Pennsylvania: Governor Ed Rendell (D): “We’re Nervous”

THANK YOU to all of you! Those of us at Mitt Romney Central are witness to thousands of people across this great land of America who are working diligently, night and day, in so many critical ways to help Governor Romney get elected. As we research for the site, we receive comments, emails, tweets, and Facebook discussions in which it is apparent that many millions of man-hours are being logged in creative grassroots efforts everywhere, not to mention the prayers of faith. Only five more days of hard work. Keep it up. THANK YOU.

PENNSYLVANIA. George H.W. Bush is the last Republican to win it; that was 1988. Senator McCain lost it to Senator Obama in 2008 by 10%. You may recall that Governor Romney called it September 28th telling a crowd he would win the state. About two weeks ago, a reputable in-state poll was showing Romney leading Obama in Pennsylvania 49% to 45%.

Governor Romney greeting cadets at the Valley Forge Military Academy in Wayne, PA in September (Photo: Brian Snyder / Reuters / File)

Governor Romney has directed significant resources this past week into Pennsylvania and the Obama camp is saying he is desperate. It never occurs to the Obaminions there might be a strategy involved (“strategy” is Romney’s second middle name). Romney obviously has known for months that 96% of the Pennsylvania electorate vote in person on election day making the state a perfect blitz state for the last week. What is it called when desperate people call others desperate? What was it? “Panic?”

Writing for the WSJ yesterday, Matthew Kaminski provides outstanding insight in support of what appears to be a brilliant strategy by the Romney team.

Pennsylvanians have no problem voting Republican. Out of 67 counties, 52 are in GOP hands. So are 12 of 19 congressional districts, both houses of the state legislature and the governor’s mansion. Republican Pat Toomey won a Senate seat in 2010.

As party hacks know, the trouble for the GOP here is at the top of the ticket. The state last turned red in a presidential race 24 years ago for George H.W. Bush. His son made it a priority in 2004 and lost by 2.5%. Barack Obama’s 10-point win in 2008 was supposed to take it out of the swing column this year.

Yet one of the surprises of the past month is a quietly competitive race for Pennsylvania’s 20 electoral votes. Since the Denver debate on Oct. 3, Mr. Obama’s lead has narrowed to 4.7%, according to the RealClearPolitics average of state polls.
[...]
If Pennsylvania stages a surprise next week, it’ll come out of suburban Philadelphia. The four so-called collar counties (Bucks, Chester, Delaware and Montgomery) were once moderate Republican bastions. In the past two decades, the suburbs have gone for Democratic presidential candidates. You can’t win without them. Bucks (pop. 626,854) is the bellwether: A mix of educated middle-class, rural and blue-collar communities, it votes both ways in local elections—and always for the presidential winner.
[...]
Republicans in the collar counties had little reason for enthusiasm before the first debate. The morning after Denver, the party office in Bucks was overrun with people looking for Romney-Ryan lawn signs. The Romney message strategy echoes that of Sen. Toomey and other successful GOP candidates here two years ago: Talk about jobs and debt, appeal to bipartisanship, and avoid the subjects of abortion and religion as much as possible.

As it happens, Mr. Romney is the first Northeasterner to get the Republican nod since the Connecticut native Bush 41 in 1988. He looks and sounds like Republicans whom Pennsylvanians have voted for in the past. Texas swagger and Sarah Palin didn’t play well in Bucks.
[...]
Then comes a series of queries about high gas prices, a tough job market and how to balance budgets. A local software provider and Fitzpatrick supporter standing next to me in the audience says: “There’s only one businessman I know of who is doing better” than four years ago “and he’s a bankruptcy lawyer.”
[...]
A visible difference from 2008 is the improvement in the Republican ground game. As in Ohio, the Romney campaign has been able to tap local evangelicals and tea-party activists and has built up a decent infrastructure with 24 offices and 60 staffers in the state.
[...]
Ed Rendell, the former Democratic governor, says in a telephone interview before the Romney TV buys were announced that any late ad push may backfire for Republicans. “It would remind people that there’s an election going on,” he says. Republicans “clearly hope Democratic turnout collapses.” The Obama campaign, calling the Romney buys “a desperate play,” is going on air in response.

I love it. The Obaminions calling Romney’s move into Pennsylvania “desperate” is classic for, “Wow, we didn’t see this one coming and we better get our act together now and fast!” And you know how we know the Obaminions are wrong? Check Governor Rendell’s two word quote at the end of the next paragraph.

The Democratic game is about turnout. The president’s re-election campaign is a formidable operation. In a signal that Pennsylvania is not a closed deal, Mr. Obama last week gave an Oval Office interview to Michael Smerconish, a Philadelphia radio talk-show host who was born in Bucks County and has a following in the collar counties. Gov. Rendell sums up the mood among Democrats: “We’re nervous.”

[emphasis added]

And this from CNN:

On Monday’s Obama call, campaign manager Jim Messina said of Pennsylvania, “We’re not going to take anything for granted.”

The reason I am watching Pennsylvania so closely is because I think it is signaling something much larger. Somewhat akin to tremors in my state of California before a large earthquake. If Pennsylvania can fall from the Dems, what other states could we see hitting for Governor Romney? The Obaminions never thought their blue state would ever be up for grabs. They never saw this one coming. They are scrambling in full panic mode.


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 Leads Obama in Early Voting 52% to 45% — “Reagan Excitement Level”

We are going to win one week from today!

Listening to Stephanie Desperation Cutter and David Panic Axelrod from the Sunday talk shows would have us all believe that President Obama has all but won this election. Cutter and Axelrod seem to be deeper encapsulated in the bubble than President Obama! Ms. Cutter is straining so hard to tow the line for Mr. Obama that she has lost all credibility (she blew by Axelrod after the first debate when she declared Obama the winner! Classic!). Even the TV pundits strain to help her out as she obviously believes her own advertising now (she talks and blinks faster every time she is on TV these days and I don’t think it is the caffeine). Stephanie Cutter obviously loves her White House job!

Mitt Romney helping in the kitchen / A favorite photo of the author (Photo courtesy of the Matt Romney family)

Remember, Senator Obama beat Senator McCain by only six points in 2008; that’s it! Six points! And that was during a year when everything was going his way; with the wind to his back and atmospheric expectations. After all, promises were in abundance fueled by the dreamy platitudes, faith in the future, and hope beyond hyperbole. Change for all!

There are so many variables and factors at play in 2012 that could make a huge difference in the final election results. Consider these: Obama got 95% of all African American votes; what if the same number of black voters turn out but only 80% or 70% vote for him? (see African American Bishop Jackson’s plea here). Many first time young voters that supported Obama in 2008 have been completely disillusioned by his many failures; what if 40% of these just don’t show up in 2012 or decide to take action for Romney? Remember the women voters? Obama told us all year he had them locked up and was leading by 20 to 35 points by some estimates; now Romney and Obama are tied with the women vote. What if 3, 5, or 9 percent of all Obama voters of 2008 just decide to stay home this election? Obama got a high percentage of the Jewish vote in 2008; what if the Jewish vote is split evenly this time? There are many other variables we could explore. I think we are going to see some big surprises this year.

Fact: More Republicans will vote in 2012 than in 2008. Yesterday, Gallup reported that Romney leads Obama in early voting 52% to 45%. Breitbart writer John Nolte writes:

Romney’s early voting lead in Gallup may not jive with the CorruptMedia narrative, but it does with actual early vote totals that have been released and show Romney’s early vote totals either beating Obama in swing states such as Colorado and Florida or chipping away at the President’s advantage in the others. For example, here’s what we know about Ohio’s early voting numbers, thus far [from Politico]:

But here is what we do know: 220,000 fewer Democrats have voted early in Ohio compared with 2008. And 30,000 more Republicans have cast their ballots compared with four years ago. That is a 250,000-vote net increase for a state Obama won by 260,000 votes in 2008.
[...]
Other than the fact that this is Gallup, another reason to embrace this poll is due to its very large sample size of 3,312 registered voters.

Photographer Unknown

Ronald Reagan’s Treasury secretary, Bay Buchanan yesterday compared the look and feel of Romney’s 2012 campaign to that of the Reagan 1980 campaign:

“The intensity level is remarkable,” says Buchanan, who was also the treasurer of Reagan’s presidential primary campaigns in 1976 and 1980 and national treasurer of Reagan’s general election presidential campaigns in 1980 and in 1984.

“It’s not only showing up in the polls, but if you go out in the states as I have, in Florida and in Wisconsin, the excitement level is something that I haven’t seen since Reagan,” she says.

At a rally in Colorado, “The forum sat 10,000 people and 10,000 people packed in there and they had to turn people away,” Buchanan says. “In Leesburg, Va., there were 8,000 people in the line to get in, and it was a mile long down into the main part of town.”

Buchanan says Romney’s campaign has become a movement.
[...]
As a result, “From my personal experience, the excitement and enthusiasm of our supporters is equal to what I saw during Ronald Reagan’s first campaign,” Buchanan says. “We’re now a movement to change America, and Mitt Romney heads it up.”

Finally, how much influence do Israeli citizens have with the Jewish voter here in America? I have no idea, but consider the fact that 57% of Israelis prefer Romney to 22% that prefer Obama:

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney leads President Barack Obama by a whopping 35 percentage points among Israeli Jews when it comes to who they think will best look out for Israel’s interests, according to a new poll from Tel Aviv University/Israel Democracy Institute.

Rarely have I given my opinion here in MRC about polling or surveys. The reason being that statistics can be manipulated in so many diverse ways and unless one is willing to become an expert analyst he will just be manipulated. That said, I think we should completely ignore all polls in this last stretch of seven days, no matter how positive they may be. Governor Romney is bringing it. We need to work harder than we have ever worked to bring it in our neck of the woods.

[emphasis added above]

Photographer Unknown


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

The Mantle of President of The United States

As the presidential election is now within sight, I chose some of my favorite photographs of Mitt and Ann Romney to share below. I hope you enjoy them as well. In about eight days, “President-elect Romney” will retire “Governor Romney” as the formal title until the third week of January 2013. Lest you think I am too presumptuous, I wish to assure you that none of us will be letting up in our grassroots work until we have surety. All of us will be working harder in the next eight days than we have ever worked in this important endeavor. Nothing is guaranteed. If you have not yet read Ryan Hawkins’ excellent post from yesterday, please take a moment to answer the call to close strong: CALLING ON ALL ROMNEY SUPPORTERS. We will never take anything for granted!

Photo courtesy of Matt Romney Family

That speech President-elect Obama made following his 2008 election victory was most inspiring to me. It really was. I have to tell you that I was as proud that night as an American as I had ever been in my life to witness our nation coming together to freely elect an African American to our nation’s highest office. I am still proud of the fact we did that! In so many ways, peoples of others nations were truly stunned – I remember reading the interviews of many. The people of the United States of America are great!

Photo: Courtesy of Matt Romney Family

I did not vote for Barack Obama in the 2008 election. Race had nothing to do with my decision. To be completely candid, I probably take a rather simplistic approach to my choice for president each election. When weighting various attributes and skill-sets, I place extraordinary emphasis on successful leadership experience. After assessing Barack Obama’s career, I saw very shallow leadership experience, and when combining that fact with his many “present” votes of indecision as a U.S. senator, the decision to vote for McCain was a clear and easy one indeed. There is no question in my mind a large percentage of the American electorate voted for Mr. Obama based solely on the fact he was African American. I have met these voters and read about many others. In fact, I believe Colin Powell is one of these.

Nate (super hero) Romney with Grandpa (Photo: Courtesy of Matt Romney Family)

History I believe will judge President Obama to be one of the worst presidents in all of American history; certainly the worst in the modern era. Of this I have no doubt. 20, 30, 50 years out, he will be judged on the larger issues of his inability and unwillingness to work in a bi-partisan manner. He will be judged for receiving zero votes from both houses of congress for his budget proposal and for running up obscene, trillion dollar deficits each year with no restraint whatsoever. He will be judged incompetent for raising the expectations of all Americans with lofty promise after lofty promise while blaming others for failure at every turn. I think he will be judged by historians as lazy by in large and as a man with no real passion for the job. Finally, he will be judged much harsher than Mssrs. Johnson and Nixon for his obvious dishonesty with the American public for his intentional evasion of scrutiny of the Benghazi assassinations and subsequent cover-up that continues to this day.

Photo: Courtesy of Matt Romney Family

Much has been said of the contrast between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. From my perspective, these two men are polar opposites in just about every aspect of their careers, character, policies, lives, and work ethic. While Barack Obama entered the presidency as one of the most unprepared men to ever take the office, Mitt Romney will be one of the most prepared leaders in the history of the republic to receive the mantle of president.

Though I do not know Mitt Romney personally, I know many who know him well. In the last seven years, I have read just about everything ever written by the man or about him. His leadership talent and reputation for inspiring others to greatness is legendary. His style of leadership is that of the servant leader. It is born of humility and an intense gratitude that emanates from an enduring knowledge that the privilege of receiving authority over others is a blessing from God that is to be exercised with care and wisdom.

Photo Credit Unknown

The challenges facing the United States of America today are greater than any I can remember in my lifetime. No other person is more prepared and more qualified to face those challenges head on that Mitt Romney. Of this, I have no doubt.


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

“Let Freedom Ring” — Liberty? Pursuit of Happiness?

By Glen Goodsell

“Let freedom ring,” the immortal words of Martin Luther King Jr. I am not alone in my concern as an American when I feel we have strayed far from the foundations of our Constitution and the roots of the brave men, women and families who gave everything for the freedoms we enjoy. I ask every living soul to read and seriously consider these sacred words from our Declaration of Independence –

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. – That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, – That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it.”

I am very concerned. I believe each one of us needs to be concerned and more importantly take a stand.

I recently saw a news ticker on a major television network with the following statement related to education. “This is something (education) that only the national government can solve,” (by President Obama). I was stunned. This statement is at the root of the vision Barack Obama and his allies have for our nation. They don’t believe in us as a people. They would see the basis of this nation, which is based on individual freedoms and God given rights, replaced by a mass of confusion and government regulation. Who do they think we are? Do you see anything our government runs that comes close to the efficiency of free enterprise?

Signatories to The Declaration of Independence

The America I know is very different from the view of our current President – Barack Obama. I see amazing and diverse people every day who are dedicated to each other and family. I see entrepreneurs who work hard and want to provide opportunity for others. I see people of purpose who are willing to sacrifice for one another. I see people of intelligence who if released from the bondage of debt and encumbrances of a government out of control will drive a great revolution and economic recovery.

I look to the words of Thomas Jefferson.

“On every question of construction, (let us) carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.”

I assure you our Founding Fathers see the tangled web our government has become contrary to any intent our Founding Fathers envisioned.

We have given four years to an experiment that has failed us entirely. I go back to Obama’s statement, “This is only something the national government can solve.” Are you kidding! We need our freedom. We need complete change. We need a government that you and I barely know exists. We need leaders that will ensure the rights our Constitution guarantees – “Secure the Blessing of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”

I can honestly say that over the past four years our freedoms and God given rights have been strangled. Do I believe another four years under the present watchman will bring us closer to the freedoms we were “endowed by (our) Creator” -absolutely not. Are you willing to entrust our freedoms to a watchman who openly believes and promotes “this is something only the national government can solve.”?

The choice is clear – one that brings us further from the ideals of our Founding Fathers or one that puts us on a path of recovery and the freedoms that are “unalienable.” I believe Mitt Romney gives us that opportunity.

Obama’s Credibility is Severely Degraded by Battleships and Benghazi

Mr. Obama’s condescending comments in the debate last Monday evoked embarrassment for him as his stature seemed to diminish right in front of my eyes. As if this much younger man with virtually no leadership experience 44 months ago feels so elevated as to lecture a proven, seasoned leader such as Mitt Romney. Mr. Obama’s hubris knows no bounds. The nature of narcissism is such that humility is rarely felt by a man that places high value in the power he thinks he possesses.

The WSJ editorial board published a short column titled, A Game of Battleship? Mr. Obama’s supreme confidence in slamming Governor Romney on the size of the Navy serves to only compound a growing sense among Americans that Obama’s credibility is eroding.

And so the question is not a game of Battleship, where we’re counting ships. It’s what are our capabilities.

That was President Obama at Monday night’s debate, rebuking Mitt Romney for noting that the U.S.Navy is the smallest it’s been in nearly a century and may soon get smaller. It would be nice to think the President has been up late reading Alfred Thayer Mahan. To judge by the rest of his remarks on the subject, he hasn’t.

F/A-18C Hornet on Aircraft Carrer Deck (photo source: www.Navy.com)

We mean Mr. Obama’s well-rehearsed jibe that “we also have fewer horses and bayonets” than we did during World War I. This was followed by the observation that “we have these things called aircraft carriers, where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines.”

Yes, Mr. President. And we have fewer of all of those things, too.

Many historians believe that President Reagan defeated the mighty Soviet empire economically; that by building a strong national defense, the Soviet Union was constantly keeping up until it effectively went broke.

When the Soviet Union fell in 1991, the Navy counted 529 ships in the fleet, including 15 aircraft carriers and 121 nuclear submarines. In 2001 the Navy was down to 316 ships, with 12 carriers and 73 subs. In 2011 the numbers were 285, 11 and 71, respectively. On current trajectory, Mr. Romney said, “we’re headed down to the low 200s,” a figure Mr. Obama did not dispute.

The USS Wilbur, a guided missile destroyer with Mt. Fuji in background (photo source; www.Navy.com)

The President is right that the ships the U.S. puts to sea today are, for the most part, much more capable than they were 20 or 30 years ago. But that’s true only up to a point. Aegis cruisers and destroyers responsible for defending their immediate battle space are now taking on the additional role of providing ballistic missile defense. The tasks multiply, but the ships aren’t getting any additional missile tubes.
[...]
Concerns about ship numbers may seem passé. They also seemed passé to many in the late 19th century, which is exactly why Mahan wrote “The Influence of Sea Power Upon History.” If we’ve again become cavalier about maintaining the freedom of the seas, it’s because a powerful U.S. Navy has accustomed us to indifference. Weaken the Navy further, and that’s a luxury we’ll lose.

Ultimately, it is the credibility of the POTUS that allows him to retain authority through reelection. One definition of credibility is “worthy of trust.” The complete erosion of trust was so complete with Presidents Johnson and Carter they lost a second chance to serve (President George H.W. Bush lost mainly because his vote was bifurcated with Ross Perot). It has become most apparent to me and many other Americans that President Obama is no longer worthy of our trust. Daniel Henninger’s weekly column in the WSJ is excellent on this subject: Suddenly, a Credibility Gap:

There have been only two events that could be said to have caused significant movement by voters in the campaign. One was the Oct. 3 Denver debate in which Mitt Romney disinterred political skills that stunned the incumbent and woke up a sleeping electorate. Race on.

The other is Benghazi. The damage done to the Obama campaign by the Sept. 11 death in Benghazi of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three American colleagues has been more gradual than the sensation of the Denver debate, but its effect may have been deeper.

The incumbent president has a credibility gap.

The phenomenon of a credibility gap dates to the Vietnam War and the presidency of Lyndon Johnson. The charge then was that LBJ wasn’t leveling with the American people or Congress about Vietnam. The credibility gap was hardly the only thing that caused LBJ to withdraw from the 1968 election, but it eroded support for his presidency.

Vehicle inside the U.S. Consulate compound in Benghazi, Libya, Sept. 11 (photo credit: AFP/Getty Images

Credibility gaps can be unfair things. They generally involve difficult foreign affairs in which presidents possess information and realities never revealed to the general public, presumably for its own good. That may be what this White House believes about Benghazi. But it is also true that only this White House knows why it allowed the Benghazi disaster to drip though the news from September into October, with no credible account of the attack, even as reporters for newspapers such as this one got the story out.

In time it was no surprise that people began to ask: Was the White House hiding something about an event of enormous gravity to protect the president’s candidacy? For much of the American electorate, that would be cause to start marking down a presidency.
[...]
Even by the standards of our celebrified culture, Barack Obama’s personalization of the American presidency has been outsized. He and his political team sought this aura. Hillary and the rest of the cabinet receded, while he rose. In Monday’s debate, Mr. Obama stumbled into a summation of his status: “This nation, me, my administration.” L’etat, c’est me.

Until now, it worked. Despite an awful economy, the president’s likability numbers held firm. Many wanted to believe in this larger-than-life president. His clumsy handling of Benghazi, however, has opened a gap in the president’s credibility…
[...]
It may be that voters think both candidates have stretched the truth, but credibility is the coin of a presidency. The political cost of devaluing that coin is higher for an incumbent seeking a second term and higher still for this one. Two weeks from Election Day, Barack Obama has been shown in Benghazi to be a president with feet of clay. It may well take him down.

Contrast Mr. Obama’s loss of trust or credibility with the following statement made by Governor Romney in Colorado this week when he walked out to speak at a much larger audience than he had expected; as reported in The Ulsterman Report:

“Lord, if this is your will, please help to make me worthy. Please give me the strength Lord.”


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

Mitt Romney’s Favorability Surges as He Strips Obama’s Curtain Away

Five days ago, several polls (including a liberal one) reported that Romney’s favorability rating has surged past Obama’s:

And late Thursday, the Pew Research Center, the poll that has been toughest on Romney’s favorability, released results showing that Romney is ahead of Obama by a point, 50 percent to 49 percent. That is a stunning turnaround from March, when Obama’s favorable rating in Pew was about twice Romney’s, 55 percent to 29 percent.

Pundits from the mainstream media love to point out that rarely if ever does a presidential candidate get elected when their favorability number is below that of their opponent. Until this week, Obama’s rating has been higher than Romney’s all year long. What changed? Mr. Obama poured hundreds of millions of dollars into the media to paint Governor Romney in a negative light most of 2012. Then Americans got to know Mitt Romney, the man, starting with the first debate (see graph above). Both Romney and Obama experienced a dip in their ratings from last week’s intense debate of confrontation. I am guessing we will see a dramatic positive change for Governor Romney after Monday’s debate in which Obama employed sophomoric attacks against a calm, gentleman opponent.

The Washington Times also reported:

“The debates — especially the first one — destroyed the Obama crew’s strategy of disqualification,” said Republican pollster Mike McKenna. “Six months of work and $400 million of ad buys went up in smoke in about 10 days. With less than 340 hours to go, they are having real trouble with their footing.”

The debates’ effect can be seen in the favorability ratings. At the end of September, ahead of the debates, Mr. Romney had a 44.5 percent favorable rating. But by Monday, when he and Mr. Obama faced off for the third and final time, the Republican’s rating had leapt to 50.5 percent.

Tom Jensen, director of Public Policy Polling, a Democratic firm, said Mr. Romney’s favorability surge “really has been remarkable” and explains why Mr. Obama has not been able to put away the race at this point.
[...]
By Tuesday, Mr. Romney’s favorability average at Real Clear Politics had dropped below 50 percent again, though he still leads Mr. Obama when it comes to net favorability — the calculation of favorable rating minus unfavorable rating.

Mr. Obama’s favorability averaged 49.7 percent, or 4.5 points more than his unfavorable rating. Mr. Romney’s favorability was 49.3 percent, or 6.5 points more than his unfavorable rating.
[...]
John Zogby, a pollster for The Washington Times, said Mr. Romney’s favorability surge is a significant development in the race.

“Voters got to see an option. Now that there is an option, Romney is viewed as favorably as Obama as a person,” he said.

[emphasis added]

Could it also be that America is finally seeing Barack Obama, the man, for who he really is? A person that allows his ego and pride to blind him from perceiving reality? Why is it that article after article from the Left and the Right frequently use words now such as arrogant, condescending, petulant, hubris, etc., when referring to Barack Obama? In his weekly WSJ column last week, William McGurn wrote an outstanding article titled, The Wizard of Obama. Excerpts:

Mostly this image was the making of his own immodesty, starting the night he clinched the 2008 Democratic nomination. Mr. Obama might have simply declared victory and congratulated Hillary Clinton on a valiant fight. Instead it became the backdrop for one of his more infamous egoisms. History, he said, would look back at his victory as the moment “the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.”

This was no aberration. A man who interviewed for a job on the campaign was told by Mr. Obama: “I think that I’m a better speechwriter than my speechwriters. I know more about policies on any particular issue than my policy directors. And I’ll tell you right now that I’m gonna think I’m a better political director than my political director.”

Everything about his campaign fed that idea. The Styrofoam Greek columns at the Democratic convention when he was nominated. The faux presidential seal with its own Latin motto. And before the campaign, the two books he authored about—himself.

The press, far from exhibiting any skepticism about this immodesty, bowed before it.
[...]
An editor at Politico (and veteran of the Washington Post) put it this way: “I have witnessed the phenomenon several times. Some reporters need to go through detox, to cure their swooning over Obama’s political skill.”
[...]
In short, Mr. Obama was the man who declared that he would change the thinking of the Muslim world by the mere fact of his election, restore science to its rightful place, and win what he called the “necessary war” in Afghanistan.

And then came this month’s debate in Denver.

That night, the American people watched “the smartest guy in the room” struggle to put together a simple declarative sentence, and then ask the moderator to move onto another topic after Mitt Romney had given a strong statement about jobs and growth and tax revenues.

Some 67 million Americans were watching on TV. What they saw was the scene from the Wizard of Oz, when Dorothy’s dog pulls back the curtain to reveal there is no wizard at all, just a man from the Midwest who pumped himself up into something far beyond his mortal self—and got the whole of Oz to believe it.

[emphasis added]

“The whole of Oz” now sees the little man who once stood tall behind his protective curtain. Or is it the emperor without clothes whose reign draws to a close?

Photo: Saul Loeb / AFP / Getty Images



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

Mitt Romney Knows the Average American Well

Most of 2012, Barack Obama spent literally hundreds of millions of dollars using every artifice available in his attempts to define Mitt Romney as an out of touch rich guy that could never understand the average woman or man. That worked with audiences that had never met the man. Over the last four weeks or so, 59 to 70 million Americans have gotten to meet and know Mitt Romney for 90 minutes at a time. And guess what? They discovered what all of us have known for years: He is a gentleman who cares deeply about his fellow man. Indeed, many true stories have come to light about his generosity of time and resources.

Of the two men, Obama and Romney, let’s discern which has the highest probability of being “out of touch” from the average American. This is simple. Mitt Romney served approximately 17 years as a pastor of his church (1977 to 1994) as a counselor in a stake presidency, as a bishop, and as a stake president. In these pastoral roles he met on a regular basis with between 10 and 20 members a week to provide counsel, spiritual guidance, grief counseling, financial advice, etc. He met with those struggling in life with the loss of a job, financial set-backs, a death in the family, marriage and family challenges, and many other matters. All were average Americans.

Simple math informs us that in those 17 years, Mitt Romney personally met with and spent a lot of time with 8,500 people on the low end and 17,000 on the likely end. How many individuals or couples or families has Barack Obama met with in his lifetime, on a personal basis, with the express intent to serve, assist, lift, and inspire them, one on one?

Case closed.


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

It is High Time for a Full-Time President

By Doug Stevens

I have finally realized what it is about President Obama that has eaten at me since the debates began. He is a part-time President. For most of his presidency I have felt he enjoyed campaigning more than governing, but recently I have concluded he just doesn’t enjoy governing at all. It seems he prefers activities where he receives adoration and positive feedback rather than doing the hard work of decision making. Now this may sound like a wild claim, so let me make my case.

Photograph: Jonas Karlsson

First, there is increasing proof that he isn’t into the details of foreign policy. The Benghazi terror attack is the first piece of evidence I introduce. I haven’t seen recent reports of his attendance at the Presidential Daily Briefing (PDB), and especially on September 11 or 12, 2012, but I would be willing to posit that he was not in attendance. Marc Thiessen in his September 10, 2012 Washington Post Op-Ed gave the President’s percentage of attendance since the beginning of his term. Last year was 38%. For someone calling the shots on foreign policy, this meeting provides all of the up to date intelligence needed for presidential decision making. Absence would imply others are making those decisions, or that the details needed to govern would not be at hand. For Benghazi to suggest a sacrilegious video was the reason for the terror attack to me seemed so off the wall at the time. We see now it was a practical political reason and deflected a policy explanation, but it had absolutely no evidence of being based on the details of foreign policy. It was a lazy-governing, politically-practical explanation.

My second piece of evidence is President Obama’s preparation schedule for the first debate on October 3. According to a few articles I have read, prior to the debate, he disengaged from the preparation process. See Sara Noble’s article of October 9, 2012. Mastering details is hard work. It would seem like a small extension to the routine of governing to prepare for the details of a crucial debate. Active governing should mean much of the information is already understood. His actions before the first debate suggest detail work is not something he was used to doing. A distance runner can easily run a short distance without training. This and his debate performance is more evidence proving he is not used to or proficient at the hard work of governing.

Photo Credit Unknown

For my third piece of evidence, I cite Obama’s intensive interest in golf. Now, we all need hobbies to provide a balance to hard work. What I don’t understand is as he becomes the most powerful man in the free world he becomes obsessed with being expert in golf. I offer Jody Kantor’s New York Times article of September 2, 2012 that illustrates his obsessive attention to golf. As cited in this article, 104 rounds of golf at an average of 4 hours is a total of 416 hours, or 52 eight-hour work days. I know I couldn’t spend that amount of time golfing in my line of work.

My fourth piece of evidence is the scripted way he seems to present himself. A dedicated leader will set the tone and pace of a team, demand excellence and be constantly seeking input to facilitate a stream of crucial decisions. Isn’t the outcome of effective leading and governing a stream of well-considered decisions? It seems like Obama is the public side of a team, possibly with Valerie Jarrett as the captain. In a September 1, 2012 piece in the New York Times, Jo Becker gives a look at the role Valerie Jarrett plays in the white house. The last three sentences in the article were most telling to me. She often says to the President and he then repeats the mantra, “Homestretch.” It’s like she’s managing his attitude and energy level to get him through the election season. If that is needed, and based on how scripted his actions appear to be, it’s increasingly obvious to me that we are not seeing Barack Obama leading; we are seeing him acting as a governing spokesperson. That approach may work in TV commercials, but not as President of the United States.

My fifth and final piece of evidence echoes the notion put forth by Neera Tanden, a former Obama aide, in an article written by Selwyn Duke; that basically Obama doesn’t like people. If Obama is that narcissistic and doesn’t value other people, how is he going to be motivated to govern people? Why is it that we hear so many Campaigner-in-Chief, Narcissist-in-Chief zingers from humorists; don’t we really want a full time Commander-in-Chief? Can’t we be done with disengagement in the presidential governing process?

So we have a President that is disengaged in the business of governing, and yet expects the nation to ‘rehire’ him for four more years. The past four years we have endured a ‘Perfect Storm’ of disinterest in governing, fiscal irresponsibility and social reengineering. We need to end the storm and send Obama packing. I am even happy to give him a rain slicker, but just go. I say it is time to let him be unemployed, and hire a governing expert, Governor Romney.

Governor Romney has proven that not only is he highly proficient in leading and governing, but he has an above-self passion for the welfare of our country. In every endeavor Governor Romney has accepted, he has been a full-time participant – his business career, the Olympics and Governor of Massachusetts. Not only has he been effective and full-time in effort, but he has been wildly successful.

We can no longer tolerate a part-time POTUS leading our country. By electing Governor Romney, we will also be removing a great burden that is making President Obama stressed and unhappy, governing. It will give him more time to pursue his passions, including golf. Please join me in voting on November 6 and electing a real leader, one that knows how to govern and one who will be a full-time President of the United States!

Benghazi TRUTH: Obama’s Naked Hubris Drives Continuing Cover-up (Powerful Video)


Please help us promote this information far and wide before Monday’s debate. (Thank You!)

Count on it: Before Monday night’s last presidential debate, the Obama administration and/or the State Department will release new information surrounding the attack in Benghazi, Libya in a desperate attempt to alter the truth: That their combined efforts for a month to cover-up the fact they could have prevented the assassination of an American ambassador and three other great Americans. And the fact they all knew on September 11th the attack was a pre-planned, sophisticated, terrorist attack. The desecration of Camp David has only just begun this weekend.

The history we are witnessing right now will go down in American legacy as far more serious than anything related to the Watergate scandals. Nixon’s web of deceit was bad. Obama’s is obscene! The stain he is leaving on the Office of President is deplorable. The intelligence community is only now beginning to expose Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton after they falsely and repeatedly blamed the intelligence community for promoting the “movie-trailer video” narrative.

We at MittRomneyCentral know that most of our viewers prefer brief videos. However, I believe the following video contains crucial information every American should see and understand. For if they were to take it all in, not one American voter would ever vote for Mr. Obama. Not one.

THANK YOU to Bret Baier for this comprehensive investigative reporting! If you wish to only watch the portion of video where the Obama administration’s deceit and cover-up began, see the minute descriptions outlined below the video.


I believe Bret Baier’s powerful investigative reporting is important to view from beginning to end. However, if your time is limited, you may want to start at one of these points below and watch the entire piece later:

  • Beginning to minute 21:55: Actual videos, photographs, interviews, and illustrations of what actually occurred at the consulate September 11th (Warning: some of the footage is graphic)
  • Minute 22:00: The Cover-Up Begins
  • Minute 29:15: October 8th, almost one month after the attack, we see Obama actually reveal his main message and reason for the cover-up. He is desperate to prove that he has vanquished terrorism altogether; that al Qaeda’s threat is waning. In fact, the threat of terrorism is advancing! Mr. Obama’s naked hubris in the face of obvious brazen deceit is nothing short of spectacular!
  • Minute 33:58: The election…The campaigns…Governor Romney calling President Obama out in front of 60+ million Americans in his courageous duty to expose the cover-up!

We must all do out best to expose President Obama’s deceit. Time is so limited now.

For those that are just getting to know Governor Romney or who have not had time to read his books or study his past deeply, you need to understand a very important fact about this man: Mitt Romney knows more about radical Islamic terrorism than any person to ever seek the presidency of the United States. I believe that when he is elected and in office, he will be the most prepared president to face the intense, growing threat of terrorism than any previous person to occupy the Oval Office. Look it up for yourself.

EVIDENCE?

Click here to read more.

President Obama — “HORRIBLE FOR HIM”

We all contemplate Monday night’s debate on foreign policy. In the last three weeks, Barack Obama and Joe Biden blamed the intelligence community for “the movie trailer” narrative for a “spontaneous” attack on the Benghazi consulate. How long did you think it would take the CIA and other intelligence sources to correct the record on such a blatant lie? Did Mr. Obama really think we Americans are all so dumb as to believe such nonsense?

In one word, “yes.”

But why? An absolutely crucial element of Mr. Obama’s campaign theme is that al-Qaeda has been largely decimated and rendered ineffective. Why? Because Barack Obama killed Osama bin Laden. Following the flawed logic, Americans are to conclude the threat of radical Islamic terrorism is no more. We will therefore give all the credit to Mr. Obama by granting him four more years in The White House.

Mr. Obama: We know your game. We have seen this act before. You can go hide out at Camp David this weekend to spin another web of tales for Monday. We will never forget those who have sacrificed their lives for America.

As we all contemplate Monday’s debate and the authority granted each one of us on November 6, 2012, please watch this short video, especially at second 0.35 when Bill Clinton speaks for Mr. Obama. Bill Clinton’s shameless and disgusting revelation perfectly defines this president and his character:


“Horrible for him”? How reprehensible! But it is all the more “in character” after Mr. Obama’s unemotional and insensitive comments regarding the deaths of four great Americans on 9/11/12 as not “optimal.”

Mr. Obama’s “optimal” reality will be stark the evening of November 6th.


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

Page 1 of 19123456Last »