My Closing Argument, and This Ain’t Just Rhetoric

Overview: My Main Philosophical Reason I’m Voting For Mitt.

I feel so strongly that Mitt Romney is the right choice for president that I wanted to make one last post, my closing argument as it were, in hopes of convincing that one last undecided voter out there somewhere to vote for Mitt. I wanted to explain why I, and the other authors here at Mitt Romney Central, have devoted such time, effort, emotion, and yes, money, to the cause of electing Mitt. My list of specific reasons why I like Mitt, and my counterarguments to President Obama’s case, are below. But I can sum up why I feel so strongly with this: Barack Obama’s vision for America is inconsistent with that of our founding fathers and our Constitution.

A Limited Government Preserves Freedom

Our government was founded on the principles of self-determination and freedom. Americans were not content to be told by the British government how much they should pay in taxes or what freedoms they were entitled to. So they fought a war to gain their independence. When the founding fathers then set up their own government, at the forefront of their minds was the concern for how to preserve their hard-won freedoms. So they came up with three fundamental ideas about the new federal government: (i) it should be small, split into different branches with checks and balances over each other’s power, (ii) it should share power with, and in fact have less power over citizens’ day-to-day lives than, the states, where the citizens were better represented, and (iii) our most basic freedoms should be enshrined in a Bill of Rights to make absolutely sure the federal government did not violate them. This combination of ideas, they thought, would assure, over time, that the God-given rights they had won back from their government at great cost would be preserved against tyranny.

Obama’s Vision of a Larger Government is Antithetical to Freedom.

In 2008 when Senator Obama talked of “transforming” America and saying “we can do better,” it was clear to me he was talking about fundamentally changing these key principles. He stood for a larger federal government; one that would try and take responsibility for the poor and do more for its citizens. While that may sound nice, having a government undertake that responsibility also means it must become larger, tax more (a government that undertakes to define what’s fair for all its citizens will also try and make everyone pay their “fair share”) and become more involved in our lives, much more involved than the founding fathers intended. A larger government necessarily becomes more difficult to manage, begins to take on a life of its own, and becomes very difficult to control. A larger federal government also means a shift in power from the states, where citizens can more easily control their own destiny. And once people begin to rely on government largesse, cutting the size of that government and its programs, even if the government cannot afford them (witness our overwhelming deficits and the troubles in Europe as it tries to cut back), becomes very, very difficult. People become less willing to give up that security, even if it means a loss of liberty. And they can become accustomed to the idea that the government represents someone else, not them, and that they are owed something by that government (witness appeals from the left that sound like class warfare). As a result, I believe the policies of President Obama reflect a threat to our liberty. Perhaps not immediate. Perhaps only a little. But what he wants to do, at its core, is inconsistent with the intended size and role of our government, which means we will inevitably lose a little, or a lot, of liberty. How much really depends on how much further down Obama’s road we go. And in my view, we’ve already lost too much.

Example: Obamacare.

As an illustration of what I mean, I’ll use Obamacare. It sounds nice to make sure everyone has health insurance. And there are lots of stories of people who can’t afford insurance, and how having it would benefit them greatly. I get that, and I feel for their situation. This is what Obama meant by “we can do better.” He’d like to use government resources to fix these problems. But, just like when you get your first credit card, you need to look beyond the nice things you can buy and decide whether you can really afford it, because that bill will come due at some time. As for the cost in dollars and cents, it’s clear we can’t afford Obamacare. We just can’t. It adds trillions of unfunded government outlays over the next two decades. And once these benefits are offered to citizens it’s very difficult to take them away. In addition, Obamacare has already begun to infringe on our freedoms. At its core it’s the federal government (not the state, which is the principal difference between Obamacare and Romneycare), forcing us to buy a product. Then, because it forces us to buy this product, it must go further and legislate the minimum requirements of this product (or everyone would buy the cheapest version available). That legislation now includes elements some religions find offensive. How’d we get here? By involving the federal government in something it really was never intended by the founding fathers to be involved in: providing health insurance. Further, because the IRS will be in charge of enforcing compliance with the mandate, it will need to know our personal health information. The founders’ vision of limited federal power, with express limits on what the federal government can and can’t do, has been violated by Obamacare. And having the federal government in this position simply poses a threat to our freedom. The founders knew power corrupts, and while we think we can trust the government now, we don’t always know we will be able to. When will it be your religious belief that’s infringed? Or your freedom of speech? This is why the Republicans resist President Obama so much. This is why Obamacare did not get one single Republican vote. This is why Obama’s own budget was rejected by not only Republicans but his own party. And finally this is why Mitch McConnell said it was his goal to make sure Obama only had one term: to try and make sure the damage President Obama does is not long-lasting. Obamacare is a threat to our freedom, and it’s just one example.

This Ain’t Just Rhetoric.

Let me say that this is not just rhetoric. I’m not just making an argument because I want you to vote for Mitt for some other hidden reason. This is why I’m voting for Mitt, and why I honestly believe everyone should. This is what worries me about the prospect of Obama serving another term. He has already made some strides toward “transforming” America into something I believe it was never intended to be. Obamacare was one very large step in that direction. As Vice President Biden said, it was a “[blanking] big deal.” I know the further we go down this road the more difficult it is to go back. I also know the GOP will fight Obama to preserve that liberty, which is likely to result in more gridlock at a time when our government needs to work together. Unfortunately, though, cooperating with the president can mean, and has meant, the loss of some of these liberties, which makes compromise difficult.
(more…)

To Gary Johnson Voters, Ron Paul & Other ‘Write-In’ Voters: Supreme Court Consequences

A front view of the four story, marble-clad United States Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C.
Click on photo to enlarge. (Photo – Mark Fischer)

To: Those intent on voting for Gary Johnson, Ron Paul supporters, and other ‘write-in’ voters…

Take a moment to read the following IMPORTANT article from Matthew D. Carling, Esq. He lays out the case for thoughtfully considering the repercussions of your voting choices. For years to come, America’s course will be determined through coming Supreme Court appointees.

Carling’s background:

Matthew D. Carling is an attorney specializing in appellate law in the states of Utah and Nevada. He has previously been a prosecutor for the District Attorney’s Office of Lincoln County, Nevada, has served as a defense attorney, and also as Judge Pro Tempore for the North Las Vegas Municipal Courts. He received both his Juris Doctor and Master’s of Business Administration from Creighton University in Omaha, Nebraska.

(Carling has given permission to reprint his article in full.)

The Purist Vote: How Obama’s Foes Might Extend His Legacy for Decades
November 1, 2012
By Matthew D. Carling, Esq.

(or) The Purist Vote: American Conservatives Playing Russian Roulette

Every four years, American voters eagerly line up to choose their favorite candidate for President. We brim with hope for a leader who sees the world like we do—someone a lot like us. But once our ideal contender is eliminated from the field, disappointment often turns to disgust. Voters by the thousands remove themselves from the political battlefield and refuse to participate further. It’s either my nominee or nothing.

Consoled in the belief that one vote won’t matter, the disenfranchised gently beguile themselves into apathy. Surely four more years of any single administration cannot possibly unravel the rich heritage of our nation. Others withdraw out of a need to take a moral stand, indignant over the flaws they would otherwise feel they are endorsing with their vote. Some even choose strategic revenge, hoping to punish less-pure conservatives with four more years under a stanch liberal president — a small price to pay if the lesson finally awakens such “useful idiots” from their folly. After all, how much damage can one president leave that can’t be undone by his successor?

These might be valid points except for one detail. A president’s most lasting legacy is not usually the bills he signs into law, his executive orders or even the wars over which he presides. It is his unique role in shaping the entire third branch of government, the Supreme Court, which has power to overrule the others. Indeed, his nominations to the bench can alter our society for generations.

Consider George W. Bush. With the retirement of Justice O’Connor and the passing of Chief Justice Rehnquist, President Bush reshaped the Court with his nominations of John Roberts and Samuel Alito, both thoughtful and mostly conservative jurists. Whatever Bush’s faults, these two acts could benefit our nation immensely for generations to come. President Obama, on the other hand, countered by replacing two activist jurists (Souter & Stevens) with two more: Elena Kagen and Sonia Sotomayor, each fully in step with the current Administration’s societal and political agenda. These appointments have not disappointed the progressive left.

How much does this matter? For most people it depends on the issue. Until recently, for millions of Americans in major cities across the nation, owning a handgun was severely restricted if not banned entirely. For decades, Second Amendment advocates had wistfully dreamed of the Supreme Court striking such laws, but were afraid to bring forth a case. What if they lost? Might the Court instead end up nullifying the Second Amendment? On June 28, 2010, with Bush’s appointees the Court finally acknowledged the original intent: that no government, whether federal, state or local, may deny a citizen the right to keep and bear arms.[i] The victory, however, was a narrow one—only 5 to 4. If one more left leaning justice had been appointed, it would have gone the other way. Dissenting, Justice Stevens argued that owning a personal firearm was not a “liberty” interest protected by the Constitution. Likewise, Justice Stephen Breyer stated, “the Framers did not write the Second Amendment in order to protect a private right of armed self-defense.” With a single vote, this suppressive notion would have been the majority opinion.

In just the last decade, this same narrow margin has preserved school choice laws at the state level, but unfortunately tipped the other way and failed to roll back eminent domain abuse. The constitution’s safety in the court is fragile indeed.

Don’t stop now. Click here!

The One Question President Obama Must Answer Before America Reelects Him

By Mark Fidelman

President Obama has been attacked for not turning the economy around even after his promise to do so. Let’s cut him some slack. He probably believes Republican obstructionism is to blame, and he’s done everything possible during his first term. Just give him four more years, he pleads, it will all work out.

But don’t you get the feeling as I do that Obama’s new economic strategy resembles an infomercial pitch? Just a little of this, a sprinkle of that, and presto a new economy. Before, President Obama ran on hope and change, now he appears to be running on just hope: “We’ve come too far to turn back now,” he tells us.

I know Obama genuinely wants to grasp the economic strategies required to lead us out of a lousy economy and that if only government were to take charge, it could fix everything. Just sprinkle some green fairy dust across the energy sector, wave a magic job wand at small business, take the wealth potion from the rich and give it to the poor. The damsel is in economic distress, and Obama is relying on medieval enchantments for our survival.

Only in fairy tales are emperors advised that they are naked. And Obama’s advisors aren’t breaking with tradition. One gets the feeling they received the Berlitz learning method to business. They understand the language, but not the meaning. According to New York Times columnist David Brooks, while speaking to a group of us about Obama’s closest advisors: “there isn’t a single person with business experience amongst them.”

In 2008, no one dreamed the country would be left behind. We all thought we’d be better off; we’d be smarter, he’d bring the country together, he’d bring congress together for a bipartisan agenda. It hasn’t happened.

Obama has notably said, “There’s not a liberal America and a conservative America; there’s the United States of America.” He’s not saying that anymore.

But there’s still hope. He can give a straight forward answer to the following bipartisan question – It’s never too late to keep a campaign promise.

What Will You Do Differently to Fix the Economy in the Next Four Years?

Obama seems to be taking his economic cues from Paul Krugman and the school of “Hope” economics. Krugman is who all left-leaning politicians point to in order to receive approval for their economic policies. He is their gold standard – and the gold plating they wrap around any economic legislation for which they want to insulate themselves from ridicule.

In reality though, there is no such person as Paul Krugman, there is only a shell containing the opinions of his cocktail party friends and the novels of economic fantasy worlds he had read. A man so responsive to compulsion that he has become a kind of compulsion himself to anything resembling a liberal economic idea. His instinctively leftist political agenda blinds him from being a truly objective economic advisor – and so he can’t be trusted to provide sound economic advice.

Take his 2008 article titled: The ComeBack Continent. In short, Krugman believed that the economic path forward resembled a European, nanny-state model, telling us not to worry because, “If you think Europe is a place where lots of able-bodied adults just sit at home collecting welfare checks, think again.”

Later in the article, Krugman goes on to call the situation in 2008 a European comeback, crediting its “big-government” approach to its success. Incredibly, he ends the article with, “But the next time a politician tries to scare you with the European bogeyman, bear this in mind: Europe’s economy is actually doing O.K. these days, despite a level of taxing and spending beyond the wildest ambitions of American progressives.”

But we should be scared. Shortly thereafter Europe’s economy started to collapse, and the most welfare-prone countries fell the hardest and fastest. Oddly, Krugman is still promoting the same naïve, ineffective policies that have Europe on the ropes.

As a kid, I used to believe in Robin Hood. I mean I truly believed in him. Krugman still does. He hasn’t learned how the story actually ends because he’s never participated in it. He’s been an academic, an author, an economist but never a businessman. He’s never built a business, worried about keeping the lights on or suffered hardship from taxing government policies. His solution to any economic issue is wealth redistribution. He’s of the “you didn’t build that somebody else made that happen” school of thought.

This is the kind of brainwashing you still find at the elite universities. The rest of us living in the real world know better. Because on our side we have reason, experience and concrete business strategies that work. For us, government gets in the way, it doesn’t pave it.

So Obama must move away from Krugmanomics and set a new course. One lined with less government and more business. Because in the final analysis, business leaders are held accountable for their success – not government bureaucrats. If business performance suffers, the government gets a free pass even if it’s the primary problem. This authority without responsibility situation is incompatible with a thriving economy.

Obama still needs to learn this lesson.

Mark Fidelman’s forthcoming, critically acclaimed book is: Socialized, How the Most Successful Businesses Harness the Power of Social.
Follow Fidelman on Twitter @markfidelman Subscribe to him on Facebook

Will Frankenstorm Faze Halloween? Romney/Ryan Endorsement Treats: NH, MN, OR, CA

Romney supporters are ready for Halloween in Wilton, Connecticut. Oct 25, 2012
(photographer unknown)

In spite of Hurricane Sandy, dubbed ‘Frankenstorm’, on this All Hallow’s Eve most of the nation’s merry little folks in masquerade will participate in traditional Halloween activities.

Trick-or-treating is a go in storm damaged New York City; Mayor Michael Bloomberg is urging ghoulies, ghosties, and long-leggety beasties to stay away from affected areas and be cautious. According to the latest news report I heard today, Gov Chris Christie, who characterized damage in his state as “too widespread for words”, was still considering issuing an executive order to cancel Halloween in New Jersey until the situation stabilizes somewhat in his state. Given that Christie was touring storm damage this afternoon with Obama, it appears Halloween is a go in The Garden State. Various other cities affected by the super storm Sandy will postpone Halloween frolics until this coming Saturday.

UPDATE (1:21 PM PT): Governor Chris Christie has announced that New Jersey will celebrate Halloween next Monday, November 5, 2012 (election eve!).

While continuing to call upon supporters to be mindful of victims from Hurricane Sandy and to donate to the Red Cross, Governor mitt Romney and Congressman Paul Ryan are back into the ‘spirit’ of things and are campaigning. Today Governor Romney is campaigning in Florida with former FL Gov Jeb Bush and Senator Marco Rubio. Congressman Ryan is spending the day holding events in his home state, Wisconsin, and as the moon rises tonight, will be free to go trick-or-treating with his wife Janna, and three children.

Meanwhile, things that go bump in the night may be the sound of looters and spooks on the left are outrageously baring fangs over Romney’s storm relief efforts. Even though Obama told bone rattling Biden “now is not the time for politics” Joe was up to his usual hocus pocus and also hinted at a 2016 run for the White House. Yikes for America.

Obama will be back on his thorny campaign trail tomorrow, so beware!

Meanwhile, in spite of the double, double, toil, and trouble, the ENDORSEMENT cauldron continues to boil and bubble for the GOP ticket!

Nashua Telegraph (NH)
October 30, 2012

http://www.nashuatelegraph.com

Mitt Romney For President

Four years ago, with little hesitation, we endorsed then-Sen. Barack Obama to become the 44th president of the United States, saying it was a time for “new leadership, a new approach to governing, a new way of conducting the people’s business.”

After several hours of spirited debate, not unlike conversations taking place in kitchens and living rooms across America, we reached a consensus that he had not. Perhaps more importantly, when we identified the key challenges facing the nation – jobs, the economy and the national debt – we concluded he was not the best candidate to meet them.

That person is former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, and we hereby endorse him to become the 45th president of the United States.

As we noted when we endorsed Romney for the GOP nomination prior to the New Hampshire primary in January, Washington is broken. In order to fix it, it will take a strong leader willing to roll up his sleeves and work directly with the heads of both parties to carve out the best possible solutions.

We believe Romney has demonstrated that he can do that; the president has had four years to demonstrate that he can’t.

True leaders also don’t wait until two weeks before Election Day – in the form of a 20-page booklet, no less – to lay out a specific agenda for the next four years. Coupled with the negative tenor of the campaign, that merely confirms the president and his strategists felt that attacking Romney’s agenda was more politically expedient than releasing one of their own.

Nevertheless, we are confident Romney is the candidate who would tackle the serious issues facing this nation, starting with jobs, the economy and the debt. In the end, we couldn’t say the same about the president.



Speaking of hobgoblins, David Axelrod, senior strategist for Obama’s reelection campaign, today declared he would “shave my mustache if Obama loses Minnesota.” Come on! Let’s make Axelfraud break out his razor! While traditionally a ‘blue-wall’, the race is tightening enough that Romney is now buying ad time in The North Star State. Check out the endorsement below:

West Central Tribune (MN)
Editorial
Oct 27, 2012

http://www.wctrib.com/

Romney vote is right for president

[T]he president’s first term has not been full of successes.

He moved on health care reform, pushing through legislation without bipartisan support, resulting in a legislative backlash which gridlocked Congress.

This administration has been unsuccessful in reducing the unemployment rate in the United States, with 43 long months with the rate above 8 percent.

Economic growth has remained stagnant through most of his first term. The three-year recovery has been very slow, poverty is up, family incomes are down and housing has been in a slump.

The scary issue facing America this Halloween is a looming fiscal crisis. There is the gigantic budget deficit $5 trillion deeper than when Obama took office. And a looming fiscal cliff deadline at the end of year, when automatic cuts of $100 billion from federal budgets and tax increases of $400 billion, happen unless Congress and the administration make a deal.

For various reasons, Obama has not been a uniting force and has not found a way to work with his Republican opposition.

Four years ago a nation tired of two wars, high deficit spending and an unfolding economic crisis sought a change. The country’s voters chose a young senator from Illinois to lead us forward.

There has been fair criticism of the Republican leaders of Congress who vowed to obstruct the president in the last two years, just as Obama had a Democratic control and didn’t work with Republicans in the first two years of his administration.

And both political parties are to blame for not having the political fortitude to deal with America’s growing fiscal crisis.

On Nov. 6, west central Minnesota voters face a choice for president. We all agree that Washington is broken and not functioning, much like a baseball team that is not winning. There is a time when a change is needed and a new manager is brought in to get the team refocused.

Republican Mitt Romney is seeking to bring that change to Washington. He is promising a new brand of leadership, an economic focus to create jobs and fiscal prudence to work on the budget deficit.

Romney has demonstrated his leadership in private business, in state government and in the 2002 Olympics.

He is a successful businessman, who earned his wealth through investment and decision-making strategies. He has spent the majority of his life in private business and said he knows how to grow jobs.

In 1999, Romney was brought in to resolve the scandalous crisis at the Salt Lake City Olympics. He addressed the situation, calmed sponsors, developed new leadership, controlled spending and staged an excellent Winter Olympics.

In 2002, he was elected governor of Massachusetts and faced an overwhelmingly Democratic legislature. He worked with that Legislature to control spending, restructure state government and eliminated a $3 billion state government deficit.

America needs a change in leadership to refocus the country and its economy toward a strong and vibrant country. This country cannot afford to slip back into another recession so soon.

We believe Romney is the right choice for president on Nov. 6.

(There’s more!)

Newspaper Endorsements Unceasing, PRAISE for Romney/Ryan: OH, WI, IA, IL, OR, FL, MA, VA

(Photographer unknown)

They just keep coming…

Newspaper editorial boards across the USA believe in Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan. Give yourself a little time to read the many endorsements given for our guys the last few days. It’s a real treat.

Additional endorsements may be read here, here, and here.

Cincinnati Enquirer (OH)
EditorialThey just keep coming! Carve out a little time to read these many, fantastic endorsements. Help us share the news, too!
October 28, 2012

http://goo.gl/VZyxd

Presidential Endorsement: Mitt Romney

The No.1 issue in our region and our nation today is how to recharge our economy and get more people working in good-paying jobs. President Barack Obama has had four years to overcome the job losses of the Great Recession he inherited, but the recovery has been too slow and too weak. It’s time for new leadership from Mitt Romney, a governor and business leader with a record of solving problems.
….
Romney’s experience as a chief executive, business leader and governor position him to be the best candidate to lead us into a new era of streamlined but effective government with a renewed focus on maintaining America as the world’s leading economy. The best indicator of how Romney would lead is his record as governor. There we have evidence of a Romney who governs more moderately than he was forced to campaign in the long runup to the presidential election.
….
He came into office in 2003 facing an immediate budget shortfall of $450 million and projections of much worse. It was Massachusetts’ worst recession in decades. Romney’s approach was businesslike, and he didn’t spare any sacred cows. He made deep cuts in local government funding and to education. He didn’t raise state taxes, but he increased fees for many government services, which raised hundreds of millions. He took heat from businesses for closing loopholes that saved them money but cost the state revenue. He blocked companies from transferring intellectual property to out-of-state shell companies, and he barred banks and other companies from avoiding taxes by paper restructuring. The bottom line: He erased the deficit in Massachusetts (which was required by state law) and left office with a $600 million surplus. He replenished the state’s reserve fund two years into his term, pushing it to $2 billion by the time he left office in 2007.

Romney’s plans for recovery revolve around the economic principles of reducing government regulation, cutting corporate taxes and opening more global markets. It’s an approach consistent with who Mitt Romney is – a businessman and a moderate conservative who doesn’t believe so much in government’s making things happen as he does in lifting government interference so they can happen.

If Romney can stabilize and expand the U.S. economy, his greatest foreign policy contribution could be employing reinvigorated U.S. economic muscle to influence the global economy. This is a precarious time for America. We’d expect a President Romney to lead toward the center, to resist the calls for a hard turn to the right that are sure to come from within his party. Romney has accomplished progress with divided government – the Massachusetts General Court (the state’s Legislature) is overwhelmingly Democratic. The gridlock in D.C. is entrenched, and we’d urge him to make a priority of finding the common ground and using his leadership to forge compromise, coalitions and solutions. Romney as president should stay true to who he is – a moderate leader who can work with the left and right, with business and with government, and who will set an example, both as an individual and as the leader of the United States of America.



The Lima News (OH)
Editorial
October 28, 2012

http://www.limaohio.com

The Lima News Endorses Mitt Romney
..
Obama swept into office in 2008 promising hope and change. But change has come too slowly, and for too many people, hope surrendered to despair long ago.

That is why Lima News is calling for a change of leadership and is endorsing Republican Mitt Romney for president.

We have little confidence that Obama would be anymore successful given another four-year term. Our memory of a euphoric Obama who energized this country four years ago is now replaced by the picture of a slumping president, tired and defensive, during his first debate with Romney.

Today, family incomes are down. The middle class is shrinking and poverty is growing. College students are graduating deep in debt with questionable job opportunities.

At the same time, the government continues to take on more debt. It just wracked up its fourth straight 13-figure shortfall. During Obama’s four years the debt has grown to more than $5 trillion. He now believes the only way to trim the deficit is by raising taxes on the wealthy and eliminating tax breaks.

We feel Romney’s solid resume in the private sector will help here. He understands that reviving the economy and repairing the government’s balance sheet are things that need to happen now, not four years in the future. His five-point plan calls for raising revenue through business expansions — definitely not new taxes — and reducing spending.

Romney has the added benefit of likely dealing with a friendlier Congress. At least one chamber, if not both, are expected to favor Republicans. It is imperative the president and Congress work together. Two years ago, Congress recommended a bipartisan 10-year, $4 trillion deficit-reduction plan, only to be snubbed by Obama, who had his own, less ambitious plan.



Green Bay Press-Gazette (WI)
Editorial
October 28, 2012

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com

We Recommend Romney For President

Four years ago, when Barack Obama was elected president, he campaigned on a message of hope and change
.

Many hoped he could bring change for a nation weary of two wars, a nation beset by a mortgage crisis and Wall Street scandal, and, most importantly, a nation whose economic future was so uncertain that massive government bailouts were needed.

However, four years later, the economy hasn’t rebounded. In fact, some say it’s worse, with high unemployment numbers, a trillion-dollar deficit, an even bigger national debt and uncertainty in the business world over the future of our economy. Poverty has increased, the median household income has dropped, and some have given up looking for work.

This nation cannot wait four more years to see if Obama’s policies will work. It needs to turn to someone who has a proven track record in the business community and will offer the steady hand to a teetering economy.

For that reason, the Green Bay Press-Gazette is endorsing Republican candidate Mitt Romney, who we believe is the best choice to turn around the U.S. economy. We believe the Republican candidate’s experience as CEO of Bain Capital, governor of Massachusetts and work with the Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City will be assets to turning around the economy.

Romney’s five-point jobs proposal looks to strengthen the middle class by creating 12 million jobs in his first term. Romney aims to reach this ambitious goal by achieving energy independence by 2020, expanding trade, improving education, cutting the deficit and helping small businesses.

Romney proposes 20 percent cuts in the marginal tax rate for individuals, which would reduce the top bracket from 35 to 28 percent, and cut the corporate tax rate from 35 to 28 percent. He would get rid of the death tax and the Alternative Minimum Tax. He would eliminate taxes on interest, dividends and capital gains for those earning less than $200,000.

Romney would cut the deficit with smaller government and addressing the national debt. The deficit was at $1.09 trillion as of Sept. 30, according to the Congressional Budget Office, which is a slight drop from the $1.3 trillion deficit Obama faced when he took office. He had pledged in February 2009 to “cut the deficit we inherited in half by the end of my first term in office.”

Despite all this, we can’t we can’t ignore the state of the economy today. It is the overriding factor in people’s lives. How they pay for health care, how they pay for their mortgage, how they pay the bills, how they pay for retirement are all chief concerns that need to be answered. They are concerns that cut across are classes and are paramount in deciding who should be in the White House.

How long can Obama blame his predecessor for the current financial woes without taking any responsibility for some of the economic duress and gridlock? At some point, the problems a president inherits become his problems if he hasn’t been able to solve them.

At that point, then, we need someone else in the White House who can solve them. We believe that person is Mitt Romney.


MUCH more! Click here.

Still Want to Vote for Obama? Former Liberals Step Up (Powerful #Video)


Barack Obama is an outstanding orator and as such, has made dozens of soaring promises ranging from bringing the unemployment rate down to 5.5% in his first term to televising behind-the-scenes negotiations to complete transparency and ending partisan bickering. Promises are easy to make. Setting strong goals and attaining them was never Mr. Obama’s strong suit. It is Mitt Romney’s.

I believe no American would ever vote for Barack Obama if they watched this video.

Hat Tip to Enrique Romero for bringing this video to MRC.


American Values: “In God We Trust” — “Liberty” — “E Pluribus Unum”

Twitter Follow: @VicLundquist – Dedicated to all members of The United States military and their families

Romney/Ryan: Resounding, Resolute Support at Red Rocks, CO!

Thousands upon thousands came to hear Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan speak last night at Red Rocks Amphitheatre, near Morrison, Colorado. NM Governor Susana Martinez, and entertainers Kid Rock and Rodney Atkins, also shared the stage with Romney and Ryan. Click on image to enlarge.
(Photo – RomneyResponse)

What a night!

In spite of gridlocked traffic hours before the event began, from near and far, they pressed forward. Driving up mountain roads, through the rocks they came…

As far as the eye could see, thousands of Romney/Ryan supporters made their way to magnificent Red Rocks Park, Colorado, for a chance in a life-time to see Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan – together for the first time in the beautiful Centennial State. The venue filled to capacity; many were turned away.

Sarah Hoyt at Instapundit.com writes:

Romney Ryan Rally at Red Rocks: [W]e left our home in time to get there just before five under normal conditions. About thirty miles out, the highway became a parking lot, where we got stuck for the next two hours. The freaky thing was the lines extending behind us at least as much. The highway exit was closed, but we’re conservatives/libertarians, we find ways. So we went back roads, parked in way outlaying parking lot (for another facility) and tried to walk. Only the people ahead of us were getting turned back at the door, so we all walked back to our cars shouting stuff like “Romney” and “Soon a real president.” Look at those pictures and let me tell you, at least that many of us were turned away or prevented from approaching.

See 360 photo posted here (scroll in/out, click two circles at top for 360 degree views).

As the enormous crowd waited to hear Congressman Ryan and Governor Romney (who, by the way, was fresh off his third and final well-executed debate with Obama), entertainers Kid Rock and Rodney Atkins wowed them.

Up-and-comer New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez – the first female Hispanic governor in the history of the United States – was also on hand to rev up the massive audience. (Remember her terrific GOP Convention speech?!)

Martinez:

Now, President Obama rattled off a “cute” joke last night about defense planning not being a game of Battleship. Well Mr. President, our BUDGET isn’t a game of Monopoly, either! Attacking Mitt Romney is NOT an agenda. Four more years, like the last four years, is NOT a solution.”

You see, this election, we’re not just picking the next president for four more years. WE are picking the direction and course of our country for a generation. It doesn’t matter which generation you come from – this is the most important election in YOUR generation!

Colorado Rockies first baseman Todd Helton also popped on stage to voice strong support for Romney and Ryan. (*See press release below).

If there would have been a roof to raise, this Romney/Ryan rally would have blown it clear up to the moon shining down on them.


UPDATE - Highlights not included on above video:

Romney supporter: “I have been at Red Rocks because I’ve lived here and I have never seen a crowd like this!

Another supporter: “It’s on fire! Red Rocks is on fire because Mitt Romney is here. And, we are thrilled to be a part of it.”



A view from the top… “More people came than the amphitheater could hold. Momentum grows even more!” (Photo and comments from @dmitchell624)



See MORE photos here.

*Yesterday, October 23, 2012, Mitt Romney announced the support of Colorado Rockies first baseman Todd Helton:

Keep going; more here!

Comedian Dennis Miller Supports Romney: “He’s a Good Man”

Dennis Miller

Comedian Dennis Miller knows what we know…

Mitt Romney has led an exemplary life and, much to the chagrin of Team Obama, IS A VERY GOOD MAN:

Romney Press Office:

Boston, MA – Mitt Romney today announced the support of political commentator and television and radio personality Dennis Miller.

Dennis Miller is a funny guy, but he understands that the challenges facing our nation are no laughing matter, said Mitt Romney. “We’ve both traveled across America, and we’ve seen hardship in many different forms. Whether it’s the family that can’t pay the mortgage, the unemployed worker who can’t find a job, or the kids graduating from college with no prospects for a career, too many people are hurting. This country needs a turnaround, one that I can deliver. As I travel around the country explaining my plan for a stronger middle class, I am happy to have Dennis Miller on my team.”

I’ll be voting for Mitt Romney on November 6th because he is a good man perfectly suited to help solve our many problems,” said Dennis Miller. “Let’s be honest with each other, folks. If we’ve reached a time in our nation’s history where men like Romney are demonized and said to be the problem, we are missing the point as badly as the point can be missed. The punditry always says that Romney ‘looks’ Presidential. Here’s what they don’t tell you. It has little if anything to do with his appearance and absolutely everything to do with the way he has led his life. Vote Romney-Ryan.”

Background On Dennis Miller:

Dennis Miller is a political commentator and television and radio personality. He began his career on Saturday Night live in 1985 and later hosted a string of talk show programs. Miller currently hosts a daily, three-hour, self-titled talk radio program, nationally syndicated by Dial Global and is a regular political commentator on The O’Reilly Factor.

Had to throw in a few Millerisms:

Why is electricity so expensive these days? Why does it cost so much for something I can make with a balloon and my hair?

You’ve got bad eating habits if you use a grocery cart in 7-Eleven.

Washington, DC is to lying what Wisconsin is to cheese.


The day before the second presidential debate (Oct 15, 2012) Miller asked what I’ve been asking. Why, in all fairness, shouldn’t one in four of the debates be moderated by someone from FOX News?

  • Listen to his radio podcast ‘The Crowley Conundrum‘.

    Follow Jayde Wyatt on Twitter @YayforSummer

  • What They’re Saying About the Presidential Duel in Denver – Obama: “Four Snore Years”

    The first debate is over!

    It was remarkable…

    for Romney.

    The day after the first presidential debate of 2012 in Denver, CO, this headline from the Boston Herald says it all… (Oct 4, 2012)

    I was going to begin this article by saying Governor Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama went eyeball to eyeball last night in Denver, but that wasn’t the case. It was a night of Romney focusing on Obama, looking directly into his eyes, while Obama’s eyes were oft-times focused… downward… as if he was willing the lectern to morph into his teleprompter. And, in my opinion, as if he knew Romney was on to him. The Boston Herald headline above encapsulates the evening.

    Romney seemed to relish the opportunity to speak to Americans without the filter of the nefarious news media. He was the man we know and admire – very well-prepared, precise, focused, in control, filled with conviction and compassion, showed humor, aggressive while affable, and was completely at ease.

    Obama was flat, subdued, distracted, passive, at times churlish and bewildered that his royal-highness-stature-and-personality wasn’t cutting the mustard. At one point Obama asked moderator Jim Lehrer to move off a topic (a first!).

    From the get-go, Obama attempted to set the campaign narrative as not what has happened in the last four years, but what will happen if he’s given four MORE years. He couldn’t be standing on shakier, flakier ground.

    Some Obama proponents today are claiming moderator Jim Lehrer was weak or favored Romney. Not so. Obama was given four more minutes of speaking time – over Romney. The Governor delivered far more substance in his allotted time than Obama with his extra OVERtime. And, Lehrer appeared at times to attempt to coach Obama via his questions, trying to prompt him to give a more cogent response.

    Last night’s debate aptly illustrated by Gary Varvel, Oct 4, 2012

    Clash of the titans? The only titan present in this race is Mitt Romney.

    I’m delighted at what is being said about the Duel in Denver (from Mitt Romney Press):

    Obama Deputy Campaign Manager Stephanie Cutter: “And I Think That Mitt Romney, Yes, He Absolutely Wins The Preparation. And He Wins The Style Points.” (CNN’s “CNN Live,” 10/3/12)

    ABC News’ Jake Tapper: “It Was Not A Strong Performance By [President Obama].” ABC’s JAKE TAPPER: “Well, I’ve covered President Obama for about six or seven years now and I’ve seen him inspire crowds of tens of thousands and then I also recall the summer of 2007 when he was listless and flat and uninspired and his campaign manager had to knock some sense in him and get him back in the game. Unfortunately for the Obama campaign that’s the Obama I saw on the stage tonight. It was not a strong performance by him.” (ABC, 10/3/12)

    Bloomberg’s Joshua Green: “Dominating…” “On Wednesday night, Mitt Romney attempted a hostile takeover of the presidential campaign … dominating President Obama.” (Bloomberg, 10/3/12)

    Politico’s Glenn Thrush: “How Tough A Night Was It For The Incumbent? He Even Muffed Some Of The Basics Of Debate 101…” “How tough a night was it for the incumbent? He even muffed some of the basics of Debate 101, struggling to find the right camera to address once or twice during the mostly civil 90-minute exchange.” (Politico, 10/3/12)

    After Mitt Romney’s debate performance, his sweet granddaughter rushed on stage to give him a big hug. Oct 3, 2012 (photographer unknown)

    Time’s Mark Halperin: “A Performance That Will Both Delight The Republican Base And Make Undecided Voters Take Note. Was The Dominant Figure On The Stage On Almost Every Exchange.” (Time , 10/3/12)

    ABC News’ Russell Goldman: “Romney Came Out Swinging In The First Presidential Debate…” “Mitt Romney came out swinging in the first presidential debate, challenging President Obama over his health care reforms, treatment of the economy, taxes and funding for Sesame Street’s Big Bird.” (ABC News, 10/3/12)

    BuzzFeed’s Michael Hastings: “For Weeks, President Obama’s Advisers Have Been Lowering Expectations … Maybe The Expectations Weren’t Low Enough.” “For weeks, President Obama’s advisers have been lowering expectations for the debate tonight, both privately and publicly forecasting that the Commander in Chief could deliver a dud. Maybe the expectations weren’t low enough.” (BuzzFeed, 10/3/12)

    Time’s Joe Klein: “Mitt Romney Won This Debate. Barack Obama Lost It. I Mean, He Got His Butt Kicked.” “Well, I’m with all the other talking heads: Mitt Romney won this debate. Barack Obama lost it. I mean, he got his butt kicked. It was, in fact, one of the most inept performances I’ve ever seen by a sitting President.” (Time , 10/3/12)

    Bloomberg’s Ramesh Ponnuru: “Romney Made The Most Focused Appeal To Middle-Class Voters On The Basis Of How His Agenda Would Help Them…” “Romney made the most focused appeal to middle-class voters on the basis of how his agenda would help them — on energy, on health care, on jobs — that he ever has.” (Bloomberg, 10/4/12)

    Read more and SEE PHOTOS by clicking here.

    America: Obama’s Reality vs Romney’s Reality


    With sufficient frustrations born of the media’s failing of America by not disseminating truth and facts, and with bewilderment over the media’s blindness to truth and substance, I have compared below the realities of America under Obama and Romney. To be fair, Mitt Romney hasn’t led America, yet, but his history and record is clearly indicative of what we might see under a Romney Presidency. Further and notwithstanding my bias towards Mitt Romney, I have tried to be dispassionate in this comparative.

    Romney’s America seems to be more robust and more hopeful, in fact, more Free.


    (more…)

    Page 1 of 38123456Last »