The Trainwreck that is Obamanomics

The Economy is off the rails

American capitalism is the engine room of the global economy. Sadly, the guy in the engine room doesn’t know how the machine works. All he knows is how to toot his own horn. This is the real difficulty of the next four years if President Obama wins another term.

What should worry you is that Romney and Ryan are making little headway in the polls. Obama has the advantage of being the incumbent. George W. Bush had the same advantage, and in spite of negative perceptions abroad and demonization in the media at home, he still won in 2004. Obama has a lot less against him.

Romney needs to focus on the economic issues, not get himself embroiled and lost in skirmishes on foreign policy issues. He needs to do two things. First, he needs to clearly spell out the trajectory four more years of Obamanomics will take us through.

Spell it out:

Step by step.

Failure by failure.

Cent by cent.

The Fraser Institute in Vancouver points out that Canada is more economically free than America. Where is America? Between Qatar and Kuwait. If that is not a warning bell then I don’t know what it is.

Obama sold himself on the economic issues in 2008, which made the economy even worse. Investors and businesses took even more drastic decisions in response to the Obama gloom rhetoric. Having set up the premise that the global economy was in a more severe state than it actually was, he set himself up as savior. He promised he would come in on wings of angels, as Hilary herself told us, to save the world.

And it worked! As an election promise, as a selling point, it worked. As a presidency, it has failed miserably. He got four years and he’s blown it. The engine is going off the rails.

Does this look like a competent driver to you?

The debt piles up. The jobless are piling up. The government is bloated even more. People, as Romney rightly said, are increasingly dependent, and voting for Romney would feel to them like turkeys voting for Christmas.

If Obama stays in situ, then the engine will break down beyond repair. America cannot afford the load he is trying to pull, and nor can the global economy.

Romney and Ryan need to focus. If they can’t get this message home, and if they can’t inspire America to get this engine moving again, then they don’t deserve the job in the driving seat.

Fraser report can be found here: http://www.freetheworld.com/release.html

America Deserves Better: New Romney Ad Questions Obama’s Character

   So far President Obama and his allies have run what is absolutely the most expensive and negative campaign campaign in history.   So you probably won’t see President Obama airing many ads that focus on his accumulating more debt than any other President in American history, or his attempts to wage class warfare, or how strong the Obama economy is and how low the unemployment is.   In fact, you may not see President Obama and his supporters air any ads that offer an honest assessment of his record.  That’s because like the President’s reelection team, most Americans realize that President Obama’s record contains little to boast about.   That fact has forced the President’s campaign and those who are assisting his reelection effort, to resort to airing a barrage of attacks ads that go after Mitt Romney personally.

The latest and most despicable example of these personal attacks ads came from a pro-Obama Super PAC called Priorities USA Action, a group which is run by former high level officials in the Obama Administration who left their positions so that they could play an active role in the President’s reelection campaign.  In the newest ad from these people, Mitt Romney is blamed for the death of a man’s wife.

Prior to that ad,  in addition to some other less than flattering descriptions, the Obama camp began accusing Romney of being a felon and most recently a tax evader.  But this is politics so many people largely just wrote it off as typical political propaganda and business-as-usual.  But even those who found such attacks as below-the-belt but not out of the ordinary for politicians, have been a bit taken back by the audacity of an attempt to suggest that Romney killed a woman because of decisions made by a company, five years after Romney left that company.  The stunningly despicable charge was so outrageous that prior to naming Paul Ryan his running mate, the Romney campaign was compelled to  make an issue out of it and as you can see in the ad below, they made it a big issue.

Unlike the convoluted thinking behind the anti-Romney ads being produced by pro-Obama forces,  Romney’s anti-Obama ad is simple.  But sometimes all one needs is the simple truth and in this case, the truth is on Romney’s side.

As stated in Romney’s ad, “Doesn’t America deserve better than a President who would say or do anything to stay in power?”

The question is a good one and not just from a political standpoint.

Politically, that rhetorical question and the obvious answer to it, is filled with promising electoral benefits for Romney.  It forces voters to question the President character and motives and it forces them to wonder just how valid the President’s case for reelection is.  The Romney ad helps to cast an image in voters minds of a President who is desperate and irresponsible. Romney’s “America Deserve Better” ad simply lays out the facts and forces people to wonder why President Obama is and supporters are so desperate that are having to make outrageous accusations and avoid the issues confronting our nation.

Romney’s “America Deserves Better” ad may now be lost in the shuffle since all the headlines were consumed by his nominating Paul Ryan for Vice President.  However; given the glee that Democrats have shown over the desire to demonize Paul Ryan for his being the architect of a federal budget that preserves Medicare, does not raise taxes and cuts $6 trillion dollars from the national debt, it is clear that lefties and their messiah, President Obama,  will forge ahead  nd demonstrate how desperate they are by continuing to distort, defame and demonize both Mitt Ryan and Paul Ryan.    At some point, they will again go too far in their attacks and this “America Deserves Better” ad will find itself or a similar version of it, back in the rotation on the airwaves of many swing states such as Ohio, Florida, Virginia, and now Wisconsin.

Without a positive record to run on, Team Obama is sure to continue stretching the truth but exactly how far can they stretch the truth in their endless attacks before something snaps in the minds of voters who want leaders that are more concerned with solutions than accusations?   Now that Romney has picked Paul Ryan as his running mate, I have feeling we will find the answer to that question sooner rather than later.

Bookmark and Share

What Does Paul Ryan Bring to the Ticket?

 Bookmark and Share  By picking Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan as his running mate, Democrats will claim that Mitt Romney, a wealthy and heartless robber baron who has killed people through his business dealings, has picked a running mate who pushed grandma off a cliff and is trying to make the wealthy richer by starving the poor.  Democrats will claim that the Romney’s selection of Paul Ryan aligns the G.O.P. with it’s most damaging and ideologically extreme policies.

Less than two hours after nominating Romney for Vice President, the Obama-Biden campaign went up with a new website that can be found when one goggles Paul Ryan or ask the questions who is Paul Ryan?  Typing that question on your keyboard will bring up barackobama.com/paul-ryan,  an Obama  website that defines the Romney-Ryan ticket as the “go back team”  and claims that Paul Ryan is the architect of a plan to end Medicare as we know it and which raises taxes on the middle-class in an attempt to create tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires.

An hour after Romney named Ryan as his Vice President, Obama campaign manager Jim Messina issued a statement claiming that Congressman Ryan “is best known as the author of a budget so radical The New York Times called it ‘the most extreme budget plan passed by a House of Congress in modern times’.”

So it is clear that Democrats are ready to do exactly what they were expected to do ——- escalate their political terrorism and double down on their class warfare tactics.   But they do so at the risk of falling right into the trap which Republicans have baited with with a tempting target that has hidden in it the issues that lie at the heart of the 2012 election —– the budget and the economy, the two issues which Democrats must avoid if they want to be elected.

By endorsing Paul Ryan as his running mate and embracing the Ryan approach to fiscal sanity, Romney has dared Democrats to continue their fear mongering.  And if Democrats continue to take the bait, they will be ensuring that the very issues they are trying to make voters fear the Romney-Ryan ticket for, are the very issues brought to the forefront of the campaign.  The selection of Ryan as his running mate is both courageous and brilliant.  It demonstrates that Romney is committed to fiscal responsibility and unafraid of defending conservative economic policies against the harsh distortion and demonization of demoncrats.  But by selecting Paul Ryan as his running mate, Romney has also plotted a brilliant strategy that now puts him in control of the political agenda by reframing the campaigning on the big issues which lie at the heart of our nation’s future.

While Obama and his fellow demoncrats try to describe the fiscal responsibility of a Romney-Ryan ticket in divisive class warfare terms, they will be forcing the Romney-Ryan ticket to explain their ideas and shed the truth on those ideas.  By going on the attack, demoncrats will be forced to actually have to debate the economy and the budget, something which they would rather not address.   The liberal strategy of distractions and distortions will give Republicans the opportunity yo fully explain the big fiscal decisions that will have to be made but which demoncrats refuse to address.

The demonization of the Romney-Ryan economic policies will provide Republicans the perfect chance to explain why it is not Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney who are endangering Medicare, but that it is the status quo of the the left and their nominee President Obama, which is endangering Medicare.   The attempts to demonize Romney and Ryan and scare senior citizens into believing that Romney and Ryan are throwing them under the bus, the ensuing national debate will force the truth out and shed the light of day on the facts that Ryan’s entitlement reforms not only reduce the national debt by $6 trillion dollars without raising taxes on anybody, but that it makes Medicare solvent and preserves it for generations to come, without making a single change to the program for those born prior to 1954.

Beyond Romney’s selection of Ryan taking control of the political agenda, it reinforces the impression of a leadership team that has the courage to propose bold plans and actual solutions that demonstrate an ability to get our nation back on track, something which the Obama-Biden team has been unable to do.  It also corners the market on the critically important independent swing vote which is made up largely of fiscal conservatives who want ideas turned into actions and actions turned into solutions more than they wish to hear politicians turn distortions into accusations.

In addition to placing someone on the Republican ticket who can appeal to independent voters, having Ryan as Romney’s running mate makes the usually blue state of Wisconsin fertile territory for Republicans.  History demonstrates that running mates can increase a tickets plurality of votes in their home state’s by as much as four percent.  Before nominating Ryan, the RealClearPolitics average of the most recent polls in Wisconsin has President Obama leading Romney by 5.4%.   Now with Ryan on the ticket there is good reason for Republicans to target that state in the months ahead, and as such, Wisconsin is likely to be deducted from the current projections of President Obama’s electoral college count.  And while Ryan’s popularity in neighboring Midwest states combined with his appeal to blue collar workers and personal background has still to be measured,  at this point in time he  can’t be seen as a drag on the Republican ticket in that region.

But picking Paul Ryan was much more than an attempt to select a regional nominee or a candidate who could help deliver a particular case.    It was a decision to pick a national nominee that would reframe the campaign and focus it on the big issues, the tough but unaddressed issues which Democrats are trying to avoid but will now be forced to confront because of Paul Ryan’s solutions and Mitt Romney’s courage to fight for those solutions.  Picking Paul Ryan will force voters to have to choose between two clearly different paths for our nation.  One path is a series of  tax and spend policies of an Administration which has refused to address our problems or even admit that the problems exist, and which has turned our economic woes into such a systemically debilitating problem that it is now the biggest threat to our national security.  The other path seeks to be hoinest with the American people and stop pretending that federal treasury is an ATM machine that issues a staedy and endlesss stream of free cash.  This other path is one which acknowledges our problems and addresses them by making tough decisions, to implement bold solutions and reforms that will help to prevent the United Sates from following in the footsteps of Greece.

What does Paul Ryan bring to the Republican ticket?

He brings us the opportunity to confront the demons that are haunting our economic health and the chance to slay them before they consume us.  He brings the promise of an issue oriented debate that reclaims the narrative of this election in a way that will allow it to focus on the problems that we face instead of the the distortions that left tries to create.   He also brings to the ticket the bait that will entice Democrats to take their class warfare strategy and lies to an extent so profoundly outrageous and exaggerated that they will lose what little credibility they have remaining.

Bookmark and Share

Romney’s Selection of Paul Ryan for Vice President is a Gamechanger

 In chosing Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan to be his running mate, Mitt Romney has set the stage for an an ideological battle that will force our nation to undergo some deep soul searching.  By picking Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney has finally proven to conservatives that his committment to fiscal responsibility is based upon more than just platitudes and political gamesmanship and in doing so he has not only fired up the base of his Party, he has gotten the attention of voters who are yearning for leaders of substance and who are willing to provide the reforms needed to solve our problems instead of prolonging or exacerbating them.

That is the message offered to us by this first major decision of Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign.

By picking Paul Ryan, the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, Mitt Romney has cornered the market on the most important issue facing Americans today, the economic health of our nation and made it quite clear that he is willing to provide our economy with more than just lip service.

As the House Budget Chairman, Ryan has dedicated himself to getting this nation’s economy back on track by actually addressing all the third rails in politics, including the mountain of entitlements that have brought our nation to the brink of bankruptcy.   As the architect of a budget plan that chooses to address our entitlement and spending problems, Paul Ryan has been one of the few political leaders with the fortitude and courage to address our problems honestly and realistically.     And by nominating Ryan for Vice President, Mitt Romney demonstrated the courage to recognize and acknowledge that Ryan is an asset that we must give a greater role to play in our governance.  As such, Romney’s decision to pick Ryan can probably best be described as purposeful.

Romney could have a chosen a running mate based on a number of political and electoral considerations.  He could have picked someone like Bob Portman in the hopes that Portman would have delivered the must win state of Ohio to Romney.  He could have picked someone like Condoleezza Rice with the intention of playing gender politics or Marco Rubio for the sake of a focussing on ethnic politics in an  appeal to the Hispanic vote.   There were any number of political based choices that Romney could have made in an attempt to appeal to different electoral demographics.  But Romney did not to give into such political temptation.  Instead he chose to appeal to all Americans by carefully deciding to put policy considerations over political considerations.   And it was a courageous choice.  It is no secret that Democrats will try to paint Paul Ryan as a heartless conservative whose budget plan attempts to destroy Americans by cutting everything from Social Security benefits to the elderly, to slashing assistance for the impoverished.  But Romney did not succumb to the fear of such propaganda.  Instead, by picking Paul Ryan for Vice President, Mitt Romney demonstrated the courage to confront such accusations.  In fact selecting Paul Ryan seems to signal Romney’s desire for President Obama to make such accusations so that the Romney-Ryan ticket can dispel those myths once and for all.

But beyond the courage behind Romney’s decision is also the worthiness of Paul Ryan himself.

Paul Ryan is young but experienced, confident, humble, and uses soft spoken words to convey hard hitting facts as he avoids demonizing the opposition.  He is a down-to-earth, friendly, likeable, family man, who can relate to voters and still make them feel confident in his ability to step into the presidency if the need arose.  So much so that almost exactly one year ago today, I saw fit to endorse Paul Ryan over Mitt Romney for President.  Given that small aside, you won’t hear me complaining about Romney’s choice.  It is a decision that leaves me confident in Romney’s judgment and excited by the promise of his campaign and potential presidency.

By picking Paul Ryan as his running mate, Mitt Romney neglected to make the safe choice that I feared he would make.  Instead he made a bold choice, the boldest choice of his political career and in the final analysis I believe Paul Ryan will prove to be an extraordinary choice.  Few people have the type of natural command of the budget that Ryan does. And as a protegé of conservative icon Jack Kemp, Paul Ryan is the embodiment of fiscal conservatism and today, Mitt Romney boldly embraced those principles and ensured us of a presidential campaign that will put the ideological direction of our nation at the forefront of the campaign and force us to debate the real issues, the issues that President Obama is trying to avoid.

Who Is Paul Ryan?

Born: January 29, 1970 (age 41), Janesville, Wisconsin

Spouse(s): Janna Ryan

Children : Sam, Liza & Charlie

Residence : Janesville, Wisconsin

Alma mater: Miami University, (Ohio) (BA),

Profession: Blue Collar worker, Marketing Consultant

Religion: Catholic

Political Career :

  • Intern for the foreign affairs advisor assigned to Wisconsin Sen. Bob Kasten.
  • staff economist attached to the office of U.S. Senator Bob Kasten
  • 1992 – Ryan became a speechwriter and a volunteer economic analyst with Empower America, an advocacy group formed by Jack Kemp, former education secretary Bill Bennett, the late diplomat Jeane Kirkpatrick and former Minnesota Rep. Vin Weber.
  • 1998 – Elected to Congress from his Wisconsin hometown

Photobucket

The Ryan Record:

Recent Key Votes

More Key Votes

Photobucket

Bill Sponsorship & Co-Sponsorship

Some of Ryan’s most recently sponsored bills include…

View All » (including bills from previous years)

Photobucket

Ryan on the Issues

Foreign Policy Gun Control Budget & Economy Education
Homeland Security Crime Government Reform Health Care
War & Peace Drugs Tax Reform Abortion
Free Trade Civil Rights Social Security Families & Children
Immigration Jobs Welfare & Poverty Corporations
Energy & Oil Environment Technology Principles & Values

Photobucket

Stars01.gif picture by kempite


Bookmark and Share

Even Liberals Are Getting Disgusted With Obama’s Hypocrisy

  Bookmark and Share  If liberals are anything, they are first and foremost, hypocrites.  Liberalism is nothing more than a hypocrisy based ideology that operates under an atmosphere of double standards and an agenda that turns all issues into wedges that are designed to divide and fuel a “them against us mentality”.   This is why although you will always find the left preaching the need for tolerance, you will rarely find a liberal who is tolerant of a difference of opinion.  Yet today, even portions of the liberal base are finding that President Obama is reaching a level of hypocrisy that is too much for them to live with.

Such is the case with the CREDO organization, a liberal, pro-Obama group that practices their leftwing activism through the collection of signatures on petitions that they create for every issue they wish to reform.

CREDO recently issued a petition drive that calls upon President Obama to take down a radio ad that he has running in coal producing state’s like Ohio.  In the ad, President Obama tries to portray himself as a pro-coal President who has strengthened the American coal industry.  Now most Americans understand that the notion that President Obama has been good for any industry is ludicrous enough but to claim that he and his policies have benefited the coal industry is down right libelous.   Yet this latest radio spot doesn’t just suggest that president Obama is a supporter and fried of coal, it actually attacks Romney for remarks he made about  a Massachusetts  coal plant back in 2003.   At the time, that specific plant in Salem, Massachusetts was the oldest in the state and it failed to comply with state environmental laws. This particular plant was so egregious that according to a report by the Harvard School of Public Health, its lack of compliance with environmental regulations were  responsible for dozens of premature  deaths and 14,400 asthma attacks each year.

In his 2003 remarks, Romney stated;

“I will not create jobs or hold jobs that kill people. And that plant kills people….”

In a blatant attempt to intentionally take Romney’s words out of context, the Obama ad implies that Romney was claiming all coal plants “kill people” and deceptively ignored the fact that Romney was referring to that specific plant in Massachusetts which failed to comply with the regulations that would have allowed it to operate in an environmentally sound manner.

But proper context has little to do with liberal logic.

A year ago,  another liberal cesspool called Climate Progress, used the same soundbite that  Obama uses in his ad but they were taking that quote out of context for their own purposes.  Climate Progress tried to use Romney’s words to demonstrate that Romney is a compulsive flip-flopper who has changed his position on the environment.  By taking the Romney quote out of context, Climate Progress tried to convince voters that Romney was once opposed to coal but now that he is running for President, he supports coal.  Move forward a year and now we have Team Obama using the same quote to try and claim that Romney is  supposedly not being as pro-coal as the President  is.

Meanwhile CREDO has now issued a petition calling upon the President to pull the ad, not because it misinterprets Romney’s position, but because as they put it ”

…”An ad suggesting that President Obama is more coal-loving than Romney isn’t just cynical, it’s misleading… Tell the Obama campaign: Drop your cynical pro-coal ad.”

CREDO gets marks for pointing out that the ad is misleading, but only a couple of points because misleading is an understatement.  But they quickly lose those points because like the liberals at Climate Progress, CREDO tries to suggest that Romney has flip-flopped on the issue of coal and that is a lie.

Still, regardless of how inherently disingenuous the left is, even the liberal Obama loving supporters at CREDO are beginning to freak out over just how two-faced the President is.

In their petition, CREDO writes;

“…Right now we need leadership from President Obama to overturn a decision by his campaign to run radio ads in Ohio which promote coal and incredibly actually criticize Mitt Romney for saying (when he was a different person, in 2003) that the pollution from coal plants kills people….”

Note how CREDO carefully tried to avoid laying blame for the ad at the President’s feet.  Rather than accuse the president of being a hypocrite, CREDO carefully phrases their criticism by calling upon the President to overturn the decision by his campaign to run the hypocritical radio ad.   It is an attempt to deny that President Obama is the one in this ad who is making all his outrageously fictitious pro-coal claims.  Instead they try to put the onus on his campaign.  Nonetheless; it is easy to see that even the President’s own supporters are beginning to get uncomfortable by the level of hypocrisy that their messiah is displaying.

Even the left is forced to to question which Barack Obama is running for reelection?  The one who spoke in the pro-coal radio ad offered above, or the one who has promised to bankrupt the coal industry and spent the past four years sapping investment in this industry and  importing coal in to the United States even though it can be found here, right under our feet.  As demonstrated in the video below, the record would seem to indicate that the Obama Administration is anything but a friend to the coal and energy industry.

All of this does prove one thing though.  Liberals, including the President, do have the market on one thing —-  hypocrisy.

Bookmark and Share

Obama Can’t Wait To Rip Apart Romney’s Running Mate. No Matter Who It Is

Bookmark and Share  In 2008, within moments of John McCain announcing Sarah Palin as his vice presidential running mate, the campaign of Barack Obama immediately mocked the choice by describing Palin  as a “small town Mayor” who didn’t have the necessary experience.  The response overlooked the fact that Palin was in her second year as a Governor and it ignored all that she had accomplished up to that point.  They also neglected to mention that Palin had more executive and real life experience than did Senator Barack Obama.  The rest is history.  From describing her as a pig wearing lipstick, to claiming that her newborn child with Down syndrome was actually her daughter’s child and not her own and even trying to paint her oldest son as a Nazi sympathizer who joined the white power movement , Palin was mercilessly torn apart by Team Obama and the Obama loving media.

Four years later and the reelection campaign of President Obama can’t wait to make the next Republican vice presidential nominee a victim by “palinizining” them much the same way they did to Sarah Palin four years ago.

Evidence of this deep rooted desire to destroy the reputation of whoever Mitt Romney nominates recently surfaced in my email box, when I received the following from the Obama’s New Jersey State campaign director, Jackie Cornell-Bechelli.

As a loyal Republican operative, I try to make sure that I receive everything that the liberal opposition sends out.  Consider it a form of opposition research.  And despite the LiberalsRlosers@aol.com email that I use when I sign up on the oppositions contacts lists, the left sends me loads of useful examples of just how they are communicating to their base.  In this case, as a resident of New Jersey, the Obama-Biden campaign sent me the email shown above.  It is intended to fire up Obama’s liberal base in New Jersey by inviting them to give examples of how terrible a governor they believe Chris Christie is.

Similar emails have been sent out in the home states of several other potential Republican vice presidential picks including Florida’s Senator Marco Rubio, Ohio’s Senator Rob Portman, and Minnesota’s former Governor, Tim Pawlenty.

Of Pawlenty, Obama’s Minnesota state director writes;

“Both Romney and Pawlenty left their states worse than they found them.”

In Ohio, that state’s Obama campaign director writes;

“Rob Portman has been our senator for two years now, but the most damning pieces of his record involve choices he made as a senior member of the Bush-Cheney administration and conservative congressman, the consequences of which still reverberate on a national scale. As one of the architects of the top-down Bush budget, Portman practically invented the policies that punished middle-class families while exploding the deficit, and crashing our economy.”

And in the case of Florida, the Obama camp writes;

“You see, we know Marco Rubio — all the way from his time in the Florida House of Representatives to his election to the U.S. Senate. But most Americans don’t know him — or the extreme, tried-and-failed policies he’d bring with him to a Romney administration. As Floridians, it’s our job to share what we know about Marco Rubio with the rest of Americans.”

It’s a sign that the Obama campaign is trembling with the desire to assassinate the character and reputation of whoever Romney picks as a running mate.

Each email asks for negative testimonials of the potential GOP nominees from voters in their home states and each one the Obama campaign sent out is a sign of just how fearful the President’s team is of the daunting reelection effort before them.  They are signs of just how concerned the Obama campaign is about the strength of support they can count on from their own base, a portion of the electorate that should be more than willing to reelect the President but seems to be dwindling in size and losing enthusiasm for the President.

This tactic also signals the desperate atmosphere that surrounds the President’s reelection effort.  It is an atmosphere that finds a a helpless Obama campaign having to resort to negative attacks.  The lack of meaningful successes in the Obama record is forcing the Obama-Biden ticket to double down on their 3-D strategy —— distract, defame, and distort.  It’s a strategy based on the need to distract from the issues and the Obama record, and  to defame their opponents and distort their records.   In this case they don’t yet quite know which person to apply that 3-D strategy to as it applies to Romneys running mate, but they can’t wait to get started.  And the truth is that no matter who Romney picks as his running mate, President Obama will do all he can to destroy them personally and politically.  No matter who Romney picks, they will be palinized.

Even if Mitt Romney picked a Mother Teresa-like figure as his running mate, Democrats would set course to burn that person at the stake.  I could see the email to voters of the state that running mate came from;

Dear Voter;

What would you say if I told you Mitt Romney is choosing Mother Teresa for the VP slot on his GOP ticket?

It’s time to start thinking about it.

Mother Teresa is on Romney’s VP short list and she has been for some time. This week her name crept back into the news, and with Romney expected to announce any day now, Catholics have a job to do.

Most Americans don’t know the truth about Mother Teresa. If and when Romney selects her, those who know her best — and that’s us — need to be able to share the truth about Mother Teresa from the get-go.

We must make sure that they understand that Mother Teresa has spent her life exploiting the sick and the ill in an attempt to gain fame and become a candidate for sainthood.  We must make sure that all Americans know the true Mother Teresa, the deceptive right wing religious fanatic who refuses to accept the concept of separation of church and state and who uses the underprivileged and the most helpless in our society for personal gain.

Share what you think Americans need to know about Mother Teresa, and why a Romney-Mother Teresa administration would be a giant step back for middle-class families.

 Your feedback will help hold Mother Teresa accountable on the campaign trail, if it should come to that.

As you know, there’s no lack of material to work with here. Right now, it’s our responsibility to make sure others know what they’d be getting into, too.

Add your voice to the conversation today:

http://nj.barackobama.com/Your-Thoughts-on-Mother Teresa

 Thanks in advance for sharing your thoughts,

~Team Obama

Bookmark and Share

Democrats Give the Economy and the American People the Finger

For Democrats Bad Politics Trumps Good Policy As They Struggle To Hold On To Power

Bookmark and Share  On Wednesday, by a vote of 256-171, the Republican led House of Representatives approved extending the so-called Bush-era tax cuts for another year.  That vote came a month after the liberal led U.S. Senate passed President Obama’s proposal to deny extending those tax cuts to those who make more than $250,00. a year.   The scenario has assured us that the stage is set for Democrats to play out a  liberal theme that is critical to their reelection strategy —– class warfare.   These political circumstances made the Republicans vote to extend the tax cuts to all, a courageous and principled stand.  Had the G.O.P. agreed with the liberal proposal to extend the cuts for some but not for others, they might have denied the President and his Party the rhetorical fuel behind his class warfare strategy.  But rather than succumb to electoral politics, Republicans decided to give the economy and the American people a hand and remained true to the mission of getting our economy on track while knowing full well that they would be  giving the left ability to exploit the G.O.P.’s position.

On the flip-side, Democrats had the opportunity to put good policy ahead of partisan politics but decided instead to put their reelection hopes ahead of the American people’s hope for a more stable economy and a brighter future.   That decision  amounted to the left giving the economy and the American the finger.

To understand how the liberal legislative initiatIve to deny a full extension of the tax cuts is driven more by a Democratic desire to create a reelection strategy than to enact actual solutions that will improve our economy, one must accept the truth about our current economic circumstances, our nation’s existing tax structure, and they must accept the findings of history.

First, it must be understood that in 2010, when the Bush tax cuts were first set to expire , President Obama agreed that the nearly stagnant economy which was experiencing a dismal growth rate of just 2.3%, could not withstand the burdens of an increase in taxes.  He and his Party agreed that any higher tax burden would have a debilitating effect on the already troubled economy.  Yet over a year later, even though our economic growth rate is even worse than it was in 2010, Democrats are suddenly trying to argue that our now even weaker economy can withstand the burdens of an increase taxes.

Rather than explaining this change of mind with any substance to support the new direction, President Obama has quite creatively interjected Bill Clinton into the election by trying to have us believe that our current economy can withstand the same tax rates that it had when Bill Clinton controlled the White House.   The problem with that suggestion is that when Bill Clinton was President, the economy was booming, thanks in large part to ridiculously rapid growth in the dot com industry and the unsustainable growth of an emerging housing bubble which has since burst and ushered in the Great Recession we are still coping with.  Now faced with that recession, the economy is not growing at rate that is fast enough to allow taxpayers to properly absorb the additional impact of any increased tax burden.

However the President and the majority of those in his Party seem unwilling to acknowledge those facts.  In order to latch on to their electoral strategy of class warfare, Democrats are unwilling to acknowledge any of the facts which contradict the rationale behind raising taxes during this economic crisis.  Instead, they choose to pursue to divide Americans by pitting those who are struggling against those who are comfortable through the use of leftwing rhetoric intended to make some resent others.  And while the rhetoric behind the left’s strategy is rich, the reality is that the rich already pay more than their so-called fair share.  While the average tax rate for those who are considered wealthy is 30 percent, it is 15 percent for the middle class.   But if that wasn’t enough to dispel the foundations of liberal mythology, the IRS confirms that the top 1 percent of income earners pay 40 percent of all federal income taxes, while the top 5 percent  pay 60 percent and the wealthiest 10 percent in America pay 70 percent of the entire federal tax burden. America’s richest 10 percent happen tp pay a share of the tax burden that is far greater than what the same top 10 percent pay in many developed countries, such as Canada, the U.K., and even in those models of European socialism, France, and Germany.   Yet liberals argue that this is still enough.

These are facts which seem to have been deleted from  liberal talking point memos.

Also ignored ignored by the left is that 47 percent of the U.S. population pays no federal income tax at all.  And if that was not enough, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation, more than half of those filing a return receive more cash from the IRS than they pay in income taxes and payroll taxes combined.

So what exactly is the left and President Obama talking about when they demand that the rich pay their fair share when the statistic beg the question —– who really needs to pay their fair share?

As if this was not enough, the glaring lack of logic behind the left’s current position on the Bush tax cuts becomes even more pronounced when one considers the history of tax cuts and the economy.

In the 1920’s, President Warren G. Harding launched an economic boom after he initiated a series of tax cuts that led to an influx of private sector investments.  Of course Harding did two things at the same, something which seems impossible for today’s political class to do.  In addition to cutting taxes, President Harding adopted disciplined spending reductions.    Those reductions made him the only postwar President to reduce federal spending to a point that was below prewar levels and when all was said and done Harding’s tax cuts resulted in a more than 61%  increase of  federal revenues that went from $719 million in 1921, to $1164 million in 1928.

In the 1960’s the Kennedy tax cuts  which were not enacted until 1964, more than a year after his assassination, reduced the top marginal rate from an absurd 91% to a somewhat less absurd 70%.  This took federal revenues from $301.19 billion in 1965, to $463.84 billion in 1969 and it led to a boost in private sector investment in the free market that allowed businesses to grow, Americans to find jobs, and our economy to grow.  Quite interestingly, when proposing his cuts,  President Kennedy stated the following;

“Our true choice is not between tax reduction, on the one hand, and the avoidance of large Federal deficits on the other. It is increasingly clear that no matter what Party is in power, so long as our national security needs keep rising, an economy hampered by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenues to balance our budget just as it will never produce enough jobs or enough profits…  In short, it is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now.”

Such thinking is a far cry from that of the incumbent President.

More than two decades later Ronald Reagan applied that same Kennedy philosophy by adopting  the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 and the Tax Reform Act of 1986.  In 1981 Reagan’s initiative phased-in a 23% cut in individual tax rates and dropped the top rate from 70% to 50%.  In ’86 his cuts took the top marginal rate from 50 to 28 percent.  Between those tax reductions and a steady stream of deregulation, Reagan avoided America’s following of Western Europe into the welfare-state decline that we find ourselves confronting today under President Obama.  Reagan’s economic policies also spurred economic growth, increased private sector investment, created jobs growth, stemmed the rapid pace at which the government was growing prior to his taking office and brought our nation out from under the Days of Malaise delivered to us under President Jimmy Carter.

The most recent major tax cuts were the Bush era reduction which included three major tax cuts.  The 2001 tax cut which we are now debating the extension of, created a new 10% individual tax rate and phased in the lowering of individual tax rates. It also phased in an increase in the child tax credit, marriage penalty relief provisions, an increase of the estate tax exemption, an increase in the IRA contribution limit, and the repeal of limits on itemized deductions and personal exemptions. The 2002 tax cut was chiefly aimed at business, creating 30% expensing for certain capital asset purchases, and increasing the carryback of net operating losses to 5 years. In 2003 additional Bush tax cuts lowered
the top individual income tax rate on dividends and capital gains and accelerated most of the phased-in provisions of the 2001 tax cut.   The results of the 2001 cuts quickly stimulated the economy out of the recession we were in ans spurred on the moderate growth of 2002 and 2003.   As a result of all three Bush tax cuts, until the housing and banking crises which ushered in the arrival of the recession in December 2007, millions of families and businesses thrived, at least in part because of the lower tax burden.

All of this historical evidence contradicts the current course being proposed by President Obama and his Party who today are trying to convince us that raising taxes will achieve the same positive results which cutting taxes have achieved.

It is all a part of the liberal political strategy that Democrats are employing in order to maintain control of government.  By refusing to accept a full extension of the Bush era tax cuts, President Obama is assuring himself and his Party of the perfect opportunity to wage a reelection campaign that will be based on the only shred of hope they have left.  The hope that President Obama and his Party can win or maintain some power by dividing Americans through class warfare.

For Democrats, as was proven in the 2010 midterm elections, it is clear that they can not run on their record.  A President’s reelection and often the fate of his Party, is always a referendum on their current term in office, a fact which is responsible for the perpetual state of fear that is driving the class warfare strategy of President Obama and his liberal colleagues in Congress.  What else can they run on?

Peace in the Middle East?

I think not.

Gay marriage?

Maybe at the next Gay Pride Festival in New York or California but no one is contesting the Electoral College votes in those states.

Can the left campaign on Obamacare?

They will try to, but with approval ratings that are lower than the President’s, Obamacare is not exactly the winning issue for Democrats and they know it.

Can Democrats and the President run on their record?

Hardly.

According to the numbers, our nation is teetering upon a double dip-recession or  perhaps even that very same depression which President Obama contends his policies averted.  The record shows that the national unemployment rate is well above 8.0% for the 40th consecutive week.  Contrast that with George W. Bush whose highest monthly average unemployment number prior to the late 2008 financial crisis was 6.3 percent and who’s overall monthly average unemployment rate over his two terms was 5.3 percent.

Making matters worse, the record of President Obama and Democrats shows that when it comes to Hispanics, the unemployment rate is 11%, and for African-Americans it is 14.4%, a number  that is actually good when you consider that the unemployment rate for African-American youth stands at 50%.   Even more disturbing is that when you add up all those in the population who have given up and dropped out of the workforce, and are not being counted by the federal government anymore, the real unemployment rate is in excess of 14.9%.  In just one month alone an unprecedented record 1.2 millionpeople dropped out of the labor force.

This is not a record to run on.  It is a record to run from, and with the help of a class warfare strategy, liberals hope they can distract Americans from that record and avoid being held accountable to it.

It is a Hail Mary Pass campaign strategy that the  President and his Party must turn to as a last resort to.

For Democrats the hope is that the average American is so beaten down that they are willing to make the most successful among us a scapegoat for their frustrations.  Democrats have turned that hope in to a political strategy, a divide and conquer strategy which President Obama has incorporated into his reelection by proposing to raise taxes on those who create jobs and by using catch phrases such as “pay their fair share” and “they didn’t build that”.  It is a strategy that avoids any attempt to appeal to common sense and decency and is instead designed to appeal to the less noble side of humanity, the side that wallows in the ugly and unproductive depths of greed and envy.  It is also a strategy that tries to denies the truth and avoid reality.

More than two decades ago, Ronald Reagan spoke of America as a shining city on a hill.  24 years later, Barack Obama has taken that shining city and placed it precariously on the edge of a cliff that is being quickly eroded by a steady flow high unemployment, out-of-control government spending, continued economic uncertainty, and excessive taxation.   This surge of damaging economic factors is eating away at our economic foundation as steadily as the circulating ground waters that dissolve rock and earth to create massive sinkholes, and in this case that sinkhole will reveal itself in the form of a double-dip recession and the possibly entry of our nation in to the next Great Depression.

But despite the undeniably obvious warning signs, Democrats have made a conscious decision to forego the implementation of solutions  in order to develop a deceptive, last ditch, reelection strategy.  Instead of following historically proven solutions to our problems, President Obama and his Party have decided to aid the corrosive flow of debilitating forces that are creating this pending economic sink hole by rejecting solutions in favor of a reelection strategy that is based on a 3D liberal approach to politics that involves distracting voters from the record that liberals have established, distorting the record of their opposition, and dividing Americans by pitting them against one another.

If this strategy will work has yet to be seen but for it to be successful, the American people will have to be willing to turn down the hand that Republicans are offering them in favor of the finger that the left is giving them when they think voters are not paying attention..

Bookmark and Share

%d bloggers like this: