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…)

Romney: More to Gain Than to Lose in Last Debate

Well, the final Presidential debate will be over in less than 24 hours.

I’m sensing a certain level of stress among some Romney supporters in the lead up to this debate. Sure, it’s human nature to feel anxious just before a big event … especially when we are so invested in Mitt’s success. But I’m not nervous one bit, and here’s why ….

Governor (soon to be “President Elect”) Romney has much more to gain than to lose in this debate. It’s Obama that has the tough job tonight. The non-incumbent challenger generally has a low-bar to clear in these debates. They only have to 1) show that they can credibly be Commander-in-Chief and 2) avoid major gaffes. Mitt has shown that he is more than capable of achieving this based on his first two debate showings.

Much of the “who won the debate?” game is about expectations. Obama was widely expected to be a superior debater/communicator, and it was a race-changing event when he lost the first debate so dramatically. This set up debate number two, where Obama had reset his bar down to the floor. As such, many observers felt that he “won” the second debate (by a much narrower margin than the 1st debate, and more on style than on actual issues according to polls). But the President’s “win” was really more of a “most improved” award … we’ve seen no bounce in the polls for him at all.

Conventional wisdom is that Obama is supposed to trounce Governor Romney tonight, since the topic is Foreign Policy. The problem for Obama, is that his supposed foreign policy superiority is already “baked into the cake” of his poll numbers/support. Obama’s problem arises from the fact that his foreign policy successes begin and end with “Bin Laden is dead.” Sure, that’s a HUGE point, but it’s sort of hard to talk about THAT for 90 minutes straight. And no voter is going to change his mind to vote for Obama on this issue. “Hey yeah, Obama got Bin Laden … I had forgotten that. I guess I’ll vote for him now.”

Even those formerly on Obama’s foreign policy team decidedly do NOT see this as a strength for him (be sure to read that scathing rebuke!).

The debate will give Mitt an opportunity to, once again, unexpectedly impress voters on the depth and breadth of his international experience and knowledge. The media have painted him as a lightweight on foreign policy, someone out of his depth. Mitt can and will highlight his substantial foreign exposure through his public, private, and religious experiences.

The wildcard issue for tonight is Banghazi … and not in a good way for Obama.


Despite the President’s higher foreign policy numbers in general, this recent Ohio poll (that was even a +8% Dem sample) showed Mitt UP 49%-47% on the question: “Do you trust Barack Obama or Mitt Romney more on the issue of Libya?” Mitt did miss an opportunity to fully expose Obama on Libya in debate #2. Don’t expect a replay of that tonight …

BoJo finds London Isn’t as Prepared as He Thought

London Mayor Boris Johnson, who took offense last week at Mitt Romney’s comments that the previously-acknowledged security issues at the London Olympic games were “disconcerting,” found out yesterday just how hard it is to get all the details right.

Mitt’s statement would hardly seem controversial in the context made:

It’s hard to know just how well it will turn out…. There are a few things that were disconcerting: the stories about the private security firm not having enough people, supposed strike of the immigration and customs officials. That obviously is not something which is encouraging.

These problems would have been troubling to someone like Mitt, who is used to having the buck stop with him, and who of course knows a thing or two about Olympic security, having run the 2002 Winter Games without incident just months after 9/11. The head of G4S, the security contractor for the London games, had already told the Home Affairs Select Committee of Parliament the security situation at the games was a “humiliating shambles” for his company and the country. G4S’ failure to recruit and train adequate security forces required impromptu use of the UK military to fill in the gaps. One UK report indicates that up to half the security forces on the ground at Olympic park are now service personnel. Disconcerting? Of course.

Notwithstanding, BoJo and the UK media took Mitt’s sentiments and did what some of our own media and politicians do so well: distorted, diverted and blamed someone else:

There are some people who are coming from around the world who don’t yet know about all the preparations we’ve done to get London ready in the last seven years…. I heard there’s a guy called Mitt Romney who wants to know whether we’re ready. Are we ready? Yes we are!”

Why did this reaction seem so natural to the US media and Democrats? Any-who, apparently Boris hadn’t checked the zip lines. The humor starts about the 0:30 mark.

Boris’ plight inspired an internet meme yesterday. (more…)

London: CNN Interview of Governor & Mrs. Romney on Various Topics

The Romneys sit down with Piers Morgan

Today in London, Piers Morgan interviewed Governor and Mrs. Romney taking the entire programmed hour. One piece of trivia: Morgan told Gov. Romney he is more English than Morgan is since Morgan’s ancestors come from Ireland and Gov. Romney’s from Preston, England. The entire interview was excellent. Following are some of the highlights of the interview.

Governor Romney mentioned two or three times he would not comment on current policies of the United States while traveling abroad out of respect for our current President. He did not mention President Obama by name.

Be sure to see the other interview segments…Click here ——–> (more…)

Romney Heads to England, Israel, Poland: Meeting Cameron, Kenny, Netanyahu, Walesa & More

Governor Mitt Romney is going overseas…

On Tuesday, after delivering a speech in Reno, Nevada to the Veterans of Foreign Wars at their annual conference, Romney will embark on a six-day, full schedule, listening tour to England, Israel, and Poland:

The presumptive Republican nominee and former Massachusetts governor will meet with the leaders of all three countries, other government officials, opposition leaders, and at least one U.S. ambassador. He plans to attend the opening ceremony of the Olympics, visit sites of historical significance, and hold public events in at least two of the countries.

Aides say Romney does not view the trip as an opportunity to roll out any new policy proposals. “This trip is an opportunity for the governor to listen and learn, to visit countries that share common values, common interests, and I should say in many cases shared heritage with people here in the United States,” Romney’s policy director, Lanhee Chen, told reporters in a conference call previewing the trip.

… While Romney is likely to highlight differences in his approach to international relations relative to Obama, he is expected to refrain from attacking Obama while traveling abroad.

A preview of The Gov’s itinerary…

England

The Olympic rings are lit up on Tower Bridge in preparation for the start of the 2012 Summer Olympic Games in London, England. The Opening Ceremony takes place Friday, July 27, 2012.

Thursday, July 26, 2012:

Governor Romney will meet with British leaders including, Prime Minister David Cameron, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, Former Prime Minister Tony Blair, Labour Party Leader Ed Miliband, Foreign Secretary William Hague, and Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne.

Friday, July 27, 2012:

Romney will meet with Irish Taoiseach Enda Kenny.

Later, he’ll meet with U.S. Olympic athletes and attend the 2012 Summer Olympics Opening Ceremonies. USA! USA! USA! (We know the strong passion The Gov has for the Olympics – the spirit of competition – and for the capacity of the games to inspire unity, mutual understanding, and respect across the world. Romney is known for his turnaround of the 2002 Winter Olympic Games in Salt Lake City, Utah.) Also, if schedules can be coordinated, he may try to meet with other world leaders who are in London for the Olympics.

Israel

The gleam from the Dome of the Rock reflects the afternoon sun in Jerusalem, Israel. Among the Israeli leaders meeting with Mitt Romney will be Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Sunday, July 29, 2012:

Romney has been to Israel three times in the past, on a family visit in the late 1990s and, in 2007 and 2011, on fact-finding trips focused on security and economic issues.

On this trip, he’ll meet first with Daniel Shapiro, the U.S. Ambassador to Israel, who will give him a briefing. Romney will also meet with Israeli officials including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Shimon Peres, and will also sit down with Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad. He has met them all on previous trips.

While aides say Romney will not specifically criticize the president’s Middle East policy while he is in Israel, he will continue to make the case for standing with Israel – as he often does on the campaign trail. “America needs to stand by its allies, particularly allies that are under siege like Israel, particularly democratic allies who have such a shared history and shared values with America” Dan Senor, a special adviser on foreign policy, told reporters in previewing Romney’s message.

In an op-ed written yesterday, former U.S. Senator Norm Coleman (GOP) shares the following:

By sheer coincidence, Romney is an old and personal friend of Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. Romney’s first job after finishing up at Harvard was at the Boston Consulting Group, and Netanyahu was working there at the time and sat in an office down the hall. The two struck up a friendship and have remained close. If Romney were to become president, it would be an extraordinary chapter in U.S.-Israeli relations.

“There is little precedent,” The New York Times wrote recently, “for two politicians of their stature to have such a history together that predates their entry into government.”

Certainly Israel could use a close friend in the White House these days.

Over the last three years, however, the U.S.-Israeli relationship has been troubled.

President Obama does not seem to have personal affection for the Jewish state. He has publicly castigated Israel, including at the United Nations. He was caught on a hot microphone denigrating Israel’s prime minister, and when Netanyahu came to Washington he received him with marked coolness, neglecting to hold the customary joint news conference before asking the Israeli leader to exit through a rear door.

Romney will also deliver remarks while in Israel.

Poland

The skyline over Gdansk, Poland turns a rosy hue at dusk. Governor Romney will meet with Poland’s former President Lech Walesa in the port city.

Monday, July 30, 2012:

Romney’s final destination is Poland, where he will meet with the current leadership, including President Bronislaw Komorowski, Prime Minister Donald Tusk, and Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski. Romney will also meet with Lech Walesa, the former Polish president and winner of the 1983 Nobel Peace Prize. Walesa, who was president from 1990 to 1995 and oversaw Poland’s transition out of communism, was the one who invited Romney to visit his country.

Ian Brzezinski, another Romney adviser, said the visit to Poland will highlight an important alliance that is “rich in history” — from Polish support for the American revolution all the way through Iraq and Afghanistan, where the country has sent troops to assist in the U.S.-led war efforts. Romney will also point to country’s economic success, which he will say stems from free market principles and capitalism – the themes he pushes on the campaign trail at home.

“This is a country that stands in sharp contrast economically to the rest of Europe where economies are dropping by about 5% or more,” Brzezinski told reporters.

Romney will also deliver remarks and visit historical sights in Poland. The ‘Lech Walesa Institute’ said in a statement that Governor Romney is visiting Poland by special invitation, issued to him at the beginning of the month, by President Walesa:

Poland and Poles are paying close attention to the election campaign in the United States, focused on choosing a leader for the American nation for the next four years,” Walesa wrote in the invitation dated July 4.

Their choice will influence the fate of America and the world.

Walesa refused to meet with Obama last year, saying “It doesn’t suit me.”

Romney’s invitation from freedom-fighter Walesa is, indeed, a high honor.

This will be a memorable week for Mitt and Ann as they find themselves in the international spotlight. It’s another opportunity for world leaders and the good people in England, Israel, and Poland to see that the USA has an opportunity, through Mitt Romney, to elect a strong, seasoned statesman who will once again respect our allies, strengthen our partnerships, and instill renewed confidence in the mighty cause of freedom.

To Mitt and Ann, Godspeed!

Follow Jayde Wyatt on Twitter @YayforSummer

Reputations of Obama and Romney — Wherein Lies the Integrity? In Whom to Trust the Economy?

Reminder: MittRomneyCentral has no affiliation whatsoever with Mitt Romney or his presidential campaign. We are a grassroots organization. Comments below are strictly the opinion of the author.

Mr. Obama’s desperation and panic have compelled him and his campaign subordinates to stoop to full immersion in pools of scum in their failing attempts to drag Governor Romney into their familiar territory of mud wrestling. As the Obama campaign chooses to wallow in the waste of deception, they ironically reveal their true characters. As President of the United States, Barack Obama has debased the office of the presidency to a level he will never be able to repair — the reputation of the presidency will now need to be restored by his successor.

By contrast, Mitt Romney’s responses have been those of a gentleman: Firm, resolute, tough, and presidential.

My anger over what I have witnessed emerging from The White House this week caused me to postpone this opinion 24 hours. Mr. Obama’s decision to not apologize to Governor Romney for blatantly false accusations, as well as his failure to disavow the slander of subordinates, is further indictment of Obama’s character and has only brought on greater indignation. By allowing his campaign staff to spew false accusations at will, he now effectively owns their statements — Obama’s future attempts to distance himself from them will ring hollow.

Those of us that contribute to this site are political junkies of sorts; in a way, we become such through constant research of facts. I admit I am one. That said, I must assume readers of this piece are not political junkies and rather click through to MRC a few minutes each day to learn truth behind each presidential candidate’s positions and policies. Fair enough.

If one does not know much about Mitt Romney or Barack Obama and their policies, one can easily discern which is the more credible principal of their respective campaigns based solely on their reputations built over a lifetime. Ignoring altogether either candidate’s ideologies or political affiliation, which person’s reputation would lead you to trust one over the other? After all, very few of us will ever have the opportunity to really know the person of Barack Obama or Mitt Romney, correct? If true, what do we have by which to judge each man’s character, integrity, and trustworthiness? Whose rhetoric can we really believe?

To discern truth, we have each person’s reputation. With whom has each person chosen to associate in service? In business? What is each person’s reputation? Consider the source.

The Reputation of Barack Obama

This week, Governor Sununu on the Sean Hannity referred to Barack Obama’s “cheek to jowl” relationship with Rod Blagojevich, convicted felon and former Illinois governor to describe Obama’s reputation of and familiarity with “Chicago style politics.” Following are but a few facts that make up Mr. Obama’s reputation:

  • Obama has stated numerous times recently that FactCheck.org “is wrong” when their research is cited in reference to his false statements of Romney. Obama clearly thinks the value add of constantly repeating the lie is worth the risk that a few people will call him on it.
  • Obama has arrogantly stated the historically liberal Washington Post’s Pinocchio fact checkers are wrong when they correct his blatantly false statements like this one.
  • Obama “cheek to jowl” with Blagojevich

  • Obama’s first significant business transactions involved convicted felon and neighbor Tony Rezko known for numerous shady dealings at all levels of Chicago politics.
  • In Obama’s book, Dreams From My Father, he admits to “composite” descriptions of those in his life for “compression” purposes, allowing the narrative he wishes to project without any risk of discovery of false claims or untoward reputation.
  • The evening of the bin Laden raid, Obama, along with the tiny group present in the Ops room committed to keep details of the operation completely secret except to disclose that bin Laden had been killed. Less than 24 hours later, Obama revealed numerous details of the raid including the use of a previously secret elite force (SEAL Team VI), endangering current and future special operations missions.
  • Obama’s hubris extends to taking credit for military operations — angering U.S. active duty military personnel — while projecting to the public that doing so was an enormous risk to himself.
  • Obama’s White House has been the source of numerous documented leaks that have endangered the lives of Americans in the military and intelligence communities and this according to Democrats like Senator Feinstein. These are widely considered to be for the political self-interest of Obama.
  • Obama pushed ObamaCare through by constantly stating it was not a tax, then argued at the Supreme Court that it is a tax, and when declared a tax by the Supreme Court, he and his surrogates vehemently deny it is a series of huge taxes.
  • Space does not allow the listing of all blatant lies. To study only the latest of Obama’s lies, click here. And to review 10 major documented lies Obama has made, click here.

In Mr. Obama’s words, watch this short video clip of seven promises Obama made to America that he never had any intention of keeping. These are only seven examples of commitments he made knowing he would never follow through:


The Reputation of Mitt Romney

Just this week, Governor Sununu and Mayor Rudy Giuliani separately referred to Mitt Romney as having a reputation above reproach when asked about accusations by Cutter and Rhoades that Romney committed a felony. As well, numerous Democrats and those that supported Obama in 2008 came out on the record to defend Mitt Romney’s reputation. That said, consider these few facts related to Mitt Romney’s life and career:

  • Since the 1970s, Mitt Romney has been instrumental in countless successful business endeavors with Boston Consulting Group, Bain & Company, and Bain Capital. His leadership was crucial in most of these successes.
  • Mitt Romney left Bain & Company to co-found Bain Capital in 1984 which became a successful venture capital firm. By 1990, Bain & Company was nearing financial collapse when Romney was asked to return to the firm to rescue it; which he did from 1991 to 1992 where he worked without pay ($1/year). He returned to lead Bain Capital afterward.
  • Mitt Romney closed the offices of Bain Capital in 1996 for a week to search for the 14-year old daughter of partner Robert Gay who went missing in New York City. He turned the Bain Capital team into a detective/search team in the City and after several days they found Gay’s daughter in New Jersey. The operation is credited with saving her life.
  • Mitt Romney was asked to take a leave of absence from Bain Capital in 1999 to rescue the financially strapped and corruption laden Winter Olympics which was running nearly $400 million short of revenue objectives. In the face of major threats of terrorism post 9/11, Romney led the Olympics to an astounding success, clearing a $100 million profit. He worked those three years without pay ($1/year). After the successful ending of the Olympics, he received a severance which he donated entirely to charity.
  • Mitt Romney served a successful term as governor of Massachusetts accomplishing many key objectives while being opposed by an 80 percent Democrat legislature. His success is attributed to many various methods and leadership techniques, including the effective use of the bully pulpit and 800 vetoes. He worked as governor without pay from 2003 to 2007 ($1/year).
  • For approximately 17 years from 1977, Mitt Romney served as the pastor (bishop) or senior pastor (stake president) of his church in which he met with and personally counseled thousands of individuals and families dealing with spiritual, employment, financial, and marital challenges, among many other leadership requirements. These responsibilities sometimes exceeded 30 hours a week, over and above his professional duties. His 17+ years service as a pastor were all without pay.
  • Mitt Romney lost the 2008 bid as the GOP presidential candidate to Senator McCain. Upon conceding to McCain, Romney immediately set out to raise as much money as he could in support of Senator McCain’s presidential candidacy, raising approximately $20 million in that effort.
  • After McCain’s loss to Barack Obama in the presidential race of 2008, Romney worked tirelessly for Republicans running for the Senate and House in the 2010 elections and was instrumental in raising significant funds in those successful wins. Ronald Reagan did the very same thing leading up to his 1980 run for the presidency.

Mitt Romney’s personal and professional reputation is above reproach. Indeed, his reputation for the highest levels of integrity is touted by the thousands of friends, colleagues, and associates that have worked with Romney at various times across this nation and over the years. That is not true of Barack Obama. In fact their respective reputations, discerned from rhetoric, decisions, actions, and policies are polar opposites in so many ways.

In whose care would you trust your business? In whose care would you trust your community or state government? Which person would you guess to tell the truth at every turn and in any situation?

Consider the source.

“Associate with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation; for it is better to be alone than in bad company.” ~ George Washington


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

BOOM! Romney Refutes Obama’s LITANY of LIES (Felon?!) New Ad

New lows from Obama…

Deceptions once lobbed through Obama’s presidential peashooter are now coming fast and furiously through misinformation missiles – aimed at Mitt Romney.

Remember Obama’s Scheme Team memo last summer to kill Mitt Romney? They weren’t kidding. Here are the latest character assassination slams from Obama’s lie launchers…

Slam! Today we’re hearing from Nancy Pelosi and liberal talking heads that Governor Romney engaged in race baiting yesterday while speaking to the NAACP. (The avalanche of positive reviews for that speech has obviously rattled them.)

Slam! Now Romney could be a criminal. Yes, we could be supporting a felon! (*eye-roll*) From lie-launcher Stephanie Cutter (Obama Deputy Campaign Manager):

In a conference call with reporters this morning, the Obama campaign focused on this morning’s Boston Globe story arguing that Mitt Romney remained at Bain through 2002. The Romney campaign has called the story “not accurate.”

“Either Mitt Romney, through his own words and his own signature, was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the SEC, which is a felony, or he was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the American people to avoid responsibility for some of the consequences of his investment,” Obama deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter asserted.

“If he was lying to the American people,” she added. “then that’s a real character and trust issue that the American people need to take very seriously.”

“If he’s legally responsible for everything that happened inside those Bain deals, seems to me that he’s also politically responsible for the consequences of those deals in terms of people losing their jobs, losing their pensions and their health care, and American jobs being shipped overseas,” she said.

Slam! Cutter also reiterated the too-stupid-for-words claim that Governor Romney is the most secretive presidential candidate since Richard Nixon. Another attempt to define The Gov by invoking a name attached with great scandal… Yes, the Obama lie launchers have obviously memorized the Alinsky playbook.

Slam! In pre-emptive worminess to negate positive press coming Romney’s way from his attendance at the summer Olympics in London in a couple of weeks, Cutter tried to get some bang with this one:

Cutter also took a swipe at his work related to the 2002 Olympics, commenting that Romney’s Olympic record was “less than wholesome, shall we say, in terms of the decisions that were made there, the contracts that were signed, and the basic operation of how Mitt Romney ran the Olympics.”

Slam! Obama’s lie-launchers are not giving up on the Romney is an outsourcer meme, either.

Yes, Ms. Cutter. LYING is a real character and trust issue the American people need to take very seriously. The fact that you and your boss are deceiving America IS BEING TAKEN VERY SERIOUSLY. So, stand back liars! Romney and team are firing back with explosions of TRUTH…

BOOM!

In a conference call Monday morning, senior staff said Romney’s surrogates would stop shying away from the word “lie” in responding to Democrats’ attacks on his business record, and plan to go on TV to call Obama a “liar,” the source said.

They are very fed up with these attacks,” said the source.

To spread the message, the source said, the campaign is going to start circulating a document to press that compiles “presidential falsehoods and exaggerations.”

BOOM!

Misleading, unfair, and untrue… Romney For President today released a new ad titled ‘No Evidence’:

BOOM!

The Romney press shop today released ‘Groundhog Day For The Obama Campaign’s False Attacks’. Check it out here.

BOOM!

The Romney press shop today revealed Obama Campaign’s Top Ten Lies & Exaggerations. Highlights:

NUMBER ONE: The Obama Campaign’s Discredited Attack On Governor Romney’s Record Of Job Creation
NUMBER TWO: President Obama Falsely Claimed Obamacare Was “Absolutely Not A Tax Increase”
NUMBER THREE: The Obama Campaign’s Attempt To Deflect Blame For The Failed Solyndra Investment
NUMBER FOUR: President Obama’s False Claim About His Record Of Creating Manufacturing Jobs
NUMBER FIVE: The Obama Campaign Distorted Governor Romney’s Position On Abortion
NUMBER SIX: The Obama Campaign’s Distorted Attacks About Massachusetts Contracts For Foreign Jobs
NUMBER SEVEN: The Obama Campaign’s Misleading Claim About Massachusetts’ Debt Burden
NUMBER EIGHT: The Obama Campaign’s False Attack About Governor Romney’s Position On Student Loan Rates
NUMBER NINE: President Obama’s Misinformation About His Own Record Of Job Creation
NUMBER TEN: President Obama’s “Ridiculous” Claim On Tax Cuts

Get the all the facts here.

BOOM!

Two days ago Team Romney shared this: The Truth Hurts.

BOOM!

The Romney press shop today released ANOTHER DAY, ANOTHER OBAMA CAMPAIGN FALSEHOOD:

“The Obama campaign must think Mitt Romney is Superman. He was, in reality, rescuing the Olympics by working in Utah 24/7 for the years the Obama campaign also alleges he was running Bain Capital. Even though the Obama campaign may be wrong about his involvement in Bain Capital, it shows that even they can admit Mitt Romney is a great leader.”Former Governor John Sununu

Today, The Obama Campaign Launched Even More False Attacks On Governor Romney’s Business Career:

Today, The Obama Campaign Falsely Alleged That Governor Romney Was Managing Bain Capital After February 1999. “The Obama campaign said a Boston Globe report Thursday proves Mitt Romney hasn’t been truthful about when he left Bain Capital. The Globe story cites SEC filings to prove Romney stayed on as head of Bain Capital after 1999.” (Pema Levy, “Obama Camp: Romney ‘Wasn’t Telling The Truth’,” Talking Points Memo, 7/12/12)

Multiple Non-Partisan Fact Checkers Have Already Confirmed Mitt Romney Left Bain Capital When He Actually Did – In February 1999:

“The Massachusetts-Based Firm Notes That Romney Retired More Than 13 Years Ago.” (Steve Peoples, “Bain Capital Defends Record In Light Of Criticism,” The Associated Press, 5/16/12)

(more…)

Ann Romney: Entertainment Tonight, Prescott Bush Awards Dinner, B-Day Cake ‘Trumps’ Fundraiser

Last night, the crew at Entertainment Tonight caught up with busy Ann Romney. Nancy O’Dell asked the former First Lady of Massachusetts a variety of questions, including queries about Saturday Night Live skits that skewer her and Governor Romney. Ann’s good humor won the evening: “Over the weekend we heard about it — our kids e-mailed us about it and we laughed about it.”

Mrs. Romney was also asked if she would ever appear on SNL (answer in video below).

Ms. O’Dell inquired about Ann’s health – her battle with cancer and ongoing challenges with multiple sclerosis. Opening up about the debilitating way M.S. affects her, Ann revealed a scare she had just before Super Tuesday. Here’s the interview:


I had such a nice time talking to her [Ann Romney]. She is such a strong woman.” ~ Nancy O’Dell

On Monday (April 23rd), the night before mini Super Tuesday elections, the former Massachusetts First Lady was in Stamford, Connecticut where she was the keynote speaker at the Prescott Bush Awards Dinner.

If you’re unfamiliar with the event, it’s named after United States Senator Prescott Sheldon Bush who represented Connecticut from 1952 until January 1963. He was the father of President George H. W. Bush (41), and grandfather to President George W. Bush (43) and 43rd Governor of Florida – Jeb Bush. The event sold out; it’s the biggest fundraiser of the year for the state GOP. This year, Tom Foley, who ran for governor in 2010, received the Prescott Bush Award. Foley was narrowly defeated by Democrat Dan Malloy.

Mrs. Romney regaled the crowd relating stories of the hard work and rewards of motherhood and shared the some of the challenges of her health. In 2002, when Governor Romney committed to take on the scandal-ridden Winter Olympic Games, her M.S. was so bad she could barely walk, but, with Mitt’s encouragement, she was able to carry the Olympic torch. She related how her husband and five boys cheered and got teary-eyed with love and pride when she completed the taxing accomplishment.

Ann spoke of the juggling act of motherhood:

“I know what it’s like to finish the laundry and to look in the basket five minutes later and it’s full again,” Romney said. “I know what it’s like to pull all the groceries in and see the teenagers run through and then all of sudden all of the groceries you just bought a few hours ago are gone. I know what it’s like to get up early in the morning and get them off to school. I know what it’s like get up in the middle of the night when they’re sick And I know what it’s like to struggle and to have those concerns that all mothers have.”
[...]
“Some people think that I didn’t work,” Romney said. “I didn’t have help for many, many years.”

Romney said it was only after the birth of her youngest son, Craig, when she had to have emergency surgery, that she enlisted help with running the household.

Ann also spoke of the outpouring of encouragement she is receiving along the campaign trail and of the many women who have revealed they are praying for her:

“I can’t tell you how much I appreciate that because the days are long, the road is hard, the trials are there and I never know when I have this little gray cloud over my head when it’s going to start raining again,” Romney said. “And I do need everyone’s prayers.”

C-Span aired Ann’s excellent speech:

Ann Romney: “There is something going on out there in America. Traveling all over the United States has been amazing and I have met the most amazing people, especially women. These women are speaking to me about the economy, about the budget deficit, about their future. I have learned that people are ready for a change and for someone to come out and fix it.”

Readers have asked about the birthday party/fundraiser Melania Trump hosted for Ann Romney back on April 17th. In a nutshell, it was a great success!

(more…)

Anyone-But-Romney Force Reveals Political Bankruptcy / Mitt, Paul Ryan, & Milwaukee

Governor Mitt Romney and Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI) take a break from campaigning to grab a bite to eat at Culver's restaurant in Johnson Creek, Wisconsin. 4/1/12
(Photo/Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

The Romney/Ryan team continued yesterday taking their timely message to Wisconsinites. They were invited to hold a town hall meeting at Moore Oil Company in Milwaukee. Here’s video of The Gov and Congressman Ryan:

Later in the day, at the same venue, Romney and Ryan were interviewed by FOX News’ Greta Van Susteren:



We’re at a halfway point…

Today’s elections in Wisconsin, Maryland, and D.C. mark the halfway point in the race for delegates. Yesterday, Governor Romney picked up three more delegates… Coincidentally, he’s now halfway to clinching the GOP nomination:

The former Massachusetts governor inched up to 572 delegates on Monday _ exactly half the 1,144 needed _ after the Tennessee Republican Party finalized delegate totals from its March 6 primary. Results in several congressional districts were too close to call on election night, leaving three delegates unallocated.

Romney got all three delegates. He also picked up an endorsement from a New Hampshire delegate who had been awarded to former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman. Huntsman dropped out of the race in January and endorsed Romney.
[...]
According to the Associated Press tally, Romney has more than twice as many delegates as Santorum. Santorum has 272 delegates, followed by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich with 135 and Texas Rep. Ron Paul with 51.

Romney has won 54 percent of the primary and caucus delegates so far, putting him on pace to clinch the nomination in June. Romney could substantially add to his lead Tuesday, when 95 delegates will be at stake in three primaries, in Wisconsin, Maryland and the District of Columbia.

Current reality:

Santorum, who has won 27 percent of the primary and caucus delegates so far, would need 74 percent of the remaining delegates to clinch the nomination before the national convention. Gingrich would need 86 percent and Paul would have to win nearly all of them, which won’t happen because most states award delegates proportionally.

Anyone but Romney? Martin Sieff (FOX News Opinion) wrote yesterday that he is “sick of Santorum:

(more…)

What’s at Stake Tuesday, Long and Short Term

The Romance of Delegate Math

If you’re like me you find yourself looking at polling data and calculating delegate counts in your head. If Mitt takes so many delegates in DC, Maryland and Wisconsin, that puts him at a new total of X, extending his lead over Santorum by Y, and making Rick need Z percent of the future delegates to win…. Okay, maybe you’re not like me.

It may sound boring to the uninitiated, but it’s the math behind propelling the most qualified candidate in the race to his party’s nomination, step one in replacing Barack Obama.

What’s at Stake Tuesday: Long View

What Obamacare teaches us. In case you don’t think replacing Barack Obama is a big deal, reflect back on the biggest political story of this week. Okay, not the open mic incident. I’m referring to our hearing our president’s Solicitor General argue to the Supreme Court why Obamacare’s Federal mandate is constitutional. The traditionally conservative justices asked for a rationale that could possibly limit Congress’ power under the commerce clause should they accept his argument. Meanwhile, the traditionally liberal justices tried their best to supply that rationale. Based on the impressions of those reporting, the decision appears headed for a familiar 5-4 vote against the law, with the four traditional conservatives on one side, the four traditional liberals on the other, and middle-of-the-road Justice Kennedy likely voting with the conservatives. But time will tell.

Shape of the Court to come. As someone concerned about finding real limits to Congress’ power (history proving we need limits to preserve our freedom), and knowing the general police power was intended to be reserved to the states (making the difference between Federal Obamacare and state Romneycare night and day), I thank my lucky stars we had presidents Reagan, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush to appoint the four conservative justices currently on the court. The liberal justices? Two from Clinton, two from Obama. By way of preview, the next president may have a chance to replace not only the lead conservative on the court in Scalia (currently 76 years old) and a staunch liberal on the court in Ginsburg (79), but iconic swing justice Kennedy, who has made the difference in many 5-4 decisions (currently 75 years old). In other words, who the president is matters, a lot, not just in signing and vetoing laws, but in appointing justices to the court who can protect the Constitution for a generation to come (a combined half-century now for Scalia and Kennedy).

MORE REGARDING THE SUPREME COURT AND AN ESTIMATE OF DELEGATES AWARDED TUESDAY BELOW! (more…)

Page 1 of 3123