July 13-15, 2012
Jul 13 00:55 Hilary Shelton: The ugly face of NAACP bigotry Jul 13 03:39 How slow can they go? Jul 13 14:21 Mindeman strikes (out) again Jul 13 19:41 Obama campaign and the Chicago Way Jul 14 10:54 Obama's nightmare scenario Jul 15 17:39 The DFL no more, Part II Jul 15 03:04 Obama campaign is all distractions Jul 15 17:21 Scott Walker for VP?
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Hilary Shelton: The ugly face of NAACP bigotry
If there's anything that's undeniable, it's that Hilary Shelton isn't even loosely tethered to reality. He's a liar through and through. He spent the better part of 6 minutes telling Bill O'Reilly that Mitt Romney didn't say what O'Reilly played video of Mitt Romney saying. This video tells the tale:
Goldie Taylor is either the biggest liar not named Hilary Shelton or she's a blithering idiot. Here's what she said on MSNBC:
TAYLOR: He might've walked into the room and talked about how we fix basic public education, which we know disrupts poverty.
O'Reilly dismantled her argument seconds later when he played a portion of Mitt Romney's speech where he talked specifically about education:
ROMNEY: I will give the parents of every low income and special needs student the choice of where their child goes to school. For the first time in history, if I'm president, federal education funds will be attached to a student so that every parent can send their children to the public or charter school they choose.
That's exceptionally straightforward. There's no ambiguity in Mitt's statement. Except that Mr. Shelton didn't hear things so clearly:
SHELTON: He did not talk about what he would do to improve public education.
O'REILLY: That's not true. He absolutely said what he would do.
SHELTON: He talked about absolutely bailing out of the public education system.
O'REILLY: He said he'd open it up to competition.
SHELTON: That isn't competition...He said that all the money would go into this new system and bail out of the public education system. That is not competition.
Later Shelton made this outrageous comment:
He didn't say he'd provide for more than one option. He said that the money would follow the child. We know what that means. That's code for vouchers.
Let's stipulate that having the money follow the child would include vouchers. Let's further stipulate that a good education frequently disrupts a family's poverty cycle. Finally, let's stipulate that there isn't a single 'silver bullet' fix to education.
That said, introducing competition into the learning process is a great way to guarantee parents having at least 1 viable option.
As offensive as those statements were, the worst statements Mr. Shelton made came when he talked about the NAACP being a nonpartisan organization. That's total BS. Remeber this disgusting NAACP ad ?
Renee Mullins: I'm Renee Mullins. My father was James Byrd, Jr. I still have nightmares thinking about him, the day three men chained him behind their pickup truck and dragged him three miles over pavement.
I can see skin being torn away from his body.
I can hear him gasping for air.
I can feel the tears in his eyes, the struggle of his brain as images of his life painfully bang through his head as the links of a heavy chain clinched around his ankles dragging him bump by bump until he was decapitated. [pause]
On June 7, 1998 this happened to my father, all because he was black. I went to Governor George W. Bush and begged him to help pass a hate crimes bill.
He just told me no.
I'm doing this commercial to ask you to call Governor Bush at 512-X and tell him to introduce a hate crimes bill in Texas.
Let him know that our community won't be dragged down by hate crimes.
Male Voice: Funded by Americans for Equality, a project of the NAACP National Voter Fund.
That's the most vicious, hyperpartisan ad I've ever seen. The NAACP should have their tax exempt status revoked outright.
This wasn't a good day for the Obama campaign. First, Stephanie Cutter accused Mitt Romney of being a felon. Next, you had Goldie Taylor say that Mitt Romney's appearance at the NAACP gathering was intended to relive Nixon's Solid South stategy. Finally, Hilary Shelton made 1 truthful answer in his interview with Bill O'Reilly.
The candidate who had the Midas Touch in 2008 can't do anything right this time. He looks discombobulated. He's jumped the shark multiple times. He's losing independents.
This isn't a finely tuned re-election team. They're a bunch of clutzes tripping over their own feet. They're the gang who can't walk and chew gum at the same time.
At this rate, there's no guarantee they'll be able to do either by the time Election Day arrives.
Tags: NAACP , Bigots , Partisanship , Hilary Shelton , Goldie Taylor , President Obama , MSNBC , Education , Democrats , Mitt Romney , Vouchers , GOP , Election 2012
Posted Friday, July 13, 2012 12:55 AM
No comments.
How slow can they go?
When it comes to approving mining projects, the EPA's policy appears to be one of waiting as long as possible, then announcing that an additional round of studies must be completed before they reject the permit.
The EPA's demands for additional EIS reports don't have anything to do with the environment. It has everything to do with progressives trying to control our lives.
PolyMet is a perfect illustration of the progressives' control freak nature. CREDO superPAC has set up shop in Duluth in their attempt to defeat Chip Cravaack. They understand that he's a threat to their control freak mindset. This article explains why they're pulling out all the stops in their attempt to defeat him:
There has been no action on the proposal in the Senate, which has been less favorable to major changes in environmental laws. And on Wednesday the Obama administration issued a statement saying the bill would circumvent public protections of federal lands, including eliminating appropriate reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act, and the circumvention of the public input process and curtailing the ability for court review.
Supporters say the law is needed to speed up mining projects for heavily used minerals such as copper and nickel, which the U.S. now gets mostly from other countries.
'Duplicative regulations, bureaucratic inefficiency and lack of coordination between federal agencies are threatening the economic recovery of my home state and jeopardizing our national security,' Amodei said in a statement. The bill 'would simply bring some predictability and transparency to the permitting process to leverage our nation's vast mineral resources, while paying due respect to economic and environmental concerns.'
The bill would cap federal environmental review at 30 months, including permitting.
Cravaack noted that the PolyMet project has been in environmental review for about seven years. He said his amendment would ensure that mining projects are given a firm timeline that 'workers, communities and families can count on.'
The bill 'is a common-sense, pro-growth piece of legislation that would simply facilitate a timely permitting process for very important mining projects throughout the United States,' Cravaack said in a statement, adding that '30 months is plenty of time to complete the total review process for permitting a mine.'
I published this post to highlight how militant environmentalist organizations sued businesses until they gave up on their projects:
Along with our allies at the Izaak Walton League of America, the Union of Concerned Scientists and Wind on the Wires, the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy and Fresh Energy argued -- first in South Dakota, then before the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) -- that the new plant was a bad idea. Our message was simple: The utilities had not proven the need for the energy, and what energy they did need could be acquired less expensively through energy efficiency and wind.
We kept losing, but a funny thing happened. With each passing year, it became clearer that we were right. In 2007, two of the Minnesota utilities dropped out, citing some of the same points we had been making.
The MCEA didn't care that people's electric bills were getting expensive. They didn't care that their claims were based on political consensus, not scientific proof. Talk about a growing consensus that global warming was real was just a vehicle for controlling people's lives.
The next step in cutting the EPA's ability to control our lives is to make them prove that their rulings are based on scientific proof, not political ideology. If the EPA can't justify their rulings based on scientific facts, their objections should be automatically voided and the permitting ratified.
It's time for We The People had the final say. It's time these regulatory agencies were accountable to people beyond their agency chiefs.
Chip Cravaack's amendment is a giant step in the right direction.
Tags: CREDO , Militant Environmentalists , Paul Aasen , MCEA , Attrition Litigation , Big Stone II Power Plant , Progressives , Democrats , Chip Cravaack , Permitting Reform , Jobs , PolyMet , Mining , GOP
Posted Friday, July 13, 2012 3:39 AM
Comment 1 by Bob J. at 13-Jul-12 08:48 AM
Craavack has been outstanding on PolyMet. For all their bluster and bombast about supporting the working class, Democrats don't prove it when it's time to vote. Thank you, Chip.
Mindeman strikes (out) again
It's a shame that Dave Mindeman insists on arguing against reality. His latest post borders on illogic in the extreme. Here's a sample of that illogic:
I hope it is noted, 49ers, that you have taken those "partisan" hats off unilaterally. There will be no reciprocation.
Not only will Mr. Mindeman's prediction be wrong, it's that Chip's been in the 49ers' corner all along :
When we took a look at Congressman Cravaack's term in office, it became clear that he has done a good job of staying away from partisan Washington politics, and really focusing on bread and butter issues that are important to construction workers in his district. He is not afraid to stand up to his party when he disagrees with their direction, and his votes reflect that .
The 49ers state unequivocally that Chip's voted the construction workers' interests even if it requires him not voting with the GOP.
So much for Mindeman's first prediction. His other predictions don't fare much better:
And if Cravaack gets the opportunity to screw organized labor via a vote with the House GOP leadership....you know he will support his party.
Don't get fooled by any old pictures of Northwest Pilot Chip Cravaack on that pilot picket line. That was self interest. When it comes to Party interest, Cravaack will be a dutiful anti-union soldier.
Are his votes with the construction workers and against the GOP are proof that he'll be a "dutiful anti-union soldier"?
This isn't a prediction. It's more of an admonition:
You may believe that Polymet mining is some kind of "answer" to the Iron Range employment situation, but if the Boundary Waters is endangered, then that economy loses more than a few mining jobs.
TRANSLATION: Don't listen to people who vote your interests. Vote for the party that's sided with the people that want to kill the mining industry. Vote for the DFL because they've talked a good game before siding with the militant environmentalists on PolyMet. Nationally, Democrats sided with the militant environmentalists on the Keystone XL Pipeline project while shafting the construction industry.
Mr. Mindeman and the DFL are wedded to keeping the construction unions voting for the DFL's candidates. They just aren't wedded to reciprocating with private sector projects that help employ construction workers.
Tags: Militant Environmentalists , Unemployment , DFL , Chip Cravaack , PolyMet , Keystone XL Pipeline Project , GOP , Election 2012
Posted Friday, July 13, 2012 2:21 PM
No comments.
Obama campaign and the Chicago Way
When Stephanie Cutter accused Mitt Romney of being a felon, it was another bit of proof that President Obama cares only about blue states. It's proof that he isn't interested in holding his campaign to the high standard of being ethical. This CNN video exposes Team Obama as utterly corrupt and devoid of character:
The American people better wake up and realize that President Obama is a disgusting, unethical man who won't hesitate to throw mud at his opponents. This isn't just an incident of Stephanie Cutter going overboard. It's just the latest incident in which a senior Obama campaign operative has gone off the deep end. It's important that voters consider this information about David Axelrod when figuring out President Obama's lack of character:
One month before the 2004 Democratic primary for the U.S. Senate, Obama was way down in the polls, about to lose to Blair Hull, a multimillionaire securities trader.
But then The Chicago Tribune, where Axelrod used to work, began publishing claims that Hull's second ex-wife, Brenda Sexton, had sought an order of protection against him during their 1998 divorce proceedings.
From then until Election Day, Hull was embroiled in fighting the allegation that he was a "wife beater." He and his ex-wife eventually agreed to release their sealed divorce records. His first ex-wife, daughters and nanny defended him at a press conference, swearing he was never violent. During a Democratic debate, Hull was forced to explain that his wife kicked him and he had merely kicked her back.
Hull's substantial lead just a month before the primary collapsed with the nonstop media attention to his divorce records. Obama sailed to the front of the pack and won the primary. Hull finished third with 10 percent of the vote.
Luckily for Axelrod, Obama's opponent in the general election had also been divorced.
The Republican nominee was Jack Ryan, a graduate of Dartmouth and Harvard law and business schools, who had left his lucrative partnership at Goldman Sachs to teach at an inner-city school on the South Side of Chicago.
But in a child custody dispute some years earlier, Ryan's ex-wife, Hollywood sex kitten Jeri Lynn Ryan, had alleged that, while the couple was married, Jack had taken her to swingers clubs in Paris and New York.
Jack Ryan adamantly denied the allegations. In the interest of protecting their son, he also requested that the records be put permanently under seal.
Axelrod's courthouse moles obtained the "sealed" records and, in no time, they were in the hands of every political operative in Chicago. Knowing perfectly well what was in the records, Chicago Tribune attorneys flew to California and requested that the court officially "unseal" them, over the objections of both Jack and Jeri Ryan.
In short, David Axelrod, like Stephanie Cutter, won't hesitate in making the most outrageous claims to protect a failure like President Obama.
It's essential that we see the big picture with the Obama campaign. One senior official accused President Obama's senatorial primary opponent of being a wife-beater. Stephanie cutter accused Mitt Romney of being a felon. These aren't exceptions with Team Obama operatives. That's the Chicago way. If someone opposes President Obama's goals, then the Chicago Way Playbook demands that that person must be annihilated.
It's incredibly easy to get caught up in a tit-for-tat mudfight with these operatives. It's important that Mitt and Mitt's surrogates use what I call an R & R strategy.
First, it's important that Mitt's team respond forcefully to Axelrod's and Cutter's wild statements. Slapping them down forcefully, however, doesn't mean demanding an apology. It means saying that a) the SEC hasn't found anything wrong with his actions, b) the Obama campaign is showing signs of being frustrated and c) President Obama doesn't want the spotlight shining on a) the failure of Cash for Clunkers, the UAW bailout, the Affordable Care Act or b) invasive government agencies like the EPA and the NLRB.
Speak directly, and frequently, about how Cash for Clunkers, the UAW bailout, the Affordable Care Act didn't create jobs. Speak directly and frequently about how the EPA's policies have kept gas and electricity prices high. Speak directly and frequently about how the ideologues in the NLRB tried preventing Boeing from building a plant in South Carolina.
The American people want to know 'what's in it for them'. They don't give a shit about the tit-for-tat BS that John Sununu and Stephanie Cutter engage in.
Every day, the Romney campaign's goal should be a) hit Obama hard, b) hit Obama smart and c) lay out their vision for rebuilding the American economy while lowering gas prices and making electrity affordable.
Of course, ads like this fit into these strategies nicely:
Tags: President Obama , David Axelrod , Stephanie Cutter , Blair Hull , Politics of Personal Destruction , Chicago Way , Democrats , Cash For Clunkers , Affordable Care Act , Gas Prices , Electricity , EPA , NLRB , Progressives , Mitt Romney , Jobs , Vision , GOP , Election 2012
Posted Friday, July 13, 2012 7:41 PM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 14-Jul-12 12:19 PM
Gary:
Two points here:
One, a story I heard about the divorce records for Jack Ryan which is what makes this a dangerous situation for Romney was while the records were still sealed Ryan had talked to a couple of conservative bloggers and had told them that nothing was in there. So naturally when they got unsealed the bloggers found out that Ryan lied. Romney needs to be well aware of what is in these records and be ready (possibly release them himself) to answer questions about them.
Two, how about pointing out how Obama is hiding being confidential documents. Holder and the Justice department for Fast and furious, college records, etc.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
The DFL no more, Part II
I've gotten tired of hearing the DFL lying about being the protectors of 'the little guy'. It drove me to researching that claim. This information paints an interesting picture of how much they're for 'the little guy.
According to this census information, the median household income for Minnesota from 2006 through 2010 was $57,243. The Median household income for St. Louis County, the heart of the Iron Range, was $44,941 during that same time period. Itasca County didn't fare much better at $45,621. By comparison, the median household income for Sherburne County was $71,704.
There are two distinct differences between the 'Iron Range counties' of Itasca and St. Louis and Sherburne County. The first major difference is the income disparity between Sherburne County and the Iron Range.
The second difference is that Sherburne County isn't hit with the onslaught of abusive regulations that the Iron Range counties are hit with. That's the explanation for the appaling income disparity. Simply put, fewer regulations leads to higher wages.
What's ironic is that a group of Twin Cities elitists insist that a) they know what's best for the Iron Range and b) the Iron Range should suffer economically because they care more about a myth than they care about real people's lives.
This is their stated mission :
From our four 'real' seasons to our 10,000 lakes, the Great Outdoors defines life here. It is where many of our most cherished memories are created with family and friends. Passing our experiences and traditions on to our children, being good stewards of our land and lakes, these are values that we all share. At Conservation Minnesota, we turn your love of Minnesota's Great Outdoors into the laws that protect it. And we provide reliable information to help you make important decisions for your family, community and future.
Notice where Conservation Minnesota's priorities are. Being "good stewards of our land and lakes" is tiny comfort to families struggling to make ends meet.
What's additionally insulting is the fact that this collection of Twin Cities elitists are protected from the MPCA's and the DNR's regulations. Why should they care about these regulations? They aren't getting hurt by them. I'd seriously doubt that they care about the disparity between the Twin Cities standard of living and the Iron Range's standard of living. Frankly, I don't know that these elitists even think about the Iron Range except when it's time to take up their newest cause.
When the DFL became the Twin Cities Party, they stopped dealing with reality. They stopped giving a damn about the rich heritage of Iron Range families. These proud people didn't ask for a handout. They just want the opportunity to provide for themselves and their families.
When militant environmentalists hijacked the DFL, they did everything possible to kill the mining industry. Based on the census statistics, their job is nearing completion.
Rather than standing up for the miners and loggers, the DFL elitists chose the environmentalists' campaign contributions. Then they threw the miners and loggers under the bus.
The Twin Cities DFL puts a higher priority on these militant environmentalists' campaign contributions than they put on doing what's right for the Iron Range.
Simply put, this isn't Hubert Humphrey's DFL anymore .
Tags: Median Family Income , Census , St. Louis County , Itasca County , Sherburne County , Conservation Minnesota , Militant Environmentalists , DFL , Loggers , Miners , Chip Cravaack , MNGOP
Posted Sunday, July 15, 2012 5:39 PM
No comments.
Obama's nightmare scenario
The headline Drudge picked for this article should frighten the Obama campaign. Here's Drudge's headline:
Bad economy dampens enthusiasm among black voters
If there's anything that President Obama would be frightened to read, it's that minority voters aren't as enthusiastic to vote this election as they were in 2008.
Last night, FNC aired a focus group of journalists. The focus group was led by Frank Luntz and included some of the highest profile journalists in the nation. One journalist, the WSJ's James Taranto, nailed it in terms of what turnout means to the Obama campaign:
TARANTO: If you look at the numbers, according to exit polling, the black percentage of voters went up from 11% in 2004 to 13% of voters in 2008. John Kerry got 88% of the black vote in 2004. Barack Obama got 95% of the black vote in 2008.
Those don't sound like big differences but they actually add up to a difference of about 5,000,000 votes. So the improvement in the black vote from 2004 to 2008 accounted for more than half of Obama's margin of victory.
Factor that information into this scenario and it's a recipe for disaster:
Polls have Obama winning more than 90 percent of the black vote against Mitt Romney, but there are signs that the high African-American turnout that fueled his 2008 victories in North Carolina and Virginia could dissipate after the hard realities of the president's first term.
The chances for depressed turnout are increased by the bad economy, which at its worst drove the unemployment rate for blacks above 16 percent and led to some disillusionment with the candidate of 'hope and change.
This chart shows the significant dropoff of support for President Obama in the black community:
According to this chart, Sen. Kerry got 88% of the black vote in 2004. President Obama got 95% of the black vote in 2008. Today, President Obama's support has eroded to 86% in the black community. While that's certain to rebound somewhat, that's a significant dropoff that President Obama can't afford and still expect to get re-elected.
Earl Ofari-Hutchinson understands that:
African Americans 'don't have to vote for [Romney]' to help his campaign, said broadcaster and author Earl Ofari Hutchinson.
'An abstention from the polls is effectively a vote for Romney,' he said. 'If there is only a minuscule drop-off [in turnout], it will spell trouble.'
A dropoff in turnout and support would be President Obama's nightmare scenario.
The difference isn't just in numbers. In 2004, President Bush focused his attention on black churches in Ohio. As a result, President Bush won 16% of the black vote in Ohio in 2004, essentially giving him his margin of victory in Ohio.
If President Obama can't reverse the trend of waning support in the black community, it's possible he'll lose Ohio, Indiana and North Carolina as a direct result of that downturn in support. Losing those states plus Florida would drop President Obama's electoral vote total to 264.
Couple those statistics with the distinct possibility that President Obama might lose Wisconsin, Iowa and Michigan and it's difficult to impossible to see a winning scenario for President Obama.
Tags: President Obama , John Kerry , Black Vote , Turnout , North Carolina , Ohio , Democrats , Mitt Romney , GOP , Election 2012
Posted Saturday, July 14, 2012 10:54 AM
Comment 1 by Susan Duclos at 14-Jul-12 01:56 PM
Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude, you need a Tweet this and Facebook button to make this easier to share!!! Just a suggestion.
Great piece.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 14-Jul-12 03:43 PM
Susan, I tweeted about this post 5 hrs. ago. Follow me at @LFRGary
Obama campaign is all distractions
It's sad to think that we have to put up with the Silly Season prior to the conventions. It's come to this because President Obama a) has been a failure on creating jobs and b) because his 'signature issue', the Affordable Care Act, is wildly unpopular.
Rather than changing directions and admitting that the failed policies he's advocated the past 4 years, he's resorted to making silly arguments about outsourcing:
Obama met Romney's plea for an apology for the attacks with an ad that charged that the firm shipped American jobs to China and Mexico, that Romney has personal wealth in investments in Switzerland, Bermuda and the Cayman Islands, and that as Massachusetts governor, he sent state jobs to India.
President Obama has to resort to this tactic because his policies have been a disaster. The economy was staggering when he was inaugurated. Then he and Tim Geithner made things infinitely worse with the stimulus that was more PEU bailout than stimulus. Then they pushed the ACA down America's throats against their wishes.
The business community has made it perfectly clear that they'll keep their money on the sidelines until the ACA is repealed and/or President Obama is fired. They've made that decision because this administration has waged war against them from multiple directions.
The EPA is doing their best to annihilate the coal industry. The NLRB told Boeing that they couldn't build a manufacturing facility in a right to work state.
Upwords of $2,000,000,000,000 (as in $2 trillion) has been parked on the sidelines for almost 3 years. Cash for Clunkers didn't stimulate the car market. The UAW bailout didn't substantially change the trajectory for GM and Chrysler.
As awful as those things are, and they're plenty awful, they're nothing compared with the ACA. That legislation frightens entrepreneurs. That's the biggest reason why they've kept their money on the sidelines.
Killing the coal industry and shutting down America's job creation engine, aka small businesses, with the ACA isn't the way to jumpstart the American economy.
President Obama doesn't want to talk about why his policies have failed, in part because he thinks his policies are brilliant, in part because he hopes nobody notices that they've failed.
If I were advising Mitt Romney, I'd tell him to start emptying both barrels on President Obama. I'd have him frequently making the rounds each Sunday morning. When Mitt isn't on TV, I'd have Kevin Madden making the case for him.
Each show, I'd have those gentlemen reminding people that President Obama's policies have destroyed the hope of the American people. Each show, I'd lay out my solutions to the problems that President Obama's policies have created.
If the Obama campaign starts trotting out David Axelrod, I'd offer to debate him. I'd demand that Axelrod explain why he thinks piling on trillions of dollars of debt while crushing businesses with disgusting amounts of overregulations is the way to jumpstarting the American economy.
I'd finish him off by asking what his explanation is for businessses sitting on trillions of dollars of cash rather than investing in the Obama economy.
President Obama has declared war on capitalism and American exceptionalism. He's declared war against Mitt Romney, too. It's time for Mitt and his top surrogates to respond with a full frontal assault against President Obama's economic and regulatory policies.
Mitt's campaign should totally focus on exposing President Obama as a total failure and on Mitt's solutions and vision for America.
I'd have Mitt explain why the Obama administration's regulatory policies have stifled the American economy. I'd have Mitt explain the necessity for tax reform. Finally, I'd have him highlight the need for repealing each of the regressive taxes in the ACA and how they hurt the middle class.
If Mitt makes those arguments the centerpiece of his campaign, he'll win in a landslide. If he doesn't, it'll be tight to the end. It's in Mitt's best interest, and America's, to hand President Obama a crushing defeat this November.
Tags: President Obama , Outsourcing , Regulations , Affordable Care Act , EPA , NLRB , Unemployment , Deficits , Democrats , Mitt Romney , Tax Reform , Coal , Gas Prices , GOP , Election 2012
Posted Sunday, July 15, 2012 3:04 AM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 15-Jul-12 09:20 AM
Obama is running around the country saying that the ideas of the GOP are what got us into this mess so why would we want to go back to that. Romney needs to be hammering home the point that the ideas of the last 3.5 years have done absolutely nothing to help "stimulate" the economy and in fact have made things 100 times worse.
We are still in the ditch that the GOP supposedly drove the county into and now he has buried us up to the roof in debt instead of getting us out.
This president is an abject failure and is now saying that the rich owe what they have to everyone else because they didn't get there on their own a la Elizabeth Warren. This man, his advisors, and his followers need to be removed from power come November or we as a country are finished.
Comment 2 by walter hanson at 15-Jul-12 01:45 PM
Chad:
I'll think what I will point out to people are:
One, we are in the mess today that we are because the housing market went to hell. Why did it go to hell? Because all mortages were being guaranteed and bankers weren't making sure loans were paid. President Bush realized this danager and when he proposed changes democrats like Obama, Barney Frank, Maxine Waters, Dodd, and a few others said everything was okay and we didn't have to do reforms. Dodd Frank doesn't correct that disaster and the economy won't recover let alone grow until the housing market now goes through pain years of letting demand match supply. Something that could've been avoided because of failed democrat policies.
Two, what was unemployment in 2006 when Democrats said Bush's policies were failures and what are they today? What changed is democrats got control of the Congress and then the President in 2008.
Three, what was the size of the deficit in 2006 when Democrats said Bush's policies were failures and waht are they today? What changed is Democrats got control of the Congress and the President in 2008.
Four, since your economic team boldily predicted that unemployment won't top 8% if we adopt your stimulus plan why should we trust anything you say now?
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 3 by indy jones at 16-Jul-12 05:20 PM
It is cheap and easy credit that creates all bubbles, and this country still has bubbles to be dealt with such as student loan borrowing. Huge amounts of credit are created and when that credit goes primarily to consumption, rather than production, it amounts to inflated prices for everything from housing to medical care to education costs. All this credit can not and will not be paid back and until the debt holder accepts the idea of no debt payback nothing will move forward. There is too much debt, it must be destroyed before the economy will recover. More debt simply extends the pain and pain threshold.
Scott Walker for VP?
The great parlor game in DC is the 'pick the VP game' for Mitt Romney. Friday night, during Hannity's show, Frank Luntz said that "Marco Rubio is the best communicator in the Republican Party. Paul Ryan is the smartest guy on policy in the Republican Party." That said, he thinks Rob Portman will be Mitt's VP pick.
This op-ed , however, shows that there's another conservative who shouldn't be ignored. His name is Scott Walker. Here's a sampling of what he'd bring to the ticket:
We need a turnaround agent in the White House who will put jobs first and free Americans from the burdens of debt and high taxation so we can live up to our greatest potential. Gov. Mitt Romney is that leader.
As the reformer of the 2002 Winter Olympic Games, Romney transformed what could have been a national embarrassment into a national success. As a job creator, he took failing businesses and turned them into job-creating success stories. Romney is known around the world for his ability to solve problems and turn things around, and those are traits we'll need in our next president.
On Day One, Romney will begin to repair the damage done by Obama and move America in a new direction toward policies proven to work right here in Wisconsin. A President Romney will secure a future for our children and grandchildren that doesn't leave them buried in debt. His comprehensive plan will put jobs first, reduce our deficit, cut reckless federal spending, repeal Obamacare, reform entitlements and bring fiscal responsibility to the White House.
That's the most coherent explanation for why Mitt Romney isn't just the best choice for president but why he's the only choice.
Everyone who's read this blog knows I was a gigantic Newt fan. I'm still a gigantic Newt fan and I'm unapologetic about it. Now that Mitt's the nominee, it's time to realize that it's a binary choice. We can either vote for Mitt or we can cast a
That's a pretty simple choice.
Gov. Walker's explanation casts this race in a totally different light. In this op-ed, Gov. Walker starts telling Mitt's compelling story in a way that Mitt hasn't done thus far. Talking about Mitt's job of taking over the scandal-riddled Salt Lake City Olympic Games and turning it into a major success is the type of thing that people need to be reminded of.
It gives Mitt the opportunity to talk about how he took over planning of a major international event that was held just months after the biggest terrorist attack in our nation's history. Not only did he rid that Olympiad of corruption but he installed anti-terrorist protocols that kept the world's athletes safe.
Now that's a success story.
This is a great shot at this administration because it's accurate:
A vote for Obama is a vote for the same old policies that failed Wisconsin in the past, are failing America now, and will continue to fail us in the future. As our debt reaches the paralyzing levels of European nations and as China gains ground on America in the world economy, we must not accept the 'just fine' attitude this president speaks of. A vote for a second term is admitting that America's best days are behind her.
President Obama repeatedly says that we're creating jobs but that we aren't creating them fast enough. His policies are why we aren't creating jobs fast enough. When this administration's sided with the militant environmentalist organizations, he killed jobs because he wanted the campaign contributions from these organizations' members.
The jobs meant nothing. The contributions meant everyrthing. Instead of doing the right thing, President Obama did the thing that helped his campaign the most.
It's painfully obvious to people that businesses will keep their money parked on the sidelines until this administration's policies are thrown into history's dustbin of failed ideas. That $2,000,000,000,000 will stay sitting on the sidelines or they'll invest in other countries where they aren't subject to this administration's policies, regulations and taxes.
With Gov. Walker on the ticket, the entire industrial Midwest becomes Romney country. Wisconsin would flip. Ditto with Iowa. Michigan might. Illinois won't but that's another story.
Most importantly, Gov. Walker would energize the conservative base. They'd run through brick walls for him. He'd bring to this ticket the type of energy that Sarah Palin brought to the 2008 campaign.
The biggest difference between this year and 2008 is that the Romney campaign won't be as polite as Sen. McCain's campaign. The next biggest difference is that the Romney campaign will spend hundreds of millions dollars more than the McCain campaign.
If Mitt wants to be a transformative president, he should seriously consider picking Gov. Walker as his running mate. Mitt should also give Gov. Walker a lengthy list of reform issues as his assignment upon taking office.
Mitt shouldn't play it safe. Mitt shouldn't worry about whether his pick is experienced. Mitt's pick should be someone with a lengthy list of important reforms and great ideas.
Stumbling in first across the finish line isn't the way to go when you have the ability to sprint across that finish line furlongs ahead of President Obama.
Tags: President Obama , Unemployment , Regulations , EPA , NLRB , Recession , Democrats , Mitt Romney , Reforms , Scott Walker , GOP , Election 2012
Posted Sunday, July 15, 2012 5:21 PM
No comments.
