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

Top 3 Reasons Why I’m Voting for Mitt Romney

It may surprise many of you, but I voted for Obama in 2008. This time around, I am voting for Mitt Romney, and here’s why:

#1 – Obama’s slim list of accomplishments –  After his first term in office, Obama can tout a very sparse list of successes.  We had all expected, and he promised, so much more. Yes, he bailed out General Motors and Chrysler, and we are all glad to see those companies doing better, but those companies make up less than 1 percent of the United States’ total economic activity. The vast majority of the U.S. economy continues to languish in the doldrums of the slowest recovery ever. 

If Obama wants to really help the auto industry, he needs to lift the rest of America out of its economic slump so that more people have the money to buy cars. Also, one of the best ways to help the auto industry is to be more tough with cheaters like China who game the system in order to sell cheaper goods than American companies. Everyone knows China is cheating on trade and that they are a “currency manipulator,” but Obama has refused to take a hard line against them. Mitt Romney has promised to label China a “currency manipulator” on the first day in office.

#2 – Mitt Romney is a man with a particular set of skills that are needed so badly in America today. This is a man who has spent his entire career turning around troubled enterprises, from small businesses to large businesses to the Olympics. And America needs a turnaround! 

Today, fewer children believe that they will be better off than their parents than at any time in our history. Americans all over the country have began accepting “the new normal”  of low job opportunities, declining incomes, and a weaker America abroad. That is a sad commentary on the state of the American Dream.

Politicians and economists are already talking about a “post-American world,” an America in decline much the same way England, Spain, and Rome all rose and fell from power throughout history. They believe America’s days of power are numbered. I can’t accept that way of thinking. I want to believe America’s brightest days are yet ahead.

As far as particular skills that Romney has, I think nobody knows better than him how to champion small businesses and help them grow. Small businesses are the lifeblood of our economy and that was Romney’s career for 25 years. I also think that Romney will be able to use his knowledge of business  organization to streamline government by consolidating departments and getting rid of duplicate and wasteful spending. Romney knows how to make organizations much more cost efficient while preserving the programs that Americans depend on. 

#3- Obama’s Benghazi-gate – In regard to the terrorist attack last month in Libya that murdered our ambassador, we now know enough to make a judgement call on Obama’s actions. We now know that the ambassador had requested increased security multiple times before the attack but was denied each time. In fact, the Obama administration ended up reducing security at the embassy one month before the attack. 

We also know that Obama refused to act in order to save those at the embassy while the attack was taking place. In fact, three different requests for aid were denied during the attack. Planes in Italy were just an hour away and could have been deployed at a moments notice during the attack which lasted over seven hours. But Obama, fearing another “Black Hawk Down” episode, did nothing.

We also know that the Obama administration’s first explanation as to why the attacks occured (namely, an anti-Muslim video and a “spontaneous protest” to that video) have been proven demonstrably false. It took Obama two weeks before he admitted that the cause of the attack was terrorism, and not the anti-Muslim video he had initially cited. We know that a terrorist organization claimed credit for the attack just hours after the initial attack and that the Obama administration was aware of the terrorist group’s announcement. In summary, we know that Obama tried to cover-up his irresponsible, reckless and naive actions in order to help his chances to get re-elected. I know “cover-up” is a strong word, but in this case the evidence is overwhelming. If there is one thing American’s expect and deserve, it is that we expect our President to tell us the truth, even when the truth is hard.

Are such actions fitting of our Commander-in-Chief? The terrorist attack in Benghazi Libya last month was the first time an American ambassador has been murdered in over 30 years. At one point in time, killing an ambassador was just cause for declaring war. But our ambassador wasn’t just murdered, he was also tortured and raped then dragged bloody through the streets of Benghazi. American’s should be angered by the Obama administrations mishandling of the situation, and especially over the cover-up that ensued the weeks after the attack.

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.

Under President Obama, GM and Chrysler DID go Bankrupt – Mitt Would’ve Saved US Billions

There is a lot of talk these days about the auto industry and American manufacturing, and rightly so. These are extremely important industries for our country. Afterall, Romney was the son of the late auto executive, George Romney, who turned around American Motors Corp. and made the company a major player on the world stage of auto manufacturing.

Mitt Romney has always expressed his great fondness for the auto industry as a direct result of his upbringing with his father. Mitt Romney is a self-described “car nut” and the notion that he wouldn’t have supported the auto industry through bankruptcy is simply preposterous.

Did Mitt Romney really say “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt”?

First, a quick but important side note. Mitt Romney didn’t actually write the title “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt” for his column in the New York Times, the editors at the paper did. Democrats like to pretend that Romney actually said those exact words but he did not.

Second, and more importantly, Romney knew that bankruptcy was the only way for General Motors to get rid of its excessive costs. In fact, Barack Obama often claims that he “saved the American auto industry” but even Barack Obama required the company to go through bankruptcy. Both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney knew that GM’s bankruptcy was inevitable and both men required GM to go through bankruptcy.

Americans are smart enough to realize that Mitt Romney, because of his upbringing, has a great love for the American auto industry and he would have supported it as it went through the bankruptcy process. The people of Michigan and Ohio are smart enough to know that Barack Obama pretends that he did something totally different from Mitt Romney but Obama also required GM to go through bankruptcy. The only difference is that Mitt Romney knew that bankruptcy was inevitable a year or so before Obama did.

It is interesting to note that George W. Bush actually started the auto bailouts and then Barack Obama expanded them.

What about manufacturing and how it relates to the auto industry?

The root of America’s difficulties in manufacturing come from a single source: China. It is widely known by both Democrats and Republicans that China is cheating on trade. China is intentionally suppressing the value of their goods and services so that they can undercut American industries by selling goods at a lower cost than American companies. China’s leaders have publicly admitted as much.

In 2007, Barack Obama promised that he would stop China’s predatory and unfair policies saying: “China has manipulated its currency for years in order to gain an unfair advantage over the United States on trade. Unfortunately the Administration has failed to effectively challenge or change China’s behavior.”

Another broken promise by Barack Obama. Obama’s soaring campaign rhetoric so rarely translates into actual deeds done. Unfortunately, Obama’s inability to address China has led to American manufacturing’s continued struggles against an unfair competitor.

Mitt Romney, on the other hand, has said that on his first day in office, he will label China a “currency manipulator.” His first day. Labeling China a currency manipulator is the strongest step America can take to help level the playing field against China and force them to change. Successfully labeling China as such would require the World Trade Organization to take action against China and its policies.

Obama has had four years to change China. He has been unable to bring about the change he promised. Mitt Romney has vowed to take the strongest step possible against China in order to help America’s manufacturers, including manufacturers associated with the auto industry.

Sununu Sets Record Straight on Obama’s Lies About Romney: Auto Bailout Attacks & More…

While Americans are cheering for U.S. athletes as they go for the gusto at the Olympic games in London (USA!) former New Hampshire Governor John Sununu continues to garner political gold on Mitt Romney’s behalf.

Sununu appeared yesterday on CNBC’s ‘Closing Bell’ with Maria Bartiromo to set the facts straight on Obama’s auto bailout attacks on Romney. Entitlement reform, taxes, the economy, and more were mentioned. As usual, solid Sununu came armed with facts and controlled the narrative.

No wonder Bartiromo couldn’t get anyone from the Obama campaign to appear with Sununu



Two days ago (July 31st) Sununu took on Juan Yawn Williams on Hannity (FOX News). Sununu ran truth circles around Williams…

“Is government the solution or the problem?” (begins @:15):


(Did you notice how Williams employed another new desperate Obama tactic? When Sununu laid out the disaster of Obamanomics, Williams attacked with a silly and ineffective “you’re-so-pessimistic-about-America-Chicken-Little” meme. Sounds like Team Obama held a few midnight beer summits to come up with that one!)
(more…)