Which Convention was “strange, full of insults”? Romney Weighs In (Baier Interview – VIDEO)

Well, they’re over.

In an attempt to woo voters, Republicans and Democrats have put their best convention feet forward.

After just the first day of the Republican National Convention (a full day of activity was cancelled due to developing storm Isaac), Obama’s top adviser Robert Gibbs characterized the GOP gathering as “angry” and “strange” and “full of insults. His remarks must have been festering in a folded paper in his hip pocket for weeks; he was pretty pleased to grab a few headlines. What Gibbs wrote turned out to be a prognostication of his own party’s convention goings-on a few days later in Charlotte, NC…

In spite of the sensitive and well-handled Republican convention storm adaptations, some rabble-rousing Democrats called for a cancellation of the entire convention. But, once the Democratic National Convention got underway a few days later, there was no reference from speakers of Hurricane Isaac or helping the victims.

Our President’s re-election insecurity prompted a ‘save-me’ call to former president Bill Clinton. Team O thought he was needed to take center-stage to plaster some pizazz over Obama’s putrid economy. Yes, that Bill Clinton who once called Obama “the chief executor of good intentions” and formerly said of Obama “A few years ago, this guy would have been carrying our bags.” Yikes. Clinton jumped at the chance to appear be a team player while visions of Hillary in the White House (and himself) danced in his head.

Obama, in spite of doing his best to rattle the rafters, delivered a flat, warmed-over class-warfare speech we’ve numbingly heard before. Maybe knowing the jobs report numbers that were to be released today messed with his head.

ADDENDUM - A comment on Michelle Obama’s speech: One got the feeling Mrs. O spent a month of Sundays at studied speech practice in front of her ‘make-up’ mirror getting those inserted smiles and practiced pauses just right. The drama… Her “Obama hunched over his desk” (hunched – mind you!) poring over letters from people having a hard go in this hardship economy (no mention of Obama’s part in it) was that which made listening to her barely tolerable. But, the cake-taker for me was her affected stammers – meant to pepper following prose with dramatic sincerity but only highlighting insincerity – that relegated her to the category of ‘First Lady Duping-The-Folks Academy Award’. She laid it on too, too thick. Charles Krauthammer thought so, too:

Most brilliantly manipulative:

Michelle Obama, by three touchdowns. Beautifully structured, delivered with studied emotion — the feigned stammer to render natural a finely written telepromptered text was a touch of genius — she made the case for why her husband governed as he has.

Because he cares. He loves his wife, loves his children, loves his family — therefore he loves you. The syllogism, a total non sequitur, was laid on with panache.

It worked. She managed to drain her husband’s entire first term of any hint of ideological or personal motivation. He is driven by his caring, giving soul — not by a deeply felt ideology developed in youth: redistributionist, government-centered, disdainful of success, committed to his social-democratic view of social justice.

Only a wife can turn a ruthlessly ambitious pol, who undid the Clintons four years ago and today relentlessly demonizes Romney, into a care bear. She pulled it off.

Read more here and here.

How about that floor flight spectacle over including “Jerusalem” and “God” in their platform?! They actually BOOED God. Plus, those numerous, hissing references to Republicans as Nazis were a turn-off and deeply insulting to those who have actually endured Nazism.

Don’t forget the featured steel worker who claimed he worked for Bain Capitol. He embellished his story against Bain by stating he lost his job when the Bain-controlled company GST steel filed for bankruptcy in the early 1990s. A big LIE.

In the end, Democrats tried to razzle-dazzle with actresses and musicians James Taylor, Mary J. Blige, and the Foo Fighters. An array of liberal speakers brought forth a parade of theatrical over-the-top rhetoric, misrepresentations, and outright lies about Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan. (Did you know Republicans are plotting to take the vote away from women? And, will do all within their power to stop women from using contraceptives? NOT.) Did you happen to catch former MI Governor Jennifer Granholm’s meltdown?

It was a circus of slander.

Mr. Gibbs, YOUR convention was angry, full of insults, and very strange.

FOX New’s Bret Baier caught up with Mitt Romney today in Sioux City, Iowa to ask him about Obama’s acceptance speech last night, today’s jobs report, repeated false claims he didn’t care about the American auto industry, doesn’t care about the U.S. military, and more:


UPDATE – Another Romney interview with FOX News’ Carl Cameron:

► With only 96,000 jobs created in August (down from 141,000 jobs in July), Obama’s hoped-for convention re-gilding isn’t going to happen:

The economy created only 96,000 jobs in August, the unemployment rate remains above 8 percent, and more than 350,000 Americans have dropped out of the work force. While some may focus on the jobs that were created last month, this jobs report is nothing but horrendous. I welcome any jobs, but American workers giving up on employment in the weakest recovery since the Great Depression is cause for alarm, not celebration.

The unemployment rate has not fallen below 8 percent for the past 43 months. The labor force participation rate is at the lowest level in 31 years. If the labor force participation rate were at the same level it was before the recession started, the unemployment rate would be 11.6 percent today. And the rate of “underemployment” or “real unemployment,” including the unemployed, those who want work but have stopped searching in this economy, and those who are forced to work part-time because they cannot find full-time employment is actually at 14.7 percent. We’re still experiencing a significant jobs crisis, whether President Obama recognizes it or not.

President Obama’s policies of more spending, more debt and more taxes haven’t worked. It’s way past time for a course correction. The country needs responsible leadership, not the President’s boasts over anemic growth and unending pleas for patience. Americans are looking for a sustained and real recovery. This weak report is nowhere near enough, and this has gone on long enough. Any real jobs plan must stop the regulatory madness and avert the fiscal cliff of tax increases on January 1. The health care law is yet another drag on the economy. Small businesses need tax relief and regulatory certainty to grow and hire.

What about the numbers of those Obama has been systematically slipping onto disability rolls after their unemployment benefits run out? Once on disability? Most always ON disability for life. Also, the Dept. of Labor today did what they usually do; they revised down the job numbers for the two previous months, resulting in 41,000 fewer jobs created than originally reported.


The way Obama opted to defend his record of failure today demeaned himself. Speaking at a rally, this is what he said on Romney, Ryan, and Republicans: “Tax cuts, tax cuts, gut some regulations, oh, and more tax cuts. Tax cuts when times are good, tax cuts when times are bad. Tax cuts to help you lose a few extra pounds. Tax cuts to improve your love life. It’ll cure anything, according to them.”

A few cheap laughs for a failed president.

Let’s turn that around, Obama: “Tax increases, tax increases, inflict more regulations, oh, and more spending increases. Tax increases when times are good, tax increases when times are bad. Spending increases to help you lose a few extra pounds. Tax increases to improve your love life. It’ll cure anything.”

Obama’s got nothin’. The middle class, small businesses, and the one in six Americans who have slipped into poverty are especially fed up. That’s why his manipulative oratory in Charlotte did not include a word about the USA’s staggering, almost incomprehensible debt of over $16 TRILLION and the 47 million Americans who, under his watch, now put groceries on the table with food stamps.



Follow Jayde Wyatt on Twitter @YayforSummer

Hey Obama! Stick to Tax Cuts, Not Spending

Earlier today Governor Romney issued the following statement criticizing President Obama for taking so long to adopt tax cuts and warning against another spending stimulus:

Romney to Obama: Stick to Tax Cuts, Not Spending

For two years we’ve listened to President Obama say that Republicans have no ideas to boost the economy as he pursued his reckless spending policies. Now he’s finally adopting some of the job-creating incentives for which I and other Republicans have been calling. Making the R&D tax credit permanent and letting businesses immediately write off capital expenditures will make a real difference for jobs and the economy. It’s unfortunate that it has taken the President so long to listen.

“It would be a mistake, however, to attach another spending stimulus, paid for with higher taxes, to the ideas that will actually work. Keep the good, and drop the bad.

Time after time Mitt Romney has given President Obama great advice on how to fix this economy. My hope is that one day Obama will take some of Romney’s advice and do what is best for the American people.

Scott Brown’s Op-Ed: A New Day is Coming

Scott Brown wrote a straightforward op-ed piece for the Boston Globe today. He shares his thoughts on the three topics that are the focus of his campaign: taxes, terror, and health care. Referencing the Massachusetts health care program, he concurs with Mitt Romney that there is always room for improvement, but he likes the plan. He also emphasizes that MA residents are insured through PRIVATE health insurance companies.

A new day is coming: restore faith and balance
By Scott Brown
January 14, 2010

I DIDN’T grow up with all the advantages in life. My mom was on welfare for a time, but I had the support of a loving family and good friends and neighbors. I don’t have all the advantages in this race either, and that’s fine by me. Being the underdog has taught me to work harder, and to appreciate the opportunities of our state and our country.

I’m running because more of our people are unemployed today than ever before. Public debt has reached $12 trillion and counting, and Washington politicians want to borrow trillions more. Terrorists want to strike our country again, and they will do so if we let down our guard. We have fighting forces in two theaters of war, and those men and women need our support.

Like everyone else, I want to see more Americans with good health care coverage. I like what we achieved in Massachusetts. It’s not perfect, but nearly everyone is now covered by a private insurance policy – not a government policy. I hope other states follow our example.

But the healthcare bill under discussion in Washington is not good. It will raise taxes and increase spending. If you are a senior on Medicare, it will lead to a half trillion dollars in cuts to your care. Since we are way ahead of the rest of the country with our own state reforms, we will get nothing in return. My opponent, Martha Coakley, will vote yes on this bill. I will insist we start over.

Failure should be admitted in Washington, and not repeated. With last month’s news that we lost another 85,000 jobs, and with unemployment stuck in the double digits, it’s time to admit that while the $787 billion stimulus had the best of intentions, it failed to create one new job. We shouldn’t pass yet another stimulus that adds to the debt without adding jobs.

My plan for the economy is simple: an across-the-board tax cut – in the tradition of John F. Kennedy – for families and businesses that will increase investment and lead to immediate new job growth. More tax increases will hurt our recovery. That’s why I have taken a no-new-tax pledge. My opponent will raise taxes.

Amid all our domestic challenges, our nation is still at war with radical Islamic terrorists determined to destroy our way of life. The Christmas bombing attempt on a Northwest Airlines plane is a wake-up call. But instead of being interrogated by military professionals at Guantanamo, the plane bomber has been given taxpayer-funded lawyers in a US courtroom. Because he’s been granted constitutional rights, he’s invoked his privilege to remain silent. Would-be killers should be treated for what they really are: enemies of a country at war, not ordinary criminals.

My opponent would accord such terrorists all the rights our Constitution grants to citizens. I will treat them as enemy combatants who should face military justice.

As this special election draws to a close, the enthusiasm from everyday citizens has been remarkable. To those who have lost faith in their elected leaders, I say: Don’t lose heart. One-party dominance in our state has led to bad decisions and a culture of corruption, but we can restore people’s faith by restoring balance to our political system.

They call me a long shot. But I’m betting that a new day is coming in Massachusetts. I am running in the name of all independent-thinking citizens, whether they are Democrats, Republicans, or unenrolled, to take on one-party rule, and the Beacon Hill bosses, and their machine, and their candidate. With your help, I intend to win.

Massachusetts Miracle

Brown’s new ad ‘Momentum’

Let’s do all we can, to enlist as many as we can, to keep the momentum rolling and make the Massachusetts Miracle happen.

Go here to help Scott Brown (scroll to bottom of article).

A GOP Upset In Taxachusetts?

Mitt Romney’s decisive endorsement of Scott Brown to fill Ted Kennedy’s MA seat in a special election on January 19th is a definite plus for Brown. Gaining national attention, the Wall Street Journal ran this article today:

 
The Dream Will Never Die
By JOHN FUND – January 4, 2010

In the two months since voters gave Republican candidates impressive wins in the New Jersey and Virginia governor’s races, unemployment has increased to 10% under a Democratic White House, and Democrats have focused on jamming an increasingly unpopular health care bill through Congress. Now comes another statewide race this month that will likely be read as a follow-up referendum on the Obama administration. Massachusetts holds a special election on January 19 to fill the U.S. Senate seat left open by the death of Ted Kennedy, and even in this bluest of states it may not be a cakewalk for the Democrat.

At first glance, the chances of an anti-Democratic tide here appear remote. The Bay State gave Barack Obama 62% of its vote last year, the state hasn’t elected a Republican to the Senate since 1972, and Democrats hold seven out of every eight seats in the state legislature. But one of the few Republicans in that legislature, State Senator Scott Brown, is making a serious play to upset the conventional wisdom, which holds that Democratic Attorney General Martha Coakley is a shoo-in for the Kennedy seat. In the process, Mr. Brown is irritating Democrats to distraction.

His first TV ad begins in black and white with John F. Kennedy describing his 1962 tax cut bill: “The billions of dollars this bill will place in the hands of the consumer and our businessmen will have both immediate and permanent benefits to our economy.” The screen slowly morphs into an image of Mr. Brown as he calls for a new tax cut by finishing Kennedy’s remarks: “Every dollar released from taxation that is spent or invested will help create a new job and a new salary. And these new jobs and new salaries can create other jobs and other salaries, and more customers and more growth for an expanding American economy.”

Democrats immediately squawked. Kennedy family friend Philip Johnston called any suggestion that the family would agree with Mr. Brown’s statement “highly misleading.” Mr. Brown responded that the reaction simply showed how today’s Democratic Party differs from that of JFK, noting that the late president “was the president of everybody, and was the first person to call for across-the-board tax cuts.” He points to the strong contrast with Ms. Coakley’s position on taxes. During a November 30 appearance at Suffolk University, she had what Mr. Brown calls a “Walter Mondale” moment in which she flatly stated: “We need to get taxes up.”

Surprisingly, no official polls have been taken in the race yet, though few are betting on a Brown victory. But an upset in a low-turnout election is always a possibility. Consider that in 2007, when support for the GOP was at dismal levels, Republican Jim Ogonowski was still able to hold the winning Democrat to 51% in a special election for a Massachusetts Congressional seat. A year later that same district gave Barack Obama 59% of its votes.

Independent groups are mulling plans to drive down Ms. Coakley’s numbers by running ads that would point out that if she loses and Mr. Brown wins, Democrats would then be deprived of the 60th vote they need to pass a final health care bill. Candidate Brown is encouraging such thinking. “I could be the 41st senator that could stop the Obama proposal that’s being pushed right now through Congress,” he told reporters last week. Even holding Ms. Coakley to a narrow victory in uber-liberal Massachusetts would rattle Democratic cages and give members of Congress pause before a final health care vote.

Scott Brown

Marty Peretz, the editor-in-chief of the liberal New Republic magazine and a Coakley supporter, nonetheless thinks Mr. Brown “might actually defeat” the Democrat because “voters are scared.” He notes that Democrats have gone “hysterical” over the Kennedy tax cut ad Mr. Brown is running. “Maybe their panic is apt,” he notes.

Remember, the special election is January 19th. Let’s GET BUSY. Deprive Democrats their precious 60th vote! Help elect Scott Brown:
http://brownbrigade.ning.com/
http://www.redinvadesblue.com/Moneybomb/Donate.html
https://www.icontribute.us/scottbrown
http://brownforussenate.com/
Tea Party Phone Brigade: http://brownbrigade.ning.com/group/teapartyphonebankbrownbrigade


Editor note: Open discussions re Brown/Coakley at Conservative Talk Forum

Romney Campaign: Mayor Giuliani Sued Republicans to Keep Commuter Taxes in Place

Governor RomneyToday, the Romney campaign came out swinging. In their first official Rudy exposé the Giuliani “tax and tax again” record is thrown into stark relief. The research is pretty extensive and makes an excellent case against the fiscal policy that Rudy advocated while Mayor.

“Earlier Today, Mr. Giuliani Assailed The Legislature For Seeking To End The Commuter Tax, Saying That If Anything, It Should Be Higher.” (Clifford J. Levy, “Leaders In Albany Plan To Eliminate Tax On Commuters,” The New York Times, 5/13/99)

FACT: Mayor Giuliani Fought To Tax People For Going To Work:

University Of Pennsylvania’s Factcheck.Org: Mayor Giuliani “Fought To Keep” The Commuter Tax. “Also, it’s worth noting that Giuliani’s list doesn’t mention one tax he fought to keep – New York City’s commuter tax, which was lifted by the state Legislature in 1999. The mayor and the city council sued the state to maintain the tax – .45 percent of earned income for most of the people affected – but lost in court. The city had been collecting about $360 million per year from commuters from New Jersey, Connecticut and other parts of New York state.” (Factcheck.org, “Giuliani’s Tax Puffery,” FactCheck.org Website, http://www.factcheck.org/, 7/27/07)

FACT: Mayor Giuliani Not Only Wanted To Keep The Tax, He Wanted To Raise It:

Mayor Giuliani Said That The Commuter Tax Should Be Increased Rather Than Eliminated. “Earlier today, Mr. Giuliani assailed the Legislature for seeking to end the commuter tax, saying that if anything, it should be higher.” (Clifford J. Levy, “Leaders In Albany Plan To Eliminate Tax On Commuters,” The New York Times, 5/13/99)

Mayor Giuliani Threatened Politicians Who Considered Voting For The Tax Cut. “At the City Hall event, Giuliani also warned Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver (D-Manhattan) and any other city-elected backers of the tax cut: ‘Voting against the interests of the city, somehow, some way, you will pay for it.’” (Dan Janison, “Former Foes United,” [New York] Newsday, 5/17/99)

FACT: Mayor Giuliani Called The $360 Million A Year Commuter Tax “Modest,” And Said The City Was “Entitled” To The Tax:

By 1999, More Than 750,000 Non-City Resident Commuters Were Paying The Commuter Tax. “The 33-year-old tax on more than 750,000 non-city residents who commute to jobs in the city rakes in $360 million a year for the Big Apple, when payments by New Yorkers and out-of-staters are counted.” (Gregg Birnbaum, et al. “Shel-Shocked Pataki Will Get Tax-Kill Bill Next Week,” New York Post, 5/20/99)

Mayor Giuliani Justified The Tax As “Modest.” “‘Sometimes, the game of politics gets out of control,’ Giuliani said. ‘This is a very modest tax.’” (Dan Janison, “Former Foes United,” [New York] Newsday, 5/17/99)

Mayor Giuliani Said That The City Government Was “Very Much Entitled To This Very Small Tax.” “‘The city should not feel that it’s doing anybody a favor here,’ Mr. Giuliani said. ‘We are very much entitled to this very small tax.’” (Clifford J. Levy, “Legislature Acts Quickly To Repeal Commuter Tax,” The New York Times, 5/18/99)

* Mayor Giuliani Administration Official: “We Want To Retain That Money.” “‘We are going into this lawsuit in a very optimistic fashion,’ said Michael D. Hess, the city’s Corporation Counsel, who joined Mr. Giuliani in an afternoon news conference at City Hall. ‘We want to retain that money for the good uses that the city will put it to.’” (Abby Goodnough, “Giuliani Files Lawsuit Challenging Tax Repeal,” The New York Times, 6/3/99)

Mayor Giuliani Said That Suburbanites “Should Feel An Obligation” To Pay The Tax. “On his weekly WABC radio show, Giuliani said that suburbanites ‘should feel an obligation to make a contribution to the city that is doing a lot for them.’” (Robert Hardt Jr., “Albany Tax Slash Has City Weighing Layoffs,” New York Post, 5/22/99)

FACT: Mayor Giuliani Sued Republicans In Albany So He Could Keep The Commuter Tax:

Mayor Giuliani Immediately Threatened Legal Action In Order To Keep The Commuter Tax. “A spokeswoman for Mr. Giuliani said tonight that he would file suit to retain the tax, maintaining that the state cannot end it without the permission of the city.” (Clifford J. Levy, “Leaders In Albany Plan To Eliminate Tax On Commuters,” The New York Times, 5/13/99)

* Mayor Giuliani: “We Will Challenge It. We Will Go To Court And We Will Win.” (Gregg Birnbaum, “Rudy Goes To War With Albany,” New York Post, 5/14/99)

Governor Pataki Signed The Repeal Into Law, Despite Giuliani’s Protests. “Gov. George Pataki signed the law eliminating New York City’s commuter tax yesterday at the Rockville Centre train station, much to the delight of hometown state Sen. Dean Skelos, who for more than a decade championed calls to remove the tax.” (Monte R. Young, “Pataki Signs Commuter Tax Repeal,” [New York] Newsday, 5/28/99)

Mayor Giuliani Filed A Lawsuit Challenging The State’s Authority To Repeal The Tax. “Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and City Council Speaker Peter Vallone joined forces and filed a lawsuit yesterday to challenge the Legislature’s repeal of the city’s commuter tax, insisting the measure was unconstitutional… The suit argues the Legislature passed the measure too quickly and did not receive city permission in what’s called a Home Rule message.” (Liz Willen, “City Sues Over Tax Repeal,” [New York] Newsday, 6/3/99)

The State Supreme Court Rejected Mayor Giuliani’s Argument And Ruled The Entire Tax Unconstitutional. “A Manhattan judge on Friday, in effect, rewrote the state law repealing the New York City commuter tax, an action which authorities said could cost the city more than $360 million a year. Supreme Court Justice Barry Cozier said the law, which repealed the payroll tax only for state residents but left it intact for out-of-state commuters, was unconstitutional. His ruling means the tax is eliminated for all commuters…Cozier agreed with lawyers for New Jersey, Connecticut and two private individuals that the new tax law, scheduled to take effect July 1, violates several provisions of the U.S. Constitution. The plaintiffs had argued that taxing some commuters and not others was unfair to those who still would be forced to pay. The judge rejected the city’s argument that the law is special legislation requiring a so-called home-rule message before any change is made. A home-rule message is a request from the city to the state to alter a law affecting city affairs.” (“Judge Eliminates Commuter Tax,” [New York] Newsday, 6/26/99)

FACT: After Losing In Court, Mayor Giuliani Continued To Fight To Keep The Commuter Tax:

The Giuliani Administration Vowed To Appeal The Ruling. “City officials said the court ruling would be appealed.” (“Judge Eliminates Commuter Tax,” [New York] Newsday, 6/26/99)

The New York Court Of Appeals Rejected Mayor Giuliani’s Appeal. “Deepening a financial blow to New York City, the state’s highest court said yesterday that state lawmakers acted within their authority last year when they repealed a city tax on commuters and that the ‘discriminatory’ income tax still levied on out-of-state commuters must also be ended. That means out-of-state commuters will be reimbursed for the city tax they’ve paid retroactive to July 1 of last year, when the repeal for in-state commuters took effect. The city had collected the 0.45 percent tax since 1966.” (Kara Blond, “Court Of Appeals Kill City’s Commuter Tax,” [New York] Newsday, 4/5/00)

Have YOU Donated 1% To Mitt?

Yes or no, consider the following.

Governor Mitt Romney is proposing a tax-free savings plan for 95% of Americans. Read about it HERE:

Any taxpayer with Adjusted Gross Income of under $200,000 would pay a tax rate of absolutely 0% on all of the income they earn from their savings, capital gains and dividends.

What does that mean for YOU, Joe Blogger? Typical savings accounts these days give around 5% return…mutuals return around 8%. Typical tax rates on those savings range between 15% and 20%. The result is an annual tax of (at least) 1% on your family nest egg, which Mitt Romney wants to give back to you in full. So if you have $10,000 in savings, that’s $100 every single year. Why not donate the first year of that to the man who’s gonna get us there?

Donate to Mitt! 1% of your savings nest egg is a good start, and President Romney will see that you get it back every year! Already hit 1%? Say so in the comments!