Romney needs to call Obama’s Bluffet….

 

We know that the Bluffet, sorry Buffet, rule is a motif for President’s class warfare, and more warning shots will be fired when Congress returns today from a two-week recess to a test vote on the rule, which would impose a minimum 30 percent tax rate on income over $1 million. The Bluffett tax targets wealthier Americans’ investments rather than salaries.

Today is the day when this issue of class warfare kicks off for November in earnest, now that we know it will be Romney for the GOP and Congress gets to have a say on the matter.

President Obama, who pays less tax than HIS secretary (he filed tax returns showing he paid an effective tax rate of 20.5 percent on income of about $800,000 in 2011) says the government needs the revenue from the Bluffett rule, estimated at $47 billion over 10 years, to cover “a broad range of goals.” He also says “This is not just about fairness.” Well, he got that right, it is very unfair, but not in the simplistic moralistic way he is peddling.

He says “This is also about growth. It’s about being able to make the investments we need to strengthen our economy and create jobs. And it’s about whether we as a country are willing to pay for those investments.” In other words, robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Fact is, do we really need government to do the investing, and where does the investment go? Into government black holes and deep pockets, rather than into businesses which create wealth. The Bluffet tax would not create wealth, it would merely enhance dependency. We would see a better rate of return on the $47 billion in business investment by the wealthy than we would from government. That is an awful lot of liquidity to take out of the markets, and I don’t see too many secretaries taking up the slack.

Of course, keeper of the Treasury keys Tim Geithner was out pushing the rule on Sunday, “Just because Republicans oppose this does not mean it’s not the right thing to do and not the right thing to push for,” he told NBC’s “Meet the Press” program. Double negatives aside, we can say that just because Democrats think it is the right thing to do doesn’t mean it even begins to make sense.

If we look at the paying side of this, we see the rich targeted for this end up paying more. Simple. But for what are they paying? Increased revenue means increased expenditure, and so the things for government to spend on expands to meet the expanded revenue. More programs, more dependency and less reward for effort. What does the payer get in return? They get little benefit, and the wealthier they are the less they need what they are paying for.

Which means the sole purpose of the Bluffet rule is twofold, increased state powers and redistribution of wealth. Conservatives who attack Romney or the rich for their wealth are playing with the same deck as Obama.

Obama says, “If you make more than $1 million every year, you should pay at least the same percentage of your income in taxes as middle-class families do… Most Americans support this idea. We just need some Republican politicians to get on board with where the country is.” Of course, Obama doesn’t have to worry too much about his investments, because after leaving office, which cannot come soon enough, he will make a ton of cash for the remainder of his days. He doesn’t have too much to worry about…The rest of us do.

A Two Horse Race

Bookmark and ShareWith the 3rd major Republican primary debate in the books there are 2 candidates whom have begun to distance themselves from the pack. Mitt Romney looked and sounded presidential as he took shots from and at the man who has unseated him as the early polling frontrunner, Texas governor Rick Perry. Perry was the self described ‘pinata’ as he wore the target as the newest candidate and he did not disappoint, handling well the shots coming at him as well as throwing some shots towards his main opponent.

There were other candidates on the stage but the debate quickly became the Romney/Perry show.

Rick Santorum didn’t do anything to hurt himself but certainly didn’t help himself either. He looked as if he were either miffed that the debate was becoming about the 2 top candidates or that he had just sucked on a lemon. Newt, always the smartest guy in the room, had some good answers but again went after the record of the media instead of the records of his opponents. Michelle Bachmann didn’t have the opportunity that she did in the first two debates to showcase her TEA party credentials and didn’t do anything to stand out. She has simply been overshadowed by the entrance of Perry. Herman Cain stuck to his buisness leader guns but is quickly fading away as he fails to have the power or ability to shine above the other candidates. Jon Huntsman was doing a good job until he got led into his global warming stance which is a quick turn off for most GOP primary voters. Ron Paul did something he normally shy’s away from and took some shots at fellow Texan Perry but again fell prey to his lack of communication skills and undoubtedly hurt the small amount of momentum he gained in Iowa.

In my opinion Romney looked more presidential, whatever that means, and remained calm and well spoken. Romney deserves the win in the 1st head to head showdown between himself and Rick Perry. Perry handled the expected barrage of shots across his bow from his opponents and came out strong in the beginning. As the debate went on Perry seemed to fade and Romney still stood out. Perry also made some bulletin board comments that his opponents, and especially liberals, will pin up and go after every time he speaks. For that he gets the 2nd place finish. The polls in the next week will be interesting. Will Perry hold onto his entering momentum….or will Romney have gained back the spot he has held since the beginning?

It would be hard pressed for any conservative who is voting Republican to deny that after this debate there are 2 candidates that distanced themselves from the rest. Mitt Romney and Rick Perry.

Bookmark and Share

Possible Third Party Candidacy Could Make Palin the Perot of 2012

Bookmark and ShareIf you haven’t caught on yet, Sarah Palin marches to the beat of a different drummer. And while she is committed to the principles of the Republican Party, she is not totally committee to the Republican Party. For her, when it comes to Political loyalty, it stops when her principles are lost in it. That is after all how she went from being the Mayor of Wasilla, to becoming Governor of Alaska and even becoming the 2008 Republican nominee. This is a woman who spotted corruption in Alaska after being appointed to the position of Oil Commissioner. She then rooted out the corruption and when it got to the point where she saw the hands of Alaska’s Governor involved in it, she resigned her post and opposed him in the Republican primary for Governor. This despite the fact that the Governor she challenged was the same man who appointed her to her position.

This loyalty to principles rather than politics was in large part the reason she was selected by John McCain to be his vice presidential running mate and despite what some may think, it is the same type of loyalty that she maintains today. This is why Sarah Palin opposed so many of the Party establishment’s candidates in 2010, by supporting their challengers in Republican primaries. Sarah Palin is not one who wishes to be defined by her Party, she prefers to define it. In 2010 she helped to do so by rallying TEA activists to the side of insurgent candidates. In 2012 she could do the same thing. Or she could try to rally them behind herself in a bid for the Republican nomination.

But like many of those who consider themselves to be TEA movement activists, Sarah Palin remains reluctant about the politics that elected Republicans will play in their new roles of power. Like many in the TEA Party, Palin is hoping that the G.O.P. holds firm in opposition to the Obama agenda and on a return to states rights, fiscal responsibility, limited government and a focus on the Constitution. Sarah is watching and waiting to see what they do. She is also watching and waiting to see who will run for the Republican presidential nomination and what each one of them will say. This is perhaps one of the reasons why she is coy about being a candidate for the Republican nomination herself.

If the Republican controlled House fails to demonstrate to the voters who put them in to power, that they are true to their words, many of those voters will turn their back on the G.O.P. as quickly as they did with Democrats prior to the 2010 midterms. If that happens, Palin will have a small window of opportunity to do one of three things. She could forego a run for President and simply continue to be an advocate for the candidates she supports and a cheerleader in the TEA movement. She could run for the Republican presidential nomination and try to convince Republican voters that she is the outsider who could bring conservative principles back to the Party. Or she could simply say the hell with the Party and run as an Independent.

Either one of the latter two are a big risk. But the biggest risk of all would be to run for the Republican presidential nomination. While Palin is popular, to many she has become a known quantity that they believe is too erratic and too controversial. Even among Republicans, her favorable to unfavorable numbers are poor. In addition to that, the G.O.P. presidential field is going to be a crowded one and an expensive one. Between Mitt Romney and Haley Barbour alone we are talking about possibly well over one hundred million dollars. Last time around, Romney spent $70 million of his own money and more on top of that with contributions. Then throw in the likes of Tim Pawlenty, Rick Santorum, Ron Paul, and possibly Mitch Daniels and what you have is a costly and bloody battle that becomes hard for anyone to get their message out in.

For these reasons, I believe Sarah Palin can bide her time and see where all the chips fall before she commits to anything.

If the G.O.P. fails to live up to their promises and voters once again become disappointed in them, would it be in Sarah Palin’s best interest to spend upwards of $50 or $60 million to try to win a nomination of a tarnished Party that she spends a year tying herself closer to? While I do not doubt that Sarah could hold her own in the primaries, I am not confident in her being able to actually win the nomination. And if she doesn’t win, does anyone think the winner will tap her to be their running mate and run for Vice President a second time? I doubt even Sarah would accept such an offer herself.

Ultimately, Sarah Palin is probably going to be wise to lay back and see how the G.O.P. presidential field shapes up. Then after taking in to account all the variables, determine if the field has an opening in it that she can fill and decide if she really wants to link herself further to the Republican Party.

If the G.O.P. falls short of their promises, all things considered, Palin might be better off to continue marching to a different drummer by running as a well-financedIndependent candidate for President. She would start off with a very energized TEA Party base, a base that can get her name on the ballot in all 50 states. And then she can deliver a Reaganesque message about her not leaving the Party, but by abandoning its principles, the Party left her and millions of other Americans.

A public decision to run as an independent could probably come as late as March of 2012, when there may very well be a Republican coming close to getting the nomination, if they haven’t already. Based upon who that nominee is, Palin could fine tune the themes of her own campaign and pick up and run with all the issues that the Republican nominee fails to run with. Of course if this were to happen, President Obama would win reelection. If Palin pursued such a course, she would do just what Ross Perot did to George H. W. Bush in 1992. Perot’s third Party candidacy was one of the most successful of its kinds ever mounted and its success was responsible for electing Bill Clinton President,

In that 1992 election, President Clinton received 44,909,806 votes (43.0%), G.H.W. Bush received 39,104,550 votes (37.5%), and Ross Perot collected 19,743,821 (18.9%) of the vote.

It is with great clarity that we see how Ross Perot took enough votes away from President George H. W. Bush to allow Bill Clinton to defeat him.

Ross Perot’s Reform Party successfully elected Bill Clinton the President of the United States, and back then, that Reform Party was at most, as large as the TEA Party is now. While the TEA Party movement rose form the streets, The 1992 Reform Party rose from the mind of a wacky millionaire and revolved around him. Without Ross, there was no Party.

That is not the case with the TEA Party. Though it is a large and active movement which does not have any one leader representing them, they could easily get behind one person who runs a campaign that represents their ideals. As a so-called darling of the TEA Party, Sarah Palin could quite easily be that one person. The question becomes, would she do so as a Republican who keeps them in the G.O.P. or will she do so as an Independent, third Party candidate who siphons them away from the G.O.P.?

If Palin ran for the Republican nomination, she could easily be overtaken in what will be a large and aggressive field. And if in the end, she lost the nomination, she will not have the resources and time left to mount a meaningful third Party candidacy. This would leave her a beaten, wounded, defeated candidate, without the same stature and platform that she had prior to entering the race.

If Palin ran as a Third Party candidate, she would spend much of her money on just insuring that she gets on the ballot in all 50 states by gathering all the right signatures in all the right ways. But with the strong grassroots of the TEA Party movement behind her, this will be easier for her than it was for Perot. And as a third Party candidate, she will be able to spend more time directing her campaign to the national electorate rather than just the Republican voters. This will enable her to win over a significant number of voters who will commit to her candidacy early. Many of them will be Republicans, even more of them will be TEA movement members and Republicans who feel disenfranchised by a Party that they believe left them. The area where Palin will have the toughest time is with Independent voters. Aside from Democrats, this is where her numbers are weakest. But a carefully crafted campaign and softening of her image could force them to give her a second look, especially since she would be representing no political Party, something that most Independents find very attractive.

A third Party candidacy would not be likely to get Sarah Palin to the White House. But her chances of doing that as the Republican candidate are actually only slightly better. But by running as a third Party candidate, Palin is insuring that she is in the game until Election Day and that she has a place in all the presidential debates. This insures her ability to shape the debate and force the Republican candidate to the right, where they should be. In fact, if Sarah Palin were to announce a third Party candidacy early enough in the primary season, that could wind up being the catalyst for the creation of a strong, solid, conservative in the Republican primary, as opposed to her having a diluting effect by splitting the conservative vote within the Republican primary.

In some ways, a third Party candidacy by Sarah Palin could do some good for the Party. It would force them to really reaffirm whether or not they are the Party of Reagan or Rockefeller. It would force them to stick to their guns instead of abandoning ship. Of course it would also help Barrack Obama get reelected.

It Is for this reason that Republicans must treat Sarah Palin with kid gloves. While she may be a lighting rod ridiculed by the left, she is also someone who helps Republicans with the very base that abandoned the G.O.P. in previous years. And if they want to win the presidency in 2012, they can’t afford to have that base wander off the path or stay at home again. The smart candidate for the Republicanpresidential nominee will try to out Palin, Palin early. While Mitt Romney has been keeping the TEA party at arms length, others like Pawlenty are embracing them. Possible presidential contender, Governor Rick Perry of Texas, has been shaping a very TEA Party-like agenda for his state. Strategies like this could pay off big. For the right candidate, it could help make them a Palin-like alternative to Sarah, without carrying any of the baggage that Palin has been saddled with.

In the end, Palin has many options available to her but those Republicans who want tomake a serious run for Presidenthave little choicebut to get Sarah Palin on their side.

Bookmark and Share
%d bloggers like this: