VA Store Owner Mourns Obama Reelection, Closes Store For a Day

Tuesday’s presidential election result caused a Virginia jeweler to close his store for a day.
(Photo – WDBJ7.com)

After Tuesday night’s election outcome, R.T. Lyons, a grief-stricken jeweler in Bedford, Virginia, chose not to open his store the next day. He taped signs to his store windows explaining why

BEDFORD Va.—
The owner of a Bedford jewelry store is explaining his decision to “mourn” the outcome of Tuesday’s Presidential election.

R.T. Lyons, owner of Lyons Jewelry, closed his business Wednesday and posted signs in his windows that read: “Closed to mourn the loss of the America that our forefathers endowed to us.”

I just didn’t feel like coming to work,” Lyons said Thursday. …

Lyons said he was experiencing feelings of grief. He believes Barack Obama’s second term will bring an end to capitalism in the United States and ultimately hurt his business.

Lyons said he believes the President is trying to undermine the principals of free enterprise that were established by America’s founding fathers. He worries that Obama will raise taxes on the wealthy people who patronize his jewelry store.

“I’m in the luxury business,” Lyons said. “I deal with more expensive items.”

Although he didn’t support Obama in 2008, Lyons said he was hoping the President could be successful. He was “excited” about the possibility of a Romney presidency, due to the Republican candidate’s background in business.

I’m sure people who are community organizers are excited (Obama) is in the White House,” Lyons said. “I was thinking I would be excited about a businessman in the White House.”

Lyons said his decison to close was not a ploy to attract attention to his business.

I didn’t want to be happy and wait on people that day,” said Lyons. “I think I was in a period of mourning yesterday and it was good for me. I went through the process. I don’t know how many steps there are, but I went through them yesterday.”

Mr. Lyons, we can relate.

UPDATE – ‘The Mourning After’ Man flies flags half-staff after election

Follow Jayde Wyatt on Twitter @YayforSummer

Election Consequences: Man Forced to Lay Off Employees Due to Obamacare

Elections have consequences…

As a result of Obama’s reelection and Obamacare repercussions, a Las Vegas small businessman, who employs 114 workers, was forced to fire 22 workers yesterday. Asking to be identified by his first name only (for obvious reasons), ‘David’ spoke with KXNT radio host Kevin Wall:

(CBS Las Vegas)…

“I’ve done my share of educating my employees. I never tell them which way to vote. I believe in the free system we have, I believe in the right to choose who they want to be president, but I did explain as a business owner that I have always put my employees first. I always made sure that when I went without a paycheck that [I] made sure they were paid. And I explained that I always put them first and unfortunately I’m at a point where I’m being forced to have to worry about me and my family now and a business that I built from just me to 114 employees.

I explained to them a month ago that if Obama gets in office that the regulations for Obamacare are gonna hurt our business, and I’m gonna have to make provisions to make sure I have enough money to cover the payroll taxes, the additional health care I’m gonna have to do, and I explained that to them and I said you do what you feel like in your heart you need to do, but I’m just letting you know as a warning this is things I have to think of as a business owner.

“Well unfortunately, and most of my employees are Hispanic — I’m not gonna go into what kind of company I have, but I have mostly Hispanic employees — well unfortunately we know what happened and I can’t wait around anymore, I have to be proactive. I had to lay off 22 people today to make sure that my business is gonna thrive and I’m gonna be around for years to come. I have to build up that nest egg now for the taxes and regulations that are coming my way. Elections do have consequences, but so do choices. A choice you make every day has consequences and you know what, I’ve always put my employees first, but unfortunately today I have to put me and my family first, and you watch what’s gonna happen. I’m just one guy with 114 employees — well was 114 employees — watch what happens in the next six months. The Dow alone lost 314 points today. There’s a tsunami coming and if you didn’t think this election had consequences, just wait.”

Click on the image below to hear more of David’s compelling phone call (Click ‘back arrow’ to return to MRC):


  • Yesterday, after news of Obama’s reelection, the stock market fell over 300 points. (The debt crisis is starting to affect EU stalwart – Germany.):
    (more…)
  • 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…)

    Obama Wants Secty of BUSINESS? USA Needs BUSINESSMAN Mitt Romney!

    President Obama recently stated, if reelected, he might rustle up a Secretary of Business.

    Why?

    Because, when it comes to business, Obama is LOST.

    Plus, tossing out that new position to the masses is a two-fer for Obama. He thinks it makes him sound smart and hopes it assuages the electorate’s fear about him right now – that he doesn’t know what he’s doing.

    Obama’s out-to-lunch-on-business evidence: His colossal mountain of national debt is proof. America’s pitiful downgraded credit rating is proof. His ‘shovel-ready‘ projects, er, lack thereof, is proof. His weak economy is proof. The number of desperate Americans standing in unemployment lines is proof. Americans working part-time when they fiercely need a full-time job is proof. Those who have given up – just stopped looking for a job is proof. Declining, downward middle class incomes is proof. The sad number of Americans descended into poverty is proof. The woeful number of Americans on welfare is proof. The atrocious number of U.S. citizens surviving on food stamps is proof. Swelling disability rolls are proof. His take-over socialization of health care is proof. His trade policies are proof. Onerous job-impeding federal regulations are proof. His auto bailout is proof. His squandered “stimulus” of $787 billion which America’s children and grandchildren will be forced to pay back is proof. His nix-on-anything beneath-the-ground energy policy is proof. (Federal oil drilling permits down 36%! War on coal! No Keystone pipeline! High gasoline prices! And, with the October bankruptcy of Satcon Technology Corp as many as 50 Obama-backed green energy companies have gone belly up or are wobbling!) His hoped-for tax policy is proof. His aversion to numbers, e.g., a federal budget, is proof.

    Obama’s badgering, big government beliefs are bad for America. When it comes to business, our outsourcer President is agonizingly, hair-pullingly, head-bangingly daft. That’s why he’s dangling the idea of adding another bureaucrat and bureaucracy if he finagles another four.

    Team Romney has released a fantastic new ad. We’ve only got five days, people. Let’s SHARE it!


    Barack Obama recently said he might appoint a Secretary of Business.

    His solution to everything is to add another bureaucrat.

    Mitt Romney understands business and knows what it will take to create jobs and get our economy moving again.

    He’s done it before.

    He’ll do it again.

    At this crucial, decisive time, America must have a president who UNDERSTANDS business.

    America needs Mitt Romney.

    UPDATE – Paul Ryan’s remarks on Obama at Greeley, Colorado today (November 1, 2012):

    “He can’t run on the broken promises. He can’t run on the trillion-dollar deficits each and every year. But he did come up with a new idea the other day. He’s got a new idea for the second term, and here’s what it is. In addition to all the borrowing and all the spending and all the money printing and all the regulating, he wants a new Cabinet position. He wants to create a new secretary of business. You know, we already have a secretary of business. It’s actually called the Secretary of Commerce. That’s what this agency does. Let me ask you a question. Can anybody name our current Secretary of Commerce? You know why? We don’t have one. It’s been vacant for over four months, and the president hasn’t even proposed or put somebody in the job. We don’t need another bureaucrat or another bureaucracy.”



    Follow Jayde Wyatt on Twitter @YayforSummer

    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.

    Paul Ryan’s MUST-HEAR Speech in Cleveland: War on Poverty? Poverty is Winning

    GOP V.P. candidate Congressman Paul Ryan gestures while speaking of the war on poverty during a speech at the Walter B. Waetjen Auditorium at Cleveland State University in Cleveland, Ohio. Oct 24, 2012 (Photo – Tony Dejak/AP)

    A packed auditorium awaited him…

    Congressman Paul Ryan today was very warmly received today as he walked on stage at the University of Cleveland in Ohio. With his unique, clear capacity to speak succinctly on the enriching principles of our free enterprise system, Ryan delivered a powerhouse speech on upward mobility and the economy.

    War on Poverty? Poverty is Winning

    FOX 8 Cleveland offers this preview:


    WATCH Ryan’s entire speech here (begins @:37).

    Transcript of Ryan’s compelling speech:

    UPWARD MOBILITY AND THE ECONOMY

    Thank you very much for that warm welcome – and thank you Jimmy, for that great introduction. I want to thank everyone at Cleveland State University for your kind hospitality. I especially want to thank President Berkman for his help in making this happen. And of course, none of us would be here today without the extraordinary work of Bob Woodson and the Center for Neighborhood Enterprise. Thank you, Bob, for bringing us together today.

    We are here in partnership on behalf of an idea – that no matter who your parents are, no matter where you come from, you should have the opportunity in America to rise, to escape from poverty, and to achieve whatever your God-given talents and hard work enable you to achieve.

    In so many ways, our nation’s history has been a long struggle to bring opportunity into every life. Our nation was founded on the creed that “all men are created equal” – that we all possess equal rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. But, of course, equality of opportunity hasn’t always been a fact of life in our country – it’s been something we’ve had to constantly fight for. It’s a cause that continues to this day.

    Even though so many barriers to equality have fallen, too many old inequities persist. Too many children, especially African-American and Hispanic children, are sent into mediocre schools and expected to perform with excellence. African-American and Hispanic children make up only 38 percent of the nation’s overall students, but they are 69 percent of the students in schools identified as lowest performing.

    That’s unacceptable. We owe every child a chance to succeed. In the words of Abraham Lincoln, we owe them “an unfettered start and a fair chance in the race of life.” Upward mobility is the central promise of life in America. But right now, America’s engines of upward mobility aren’t working the way they should.

    Mitt Romney and I are running because we believe that Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility instead of a stagnant, government-directed economy that stifles job creation and fosters government dependency.

    There is something wrong in our country when 40 percent of children born to parents in the lowest fifth of earners never know anything better. The question before us today – and it demands a serious answer – is how do we get the engines of upward mobility turned back on, so that no one is left out from the promise of America?

    Keep reading here!

    Obama Just Doesn’t Understand

    November’s election will likely come down to how people feel about the candidates…what their gut tells them.

    Unfortunately for the president, jobs numbers and anemic economic growth continue to be, as Mitt Romney has put it, a continual “kick in the gut.” Despite finally pulling to even compared to when he came into office at 7.8% unemployment, after taking into account everyone who stopped working due to Obama discouragement, the unemployment rate would now be over 10%. Not acceptable.

    In addition, it’s clear Obama just doesn’t get it when it comes to job creation. At Tuesdays’ debate he kept incredulously saying Mitt’s tax plan didn’t work because it contained trillions in cuts (that Mitt says aren’t even accurate), and he doesn’t understand how they’re paid for. Is anyone surprised Obama just doesn’t understand? It’s clear from his record. Why should we be surprised he scratches his head when looking at Mitt’s plan? Mitt knows: cutting taxes will help create jobs. It worked for Reagan. Paul Ryan pointed out it worked for Kennedy. It’ll work for President Romney.

    If you think President Obama is a friend to the middle class, and you have a job, congratulations, you’re in better shape than many. But you need to watch this video from back in April to understand just what will happen to you under Obama’s planned tax increases. Not just for the wealthy, but everyone.

    President Obama’s response to anemic job growth? Raise taxes. Apply leaches to the patient of the economy. As the growth of the economy has been slower the longer he’s been president, he’s still said he’s taken “step[s] in the right direction.” Tiny steps, getting shorter.

    It makes me wonder, after all of President Obama’s attempts to label Mitt Romney as a job outsourcer or out-of-touch rich guy, who is the real friend of the middle class? Even if President Obama is really trying, nothing he’s doing is working. Past reports have said the Obama recovery ranked dead last in modern times, at that time ten out of ten for both jobs and economic growth. I haven’t found an updated report, but I understand growth has slowed, not improved, since. During the period measured, jobs had grown only 4.1% since the recession’s low point. Reagan’s record during the same period was 10.7%. So it’s not like it can’t be done. It’s been done before.

    (more…)

    Presidential Debate #2: Crowley Butts In, Backs Off, Luntz Focus Group Liked Romney

    Taking a cue from the Biden playbook, Barack Obama pulls a face and acts like he’s going to spring from his chair as Mitt Romney makes a point at the presidential debate held at Hofstra University in Hempstead, NY on Oct 16, 2012. (photographer unknown)

    The presidential debate action at Hempstead, New York, is in the can…

    There were tense moments.

    Pundits and politicians will be talking for days about the ‘terrorism’ Libya moment – the one where Obama water carrier moderator Candy CNN Crowley interrupted Mitt Romney to side with Obama by injecting her jaw-dropping version of fact-checker. Cutting off the Governor, she sided with the President on remarks he claimed he made in the Rose Garden the day after the attack on our consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Obama said he labeled the attacks as “terror” right away. After the Crowley butt-in, Obama then called from way back on his stool for Crowley to repeat her “fact” louder. Turns out, Obama and Crowley have nothing to crow about:

    Democratic strategist Joe Trippi later said on FOX News that it looked like “the ref just threw the flag.”

    After the debate, Crowley, who repeatedly cut Romney off, and when all was said and done, bequeathed Obama with 3 minutes and 14 seconds more speaking time than the Governor, tried to back off. She conceded that Romney was “right in the main.”

    There’s so much I want to say about Ms. Crowley’s moderating, but I’ll constrain myself and just say she made a disgusting hash of it.

    Someone else agrees with me:


    After the debate, Frank Luntz (FOX News) conducted a focus group in Nevada of mostly former Obama voters. Romney impressed them. Here is Part 1:


    Luntz began the discussion by asking participants for a word or phrase to describe Romney’s performance:

    Forceful, presidential.”

    Confident and realistic.”

    Presidential.”

    Presidential and enthusiastic.”

    Our next president.”

    Dynamo! Winner.”

    Knowledgeable and sincere.”

    Steady and articulate.”

    Part 2 may be viewed here.

    The 82 voters in the town hall setting were chosen by Gallup and Candy Crowley selected the questions. Romney walked into a stacked game but didn’t back down. Voters saw him as someone with strength, leadership, and a common-sense plan to move America forward. Obama was aggressive, pulled a few Biden-style faces, did a lot of bluffing, and threw in some blaming. He offered NO plan.

    No wonder Independent swing-voters like Mitt Romney.

    If you missed the fireworks, click here to watch the entire debate.

    Before Debate Ended, Obama Cronies Concocted ‘Liar’ Meme Against Romney


    10 minutes before Barack Obama’s presidential debate face-plant ended, his panicked, damage-control, political toadies pressed speed-dial – pronto!

    Before Barack Obama and Mitt Romney even gave their closing statements, the conclusion of that cobbled-together, conspiratorial conference call was: The only way to stop Romney is to relentlessly label him – LIAR:

    New York Times:

    On the conference call convened by aides in Denver and Chicago even as the candidates were still on stage, there was no debate in the Obama campaign about the debate. None of the advisers fooled themselves into thinking it was anything but a disaster. Instead, they scrambled for ways to recover. They resolved to go after Mr. Romney with a post-debate assault on his truthfulness. Ad makers were ordered to work all night to produce an attack ad.

    Rich Lowry, in yesterday’s New York Post, writes: Team O’s pathetic ‘liar, liar’ attack

    Credit President Obama’s aides with discernment. Even before the first presidential debate was over, they knew they needed to come up with an excuse, and fast. They settled on one they haven’t stopped repeating: Mitt Romney lied his way to victory.

    [insert sarcasm] The president would’ve rebutted Romney’s gross deceptions, except he was too focused on answering questions about the country’s future and too taken aback by Romney’s brazenness to answer in real time. Although once he had a day or two and his witty rejoinders were cued up in a teleprompter, he was absolute hell on Romney.

    The case that Romney lied so brazenly that it undid the president rests, first, on the idea that the Republican misrepresented his own tax-reform plan. Obama said that Romney proposes to cut taxes by $5 trillion over 10 years. Romney denied it. The president’s team responded, with its customary civility and nuance: “Liar!”

    But this isn’t even a close call. Romney wants to cut income-tax rates 20 percent across the board and make up the revenue by closing loopholes and deductions. This isn’t a tax cut; it’s a wash. It’s been Romney’s plan ever since he proposed it during the primaries. It’s such a simple concept that only willful obtuseness keeps the president or his team from understanding it.

    If Romney proposed a 1 percent across-the-board cut on rates and the elimination of all loopholes and deductions, surely Obama would accuse him of wanting to raise taxes, because people would be paying more in taxes despite lower rates.

    In fact, this is the approach of the president’s own Simpson-Bowles debt commission: It suggested lower rates and fewer deductions such that the federal government would garner more revenue.

    Obama’s thuggery team are falsely crowing that the real Romney didn’t show up at the debate.

    Yes, he did.

    67 million people saw Romney as he really is – smart, prepared, patriotic, competent, compassionate, hard-hitting while affable, and a true leader who can think on his feet. How satisfying it was to have the corrupt mainstream media manacled on the sidelines for 90 minutes! Where is the real Obama? He’s America’s magistrate of masquerade. Every time we turn around we see a different version of the man. For nearly four years, he’s gotten away with saying one thing and doing another. Remember when our contrived Commander-in-Chief called for greater civility in the public discourse?

    “At a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized, at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do, it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.” – Barack Obama, January 11, 2012

    Oh, the sanctimony of phony baloney Barack… He laps up fawning words that cover for HIM; not so for the other guy. Blogger Doug Giles zings the excuses liberal talking heads dreamed up for Obama’s ignominious implosion (before getting the ‘liar Mitt’ memo):

    Another rather amusing post-debate kabuki show the Left put on was the ridiculous excuses for Obama’s feckless performance during that 90-minute flogging by Romney.

    One of my favorites was Al Gore’s “the high altitude got to him”… Obama wasn’t acclimated and thus he was a wee bit discombobulated. First off, Obama’s used to being high; he spent his entire college years Rocky Mountain high. Please. Secondly, didn’t he give his yippee-ki-yay DNC speech back in ‘08 in Denver? I think he did. Google it and get back to me, Al.

    Second on my list of favorite excuses regarding Obama’s clock getting cleaned came from Bob Woodward who surmised that Obama was abysmal that night because he received some heavy bad news prior to the debate that had him distracted and upset. This could be a legit reason. Maybe something in the Middle East had gone awry? Nah, that couldn’t be it because after the Benghazi massacre he was able to party with Jay-Z and Beyoncé and fly to Vegas with no problemo whatsoever.

    (more…)

    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.

    Page 1 of 16123456Last »