About Me

Name: AmericanMind
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

Make Romney V.P., Then Some Straight Talk

Here's how McCain can address the economy - number one for most Americans: 
 
1) Announce (early) Romney will be his Vice-President. Mitt Romney is a private sector superstar that fills a huge gap in McCain's otherwise strong resume. Romney's excellent at promoting free market principles to effectively counter the populist rhetoric of Obama/Clinton.   He’s also great at explaining why doing nothing (letting markets sort things out) is usually best.  America (the world's largest economy) needs a great economic leader on the ticket!
 
2) Working with Romney, McCain should draft a major speech on the economy that educates voters about the successes of capitalism and how markets work best (mostly) unfettered. For example, he can highlight how many hundreds of millions of people from India and China have been able to move from poverty to middle class and how that helps our economy (exports). He could talk about how liberal government policies and unions have crippled Detroit and Michigan hinting if you want America to follow the same course - elect Obama/Clinton. 
 
3) The knockout blow would be to debunk the myth that America can trust Democrats with the economy because of the great Clinton economy of the 1990s.  As John Adams once said, "Facts are stubborn things".  The fact is the booming economy of the 1990s began in March 1991 - 20 months before Clinton took office in January 1993.  McCain could find some prominent economist to back him up or simply point reporters to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (bea.gov).   In addition, the Clinton budget surpluses that Dems so often point to as evidence of their superior fiscal management were actually a direct result of the historic elections of the 1994 Congressional Republicans (Congress holds the purse strings) and the fiscal discipline in the Contract with America. 
 
McCain should help Americans conclude that an Obama-Clinton economy would look more like Jimmy Carter’s economy not Bill Clinton's economy. In 1976, like 2008, a Democratic nominee (Carter) ran for President, with a struggling economy and a Democratic Congress. That combination (Dem President & Dem Congress) made a bad situation worse. Do we want to repeat history and be worse off in four years?  Yes we can!  But, we won't!
 
Or, like 1980, we can elect a GOP President (Reagan) to offset the Dem Congress.  That didn't turn out too shabby :-)
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

8 Reasons for McCain-Romney

The GOP is split right now.  Oddly enough, Huckabee’s stubborn reluctance to withdraw seems irrelevant.   The real problem is McCain.

The unethical way McCain sucker punched Romney in Florida.  The unprincipled way McCain stood with those who came here illegally and against those who took a “principled stand for the rule of law”.  The ungrateful way McCain sneers at those who in the private sector who, by the way, create the wealth that pays for our world's-best military.    

One way forward is to put Romney on the ticket.  Here’s why:

  1. Romney earned more delegates and votes than any other potential VPs.  Had he stayed in, Mitt ’s lead over Huckabee would have increased.
  2. Romney can help McCain in swing states like MI, MN, MA, ME, NV and Colorado.  Huckabee only helps him in states solidly GOP anyway.  
  3. Romney’s tough on illegal immigration - important for conservatives concerned GOP sold them out for pro-illegal immigration business interests.
  4. Romney can energize the base (and raise money) while McCain campaigns hard for independents - it’s a winning combination.
  5. Romney fills some gaps in McCain’s resume.  Mitt’s brilliant on the economy and champions, rather than scorns, profit-seeking capitalists.
  6. Romney as V.P. will reduce anti-McCain vote that Huck’s getting
  7. Romney has raised more money and has more money than anyone. 
  8. McCain looks like he might kick soon – nice to have Romney next in line.

Are there others?  Maybe.  Dr. Condi Rice is a favorite of mine - nobody has more foreign policy experience and she would effectively counter a woman or a black on the other side.  Huckabee ate popcorn-fried squirrel in college - so, by law, he’s out.  I really like Giuliani but he ended up with zero states after mounting a 50 state campaign.  Thompson voted no when asked to impeach Bill Clinton - that’s a non-starter for me and most GOP.   Bobbie Jindall of Louisiana is a possibility but, like Tim Pawlenty of MN and Charlie Crist of FL, can only offer one state with the promise of more. 

Mitt offers the reality of more - he has millions of real votes and hundreds of real delegates.  Mitt beat McCain in 5 key swing states - three that Kerry almost lost in 2004 (MN, MI, ME-31 electors) and two states Bush almost lost (NV, CO-14 electors).   In addition, Mitt would help McCain tremendously in MA (12 electors), where Mitt was Governor, and neighboring NH (4 electors) where Kerry beat Bush by only 1% point.  In contrast, almost every state Huckabee beat McCain (GA, AR, TN, KS) was solidly for Bush anyway in 2004.

Net, net - Romney on the ticket may add 47 to 61 electors.  Bush beat Kerry by only 34 electors.

Another appeal of Romney as V.P. is that you have tens of millions of supporters, including more than a few hugely influential talk radio hosts, who feel Romney is due - that McCain hijacked the party and that Romney should have been our standard bearer.   Putting Romney on the ticket gives those supporters permission to get behind McCain.

Back to reality - McCain hasn’t appointed Romney V.P. or apologized for Florida or signed a no-Amnesty pledge so why should we support him? If he had won, “fair and square”, we’d support him - but he didn’t.

Honesty matters. Integrity matters.  I’m not supporting McCain until he sets things right.

I don’t care how many persuasive GOP establishment folks write articles about how much McCain is a “true conservative”.  This is up to McCain.  So, I’ll ask his “surrogates” to...stop wasting my time!

Set things right, Senator McCain, then ask for my support.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama or the liar John McCain

 
The Yes We Can video is special and not just because…

   it inspired me in the same way will.i.am was.

You see Justice for Rwanda is almost at hand…

   and its right the vanquisher is an African-American

Someday, soon, Obama will win the nomination…

   ending Clinton’s politics of personal destruction.

We can sense the end of the Clinton era…

   and know that will mean a better America.

However, we’ll wake up sober the next day…

   and know returning without success is the wrong way.

Leaving Iraq before the mission’s done…

   will mean suffering for millions and honor for none.

By helping young Arabs choose democracy over tyranny…

   we keep our promise to Iraq and America safe and free

I pray that God will help Barack…

   change course and offer success for US in Iraq.

Otherwise, I’ll have to endure some pain…

   and hold my nose…

   while voting…

   for the liar John McCain.

 

                                 Thank you Florida!  Thank you Fox News!  Not!

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Stop Putting "Lipstick on a Pig"

OK - there's a split in the Republican Party - we all know that.

On one side is the principled-not-voting-for-McCain crowd because he's wrong on immigration, campaign finance, ANWR, torture, Gitmo and he cheated in Florida.  On this side is Rush, Hannity, Ingraham, Coulter, Malkin, Santorum and millions of others.

On the other side are McCain apologists who are trying to “put lipstick on a pig” so we'll rally around their anointed one in the fall.  On this side is McCain, The Terminator, Medved, Mike Gallagher, Fox News and other Main-Stream-Media folk, etc. 

Let’s make a deal.  I believe that, with enough creativity, you can always find a solution that everyone likes without sacrificing anyone's principles.

So, here's the deal:

We principled-uncomfortable-voting-for-McCain GOP will support a McCain nominee if:

  1. McCain admits that Romney, like millions of other loyal Republicans, was for the surge - not timetables - from the start.
  2. McCain admits he lied to Florida's voters, many military, to win the primary.
  3. McCain admits he lied with only 3 days left to gain an unfair advantage.
  4. McCain urges Florida to replace his delegates with Romney's delegates.

Then let voters decide if McCain deserves to be our nominee and can win in November.  If so, I predict Romney in a landslide because if it's a fair fight - Romney will win.  Romney may win anyway.

 

Think McCain will take it?  Nope - McCain “just wants to win, baby”.

 

Which is why I won't support McCain in the General. Never. Ever. Ever. Really.


(By the way, when I say Fox News is "putting lipstick on a pig", I'm referring to the way they try to make a horrible idea "McCain being the GOP nominee" seem attractive.  The pig is the idea, not McCain the war vet.  Despite this clarification, I'm sure McCain folks will spin it as "another example of a disgraceful attack on a war hero" - shameless) 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

29% say Romney's Good or Very Good

Last night, facebook's US Politics site asked, "Regardless of whether you would vote for him, do you think Mitt Romney would be a good or bad President?"

Over 51,000 responded, including yours truly - the results were encouraging:

  • 14% - Very Good
  • 15% - Good
  • 7% - Not Sure
  • 21% - Bad
  • 43% - Very Bad

So, about 29% thought Mitt would be a good or very good President

Considering this is a 4 or 5 man race, 29% is "not too shabby."  You have to think the hardcore move-on.org democrats that support Barack or Hillary immediately checked off the 43% "Very Bad".  McCain & Huckabee folks probably make up the 20% "Bad".   Romney supporters probably chose the 14% "Very Good" and 15% "Good" (total of 29%) with 7% essentially undecided.

Of the four front-runners, Romney is the least well-known so he probably has the most upside and may sway some of those undecided his way. 

The big caveat in this, and the head-to-head national polls, is that Mitt has yet to campaign head-to-head with Hillary or Obama.   Although his head-to-head numbers may not look good now, it's hard to imagine they won't go his way big-time when Mitt faces Hillary in a debate, for example.  On character and issues, he dwarfs her and will make her seem petty, almost unqualified, to share the stage. 

At the web site for facebook, you can publish your own answer for the question about Mitt and then you can write a 300-word-or-less summary.  Here's mine:

  • "OMG - this is a no-brainer.
  • Economy - Mitt has a Harvard MBA & 25 years of success turning around companies to compete in the global economy.
  • Immigration - Mitt will not accommodate the 12 million here illegally.
  • For McCain and Clinton "the jobs ain't coming back but the illegals can stay"

The more Romney supporters that go to national blogs, debates and commentary to share our view, the better.  Please go to this site and express yourself @ http://www.facebook.com/politics/debate.php?id=23397320012.

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Fox News Enabled McCain's Hit Job

Three days before the key winner-take-all Florida GOP primary, the popular narrative said that Romney, with 25 years of successful private sector experience turning around struggling companies, would benefit, rightly, from polls showing that 40% of Floridians said the economy was the main issue - Iraq and terrorism were a distant 2nd and 3rd.

This Romney advantage was not because of an attack on McCain or a key endorsement for Romney, it was an advantage earned through years of excellence as a leader in the world’s largest and most competitive economy.

Though earned, the McCain camp decided that this advantage will not stand. However, with just three days to go, what could McCain do?  It was not enough time to become an expert on the economy, that takes years, so McCain did something that surprised even McCain supporters:

McCain lied - big time.

McCain’s new narrative:  Romney wanted U.S. to surrender in Iraq.

To help the rest of us get to the new narrative, because we were miles away, McCain implied that Romney was undecided about the surge and never supported it whole-heartedly, until after results were undeniable.  Even worse, McCain implied Romney wanted “timetables” - the buzz word at the time for surrender.  

Of course, these are fighting words to the military, and anyone who supports our troops and their mission - including myself.  Surely, given the seriousness of the accusation, the proximity to the Florida primary and the absence of this charge from 14 GOP debates, the evidence must be overwhelming. 

However, McCain only offered this one GMA interview on April 3, 2007:

Is this it?  Is this interview so compelling it wipes out months of interviews and debates where Romney publicly supported the surge and mocked Democratic requests for timetables?

OF COURSE NOT!

In fact, in the first 8 seconds the interviewer says, “You (Romney) have been very vocal in supporting the President and the troop surge yet the American public has lost faith in this war.”

So, when America had doubts, Romney took the road less traveled by supporting the surge - not timetables for the enemy.

So, how could McCain possibly pull this off?  The narrative that Romney was for surrender would pull in a lot of military votes for McCain - very important in Florida - but parts of this GMA clip actually contradicted the McCain narrative.

This is where Fox News comes in.

Most of the Main Stream Media (MSM) was for McCain and would cooperate with the political hit job (see “Meet the Press earns first “R” rating after McCain-Russert love fest“).  However, most Republicans, including Florida’s elderly and military, watch Fox News not the MSM.  So how Fox News handled the hit job would be influential.  The problem was that the only evidence McCain had, to refute months of evidence to the contrary, was the GMA interview.

So, Fox News solved the dilemma this way:

For their viewers, Fox News cut the first 8 seconds of the GMA clip - where Romney is said to be a “very vocal supporter of the surge”.

It was hard for me to believe, but the network with a strong history of being fair and balanced, especially as far as holding the evil Democrats accountable, was unfair and unbalanced covering Mitt Romney.  I first saw the FNC redacted version on that same day at 12:18 PM EST, when Bret Baer ran the same clip I showed you above, but cut out the first 8 seconds, and

Fox News cut out the last 44 secs, where Romney was asked if he’d veto a Democratic request for timetables and said, “of course”.

Later, on Fox News Sunday, Chris Wallace showed the same redacted 20 second version of the original 72 second clip shown above.  Again, the first 8 seconds and the last 44 seconds were gone.  On Monday, Megyn Kelly, at 11:10 AM EST, interviewed Mitt Romney and played the same 20 second FNC version of the clip - again, without the parts that refuted the McCain narrative.

Back to the injustice of McCain’s accusation just 3 days before Florida GOP primary.

The GMA clip was the only evidence McCain had for this outrageous accusation.  McCain never confronted Romney about his “timetables” theory for the last 8 months of the campaign and during 14 GOP debates.  Romney has made hundreds of interviews that contradict McCain’s narrative, including this one on CNN from March, 2007, where Romney tells Larry King that not only does he support the President and the surge and is against withdrawal but he demonstrates intelligent understanding of the dynamics in Iraq at the time:

 Why did Fox News enable McCain’s political hit job?

How many votes, especially military votes, did it cost Romney in Florida?  It’s hard to say, but the economy was taking center stage, McCain was struggling and Romney was rising.  Arguably, McCain could not have changed the conversation back to National Security without such an outrageous accusation and without the help of Fox News.  Nothing else would have gotten so much coverage with key voter groups in Florida. 

Obviously, many at Fox News are McCain supporters and lost their objectiveness just in time for the Florida primary.  

That will only make each Romney victory sweeter.




Categories: 2008 Campaign · Foreign Policy · Iraq · McCain · Romney · US Politics

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Meet the Press receives first "R" rating

Once again, we were treated to another MTP where Russert holds up McCain as the shining RINO on the hill he is.

Right out of the box, Russert puts up this McCain quote, “The fact is…Governor Romney has hedged, equivocated, ducked and reversed himself.” and “presses” McCain by asking him what he is talking about “specifically”.  Russert essentially asks McCain to dig a little deeper into his distortion of Romney’s record so those that didn’t get it the first time will really be misled this time. This is more than throwing softballs - it’s handing the batter a bigger bat.

Senator McCain straightens himself and prepares to give us some straight-talk.  He then implies that Romney was unclear about whether we maintain the surge in Iraq.  In the first 8 seconds of the interview below, the interviewer says, “You (Romney) have been very vocal in supporting the President and the troop surge yet the American public has lost faith in this war.” 

During those months that McCain mentioned when things looked bleak, we now know that Romney was for the surge - not timetables.

Back to our love fest, McCain also states that “just a fact” that Romney was for timetables.  Seeing the “straight-talker” lie with such ease, like the other candidate endorsed by the New York Times, was stunning and, hopefully, helped some GOP likely-voters to reject McCain’s candidacy.  The fact is that Romney was trying to answer, forthrightly, a question about whether there should timetables for troop withdrawals.

Here’s Romney’s answer:

So, did you come away from that interview thinking Romney was for troop withdrawals?

OF COURSE NOT!

Nobody would, except maybe a candidate who sees his long-held dream of working at Pennsylvania Avenue’s other end coming to an end.  McCain has wanted the Presidency for a long-time and feels he got Bush-whacked in 2000 in South Carolina.  Not one to let the facts get in the way of his opinion, he tries to convince Florida and the nation that Romney has been for timetables for withdrawals when that’s not what he said last April or a hundred times since, especially in the debates.

Why didn’t McCain criticize Romney in one of the 13 debates so far?

Because Romney has never supported timetables and, in fact, called for Bush to veto timetables. How do we know this without scouring LexisNexis or Google? Because had a leading GOP candidate supported timetables for troop withdrawals than his other opponents, and the media, would’ve pounced on it and they didn’t. 

Russert himself has had Romney on since then and does anyone doubt that Russert’s MTP team would have dug that gem up if it was there and shoved it in Romney’s face - but it wasn’t so they didn’t.

By the way, in the GMA interview, there’s a banner that says, “Republicans Rocked.  Governor Romney’s Surprise”.  The surprise was that Romney had set a fundraising record for GOP candidates.  The media often mentions Romney’s wealth - implying that’s why he’s winning.  They rarely mention that he has raised more money than any other candidate or that in states where he spent a lot of money (NH) he didn’t win.  Maybe, he’s winning because people think he’d make a better President than the other candidates.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Be A Sport - Self-Deport

In the GOP debates in New Hampshire, Mitt Romney earned my vote.  It was down to him and Giuliani - both would make great Presidents - but Romney was tougher on the illegal immigrants already here:

 

Homeland Security says that 11.6 million came here since 1980.  Of that, 6 million came during Clinton, or 750,000 per year, and 3 million came during Bush, or 420,000 per year - so Bush deserves credit for slowing the rate significantly.

However, we don’t want to just slow the increase, we want to bring the number of illegal immigrants here down to zero.

Imagine that - an America where everyone is here legally!

There are three keys to reduce the number of illegal immigrants:

1. Secure the border.  Use a double fence, increase electronic surveillance and keep the National Guard there until the situation gets under control.

2. Enforce our laws.  This means you punish sanctuary cities, increase jail capacity, implement tamper-proof ID cards, require states to tell ICE when they have illegals in custody, end anchor babies and punish employers big time for employing illegal immigrants.

3. Encourage self-deportation.  Illegal immigrants snuck in here over several years and they can sneak out over several years.  If law & order is restored (steps 1 & 2), you will see much self-deportation.  Deport them when they commit crimes, or are otherwise discovered, but no "round-ups" of illegals - no need to waste taxpayer money on non-citizens.

Here are the benefits of this approach:

Crime will drop. Not only in border states but also in immigrant communities nationwide - which legal immigrants will appreciate.  As much as 30% of our prison population are non-citizens.  If illegal immigration is stopped, legal immigration processes, which screen for criminal backgrounds (and diseases), will keep most criminals out of the country.  

Increased faith in government.  A big chunk of law abiding folks in America were outraged at last summer’s “shamnesty” bill (McCain-Kennedy).  We were stunned that many of our GOP leaders would attempt to shove such a disastrous piece of legislation down our throat.  (btw…if McCain is doing so poorly at his current job, why does he think he deserves a promotion?  I’m just asking :-).  A President that ends illegal immigration will restore some of that lost faith.

Infrastructure costs will drop.  The U.S. will spend less money on hospitals, schools, law enforcement, prisons, jails, food stamps, health care, etc…    For example, I’ve read that some hospitals have closed because they can’t afford to keep providing services to people that can’t pay.  After illegal immigration ends, those hospitals will be able to re-open to improve health care for U.S. citizens - very cool.

Greater accountability.  A year ago, an illegal immigrant crashed into the daughter of a friend of mine.  The illegal had no license, no insurance and no assets.  The police had a difficult time getting his real name.  My friend’s daughter is now paralyzed from the waist down.  That story is repeated over and over again nationwide, sometimes the victims die.  Ending illegal immigration means that people you interact with in your daily lives are accountable for their actions - isn’t that how it should be?

Export American Values.  One advantage of illegal immigrants self-deporting back home is they’ll improve their home country.  Despite “living in the shadows”, illegal immigrants have learned a few things about America they can share when they return.  These include our stronger emphasis on education, better mastery of English - the international language of success, a better understanding of how democracies work, higher expectations regarding civil and women’s rights.  As citizens of their home countries, they’ll have a lot more credibility than an American spreading good will.  Who knows - maybe they’ll lead massive protests against their government :-)

In addition, ending illegal immigration hurts Democrats politically.  Of course, there will be less voter fraud once illegal immigrants leave, but that’s just the beginning.  Many election advantages for Democrats depend on people feeling bad about America.

Some advantages for Democrats go away when illegals go away.

I’ll cover this more in an upcoming blog.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

McCain joins Democrats, improves both parties

In case McCain doesn't take my advice, and he's still on the GOP ballot in Florida this Tuesday, I want to try to convince likely voters in the sunshine state to pick Mitt over McCain.

How many Sundays did we tune in to Meet the Press to see McCain speaking out against his party and his President?  Russert's always happy to hold up McCain as an example of GOP disunity, isn't he? 

On the one issue we hoped McCain would break with Bush, illegal immigration, McCain joined Bush and Kennedy and La Raza in writing one of the worst pieces of legislation ever - and McCain's a legislator!  A seriously flawed legislator on the wrong side of most critical issues.

Here's some real straight talk:

McCain is leader of a Congress with the lowest approval ratings in history.

If he’s getting bad reviews at his current job - why should we promote him?

In case you’re still not dissuaded, read Ann Coulter's blistering inventory of McCain's many transgressions, 'Straight Talk' Express Takes Scenic Route To Truth" at Townhall.com.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Romney leads GOP - no thanks to Fox News.


All the attention was on who would win the GOP primary in South Carolina.  Fox News rarely mentioned the Nevada GOP caucus in their coverage this week.  Bill O'Reilly, who prides himself on precise prognostication, opened his show Friday with a memo titled "The latest polling out of South Carolina".   He talked about how important South Carolina was for the GOP and Nevada was for the Democrats but mentioned nothing about the Nevada GOP caucus.

Many media outlets followed suit, rarely mentioning the Nevada caucus where Romney was leading and focused on South Carolina where the media darling John McCain led with media freak Mike Huckabee a close second.  (I'm allowed to call anyone a freak who admits on national television to using a popcorn popper to cook squirrel in their college dorm).
 

What's going on?  We know the spin media loves John McCain but that would only matter in states like New Hampshire where independents can swing an election.  In states where Republicans elect the Republican nominee (what a novel idea), spin media matters not.  In those states, the voters watch Fox News and read the Wall Street Journal. 

As I mentioned above, FNC rarely mentioned Romney or even the Nevada GOP caucus.  Likewise, the front page of the Journal on Saturday did not mention Romney or the Nevada caucus and the headline inside said, South Carolina May Winnow GOP Field.  If I was a Nevada Republican, I'd be more than a little pissed off.  Despite having more delagates at stake than South Carolina (34 vs 24) the "fair and balanced" media virtually ignored a whole state.

It's hard for me to say, but it really seemed like FNC was trying to minimize Romney's success.  They've never referred to Mitt as frontrunner even though he leads in delegates, overall GOP votes and number of states won.  How else do you judge who's leading?  Aren't votes more important than polling once the primaries begin?  Instead, all Fox folk kept saying is "the GOP race is really up in the air" and "there's no clear frontrunner".

If the Boston Red Sox (Romney) were playing the Arizona Diamondbacks (McCain) and scored more runs than Arizona in the 1st inning (WY), fewer runs in 2nd (IA) and 3rd (NH) inning and then knocked a few out of the park in the 4th inning (MI) so the score was now 42 to 32 (wow - that's really bad pitching)  you'd never hear the announcer say to the audience at the start of the 5th inning, "Well, it's really hard to say who's in front at this point in the game."

Mitt Romney has, by far, the most GOP delegates going into Super Tuesday.

The new score of GOP delegates will put Romney way out in front with about 66 delegates (WY, MI, NV), McCain way back with 38 delegates (NH, SC) and Huckabee with 26 (IA).  Why would anyone on the planet feel McCain has the momentum when Romney has twice as many delegates, has won 3 out of 6 states (with large margins) and came in 2nd in two others?  By comparison, McCain has far fewer delegates, only won 2 states with narrow margins.  And it's possible Mitt could win Florida because it's pretty even now and Mitt could pick up some momentum if the media recognizes him, rightly, as the frontrunner. 

Of course, the next question is why is the media so anti-Romney?  It is anti-mormonism?  Anti-big-chinism?  Anti-anti-illegal-immigrationism?  Nope, my guess is...(discussed in my next blog :-)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Speaking English is A Love Thing

Recently I read a news report about a small Illinois town that wants English to be the official language. One Hispanic in the “no” column said he got involved because a flyer being distributed asked the question, “Are you tired of pressing 1 for English?” He said that’s racist. Huh?

It’s a fact that “everyone speaking the same language” brings people together. What’s racist about trying to bring people together? Nothing! So if we want to bring Americans together, what language should we all try to speak? Good question.

It’s important to honor one’s culture and heritage so maybe we should speak the language we’ve used for most of our songs, films, plays, ads, TV, poetry, newspapers and books for the last 400 years? Or maybe, to make things as easy as possible, we should speak the language most of us speak now? Or maybe we should forget about easy and work hard to learn the language the rest of the world uses to talk to each other? Lucky for us, English is the answer to all three.

Most of the American culture has been spoken, written, displayed and broadcast in English for 400 years. Most Americans speak English now. Many of the world’s leaders were educated in our English-speaking Universities. Most U.N. diplomats learn English as a second language because they live, eat and work in New York. Most kids in India, China, Japan, Europe and the Middle East learn English as a second language to help them succeed.

Luckily, most American kids are immersed in English every day. Some want to change that by having us communicate in both English and Spanish. Huh? Why would you want to start separating Americans? Complaining about pressing 1 for English is not racist – it’s touching, actually.

English language advocates want us to come together, to understand each other better – it’s a love thing.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

3 Reasons to Boycott China

Any other Americans fed up with China? Not the people of China, of course, but the illegitimate government of China. They’re often seen pretending they represent China at the UN, in the Sudan, in currency markets, at climate change talks, etc… At the APEC summit in Sydney last year, Bush met with Chinese President Hu Jintao.

But Hu’s a fraud.

Hu leads the Communist Party of China (CPC), which represents only 5% of the population. The CPC dominates the other 95% using an effective mix of propaganda, intimidation, harassment and torture. Why should we care? Because helping a billion oppressed people is cool, very cool. Other reasons:

China pollutes big time. A W.H.O. air quality report says 7 of world’s 10 most polluted cities are in China. One Chinese factory pollutes more in a year than a million U.S. cars. If Al Gore really wants to stop global warming, he’dl lead a boycott of China.

China enables genocide in Darfur. China buys most of Sudan’s oil, sells Bashir weapons and uses its Security Council veto to prevent U.N. intervention. If Angelina Jolie really wants to stop the genocide, shed lead a boycott of China.

Nothing will get the attention of Hu and his CPC thugs like a U.S. boycott of “Made in China”. It has the added benefit of keeping us safe from anti-freeze in our pet food and lead in our children’s toys. Not too shabby. Let’s start it here, in Vermont - a boycott heard ‘round the world.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

10 Things President Romney Will Do

This afternoon, I heard a person on the radio ask listeners to name specific things that Governor Romney will do as President. 


                 mitt_romney2002_450


Here you go:

  1. End illegal immigration by closing the border, enforcing the law and denying those illegal immigrants already here any accommodation.
  2. Increase defense spending to 4% of GDP & add 100,000 troops.
  3. Limit non-defense spending increases to inflation minus 1%.
  4. Migrate our citizens from employer & government provided health plans to private insurance - no more “free rides”.
  5. Propose new, tougher penalties for those who use the Internet to sexually assault children - “One-Strike And You’re Ours”.
  6. Reform government to improve results and eliminate waste using skills learned turning around hundreds of companies.
  7. Eliminate all taxes on interest, dividends, and capital gains for anyone with Adjusted Gross Income under $200,000.
  8. Institute federal caps on non-economic/punitive damages to eliminate frivolous lawsuits & end defensive medicine.
  9. Repeal McCain-Feingold legislation-it restricts 1st Amendment rights & enact reforms that promote transparency.
  10. Negotiate trade deals with China and India guided by a deep understanding, unique among the candidates, of how to succeed in the new global economy.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

My Dream Team for Mitt

One of the more fun things I love to do during Presidential campaigns is put together a dream team for the next GOP administration.

Here’s my shot at the strongest team led by the strongest candidate:

  • President - Mitt Romney!  (Great vision, competence, integrity)
  • V.P. - Dr. Condi Rice (great experience, attracts new voters to GOP)
  • Attorney General - Rudy Giuliani (no one better at enforcing the law)
  • Sec Def - McCain (honors McCain’s service, right on surge/Patraeus)
  • Sec State - Lieberman (courageous, choice will reach out to Dems)
  • Sec Treasury - Huckabee (Fair Tax, will lighten up cabinet meetings)
  • Sec Homeland Security - Duncan Hunter (will shut down border)
  • UN Ambassador - John Bolton, of course!

So, the GOP would have an outstanding man at the top of the ticket and a team that would attract women, African-Americans, Jews, Mormons, evangelicals,  Italian Americans, Fair Tax supporters, law and order types and those chubby hubbys (like me) inspired by Huckabee’s weight loss.

The Dems would be lucky to win a single state -)

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous12Next »