Romney Ad Strikes the Right Chords on the Obama Economy

¬† Bookmark and Share¬†The Romney campaign’s latest ad entitled ‘Many Americans”¬†is rather simple but in its simplicity lies the¬†degree of persuasiveness that could sway the very independent swing¬†voters from¬†in the very swing states that Mitt¬†Romney needs to win in if¬† he intends to be elected president. (see video below this post)

In the less than 30 second commercial spot,  a tieless Romney casually looks into the camera and in a very natural and convincing manner states;

‚ÄúToo many Americans today are struggling‚ÄĒliving paycheck to paycheck. More Americans live in poverty than when President Obama took office. We should measure our compassion by how many of our fellow Americans are able to get good paying jobs, not by how many are on welfare. My economic plan will get America back to work and strengthen the middle class. I‚Äôm Mitt Romney. I approve this message because we can‚Äôt afford another four years like the last four years.‚ÄĚ

The ad offers different things to different people.  Romney supporters will be glad to see and hear their candidate speak what they believe to be the truth.  Obama supporters who live in a state of perpetual denial will walk away from the ad believing that it was a bunch of lies.  So for the people on both  sides, the ad will have little effect.  But this commercial will have a positive impact on the increasingly small group of undecided independent voters in the middle.

With¬†the use of focus group tested keywords¬†and phrases such as¬†“living paycheck to paycheck”,”welfare”,¬†and “poverty”,¬† Romney subtly¬†bonds with these undecided voters who are complaining about and struggling with their own attempts to live paycheck to paycheck.¬† He is also capturing their attention by subtly¬†reinforcing the quiet fears of these voters who really do not want to believe that we must simply accept the current economic condition of our country as the status quo.¬† Romney’s words connect with voters who are willing to accept the fact that increased historic levels of debt, the longest sustained period of inordinately¬†high unemployment, and the weakest¬†economic recovery in history are not is can not be¬†accepted by continuing with the economic policies which are sustaining such conditions.

Then with words like “compassion”, and phrases like ¬†“get America back to work”, and “strengthen the middle class”,¬†Romney offers a narrative to¬†his candidacy that connects his campaign to all that¬†most undecided voters want to hear.¬† They want to hear that Mitt Romney has a plan that is better than President Obama’s.¬† They want to hear¬† about “good paying jobs”,¬†and about a leader who understands that fiscal responsibility is the only way to lead our nation back to a decent level of sustainable prosperity.¬†¬†And that is exactly what those voters hear in this latest Romney ad.

Bookmark and Share

Advertisements

Obama’s Race Based Hate Speech Isn’t Really News

¬† Bookmark and Share¬† As the sun set on our nation last night, an exclusive video unearthed by Daily Caller Editor-In-Chief Tucker Carlson was aired on Fox News Channel‚Äôs “Hannity”.¬† It was a video of a speech being delivered by then Senator Barack Obama back in 2007.¬† In it, Senator Obama who was campaigning in a tough race against Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination, addresses a predominantly African-American audience which he tries to fire up by essentially telling them that the federal government hates black people.¬† Of course the President didn’t use those exact words.¬†¬†Instead he painted a picture of a federal government that doesn’t care¬†as much about minorities as it does for other people.

The President made his charge in this speech by trying to claim that that the federal government is unwilling to help minorities who are victims of disasters such as those in New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina back in 2005 (see video of the remarks below).

And while he did not exactly say that the federal government is¬† a¬†bigoted¬†extension of the white man, he tried to explain that survivors of Sept. 11 and Hurricane Andrew received generous amounts¬†of aid while residents of majority-black New¬† Orleans did not because according to him, the federal government considers those victims in Florida and New York to be ‚Äúpart of the American¬† family” but it does not considers the minorities¬†of New Orleans to be “family”.

He reached that conclusion by falsely stating that the federal government refused to issue the same fund-matching waiver to the mostly minority communities torn apart by Katrina Katrina that were offered to more affluent and caucasian communities such as the one in Manhattan which was destroyed during the attacks of 9/11 on the Twin Towers.  In addition to being irresponsibly inflammatory, the charge was also false.  As it turns out, the federal government did issue the same fund-matching waiver to Katrina-torn regions that it offered to the victims of other disasters throughout the nation.

As seen in the clip below, Tucker Carlson sums¬†the video up¬†probably better than anyone else.¬† According to him, Obama’s words were “shocking”, “divisive”, “demagogic”, and “untrue”.

Since the initial reporting of the story, conservative activists have been a buzz. For some, like Tucker Carlson, the story has the makings of that oft mentioned ‚ÄúOctober surprise‚ÄĚ that every campaign hopes to avoid but prays to see their rival‚Äôs campaign have to figure out how to recover from.¬† The problem is that this conservative activist doesn‚Äôt see it that way.¬† Unfortunately, I don‚Äôt believe this speech will have any impact on the election.

While the video most certainly shows the soon to be¬†President lying and while it also reveals him to be¬†speaking in what is described as a highly ‚Äúurbanized African-American accent‚Ä̬†which is undeniably uncharacteristic of Barack Obama, what the video does not do is present anything new to us.

We have already seen President Obama launch into his chameleon-like ethnic accents that are¬†designed to endear him to the audiences he addresses.¬† It is practically a standard operating procedure for the Obama-Biden campaign.¬† It was perhaps best displayed back in August when Vice President Biden stood before another predominantly black audience in Danville, Va. and shouted with an exaggerated Southern drawl… “They’re going to put y’all back in chains.”

This latest Obama video also does not make news by revealing to us that President Obama is a liar.  Many of us already know that President Obama lies. We know that he lies straight to our faces.  Recent events in Benghazi have made that more than obvious.

Furthermore; we¬† also know by now that President Obama is anything but a uniter.¬† We have long understood that this President has built his entire political career on a divide and conquer strategy.¬† And it has long been understood that this President’s entire reelection effort is based on ¬†a class warfare strategy designed to pit some against others.

If there is anything worth reporting here it is that Mitt Romney raised this very issue back in August while speaking at a rally in Chillicothe, Ohio.  It was there that Romney first told us the following;

‚ÄúOver the last four years, this president has pushed Republicans and Democrats about as far apart as they can go. And now he and his allies are pushing us all even further apart by dividing us into groups. He demonizes some. He panders to others,‚ÄĚ Romney said. ‚ÄúHis campaign strategy is to smash America apart and then try to cobble together 51% of the pieces.‚ÄĚ

He then added;

‚ÄúMr. President, take your campaign of division and anger and hate back to Chicago, and let us get about rebuilding and reuniting America.‚ÄĚ

So I repeat… President Obama’s hate filled, lies in this speech are nothing new and as such, nothing new will come from this latest example of his deceitful, race baiting tactics and divisive political tendencies.¬† The truth is that the 47% of the electorate that opposes Barack Obama knew this about¬†him long ago.¬† So this video will not change their votes.¬†¬† The other 47% knows Obama is a divisive liar but they refuse to admit it.¬† So those Obama supporters will also not be changing their vote because of this video.

As for the remaining 6% who describe themselves as undecided, they will be seeing this video through the¬†filter of a¬† primarily pro-Obama, biased¬†media that will excuse the President’s¬†comments away.¬† As they get fed the liberal spin on the President remarks, these six percent who claim to be¬†undecided but whom I see as simply slow, dazed, and confused , will accept the liberal narrative given to them.¬† As such, most of these “indecisive” voters will never realize how much the President’s past words undermine¬†his attempts to portray himself as a unifying¬†force in American politics.¬† Because of the media’s biases, this swayable six percent of the electorate will probably never allow themselves to accept the fact that President Obama is playing us¬†all for fools.¬† They should, but they probably won’t.

Bookmark and Share

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

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

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

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

According to the C.B.O. revenue increases built into in the Obamacare law would essentially lead to a trillion dollars¬†in higher taxes.¬† These taxes include¬†revenues from Obamacare-driven¬†individual¬†and employer mandates, combined with a so-called “Cadillac tax” on high-cost benefits and additional taxes on¬†drugmakers, medical device manufacturers and insurers.¬†¬† All of which in addition to raising medical costs will also¬†place direct¬†and indirect tax increases¬†on middle class taxpayers and their families.¬† The report also concludes that this would all result in¬† a net increase in federal budget deficits of $109 billion over the 2013‚Äď2022 period.

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

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

Bookmark and Share

Romney‚Äôs Rosy But Bumpy Road To Victory

   Bookmark and Share  According to most of the latest data made available to the public through the mainstream media, there is no denying that President Obama holds an upper hand in his reelection effort. In fact, according to most pundits, pollsters, and network political prognosticators, President Obama is almost certain to be reelected.  However, given a number of factors including the depth and duration of our dire economic condition, a proliferation of polls that are based on a 2008 voter turnout model which overestimates the enthusiasm that exists for President Obama in 2012, and a growing trend toward Mitt Romney among the critical independent voting bloc , I am not convinced that this election can be called for President Obama just yet.

It’s The Economy Stupid! Maybe?

As for the economy, now over 5 years since the recession began, over 25 million Americans remain unemployed or underemployed  and despite approximately $800 billion in Obama deficit spending meant to stimulate the economy, the government’s official but undercounted unemployment rate remains above 8.0%  for 43 consecutive months.  And at the same time, all other economic indicators remain so sluggish or stagnant that it is clear that our  job growth and overall economic growth fails to even keep pace with the existing population growth rate.  Yet regardless of these glaring facts, polls would have us believe that a majority of Americans do not hold this worst economy since the Great Depression against President  Obama.  It is a conclusion which I find hard to fathom.  Especially given that if reelected to another term, the only solution President Obama seems to be offering is more of the very same Keynesian, deficit spending mentality which has sustained and prolonged the worst economic recovery in American history.  Still though,  even with history as a guide, I can not state for sure that a majority of Americans will blame the poor economy on the President.  During the Great Depression, voters did not blame FDR for the very slow recovery he commanded over, but in 1980 angry voters did hold Jimmy Carter responsible for inflation, stagflation, unemployment, and the misery index which he presided over.

The optimist in me wants to believe that most Americans do believe that President Obama should be¬†held accountable for his failing economic policies which¬†seem to lack the ability to¬†turn the economy around.¬† However, the pessimist in me fears that the socialist tendencies promoted for generations through FDR‚Äôs New Deal, LBJ‚Äôs Great Society, and now BHO‚Äôs blatant focus on the redistribution of wealth, have finally been accepted by a majority of Americans as the new norm… a norm that has¬†a majority of¬†Americans proudly dependent upon government.¬† It is a mentality demonstrated in the clip below.

If a majority of voters agree with that woman, then Barack Obama will be a two term President.  But I am not yet ready to believe that the views held by the slave to government in that video clip are the views held by most respectable and  learned American voters.

Slanted Polls and the Blatant Media Bias

The second area of doubt that I have regarding the certainty of a successful reelection effort by President Obama is based upon the polls and the interpretations of those polls being offered to voters by the mainstream media.

Now to be clear, I am convinced that most reputable polling outfits want to be accurate in their polls.  Although the current regime in Washington, D.C. finds the free market to be an enemy of the people, the free market still drives entrepreneurs, even the political entrepreneur who wishes to make a buck by gauging the sentiments of voters.  That stated, it behooves pollsters who want to be in demand in the future to get things right in the 2012 election.  So I cannot in good conscience totally discount all the current polls that are out there.  But I can and do disagree with the decision by most pollsters to rely on the 2008 turnout model which tends to overstate the strength of President Obama’s support.

I am of the opinion that in 2012, a more accurate turnout model to base this election on is the turnout seen in 2010.  I see little reason to believe that the massive anti-Obama sentiment which existed in the 2010 midterm elections does not continue to exist in 2012.  In my view even those voters who are not quite excited by Mitt Romney will still be coming out to cast their ballot for Mitt if for no other reason than to vote against President Obama.

Independent Voters

Combine those two factors with the lack of appropriate reporting regarding the fact that the all important independent vote seems to be breaking for Mitt Romney by as much as 14 to 20 percent and I believe that the Romney-Ryan ticket is on the verge of establishing an Election Day lead over  the Obama-Biden ticket.

While an undeniably polarized electorate consisting of the 94% of voters who are firmly planted on one side of the political and ideological spectrum or the other make it certain that states like California and New York will be voting for Obama while states like Missouri and Texas will be going for Romney, the six percent of the undecided independent voters in the middle will make all the difference in the remaining states that are toss-ups… particularly Colorado, Florida, Iowa, New Hamphire, Nevada, and Virginia.¬† If this pro-Romney trend among independent voters continues, and I believe it will, each of those states will cast their lot with the Romney-Ryan ticket.

The Results

I cautiously arrive at that conclusion through a combination of¬†factors that include¬†polling, reporting, and my own judgments and political instincts regarding¬†all the available data that could and should be¬†reasonably factored in the electoral equation.¬† At the moment¬†though, even my own unique formula finds Mitt Romney at a disadvantage.¬†¬† Using the Real Clear Politics average of polls in six of the seven current toss ups states, as a rule of thumb, I have adjusted for the overestimated Democrat turnout in the polls by giving Mitt Romney the benefit of the average margin of error in the Colorado, Florida, Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and Virginia.¬† In those six states, the average margin of error is 3.7%.¬†¬† Ohio and North Carolina¬†are also¬†considered¬†to be¬†tossups¬† however, I believe North Carolina is a reliable state for Romney and that Ohio¬†may be¬†out of Romney’s reach at this point.¬† Therefore; I have taken¬†both of those states out of the¬†toss-up category.

According to my formula, the adjusted 3.7% margin for Mitt Romney would swing Colorado, Florida, Iowa, New Hampshire, and Virginia to Romney, giving¬†him a total of 267 electoral votes.¬† At the moment¬†though, President Obama holds an RCP average lead over Romney in Nevada¬†that stands at 4.%.¬† That is 0.3%¬†outside of¬†the existing margin of error which I give to Romney.¬† Unless Romney closes the gap, President Obama would win Nevada and reelection to the presidency with a total of 271 electoral votes… one more than needed.¬† However, given the closeness of the race¬†in¬† Nevada and the momentum¬†Mitt Romney has among independent¬†voters, I see the Golden State as being quite winnable for Romney. ¬†If that is the case Romney will defeat President Obama in the race for President with 273 electoral votes to Obama’s 265 electoral votes.

The Problem(s) Produced By a Race That is Too Close For Comfort

As politically divided as Americans are in 2012, a very close election result is fraught with problems that could trigger historic constitutional measures into action and lead to a level of discourse not seen since the Bush v. Gore case in 2000.

Thanks to the already incredibly polarized electorate and the left’s continued desire¬†to exact revenge for the Supreme Court decision that thew¬†the election¬†to George W. Bush in 2000, if the presidential election turns out to be¬†as close as it seems to be, we could easily another case of a Republican winning the White House by losing the popular vote but winning the Electoral College vote.¬†¬†¬†The ensuing tensions from such a result could¬†reignite a popular backlash that will lead to varying degrees of civil unrest that¬†have the potential to linger¬†on for at¬†the very¬†least, a few months and possibly spark a very real attempt to do away with the Electoral College… a cause that would consume the national agenda for quite some while.

With extraordinarily large pluralities being produced for President Obama in some of the most densely populated states in the nation, i.e.: California and New York, it is quite likely that much smaller pluralities for Romney from less populated states such as Montana, New Hampshire, Utah, and Wyoming, will not be enough for the Romney-Ryan ticket to overcome the total popular vote that the Obama-Biden ticket receives but could easily allow the Romney-Ryan ticket to reach the 270 votes required to win the presidency in the Electoral College.

Making matters worse, is the fact that if the election¬†is actually as close as the above projection indicates, in¬† addition to Romney losing the popular vote but winning the election in the Electoral College, if each state goes the way I predict but New Hampshire happens to go for Barack Obama instead of Mitt Romney, there would be a 269 to 269 vote tie in the Electoral College and with both candidates 1 elector short of the 270 needed to win the presidency, the election would be forced into the House of Representatives.¬†¬†In that event,¬†thanks to a¬†likely makeup of each state’s¬†congressional delegation, Republicans would have control in at least 26 states, enough to assure a Romney victory.¬† A result that will please conservatives like myself but which will send liberals running¬†through the streets screaming.

Those are just some of the situations that could drag this election out if it remains as close as current data indicates.

But there still remains the possibility that this election will not be as close as we are led to believe it is.

With less than five weeks remaining, I contend that Mitt Romney will surprise many with a well coordinated and highly targeted campaign that will have the ability to attract the type of heavy Republican turnout that we saw in 2010.  Of course being a presidential election year, the Democrat turnout will be much higher than it was in 2010 and that will compensate a bit for the wide gap that existed in 2010, it will not be enough to overcome the anti-Obama sentiment that I believe still exists.  So much so that Romney may even be able to actually make a run at winning a state like Wisconsin and possibly also avoid becoming the first Republican to win  the White House without Ohio.  Unfortunately I do not yet see Romney winning either of those states yet though.

Bookmark and Share

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

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

Then came the competitions.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CNN political reporter Peter Hamby, tweeted the following;

To which I replied ;

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

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

Bookmark and Share

“We’ve Heard It All Before”

As Democrats kickoff their convention and try to make the case for President Obama’s reelection, Republicans have¬†released a video reminding voters that they’ve heard¬†it all before.

The video offers a compelling comparison of the words used by President Obama in 2008 when trying to explain why he should be elected and the words he is using now, four years later in his attempt to explain why he should be reelected in 2012.  As it turns out, they are the same words.

It helps to emphasize the fact that with the President offering us more of the same rhetoric, is there any reason to believe that his next four years will offer us any results that are different from those which are different from the ones he achieved in the last four years?
Bookmark and Share

The Dumb Blond Joke Behind the Democratic National Convention

“Why don’t women wear a watch?

“Because there‚Äôs a clock on the stove.”

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

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

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

But Clinton‚Äôs politically timed exile from the convention to the far reaches of Siberia aside, Democrats are gearing up to feature liberal women like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Democratic National Committee Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz‚Ķ two people who argue that unless the government finances the interests of women, woman can‚Äôt succeed.¬† Other women they will feature include women‚Äôs rights activist Lilly Ledbetter, President of Planned Parenthood Action Fund Cecile Richards, National Abortion Rights Action League Pro-Choice America President Nancy Keenan, and the highly accomplished and well-known Georgetown Law School Graduate Sandra ‚ÄúWho‚ÄĚ ¬†Fluke.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

‚ÄúHow do you make a blonde laugh on Monday?”
“Tell her a joke on Friday?‚ÄĚ

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

For Democrats the answer to that question is ‚Äúlie to them and hope that they don‚Äôt realize the truth till at least the day after the election.‚ÄĚ

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

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

Bookmark and Share

%d bloggers like this: