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 …

Michigan, are you listening? Debunking Obama’s Bankruptcy Spin on Auto Bailouts

Obama’s auto bailout ‘success’ is a disaster for taxpayers.

Like a toddler who likes to continually jabber a new phrase, Obama keeps blabbering “Romney said let Detroit go bankrupt! Romney said let Detroit go bankrupt!”

Here’s what our prattling President doesn’t want Americans to know:

Deceitful, smoke-’n-mirrors Obama ADOPTED Mitt Romney’s idea of a managed bankruptcy for American car makers. BUT, Obama’s mishandling of the process has proven very costly.

Romney Press – Oct 16, 2012:

Mitt Romney Will Help Our Auto Industry Become Stronger And More Competitive

As a Michigan native and the son of a car guy, Mitt Romney has always believed that a strong auto industry is an essential component of the nation’s economy. He has a plan that will help the auto industry move forward into a new era of innovation and dominance.

  • Domestic Energy Production That Aids Manufacturing: We are on the cusp of a manufacturing renaissance in the United States, and it will be made possible by an abundant supply of cheap, reliable energy within our borders. Mitt Romney will have a true all-of-the-above strategy that includes coal, natural gas, oil and other resources.

  • Trade That Works For Our Auto Industry: Our workers make the best cars in the world. We must develop markets abroad where our cars can be sold. Mitt Romney will open new markets to American automakers far more aggressively than this President has.
  • Stand Up To China And Level The Playing Field: Mitt Romney will stand up to countries like China that don’t play by the rules. Starting on day one, Mitt Romney will make clear to China that they must respect the intellectual property of American manufacturers and open their markets to American products.
  • Lower Our Corporate Tax Rate To Boost Competitiveness: Mitt Romney will reduce the corporate tax rate, so that our carmakers can compete on a level playing field both at home and around the world, and can afford to invest more in breakthrough products. He will also stop the foolish practice of imposing an extra tax on our automakers when they sell cars overseas so they can reinvest the profits here at home.
  • Get Government Out Of The Car Business: President Obama has told Detroit what kind of cars to build, implemented extraordinarily onerous regulations that will drive up the cost of each car by thousands of dollars, and to this day owns more than one quarter of General Motors. Mitt Romney will get the federal government out of the auto industry and eliminate regulations that distort the market and drive up costs.
  • A Reminder – Mitt Romney supported a managed bankruptcy process for our automakers, which is what President Obama ultimately agreed to support:

    Months After Taking Office, President Obama Finally Arrived At The Conclusion That Managed Bankruptcy Was Preferable To His Initial Strategy. “The Obama’s administration’s leading plan to fix General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC would use bankruptcy filings to purge the ailing companies of their biggest problems, including bondholder debt and retiree health-care costs, according to people familiar with the matter. … President Barack Obama’s task force has told both companies that the administration prefers this route … rather than the prolonged out-of-court process that has thus far frustrated administration officials.” (The Wall Street Journal, 3/30/09)

    The Obama Administration Ultimately Found Bankruptcy To Be The Only Way Forward. “The administration says a ‘surgical’ structured bankruptcy may be the only way forward for GM and Chrysler, and President Obama held out that prospect Monday. ‘I know that when people even hear the word ‘bankruptcy,’ it can be a bit unsettling, so let me explain what I mean,’ he said.” (The Wall Street Journal, 3/30/09)

    What did Governor Romney NOT support? Labor Union handouts, giving American companies to foreign owners, ill-considered dealership closings, and keeping government in the car business:

    President Obama’s Handling Of The Bailout Gave The United Auto Workers Union A Majority Ownership Stake In Chrysler. “The Obama administration’s decision to bail out Chrysler gave the union trust what was initially a majority ownership position of 55 percent of its shares.” (Reuters, 6/3/11)

    The Obama Administration Handed Over Control Of Chrysler To Fiat, An Italian Automaker. “Chrysler LLC, for years America’s third-biggest automaker, survived perhaps the most dire of its periodic near-death experiences in 2008 and 2009, when the federal government forced it into bankruptcy, pumped in $10 billion in taxpayer funds and put it under the control of the Italian automaker Fiat, with the auto workers union as the company’s biggest shareholder.” ((The New York Times, 7/30/12)

    President Obama’s Auto Task Force Pressed GM And Chrysler To “Close Scores Of Dealerships Without Adequately Considering The Jobs That Would Be Lost.” “President Obama’s auto task force pressed General Motors and Chrysler to close scores of dealerships without adequately considering the jobs that would be lost or having a firm idea of the cost savings that would be achieved, an audit of the process has concluded.” The New York Times, 7/18/10)

    The Obama Administration “Contributed To The Accelerated Shuttering Of Thousands Of Small Businesses” And Potentially Added “Tens Of Thousands Of Workers” To The Unemployment Lines. (CNN Money, 7/19/10)

    General Motors Now Wants The Government To Sell Its Stake In The Company, But The Obama Administration Is Resisting. “The Treasury Department is resisting a push by General Motors Co. to sell the government’s entire stake in the auto maker – the latest source of tension between two unlikely partners thrust together at the depths of the financial crisis. U.S. taxpayers kept the nation’s largest auto maker by sales afloat with a $50 billion bailout in 2009 and now own 26.5% of the Detroit company. But GM executives have grown increasingly frustrated with that ownership and the stigma of being known as ‘Government Motors.’” (The Wall Street Journal, 9/17/12)

    Taxpayers Are Taxpayers Are Currently Projected To Lose More Than $25 Billion On The Bailouts Of Auto Industry. (U.S. Treasury Department, 8/12)

    Now, you have the truth.

    Michiganders, help Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan obtain your 16 electoral votes. CAll NOW to get started. Readers, you, too, can help.

    By Lisa Benson



    Follow Jayde Wyatt on Twitter @YayforSummer

    More Voices Join: Romney Right on Best Way to Save Auto Industry

    I said in my prior post that Mitt often comes to the right answer a couple beats before others do. Today’s Detroit News features an op ed from Hal Sperlich, a former president of Chrysler from 1984-88 and a member of the Automotive Hall of Fame, entitled “Romney was Right on Detroit Bankruptcy.” This article illustrates the point.

    The entirety of Mr. Sperlich’s piece is below, but highlighted below are a few critical points we have made here on this site previously:

    1. Obama’s assertion he saved the US auto industry while Governor Romney would have let it go under is simply not true.

    2. Obama’s plan mirrored Mitt’s plan, with a couple key differences:

    * Obama used $80 billion in taxpayer cash, about $25 billion is still at risk.

    * Mitt’s “far superior” plan would have only guaranteed automaker obligations, not offered cash.

    * Mitt’s plan would have built competitiveness, the key to long term success.

    3. Mitt was not proposing abandoning the auto industry, that’s only an Obama soundbite. Mitt’s plan would have been less expensive and more successful.

    Here’s the entire piece.

    No, Mitt didn’t want to abandon the US auto industry. He wanted to save it, and his plan was better and cheaper:

    Romney was right on Detroit bankruptcy
    By Hal Sperlich

    President Barack Obama alleges that he saved the U.S. auto industry, whereas Gov. Mitt Romney would have let the U.S. automakers go under.

    Not true.

    In an op-ed piece in the New York Times dated Nov. 18, 2008, Romney proposed a plan to enable GM and Chrysler to survive as strong competitors through a managed bankruptcy.

    Four months later, the Obama administration proposed a similar managed bankruptcy, but with two very important differences.

    The Obama administration proposed a very costly bailout of the two companies with $80 billion of taxpayer cash, a process started by President George W. Bush with $17 billion of TARP money. Close to $25 billion of those taxpayer funds remain uncollected, still tarnishing the GM brand with the label “Government Motors.”

    The Romney plan was far superior.

    First, it proposed using government guaranteed private financing, similar to what we did with Chrysler back in 1980, not massive quantities of precious taxpayer cash, as was done by the Obama administration. Second, as a man who has led many business and public sector turnarounds, Romney recognized that the auto companies not only had to survive the crisis, but they had to build the strength to allow them to be stronger competitors in the years to follow.

    Let me digress for a moment to make a point. I was privileged to be in a leadership role during the Lee Iacocca led Chrysler turnaround that began in 1980. In fairly short order, we converted the world’s least competitive auto company into one of the most competitive. America’s first fuel-efficient front wheel drive cars, along with innovations like the first mini-vans, replaced the obsolete. Market share increased 50 percent by 1988 and, with dramatically improved costs, great labor management cooperation, major quality improvements and shared sacrifice from everyone, Chrysler became competitive and highly profitable. We baked a bigger pie so that all could share, including customers, shareholders and the folks who built the products.

    That’s what competiveness does.

    Just about every businessman will tell you it begins with competitiveness. If you do it better than the guy down the street, you will generate growth and jobs. If we do it better than the people in the next country, we will have more jobs here in America. It’s that simple. Competitiveness is the foundation for the prosperity we seek.

    Romney understands this. He would not have abandoned GM, Chrysler and all their employees. In the end, either the Obama or the Romney approach would have provided the companies the support necessary to move forward.

    But the Romney plan would have spared the taxpayer the billions invested by the Obama administration in the bailouts. Further, the more aggressive approach to new levels of efficiency proposed by Romney would have left the companies significantly more competitive.

    As a result, the companies would have been better positioned to provide the long-term job security for their employees that only true competitiveness can guarantee, and to grow, adding thousands of new high paying American jobs.

    In his November 2008 op-ed, Romney said, “Detroit needs a turnaround, not a check.”

    In a way, I believe the same can be said of America at this point.

    We don’t need to continue borrowing money we may never be able to repay.

    America needs a turnaround.

    America needs to become more competitive.

    Romney understands this at a deep level and his policies are designed to enable a more robust and competitive America.

    That’s what experienced leadership is all about.

    UPDATE: An astute reader also caught the following post, also in the Detroit News’ op ed section: Delphi debacle spoils Obama bailout boast. One key quote:

    When President Barack Obama uses the first of three debates Wednesday to tout his bailout of Detroit’s auto industry, as he surely will, Republican challenger Mitt Romney should be ready with a single number:

    22,000.

    That’s how many salaried retirees of the old Delphi Corp. saw their pension fund seized by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. at the behest, documents suggest, of an Obama Treasury Department that ensured no such thing happened to the Troy-based auto supplier’s unionized workers and retirees.

    Even worse, as the president and his proxies hail the auto bailouts as a cornerstone of an otherwise dismal economic record, they’re slow-walking congressional demands to explain fully why taxpayer dollars were used to favor the pensions of Delphi’s union employees over their salaried counterparts — many of them located in the politically critical battleground state of Ohio.

    Romney’s Leadership & Integrity will Trump Obama’s Four Inherent Advantages

    The mission of this website (MRC) is very simple: We are a grassroots blog dedicated to the election of the finest leader to ever run for President of the United States: Mitt Romney. As a blog, we provide information of course to keep you informed, but our mission is to influence readers to take action; to join us in making a difference. If our presence on the Internet does not translate to energetic action in support of Mitt Romney, we have failed. If you have followed MRC for more than a few weeks, you have seen me start some of my posts with “We are going to win!” I have been steadfast in that declaration and I stand by it now.

    That said, as in any competitive endeavor, we can lose. This contest is a simple one. The winner will be the candidate that receives the majority of electoral votes, which depends entirely on which candidate gets the largest number of people to cast ballots. Simple. If you are like me, you have gotten a bit nervous these past 10 days or so (or six months) watching with dismay as the mainstream media (MSM) spins everything to favor Mr. Obama. But you know what? It is what it is. The MSM will not change in the next 43 days, so we must overcome this enormous disadvantage with – as my father would say – sheer hard work; we must outwork the opposition.

    As I see it, Mr. Obama has four significant advantages that Governor Romney does not and will have between now and November 6th. All of them are inherent with Barack Obama as a person, his party, and his office. In no particular order they are:

    1. Incumbency: As POTUS, Obama has Prestige of Office and Inherent Credibility
    2. A Corrupt and Biased Mainstream Media
    3. Rhetorical Deception
    4. Union Power and Corruption

    Incumbency: As POTUS, Obama has Prestige of Office and Inherent Credibility

    The advantages of running for re-election as a sitting president are roughly akin to the Yankees (largest payroll in the MLB at $200M) playing the Padres ($55M) in the World Series. Many advantages are obvious such as the unlimited use of Air Force One used to travel to fundraisers and the ability to invite anyone to the White House, etc. The others are less obvious but definitely crucial in a re-election bid, such as prestige of the office and the credibility of actually being the current POTUS. Think about it. The prestige and credibility of the office of POTUS were established by the reputations of predecessors such as Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Lincoln, and other incredible patriots of the last century and modern era. For reasons I lay out below, I strongly believe Barack Obama has not nearly lived up to the high standards Americans expect of their president. But that does not change the fact that Mr. Obama is the beneficiary of the incredible prestige and reputation of the mantle of president as established by his predecessors. How does that matter? Americans almost always, as a matter of course, give the president the benefit of the doubt. This is not insignificant in his re-election bid as he uses deception to his advantage.

    A Corrupt and Biased Mainstream Media (MSM)

    Volumes have been published on this one topic. Just today, our Paul Johnson posted an outstanding piece on this topic (if you have not read it entirely, I highly recommend you do). The MSM is not just biased, which is bad enough. Decisions are made all the time at the highest levels of news organizations relative to amount of content, type of content, and how the content is presented. A recent, obvious example of corruption in my opinion was MSNBC’s decision during the RNC coverage to cut away each time a minority speaker began their speech, choosing to “open up discussion” to their pundits. A more recent example is the extremely thin coverage last week of the largest destruction of United States aviation since 1968 in Vietnam. Did you hear about this terrible event? Neither had my wife and she follows the news from a number of MSM sources. Why did the MSM bury it? Because it does not fit the narrative that Obama is succeeding as commander in chief in the war in Afghanistan after making the terrible decision to give the Taliban a date certain we will leave. Examples are pervasive and numerous. I could go on and on but Paul Johnson covered it best in his piece.

    Rhetorical Deception

    What I meant here is Mr. Obama is an excellent liar. I’m not referring to a “poker face” as they say. He routinely lies with a smile on his face. How is this an advantage you ask? When combining intentional deception with a) the high reputation of the office of president, and b) the bias and corruption of the MSM, Mr. Obama can say almost anything to the American public and do so with impunity. Watch him. He is perfectly affable and genial as he lies in the face of major calamity. I believe Governor Romney will hold him accountable in the debates.

    The MSM is in the process of revealing a probable cover-up by the Obama administration in which they knew of threats against the consulate prior to the attack. In short order after the news of the rare death of an American ambassador, Mr. Obama was partying it up with celebrities in Vegas and laughing it up on Letterman. Seriously! The assassination of a U.S. ambassador is an act of war. The last time an ambassador was assassinated was during the Carter administration, over 30 years ago! Remember the emotional indignation of President Reagan when the Berlin night club was destroyed by a terrorist and which prompted him to bomb Gaddafi’s home? There was no emotion by Obama or Clinton in any of their speeches. They read from prepared remarks with little emotion of any kind; then they turned those remarks into a video for Pakistanis to view as another form of American apology. Sure, they were serious. Within hours though, Mr. Obama was smiling and laughing again outside The White House. BTW, watch Mr. Obama. He refuses to use these three words: “assassination,” “terrorism,” and “evil.” There are many reasons for this which we can address at a later time.

    Why is Mr. Obama’s lying deceit an advantage over Governor Romney? Because Governor Romney values integrity above all other character attributes of leadership. Barack Obama considers deception a tactic to success much like a military leader uses deception to out maneuver the enemy. In other words, for Mr. Obama, the end (getting re-elected because ‘my policies are most needed by the world’) justifies the means (lying). Lying is not an option available to Governor Romney.

    Union Power and Corruption

    Much has been documented over the decades of union power and corruption. It is not my objective here to prove it out all over again. Suffice to state that union bosses wield tremendous power over their members. They care little about local, state, or federal laws or ethics regulating pressure over their members’ voting freedom. If they can skate by the rules, they will. Do you think for a moment union members are not being bombarded by regular mailers, paycheck stuffers, and flyers handed them from their managers on how to get out the vote and how to vote? Union membership has diminished over the years but union influence among its members is as powerful as it ever was. Why is this advantage so important? The reason is that many of those who voted for Mr. Obama in 2008 may be disenchanted with him and may decide not to vote in November. But not the union members. They will vote in high numbers for Obama and many will vote en masse for him as they are bussed by the likes of Harry Reid and others like him. I will not line out the forms of corruption they are known for. Will Romney volunteers be more or less determined than union bosses and their members?

    As volunteers and supporters of Mitt Romney for president, we must do everything we can now and in the next 40+ days to get involved. To make phone calls into the battleground states. Travel to the battleground states when organized and invited by the campaign. Ask your friends and family members to register to vote and ask them to ask their contacts to do the same. And then get them to vote. There is so much to do. There is so much we each can do! We will overcome the inherent advantages Mr. Obama possesses. Truth, honor, and integrity will prevail.

    See how important the “The Likability Test” has been historically in past presidential elections. Click here ——–> (more…)

    America’s Trickster-in-Chief? The Obama You DON’T KNOW

    Barack Obama


    A relevant, but perhaps overlooked, aspect of President Obama’s character was briefly mentioned in the thought-provoking documentary film 2016: Obama’s America. While a young teenager, Obama made an enlightening discovery. He figured out a trick – that he had a “knack”. The trick was, if he smiled, was polite, and “didn’t make any sudden moves”, he could manipulate people. Not only that, he could get people to want to help him. It was a “knack” he carefully perfected through the years. It became a trick that would help put him in the White House…

    Does America have a Trickster-in-Chief? Who is the real Barack Obama?

    Today, The Washington Examiner published an in-depth article peeling back the layers of the Obama you don’t know. In a four-month research effort, many interviews were conducted with Obama supporters and non-supporters in Chicago and elsewhere. In an effort to separate myth from reality, court transcripts, government reports and other official documents were also referenced. I’ve only highlighted some of what was written and urge you to read the entire article.

    Over the years and in two autobiographies, Obama has presented himself to the world as many things, including radical community organizer, idealistic civil rights lawyer, dynamic reformer in the Illinois and U.S. senates, and, finally, the cool presidential voice of postpartisan hope and change.

    With his air of reasonableness and moderation, he has projected a remarkably likable persona. Even in the midst of a historically dirty campaign for re-election, his likability numbers remain impressive, as seen in a recent AP-GFK Poll that found 53 percent of adults have a favorable view of him.

    But beyond the spin and the polls, a starkly different picture emerges. It is a portrait of a man quite unlike his image, not a visionary reformer but rather a classic Chicago machine pol who thrives on rewarding himself and his friends with the spoils of public office, and who uses his position to punish his enemies.

  • Chapter 1 – A childhood of privilege, not hardship:
  • First lady Michelle Obama told the Democratic National Convention that “Barack and I were both raised by families who didn’t have much in the way of money or material possessions.”

    It is a claim the president has repeated in his books, on the speech-making circuit and in countless media interviews. By his account, he grew up in a broken home with a single mom, struggled for years as a child in an impoverished Third World country and then was raised by his grandparents in difficult circumstances.

    Uh, not so fast…

    Obama’s step-father, Lolo Soetoro, had a coveted job in Indonesia as a government relations officer with Union Oil Co. They lived in Menteng, the most exclusive neighborhood of Jakarta, where economic elites resided. Obama would later live with his grandparents in Hawaii where his grandfather was in sales and his grandmother would become one of the first female vice presidents of a Honolulu bank.

    The year Barack joined them, his grandparents moved to a “sleek new 10-story apartment building” close to the prestigious prep school Obama would attend for eight years. The school was one of the most expensive on the island and was a “lush hillside campus overlooking the Waikiki skyline and the Pacific Ocean.”

    All the touting he’s done about his community organizing? Obama has never lived in a black neighborhood. He chose to commute 90 miles each way daily to the housing project where he worked.

  • Chapter 2 – The myth of the ‘rock-star professor’:
  • Time magazine gushed in 2008 about Barack Obama’s 12-year tenure as a law lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, saying, “Within a few years, he had become a rock-star professor with hordes of devoted students.”

    Time magazine put lipstick on a pig. Described by some faculty members as “disengaged” and “doing only what was minimally required”, Obama was the third-lowest ranked lecturer at the law school in 1999. Only 23 percent of his students recommended his classes.

    The pattern of minimal performance at the Chicago campus was not an exception to the rule for Obama. In the state Senate during the same years he was lecturing, Obama voted “present” nearly 130 times, the most of any legislator in the chamber.

    And during his lone term as a U.S. senator, according to Gov Track.us: “From Jan 2005 to Oct 2008, Obama missed 314 of 1300 recorded or roll call votes, which is 24.0%. This is worse than the median of 2.4%.”

  • Chapter 3 – The 1997 speech that launched Obama
  • (more…)

    Romney Slams President Obama and Unions Bosses in Wake of Chicago Teachers’ Strike

    Mitt Romney today issued the following statement the on ongoing teachers’ strike in Chicago:

    “I am disappointed by the decision of the Chicago Teachers Union to turn its back on not only a city negotiating in good faith but also the hundreds of thousands of children relying on the city’s public schools to provide them a safe place to receive a strong education.

    Teachers unions have too often made plain that their interests conflict with those of our children, and today we are seeing one of the clearest examples yet. President Obama has chosen his side in this fight, sending his Vice President last year to assure the nation’s largest teachers union that ‘you should have no doubt about my affection for you and the President’s commitment to you.’ I choose to side with the parents and students depending on public schools to give them the skills to succeed, and my plan for education reform will do exactly that.”

    Democrats Believe Obama Can Lose, Worry Warts Growing

    What are those little bumps growing on Democrats?

    Check out the first paragraph of Mark Halperin’s article today on Time.com:

    Between the Lines

    With five months until Election Day, Barack Obama faces a grim new reality: Republicans now believe Mitt Romney can win, and Democrats believe Obama can lose … Last week’s anemic job-creation and economic-growth data was sandwiched between two Bill Clinton specials: in one television interview, the 42nd President lauded Romney’s business record as “sterling”; in another, he veered from the Obama line on the extension of Bush-era tax cuts … The failure to unseat Wisconsin’s Republican governor Scott Walker in a recall election was another bad sign for Democrats since it will rev up conservatives nationwide, including the kind of millionaires who gave big bucks to Walker’s effort … Veteran Democratic strategists from previous presidential bids and on Capitol Hill now wonder if the Obama re-election crew is working with the right message … The White House remains on a rough political trajectory, with a potentially adverse Supreme Court decision on the Obama health care law looming, additional bad economic news from Europe coming and more worrisome polling pending … Another danger for the President: the media freak show. Stalking that circus’ center ring is Matt Drudge, whose caustic website continues to help drive the news cycle with an emphasis on negative, mocking items about Obama and Vice President Joe Biden and their wives. The latest sign of Drudge’s potency: Ed Klein, the author of the virulently anti-Obama book The Amateur, was barred from major TV appearances and mostly ignored by the mainstream media, but the book’s prominence on Drudge’s website propelled it to the No. 1 slot on the New York Times nonfiction list.

    (emphasis added)

    Besides former President Bill Clinton, other Democrats are ringing the warning bell: Gov Ed Rendell (D-PA), retiring Rep Barney Frank (D-MA), Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Sen. Chris Coons, (D-DE), ex-Rep Harold Ford Jr. (D-TN), Mayor Cory Booker (D- Newark, NJ), former Rep Artur Davis (D-AL), Sen Mark Warner (D-VA), former Obama Economic Adviser Steve Rattner, and Obama bundler Don Peebles.

    Yes, it’s early. Yes, a lot can and will happen in five months. And, Americans worried about the direction America is going must work harder than ever to elect Governor Mitt Romney. But…

    The next time you see Obama or Axelrod, look closely.

    Worry warts are growing.

    Caused by growing woes... Worryoma Warticus.



    Follow Jayde Wyatt on Twitter @YayforSummer

    Eyes on GOP Primaries: CA, MT, NJ, NM, SD – Romney Supports Walker in WI Recall

    Governor Mitt Romney speaks with supporters of Wisconsin Gov Scott Walker before making phone calls on his behalf at a phone bank in Fitchburg, Wisconsin. March 31, 2012 (Photo Darren Hauck/Reuters)


    Romney supporters are tuned in to today’s lively political action.

    Primary elections in five states, and a recall election with national implications in another state, are spurring voters to the polls.

    Governor Mitt Romney officially became the GOP presidential nominee last week and voters will award additional delegates in California (172 delegates), Montana (26 delegates), New Jersey (50 delegates), New Mexico (23 delegates), and South Dakota (28 delegates).

    We encourage Romney supporters to cast their votes in The Five today and show The Gov a lot of love with a resounding across-the-board victory!

    Eyes are on the contentious recall effort (which began last November) against Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker. After months of acrimony over needed public union restrictions, which Walker campaigned on and enacted, the rematch with Milwaukee’s Democratic Mayor Tom Barrett (who Walker bested in a GOP sweep of the state in 2010), will be determined by voters today in The Badger State.

    A couple of months ago, Governor Romney, accompanied by Rep. Paul Ryan, expressed his support for Walker during stops in Wisconsin:

    Mitt Romney used a Wednesday tele-town hall with Wisconsin voters to give a strong endorsement to Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, a Republican who is fighting off a recall effort led by Democrats.

    “Gov. Walker is, in my opinion, an excellent governor,” Romney said, according to a report by ABC News.

    “And I believe that he is right to stand up for the citizens of Wisconsin and to insist that those people who are working in the public sector unions have rights to affect their wages but that these benefits and retiree benefits have fallen out of line with the capacity of the state to pay them.”

    “And so I support the governor in his effort to rein in the excesses that have permeated the public sector union and government negotiations over the years,” Romney said.

    Romney, a former governor of Massachusetts, also talked about other states that have passed legislation aimed at curbing collective bargaining.

    “The state of Indiana, even my home state of Massachusetts, has reined in the collective bargaining excesses associated with retirement benefits for future retirees,” Romney said.

    Governor Romney praised Gov Walker as he traveled through small towns and cities across Wisconsin. He also stopped by a phone bank in Fitchburg, WI, and made calls on the embattled Governor’s behalf.

    In U.S. News Weekly, Mary Kate Cary writes about three reasons why the Walker recall election matters:

    First reason:

    Walker is proving that struggling states can turn their economies around, and that fiscal conservatism works.

    Walker eliminated a $3.6 billion deficit and balanced the budget without raising taxes. He did it by asking public employees to contribute, like the rest of us do, to their healthcare costs and pension funds—a move which prevented teachers, firemen, and police from being laid off. Unemployment in Wisconsin is below 7 percent for the first time since 2008, and joblessness there is now below the national average. Plus Wisconsin’s public employee retirement system is now fully funded. Unfunded pensions are a big deal in many states, and could cost taxpayers in many states millions in new taxes.

    …[R]ecently polled Wisconsin voters … found overwhelming support for many of Walker’s policies:

    72 percent favor asking public sector workers to increase their pension contributions from less than 1 percent to 6 percent of their salaries.
    71 percent favor making government employees pay 12 percent of their own healthcare premiums instead of the previous 6 percent.
    Police and firefighters were exempted from the pension and healthcare adjustments but 57 percent of taxpayers say they should not have been.
    65 percent say public sector workers receive better pension and health care benefits than private sector workers.

    When asked what state and local officials should do if pensions and health benefits are underfunded, 74 percent favor requiring government employees to pay more for their own healthcare and retirement benefits. In sharp contrast, 75 percent oppose cutting funding for programs like education and 74 percent oppose raising taxes to help fund government worker benefits.

    Second reason:

    The recall election spells big trouble for unions, especially public employee unions.

    When recall supporters first garnered nearly a million signatures in order to get on the ballot, the unions were ecstatic. They’ve poured millions into the state and bussed in thousands of volunteers, but as the issues in the race became clear, the union position came across as greedy and unreasonable. Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell told Politico that if Walker wins, it will be “a significant blow to the labor unions,” and will definitely embolden other Republican governors to take on labor unions in battles over collective bargaining. There’s a chance Democrats will win one of four state Senate recalls, which will give them control of the state Senate and a way to put the brakes on Walker. But no matter what happens in the Senate, Walker’s success has already sparked a round of recriminations between union leaders and top-level Democrats, who are avoiding the state. Obama endorsed Walker’s opponent the night he won the primary, but other than that has remained silent; the Democratic National Committee has refused to give the state party any money for the cause.

    Third reason:

    The recall fight exposes the flaws in the Obama campaign strategy.

    Here’s how Kelly Steele, a strategist for We Are Wisconsin, the leading union-backed anti-Walker coalition put it a few months ago to Politico: “Scott Walker lied his way into office, and has since launched unprecedented attacks on Wisconsin’s working families, dividing the state like never before,” Steele said in an E-mail. “This historic recall is a … victory for Wisconsinites united to take their government back from wealthy special interests who bought and paid for Scott Walker and are dictating the terms of his extreme agenda.”

    Sound familiar? Might as well be a page out of an Obama speech about Mitt Romney. Instead of defending the public employees unions’ position, We Are Wisconsin’s website now has talking points about the GOP “war on women.” Good grief.

    The left in Wisconsin is pitching an angry, populist message to voters. So is Obama.

    Scott Walker is a canary in a coal mine. If he wins, we’ll know that at least one state’s voters now view budget-balancing as something reasonable that needs to be done right. And we’ll know how they feel about the unions’ intransigence and angry rhetoric on entitlement reform. We’ll all be watching that canary on June 5 to see if it flies.

    Walker’s Lt. Gov Rebecca Kleefisch, and three Republican state senators are also part of the recall election today. A fourth state senator targeted for recall resigned; a candidate from each party is vying for her empty seat. Democrats only need to win one seat to gain the majority in the State Senate.

    Ten days ago, Debbie Wasserman Schultz (shrill Chair of the democratic National Committee) admitted the Wisconsin recall is a test run for the presidential election this fall. Sensing a possible defeat, Obama distanced himself from the brouhaha, but managed to chirp a tweet today.

    The good news is Governor Walker is polling at about 7 points ahead of his opponent. Today’s results in The Badger State depends on which side has the best ground game and voter turn-out.

    Best wishes today to both of these great guys!

    Romney supporters are invited to join us on MRC’s chat forum this evening’s exciting election results.

    Follow Jayde Wyatt on Twitter @YayforSummer

    Who is Funding the Left? Surprise – Thanks to Santorum, It Might be You!

    Since my recent installment on Rick Santorum’s astonishing betrayal of blue-collar Americans when he worked to defeat the national Right-to-Work law in the Senate, much has changed. His quixotic campaign to win the nomination by appealing to a limited demographic is losing steam, and the delegate math has become practically impossible.

    I don’t want to kick a guy when he’s down; truly, I think our days of writing about Santorum as an opponent are near an end.

    And so, whether he elects to go gracefully or otherwise, I am inclined to write non-unpleasant things about him. I will certainly hope for him to assume a more positive and productive role in the battle for the White House, which he can still do.

    But before his campaign fades into memory, his record points up a very important fact that absolutely must be aired before we all move on – especially in Wisconsin, which is Ground Zero for union influence over politics and political fundraising right now. Let this serve as a cautionary tale for other Republican office-holders who may get confused from time to time about “how things work.”

    To recap the earlier post: Rick Santorum’s Senate votes against right-to-work legislation and for Davis-Bacon wages hurt both workers and taxpayers.

    His vote to scuttle the national Right-to-Work bill effectively abandoned many American workers to “closed shops,” where they are forced to pay a portion of their hard-earned wages to union bosses who are neither truly accountable to them nor particularly interested in their workplace issues. Instead, large chunks of those forcibly-collected dues go to fund far-left politicians and radical social agendas.

    His vote to perpetuate the pro-union Davis-Bacon Act ensured that American taxpayers frequently pay much more for goods and services than other consumers, adding to our rising deficits and soaring debt. More importantly, it has also pushed scores of American manufacturing jobs overseas to lower-cost countries. Sadly, as I reported in the earlier missive, even uber-liberal San Francisco is buying steel and having major portions of its new Bay Bridge manufactured in China (“Bridge Comes to San Francisco With a Made-in-China Label,” New York Times 6/25/11).

    So if you’re a middle-class wage-earner stuck paying union dues, Santorum’s pro-union actions have picked your pocket not once but twice: first, when union dues were forcibly deducted from your paycheck, and again when your taxes went up to pay for bloated federal projects – all so that Rick could stay in the good graces of labor bosses in his home state of Pennsylvania. And if you’re one of the unfortunate many who have lost jobs in the manufacturing sector to overseas competition, well, Santorum’s fingerprints are on that one, too.

    But there is a far more important – and much more disturbing – aspect of Santorum’s historical allegiance to Big Labor that needs to be dragged out into the light.

    The Right-to-Work bill he defeated would have struck a profound and lasting blow for conservative principles in America. How? By significantly (more…)

    Santorum: Sold-Out The Working Man & Fiscal Conservatives — No Right to Work (Guest: Greg Stapley)

    By Greg Stapley

    Rick Santorum is not who he says he is.

    Santorum has been loudly proclaiming not only that he is the one true conservative in this race, but that he’s the only candidate who understands and will fight for working Americans. To hear him tell it, you’d think he invented conservatism.

    Greg Stapley

    Not so fast, Senator. There are a few things that working people and conservatives alike should know about you and your record before they pull the lever.

    I am certainly not a one-issue voter, but one principle is so fundamental in the raging battle for America’s soul that it has become the threshold across which all candidates must pass before they can legitimately claim the title and honor of Conservative. That principle is freedom from forced unionism.

    There was a time in our nation’s history when unions helped and protected workers. However, today’s union movement has been largely co-opted by left-wing social engineers, who are using the economic engine of forced union dues to fund sweeping changes to American society, government and values — changes that are the antithesis of the conservative principles I hold dear.

    Against the wishes of large swaths of their membership, today’s union bosses routinely pick their members’ pockets by using forced dues to support politicians and agendas that are have nothing to do with the workplace, and are often opposed to the values and philosophies of those members.

    In 27 states (it was 28 until just last month — congratulations, Indiana!), union bosses have become so powerful that they have secured mind-boggling legislation which allows them to deny gainful employment to honest, hard-working citizens who want nothing more than to put bread on the table without funding some union leader’s social and political agenda. This keeps the bosses in power. More importantly, it keeps the money flowing from their unwilling members’ paychecks to union coffers and on to their cronies in government. They just need a few cooperative politicians to keep these laws in place for them.

    And Rick Santorum — “Reliable Rick” — is Big Labor’s go-to guy on the “right.”

    Denying a basic freedom like the right to work is about as anti-conservative as it gets. No politician can give lip service to the principles of individualism, self-determination or the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness while at the same time colluding with entrenched labor interests to compel workers into unions that forcibly take their money and do little to help them.

    But remarkably, despite his claims that he is a champion of blue-collar America, Rick Santorum has done exactly that.

    For example, in an astonishing effort to ingratiate himself to the union bosses who control the campaign purse strings in his home state of Pennsylvania, then-Senator Rick Santorum actively worked to defeat the federal right to work bill in the United States Senate. (104th Congress, S. 1788, the National Right to Work Act of 1995. (“On the Cloture Motion (motion to invoke cloture on motion to proceed to consider S.1788),” Senate Bill Clerk, Vote Number: 188, www.senate.gov, 7/10/1996)

    Had it passed, millions of American workers who are currently trapped in union shops, compelled to follow union rules and forced to pay union dues against their will, would have been liberated from the clutches of their union overlords. Sadly, no thanks to Rick Santorum, these workers are still imprisoned in forced-union Perdition. (more…)

    Page 1 of 212