelrod. Do the liberals understand that? Have I dumbed this down enough for them? We will see.