Conservative Samizdat

Obama Inaugural Speech Is Not Anchored in Reality

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Tue, 22 Jan 2013 01:11:00 +0000

Like many conservatives across America, I choose not to watch Obama's second Inaugural Speech. I chose to spend the holiday with people and enjoying my favorite restaurant. However, I did read a transcript of his speech. I wasn't impressed because what his speech is hollow and empty because I know that while Obama gives good speeches, it is not anchored in reality. He presents a progressive interpretation of American history and its future which is not anywhere close to the truth about the history of the United States. He also cannot give an accurate or honest description of where America is at the present moment. The best example of this is when he talks about the economy, unemployment and being able to persue the career of your dreams:

An economic recovery has begun. (Applause.) America’s possibilities are limitless, for we possess all the qualities that this world without boundaries demands: youth and drive; diversity and openness; an endless capacity for risk and a gift for reinvention. My fellow Americans, we are made for this moment, and we will seize it - so long as we seize it together. (Applause.)

For we, the people, understand that our country cannot succeed when a shrinking few do very well and a growing many barely make it. (Applause.) We believe that America’s prosperity must rest upon the broad shoulders of a rising middle class. We know that America thrives when every person can find independence and pride in their work; when the wages of honest labor liberate families from the brink of hardship. We are true to our creed when a little girl born into the bleakest poverty knows that she has the same chance to succeed as anybody else, because she is an American; she is free, and she is equal, not just in the eyes of God but also in our own. (Applause.)

We understand that outworn programs are inadequate to the needs of our time. So we must harness new ideas and technology to remake our government, revamp our tax code, reform our schools, and empower our citizens with the skills they need to work harder, learn more, reach higher. But while the means will change, our purpose endures: a nation that rewards the effort and determination of every single American. That is what this moment requires. That is what will give real meaning to our creed.

Despite his speech, Obama was never serious about improving our economy or reducing unemployment. Obama promised at the beginning of his term as President that unemployment would not rise above 8% if we let Congress pass the bailout/stimulus bills. As of today, unemployment still isn't down to 5.8%.

My Open Letter To The GOP: Don't Forget The Disabled

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 06:10:00 +0000

Even though the election ended a few weeks ago, the Republican party is still feeling the sting of losing the election and are reviewing the reasons why the election did not turn out the way we predicted. I've sat and read many articles that attempted to explain our party's loss and identify the problems of the GOP. It seems to me that there is a general consensus that the GOP party and Mitt Romney's campaign failed to seriously take the current and future demographic make up of our country. Our country's make up has rapidly changed and will do so in the foreseeable future. As a result of these huge demographic change, there will be a change in how people view the government and its responsibility to the citizens.

The pundits, columnists, political advisors seem to all agree that our party needs reach out to important voting groups such as women, Asian Americans, Latinos, African-Americans or young people. However, there is one demographic that the GOP doesn't even make an attempt to reach out to that Democrats consistently do and they win by large margins.

Its people with disabilities.

According to some estimates, there are approximately 54 million Americans with some kind of disability. What's so important about this group is that it can be found across every level of society and affects people of every age, race, occupation, education or economic situation. This means that approximately 1 in 5 U.S. residents, or 19 percent of America, fall into this group. The democrats are very aware of this segment of society and that's why they overwhelmingly win this voting demographic at the ballot box.

But the size of this group isn't limited to just those who have some form of disability. If you include the individuals, single parents, families, educators, law enforcement, the judicial system and businesses who deal with disabilities on a personal and daily basis, you have a large voting bloc. They join in on the concerns and issues that this demographic group is concerned about. Think about it. We all know someone who has some form of a disability whether it be severe or mild and we know the challenges they face. They are deeply concerned about promoting their interests and protecting their rights.

If the Republican party can reach out to this group and articulate how conservative principles will improve the lives of people with disability, it will dramatically change how people, especially minorities, view the Republican party. People will be more receptive to the conservative message and view the GOP in a more positive light if they could see the tangible impact on the lives of the disabled. They will know that if it works for them, it will work others as well.

In volunteering or working for various political candidates, I have suggested that we reach out to Deaf people as well as people with other disabilities. Nobody takes my suggestion seriously. But then again, the Republican Party and consevatives don't fully understand why they need to.

Conservatism is a universal yet unique message. Our principles and values apply to everyone regardless of who they are or what groups they belong to because our policies allow the greatest number of people to be successful in society. That is made possible because we believe that paths to success are as infinite and unique as the people who dare to dream to do what they aspire to do.

Conservatism is a liberating, empowering and powerful message because the individual, can expand or push beyond the limitations that their bodies, circumstances, or background places upon them. It is a free thinking and open minded belief that encourages people to be their best selves and to constantly reach for new vistas of excellence. It allows people to reach their fullest potential by using their intellect and creative powers to solve problems that benefit themselves and others, to create products and services and to make beautiful paintings, art, books, film and clothing.

However, in the conservative world view, the individual isn't an island unto himself. There are times when the individuals rely on othera who freely and voluntarily pool their talents, resources and finances to individuals in need. Families, churches as well as educational and medical organizations are the best venues to help disabled people reach their full potential.

The final point to the conservative message is that we do believe in a limited government. This concept is a message that needs to be better articulated to the public because non-conservatives understand this idea in theory but not in practice. What this means is that government is given specific duties as well as limited responsibilities and powers. In practice, that means that government can be the solution to some problems that are too large for individuals to fix and that provide fairness and equality to everyone.

This is why we need to better explain this message to the various groups. The major, and common, concerns of these different minority groups is their concern about widespread discrimination both in the past, present and future as well as the inability to integrate into American society.

However, Republicans were once fully aware of these concerns and addressed it. After all, Republicans were the ones who got the post civil war Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution passed. It was the Republicans who passed the Civil Rights Act of 1866, the Reconstruction Act of 1867 and other civil rights laws in 1875, 1890, 1922, 1935, 1938 as well as the anti-poll tax bills in 1942, 1944, and 1946. The Republican party also passed Civil Rights laws of 1957, 1964 and 1965.

When it comes to helping people with disabilities, it was a Republican President named Abraham Lincoln who established the Galludet University which is a college for Deaf people.

It was a Republican President, George H. W. Bush, who signed the Americans With Disability Act (ADA). The law is not perfect but as a conservative lawyer who engages in disability discrimination litigation in a deeply Republican state populated by a majority of people who share my faith, I can tell you that this law and other anti-discrimination laws that help people with disabilities is the kind of limited government solutions to big problems that real conservatives endorse.

If the GOP wants to be successful in upcoming elections, they have to clearly articulate and demonstrate that our policies and agendas allow the greatest number of people benefit in a country with different ethnic, racial, social, religious, economic and physical backgrounds. We believe that the free market is the best way for all walks of life to become successful. We also believe that the government can help those who sincerely need it. We do not believe that government should be helping everyone regardless if they need it or not.

When conservatives talk about limited government, conservatives can demonstrate what they mean by that phrase. The disability community relies on government for assistance, legislation and public funded programs and they are justified in doing so. They don't seek a government handout. These programs help people who truly need it to in order to be independent, to obtain medical assistance they cannot afford, or to become active participants in society.

Conservatives should tread very carefully when talking about people who receive government assistance because their are certainly those who abuse the system and there are those who truly need it. Libertarians and Conservatives have been careless and not very articulate when talking about Americans who receive public assistance of some kind. There are those, such as John Stossel, who have openly opposed anti discrimination laws such as the ADA. They fail to realize that they're alienating people rather than attracting people to their political views when they make stupid comments about individuals with disabilities.

I don't oppose people criticizing the ADA since there are valid objections to be made. However, what these critics fail to realize that for people with disabilities, life in the absence of these laws, was not that great. Thanks to these laws, it helps to combat discrimination, allow disabled people to be employed with businesses supplying reasonable accommodations for them and having the technology to become more integrated into our society. Disabled people didn't have these kinds of protections back then.

As a result, the Republican party and conservatives need to do better at making their case to the American people when it come to the discussion of the entitlement society and the people who rely on some form of government assistance. We need to make the distinction clear to the American people that we oppose those who who abuse the system and support government support for those who truly need it.We need to set up policies that understands this distinction and addresses these problems.

I know that reaching out to people with disabilities is a winning message. I've seen it. When Sarah Palin talked about her commitment to help people with disabilities and to make it a priority as Vice President in her 2008 GOP convention speech, she got conservatives Moms and Dads excited and teary eyed. But if Sarah Palin and others want to reach out to the Disability community, they're going to have to mean it since many the GOP rarely follow through with talk of including them in our party or government policies.

The conservative philosophy for individuals with disability works. I know because I am an example of it. I have worked hard to overcome discrimination and other obstacles to become one of the handful of Deaf attorneys in the United States. I have received assistance from the government not as a hand out but as a stepping stone to achieving my dreams of becoming an attorney.

If the GOP wants to become successful, they need stop playing safe in promoting our message but go out and share that message in places we normally don't share it:

What I am talking about is taking the conservative message, a message that stands to benefit everyone in society, to places the GOP often ignores--local African-American and Hispanic church groups, feminist centers, and left-leaning college campuses, to name a few.

Will your message face resistance? Yes, and that's okay. It gives you a chance to correct false, media-driven stereotypes about conservatives and conservatism. Will you convert the majority in one afternoon? Of course not; these stereotypes have been inculcated over decades. Opening hearts and minds is a process, not a lunch appointment.

If the GOP is serious in winning elections in the future, they're going have to get serious about promoting that message. We don't need to change our core values, principles or beliefs. We already have a wining message. We just need to do better in reaching out to those people and helping them understand that conservatives believe that government needs to get out of the way of those who don't need government and to get invovled with those who do need it.

Where Do I Go From Here?

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Mon, 12 Nov 2012 02:54:00 +0000

I have been purposely avoiding politics for a while now because I'm still trying to get over the shock of the 2012 election. Since I have been a Romney supporter since he ran for President back in 2008, his loss has been very difficult for me to accept. I am still shell shocked and I have been very bummed out lately. Which explains why I've been listening to Radiohead, Sigur Ros, Mogwai and the Blade Runner soundtrack lately. To say that I am bummed out about this election is an understatement.

I have always politically active in supporting conservative causes and candidates but never to the extent that I have in rooting for Mitt Romney. I dedicated a lot of time in blogging, calling, researching, doing other projects and made several donations to the Romney campaign. I was a hard core and loyal Romney supporter. I still am and always will be.

Like many others, I made an optimistic prediction of Mitt Romney's victory which turned out to be completely wrong. I have also engaged in the same futile quest of trying to figure out how Mitt Romney lost and why.

However, my heart aches not just because Mitt Romney lost, but I fear the consequences of having Obama as president for a second term. Its not Obama that I worry about. I am deeply concerned about the consequences this election will have on our country.

Our country faces a multitude of problems both domestically and internationally. On the home front, we face rising prices for food, gas and other necessities. We are trillions in debt. We face high unemployment. We will see the collapse of entitlement programs unless the necessary modifications or outright elimination of these programs take place. Obama will have the opportunity to appoint three or four new liberal/progressive Supreme Court justices which will forever alter the character of our nation in which we will be a people more dependent on government than ourselves.

We face problems internationally. We are still battling terrorists. We have major conflicts boiling in the middle east in Syria, Egypt, Israel, Lebanon. Iran, China, North Korea, Russia and Venezuela are our enemies and do not consider our country to be a serious threat or deterrence to their foreign policy objectives. The EU faces a potential meltdown politically and economically.

Another reason why my heart aches is because despite the overwhelming problems our country faces and the lack of leadership, the majority of the American people made the wrong choice. Like President Obama, the majority of the voters in this election are less concerned with maturely confronting the internal and external threats to our nation's sovereignty, economic stability, liberty and integrity and more concerned with the benefits and promises our government has promised them but knows it eventually cannot keep. They have chosen to delegate self-governance, self-reliance, accountability, responsibility, and liberty to a government that has difficulty governing and a leader who cannot lead in exchange for temporary security and empty benefits.

Like many conservatives and the Republican party, I am asking myself what do we do now and in the future? After many days of pondering, thinking and and analyzing, I have come to the following realizations:

I need to change and improve myself in ways that will contribute to the defense and improvement of my county. The county will right itself but it has to start with us, the individuals and people, have have made this country better and stronger since the founding of this country. People made America and it was often done without government assistance or intervention. Its time to stop believing that electing a President can make things better and believe in our own capacity make a difference in this country.

With Mitt Romney's loss and the failure of the Republican party to do all that it could to help him win in 2012, I have also come to realize that I will no longer follow a single man or party but that I will follow my conservative principles and convictions. I am currently reassessing my relationship with the Republican Party.

I will continue to maintain my relationships that I have made with fellow Romney supporters. In speaking with some supporters, we will regroup and reorganize to continue to keep the conservative agenda going. That means that we will take a different and innovative approach to how we will accomplish those objectives.

Finally, I am announcing that my blog will undergo a radical transformation in January. My blog will receive a new name. I will change look of the blog. The purpose of my blog will change as well. The subjects that I cover will be different as well.

My Prediction For Tuesday: Romney 295-Obama 243

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Sun, 04 Nov 2012 17:08:00 +0000

A lot of people have been predicting what the Electoral College map will look like on Tuesday night or Wednesday morning. One article gathered 9 different predictions gathered from various sources that show Obama winning a second term.

However, Karl Rove has Romney winning at least 279 electoral votes and Michael Barone, a columnist for the Washington Examiner, is predicting that Mitt Romney will win 315 electoral votes.

Two University of Colorado professors, Michael J. Berry's and Kenneth N. Bickers published an article back in August that that Mitt Romney would win the election by 330 electoral votes while Obama gets only 208 electoral votes and still won't back down from that prediction. Michael J. Berry's and Kenneth N. Bickers do not base their predictions on poll numbers but on economic data which are extremely accurate in predicting the outcomes of presidential elections.

While many election forecast models are based on the popular vote, the model developed by Bickers and Berry is based on the Electoral College and is the only one of its type to include more than one state-level measure of economic conditions. They included economic data from all 50 states and the District of Columbia. [...]

The Bickers and Berry model includes both state and national unemployment figures as well as changes in real per capita income, among other factors. The new analysis includes unemployment rates from August rather than May, and changes in per capita income from the end of June rather than March. It is the last update they will release before the election. [...]
In addition to state and national unemployment rates, the authors analyzed changes in personal income from the time of the prior presidential election. Research shows that these two factors affect the major parties differently: Voters hold Democrats more responsible for unemployment rates, while Republicans are held more responsible for fluctuations in personal income.

Despite some high profile names predicting Mitt Romney winning the election, I'd like to offer my humble prediction of how I think the Electoral College numbers will be. Look below and tell me if you think I'm right or wrong:

By the way, predictions are just predictions. Don't get excited or depressed by what you see on the news or read in print or online. The important thing is YOU get out and vote. Your vote does matter. You and the millions of Americans who will go to the polls on Tuesday will decide if America will keep Obama or make him a one term president. Go Vote on Tuesday!!

PSA: Don't Forget To Change Your Clocks And Your President

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Sat, 03 Nov 2012 16:06:00 +0000

Folks, I've been absolutely swamped with law work that I haven't been able to post an article for many days now. However, I would like to put out a public service announcement to remind you to change your clocks and your President.

Please go out and vote early or on election day. I have seen articles claiming that Obama is ahead and that he will win the Electoral college. I have seen articles that have this race being very close. I have also seen predictions that Mitt Romney will win. I personally believe Mitt Romney will win this election. However, to make that happen, you have to go out and VOTE. Let us make Obama a one term President.

The Risks And Perils Of ObamaCare

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 20:35:00 +0000

A bunch of doctors in Ohio have placed an advertisement that explains what ObamaCare will mean for America. Read the article below:

Prominent African American Leaders Telling People To Leave The Democatic Party

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 15:24:00 +0000

With the 2012 Presidential election coming to an end in just a few weeks, Obama may not be getting as many votes from African Americans in this election as he did in 2008. Many prominent African Americans are telling Blacks to leave the Democratic Party. Watch below a sample of just three prominent leaders sharing that message their community:

Three Videos Every Jew Should Watch Before Voting In November

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 14:00:00 +0000

With the election only a mere few weeks away, Obama is looking to depend on a key voting bloc to help keep him in office. However, many of them may not be there to support him in the ballot box because they have serious concerns about his commentment to Israel. They have legitimate reasons to be nervous about allowing Obama to have a second term. These three videos below will explain why:

Another example of Jewish concern about Obama's commitment to Israel is found in this billboard that was put up recently:

On the other side of the world in the Middle East, Israelis are also concerned about Obama's commitment to their country. Jonathan Spyer, who is a Jewish research fellow at the Global Research in International Affairs Center, journalist, soldier and author of his first book, The Transforming Fire: The Rise of the Israel-Islamist Conflict, offers his opinion of how confident the citizens of Isreal feel about President Obama's promise that he won't allow Iran to acquire nukes. Here's what he had to say which I think also similarly reflects how many Jews here in America feel about Obama:

MJT: Obama repeatedly says he will not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. Do you believe him? How many Israelis believe him? He’s letting Assad get away with murder, but he did go after Qaddafi and bin Laden.

Jonathan Spyer: I don’t want to interfere in the internal American discussion, but your question is nicely phrased so I can comment without doing that. Confidence in President Obama is very low in Israel. That is because his performance so far seems to suggest that he has little understanding of the Hobbesian world of Middle Eastern politics and the aspects required in order to build firm alliances and proxies here. From his Cairo speech and the abandonment of Mubarak to the vacillating and paralysis on Syria, he just seems to be singing from a different and wholly unsuitable songbook. So I think very few Israelis have confidence that he will act effectively to prevent a nuclear Iran. No coherent red lines, including an outlining of the consequences of crossing them, means the Iranians will keep on moving ahead. Obama wants out of the Middle East, as he himself has made clear. He’ll do counter-terrorism from the air against small, extreme jihadi groups. In Libya, I think it was the Europeans and specifically the French who got that rolling, with the US following on, though of course inevitably doing most of the heavy lifting in the end. And frankly I think many Israelis also have the feeling, which we haven’t had for quite a few years, that the man in the White House right now isn’t a deep friend of our country, that he doesn’t understand or isn’t really interested in the story of Israel and the Jewish People, and consequently lacks a grasp of the deeper moorings which I think should underlie, and have in recent years underlain, the alliance between the US and Israel.

MJT: What is it specifically that President Obama does not understand? Surely he knows the Middle East is a much rougher neighborhood than Europe and North America. What else does he still need to grasp besides the obvious? What would you explain to him if you had his ear for a couple of minutes?

Jonathan Spyer: I would try to explain to him the dynamic of patron-client relationships in our neighborhood. I would explain to him that your clients don’t need to love you, don’t want you to bow to them, and don’t even really need to know that you respect them and empathize with them (though they will need you to at least go through the motions in this regard.) What they need to know is that if they get into trouble (and they will) you will back them and help them to your utmost. If they think you won’t or can’t do that, they won’t want to be your client. They will prefer to be the client of another patron (probably your enemy or rival) who will be willing to do this. As a result, the value of your strategic coin will rapidly decline. Right now, the net result of Obama’s losing Egypt/Tunisia/Yemen, and Iran/Russia/China’s non-losing of Syria, is that US credibility as a patron is low. Obama seems mainly dangerous to his friends, less so to his enemies, the killing of Bin-Laden notwithstanding. This is making allies nervous and enemies happy. This is not good. In particular, the most vulnerable allies (the Gulf monarchies) are very nervous indeed, and are seeking to organize themselves independently because of their impression that the US right now is not there. The trouble is that these countries are too weak for the job. As we see now in Syria, for example, they can’t deliver against Assad. So the end result of Obama’s conceptual error is that the Iran-led alliance, which remains by far the most potent and dangerous enemy in the region, is holding up well, while what used to look like a US-led regional alliance no longer really exists. This, in my view, derives directly from the American President’s failure to grasp the basic rules for behavior as a patron in the Hobbesian space of the Middle East. So if I had a few minutes that’s what I’d tell him. But I’d tell him this without a great deal of enthusiasm, because I’m pretty sure he wouldn’t get it.

Obama has had a long histoy of being flaky on Israel to the point that even life long liberal Jews are wondering about how committed Obama really is to Israel. While Obama enjoyed support from Jews in 2008, he will not get that same level of support or votes in 2012. If enough Jews abandon him at the polls on November 6th, he will not be reelected as President.

Video: Mitt Romney At The Al Smith Dinner

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 05:16:00 +0000

Mitt Romney displays his sense of humor at the annual Al Smith Dinner at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel. He does a great job poking fun at himself and negging Obama. I don't want to ruin the video but Romney got me laughing pretty hard especially when he mentions Obama and Sesame street.

Watch below:

Obama's Chances Of Getting Reelecteed Is Growing Slim

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 23:55:00 +0000

There are several signs that Barack Obama's campaign is in serious trouble and that there is a strong likelihood that he will not be reelected on November 6th, 2012. With Obama not winning the last two debates and running a poor campaign with no new vision or plans, using lame attacks on Romney over Sesame Street's Big Bird or Romney's comments about getting a binder that contains a list of women he could hire, his campaign is starting fall apart.

One of the best indicators that Obama's campaign is in trouble is RealClearPolitic's electoral map which shows Mitt Romney having an electoral lead for the first time in the 2012 general election:

The second piece of evidence that shows Obama is in real trouble for November 6th is polls show that Mitt Romney has opened up a 7 point lead in the crucial swing states. That is part of the reason why there has been a strong shift in the polls and electoral map that has swung in Mitt Romney's favor. Mitt Romney is gaining support among female voters.

Even Bob Beckel, a well known liberal on Fox News admits that the writing on the wall doesn't look good for Obama.

While Obama's chances of wining are slipping away from him, it doesn't help the President that Bill Clinton is admitting that Obama hasn't fixed the economy like he promised. One can speculate if this is pay back for Obama throwing Hilliary under the bus or not, but such speculation doesn't really matter. What matters is Bill Clinton's comments are going to matter with moderate Democrats and independents who need a perfectly good excuse to ditch Obama at the ballot box.

Obama only has 19 days to keep his campaign from sinking. He has one more debate left with Mitt Romney. However, given that Mitt Romney has performed well in the last two debates, only a miracle would help Obama now.

Who Won The Second 2012 Presidential Debate?

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Wed, 17 Oct 2012 05:47:00 +0000

The first indication that Mitt Romney won the debate came immediately after the event had ended and CBS News released this tweet:

After that, other results started to come in. CNN posted these results on television:

MSNBC had a panel of undecided voters who gave their opinion that Mitt Romney won tonight's debate.

Fox News had a similar panel in which Frank Luntz found out that they were also swayed to support Mitt after the debate.

I think it is safe to say that the immediate reaction is that Mitt Romney won tonight's debates. Further polls that will come out in the next few days will most likely confirm this.

This has been one of the most aggressive and fierce Presidential debates I've ever seen. I think everyone benefited from watching the debates tonight even if you are a hard core Romney or Obama supporter. I learned alot about Obama and Mitt from this debate. For the undecideds, it looked like this debate was influential in who they will ultimately vote for on November 6, 2012.

Complete Video Of The Second 2012 Presidential Debate

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Wed, 17 Oct 2012 04:23:00 +0000

6 Things Obama And Romney Could Learn From The UFC For The Next Debate

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 05:50:00 +0000

Obama is currently cramming for the next Presidential debate on Tuesday in order to make up for his terrible performance in his first debate with Mitt Romney and Joe Biden's odd and rude debate with Paul Ryan. Meanwhile, Mitt Romney knows he won't face a pacified Obama in the second debate and is preparing for an Obama who promises to be more aggressive with Mitt.

While Mitt Romney and Barack Obama are preparing for the debates, I'd like to offer some lessons on debating from an unlikely source: the UFC. Here's some lessons the candidates could learn from the UFC.

1. Take Your Training Seriously: As any UFC fighter or Coach will tell you, be serious about your training and train hard. Apparently, Obama didn't train hard or seriously in his first debate. As a result, his lack of preparation and not taking it seriously was obviously apparent. If UFC President Dana White could offer advice to Mitt Romney and Barack Obama, he would probably tell them, "If you want the f***ing belt, train like you f***ing want it."

2. Stick To The Game Plan: Many UFC coaches and training will tell you that sticking to the game plan as established in the training sessions will increase your likelihood of wining in the Octagon. Apparently, Obama didn't stick with his prearranged game plan that in the first debate:

In an extraordinary insight into the events leading up to the 90 minute showdown which changed the face of the election, a Democrat close to the Obama campaign today reveals that the President also did not take his debate preparation seriously, ignored the advice of senior aides and ignored one-liners that had been prepared to wound Romney.

The Democrat said that Obama's inner circle was dismayed at the 'disaster' and that he believed the central problem was that the President was so disdainful of Romney that he didn't believe he needed to engage with him.

'President Obama made it clear he wanted to be doing anything else - anything - but debate prep,' the Democrat said. 'He kept breaking off whenever he got the opportunity and never really focused on the event.

'He went into the debate armed with a number of one-liners to throw at Romney, including at least two about Romney not caring about 47 per cent of the country. But he decided not to use them.'

The Democrat, who is aligned with the Obama campaign and has been an unofficial adviser on occasions, said that David Axelrod, Obama's chief strategist, was stunned that the President left the stage feeling that he had won the debate.

'To his credit, the President believes that debates are about substance rather than performance. He felt that his argument about the direction this country should take was much stronger than Romney's. Unfortunately, that's not the way modern debates work.'

During his debate preparation in Henderson, Nevada, Obama broke off to visit a campaign field office. There, he joked with a volunteer about how his advisers were 'keeping me indoors all the time' to practice. 'It's a drag. They're making me do my homework.'

By playing it safe and letting the judges score the fight rather than going for a decisive knock out, Obama may have thrown away his chances of winning the election. Will Obama stick to his advisor's game plan in the second debate? That remains to be seen.

3. Its All About Cardio: You can be the strongest fighter in the world but lose many fights if you are not able to sustain your energy throughout the entire match. In watching the debate, Obama appeared to me to come out strong but gassed out shortly after the debate began. You can see it when Obama tells Jim Leher, the moderator, "Jim, I -- you may want to move onto another topic." To me, that was an admission from Obama that he was losing the energy to stay in the fight with Mitt. To make matters worse, Romney took advantage of that lack of preparation and sucked out whatever remaining energy Obama had left by keep throwing those laser guided punches.

Another piece of evidence that Obama had no stamina for the first debate was that he never maintained eye contact with Romney. He could not look Romney in the eye which revealed that he could not muster the confidence or energy to defend his own record. By contrast, Romney kept his gaze on Obama which made Obama appear weak, small, and not at all presidential

Given Obama's lackluster performance at his first debate, does Obama really have the stamina to go toe to toe with Mitt Romney for another 1 hour round with Mitt? Can Mitt Romney repeat his performance at the first debate a second time in his second match with Obama? If both candidates want to win, they must be able to look strong, sharp and have the energy to endure the brutal debate. Neither one can afford to gas out in this match.

4. Don't Let It Go To The Judges: Dana White, the President of the UFC, has consistently told fighters to not let the fight go to the judges because victory is left in the hands of someone other than you. In his first debate, Obama clearly was willing to let the debate be decided by the judges, in this case, the American people. The American people overwhelmingly thought Obama lost that debate. In contrast, Mitt Romney didn't play it safe but came out swinging. That's why he won the debate.

I didn't see the debate live and so when I was reading and watching the post-debate news, the media made it appear as if Romney gave Obama a beatdown. When I finally saw the debate, Obama didn't perform as badly as the media portrayed him to be but that Romney gave a perfect debate in terms of technique and style and Obama simply wasn't ready for it at all. Romney picked Obama apart with precise and hard punches. When the debate ended, the judges, the American people, clearly gave Romney the victory in that debate.

5. Be Selective With Your Punches: This lesson comes from the Vice Presidential debates and I think both Obama and Romney should review the tapes of this debate in preparation for Tuesday's debate. Its a simple and basic lesson but the Obama campaign apparently hasn't learned this lesson yet.

I am 100% positive Peggy Noonan doesn't watch the UFC but she makes a great point about confusing strength with aggression. In the UFC, one can be strong and not need to be aggressive to win a fight In contrast, you can be aggressive and still end up losing the fight. Joe Biden was wildly aggressive towards Paul Ryan but there was no strength behind his attacks. He was throwing haymakers but not landing any punches on Mitt's running mate:

Joe Biden came out swinging at Paul Ryan, flailing wildly and landing a few punches on his own jaw as well as his opponent's. He showed the kind of spirit and populist anger that President Barack Obama was so conspicuously lacking and has cheered up many demoralised Democrats.

Obama campaign advisors are openly stating to the media that Obama will be like Joe Biden in the next debate. Obama should be careful in with that strategy since Biden attempted to have a bar fight with Paul Ryan but ended up losing because Paul Ryan's debating style is much like Mitt Romney's in terms of executing patient, precise and hard punches against his opponent. One commentator correctly named the Biden-Ryan debate The Bully v. The Wonk.

Mitt Romney could learn a thing or two from his young Vice Presidential running mate in reviewing the debate tape of the Vice Presidential debate. It will help him review the fundamentals of debating that he executes so well. It will also help Romney in terms of how to be on the defensive when Obama starts throwing his punches and how to return fire. Although both men are known to be well informed policy wonks who love to get deep into the details, I think Paul Ryan is much better than his older in finding that balance of educating the voters with facts and details while landing the hard punches on his opponent.

6. What Happens After The Debate Is Just As Important As What Happens During The Debate: Its clear that Obama didn't take the debate seriously when preparing for it. However, sometimes UFC fighters can make up for their loss by how they act after the fight. About 99% of the time, most UFC fighters are humble and pensive about their losses. Rarely do they get cocky about which can diminish the way the fans view the fighters. For Obama, he negatively influenced the way Americans look at him when it was revealed that the President thought he won the first debate immediately after he left the stage. To make matters worse, Obama still thinks he won the debate and claims that people will judge him as the winner if they read the debate transcript. In this day and age, I don't think anyone reads transcripts anymore. I don't think making that statement helps Obama at all.

Obama also went after Mitt Romney after the debate had debate had ended by calling Mitt Romney a liar and running ads about Sesame Street. I think the American voter wasn't amused by Obama's post debate behavior and it will hurt him in the long run.

In contrast, Mitt Romney simply went out on the campaign trail as if victory was natural to him. It also made him look very Presidential. This will help him tremendously in building the momentum for November 6th and sharpening the contrast between himself and Obama.

It may appear that the UFC and Presidential debates have nothing in common but by reviewing these basic lessons, a Presidential candidate can be well prepared for a debate. Obama needs to learn these lessons badly while Romney simply needs to review them in preparation for Tuesday's debates.

What other lessons from the UFC do you think Romney and Obama could learn in getting ready for the debate?

2012 Presidential Debates: Mitt Romney's Economic Record

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Wed, 03 Oct 2012 21:29:00 +0000

Many of you have been doing your due diligence of conducting your own research into who you should vote for in November. Tonight's 2012 Presidential debate will focus on the economy. A few months ago, I wrote a series of blog articles analyzing various aspects of Mitt Romney's record which will help you educate yourself in preparation for tonight's debate. You can now read the entire series below:

2012 Presidential Debate: The Facts About ObamaCare & RomneyCare

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Wed, 03 Oct 2012 21:17:00 +0000

Many of you have been doing your due diligence of conducting your own research into who you should vote for in November. Tonight's 2012 Presidential debate will focus on the economy. Quite naturally, there will be a debate between Obama and Romney on health care. I have collected a series of articles I have written that you can read in preparation's for tonight's debate.

The Facts About ObamaCare

The Facts About RomneyCare

2012 Presidential Debate: Educating Yourself On The Candidate's Economic Records

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Wed, 03 Oct 2012 21:14:00 +0000

In contrast, I have prepared a few articles which highlight's Obama's economic record.

Get Yourself Prepared For Tonight's 2012 Presidential Debate

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Wed, 03 Oct 2012 20:54:00 +0000

In contrast, I have prepared a few articles which highlight's Obama's economic record.

Quite naturally, there will be a debate between Obama and Romney on health care. I have collected a series of articles you can read in preparation's for tonight's debate.

The Facts About ObamaCare

The Facts About RomneyCare

I know its a lot of reading but you can use this to help you arm yourself with the facts so that you can be prepared for tonight's debate. You can also bookmark this page and come back to it to do more reading in preparation to decide who to vote for on November 6th.

Barack Obama Gets His First October Surprise

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Wed, 03 Oct 2012 03:13:00 +0000

Today, the Daily Caller has obtained a video of Obama that the America public has never seen before and has posted clips of it online. You can watch the ENTIRE clip below.

The American public needs to watch the entire unedited speech rather than small clips that the media likes to play in order to understand the real Barack Obama when he knows the public or the media is watching him.

In Obama's entire political career, I don't think he has ever faced an October surprise before. Having a damaging video come out barely a month before the November election is something he's never experienced because Obama is usually good at springing a surprise just before a crucial election. Ann Coulter explains his favorite campaign tactic that he loves to employ:

Let's take a romp down memory lane and review the typical Obama campaign strategy. Obama became a U.S. senator only by virtue of David Axelrod's former employer, the Chicago Tribune, ripping open the sealed divorce records of Obama's two principal opponents.

One month before the 2004 Democratic primary for the U.S. Senate, Obama was down in the polls, about to lose to Blair Hull, a multimillionaire securities trader. But then the Chicago Tribune leaked the claim that Hull's second ex-wife, Brenda Sexton, had sought an order of protection against him during their 1998 divorce proceedings.

Those records were under seal, but as The New York Times noted: "The Tribune reporter who wrote the original piece later acknowledged in print that the Obama camp had 'worked aggressively behind the scenes' to push the story." Many people said Axelrod had "an even more significant role -- that he leaked the initial story."

Both Hull and his ex-wife opposed releasing their sealed divorce records, but they finally relented in response to the media's hysteria -- 18 days before the primary. Hull was forced to spend four minutes of a debate detailing the abuse allegation in his divorce papers, explaining that his ex-wife "kicked me in the leg and I hit her shin to try to get her to not continue to kick me."

After having held a substantial lead just a month before the primary, Hull's campaign collapsed with the chatter about his divorce. Obama sailed to the front of the pack and won the primary. Hull finished third with 10 percent of the vote.

As luck would have it, Obama's opponent in the general election had also been divorced! Jack Ryan was tall, handsome, Catholic -- and shared a name with one of Harrison Ford's most popular onscreen characters! He went to Dartmouth, Harvard Law and Harvard Business School, made hundreds of millions of dollars as a partner at Goldman Sachs, and then, in his early 40s, left investment banking to teach at an inner city school on the South Side of Chicago.

Ryan would have walloped Obama in the Senate race. But at the request of -- again -- the Chicago Tribune, California Judge Robert Schnider unsealed the custody papers in Ryan's divorce five years earlier from Hollywood starlet Jeri Lynn Ryan, the bombshell Borg on "Star Trek: Voyager."

Jack Ryan had released his tax records. He had released his divorce records. But both he and his ex-wife sought to keep the custody records under seal to protect their son.

Amid the 400 pages of filings from the custody case, Jack Ryan claimed that his wife had had an affair, and she counterclaimed with the allegation that he had taken her to "sex clubs" in Paris, New York and New Orleans, which drove her to fall in love with another man.

(Republicans: If you plan a career in public office, please avoid marrying a wacko.)

Ryan had vehemently denied her allegations at the time, but it didn't matter. The sex club allegations aired on "Entertainment Tonight," "NBC Nightly News," ABC's "Good Morning America," "The Tonight Show With Jay Leno," and NBC's "Today" show. CNN covered the story like it was the first moon landing.

(Interestingly, international papers also were ablaze with the story -- the same newspapers that were supposed to be so bored with American sexual mores during Bill Clinton's sex scandal.)

Four days after Judge Schnider unsealed the custody records, Ryan dropped out of the race for the horror of (allegedly) propositioning his own wife and then taking "no" for an answer.

Alan Keyes stepped in as a last-minute Republican candidate.

And that's how Obama became a U.S. senator. He destroyed both his Democratic primary opponent and his Republican general election opponent with salacious allegations about their personal lives taken from "sealed" court records.

The reason why Obama has never faced an October surprise is because the media has been unwilling do the dirty work that Obama likes to do to his opponents. In fact, the media eagerly ran the dirt that Obama found on his opponents in his previous races and refused to do a deep investigation of Obama in the 2008 election and in this 2012 election.

Had the media done their job, Obama would have been exposed as a liar in the 2008 election since the Reverend Wright scandal would blow up a few months later and the media know that his denunciations of his pastor were a lie. However, the media conspired to down play Obama's connection to Reverend Jeremiah Wright and the scandal that almost cost him the election. In fact, as the Daily Caller points out, the media was a willing accomplice in deceiving the American public so that they could get Obama elected:

Obama gave the speech in the middle of a hotly-contested presidential primary season, but his remarks escaped scrutiny. Reporters in the room seem to have missed or ignored his most controversial statements. The liberal blogger Andrew Sullivan linked to what he described as a “transcript” of the speech, which turned out not to be a transcript at all, but instead the prepared remarks provided by the campaign. In fact, Obama, who was not using a teleprompter, deviated from his script repeatedly and at length, ad libbing lines that he does not appear to have used before any other audience during his presidential run. A local newspaper posted a series of video clips of the speech, but left out key portions. No complete video of the Hampton speech was widely released.

The only way to punish Obama and the media for the massive deception, corruption and collusion is to vote him out of office. It won't fix the bias or the corruption or collusion of the liberal media but it will end Obama's presidency.

If Mitt Romney Is Our Next President, Who Would He Nominate For The Supreme Court?

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Tue, 02 Oct 2012 00:13:00 +0000

CNN has recently published an article of possible Supreme Court nominees that Mitt Romney would pick if he became President. CNN claims that they were able to obtain an unofficial list of potential nominees based on a variety of sources. Mitt Romney has not publicly stated who he would name if he became President and this list complied by CNN could be nothing more than pure speculation by their sources.

Below is the list of potential Supreme Court nominees:

Paul Clement, former U.S. Solicitor General

Judge Brett Kavanaugh, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit

Judge Diane Sykes, 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, Milwaukee

Sen. Mike Lee, Republican from Utah

Judge Steven Colloton, 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, works in Des Moines, Iowa

Judge Neil Gorsuch, 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, Denver

Judge Jeffrey Sutton, 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, works in Columbus, Ohio

Judge Janice Rogers Brown, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit

Judge Allyson Duncan, 4th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, works in Raleigh, North Carolina

All the issues that conservatives and Republican care about can be traced back our concern for the rule of law. If we fail to make the Constitution, our judicial system, criminal system, or our legislative system legal issues our top priority and concern as conservatives and Republicans, then we will not be able to be successful in fighting for life, economic liberty, national security, right to bear arms, health care, education or any other issue. As a result, this election is extremely important for conservatives of all stripes because who wins this election will have the chance to influence the make up of our Supreme Court for many years to come.

By electing Mitt Romney, we will have the opportunity to put more conservative judges on the Supreme Court. Wee need a conservative majority not only to keep the liberals in the minority, but we also need them in the event one or two justices decide side with the liberal justices, we still have a conservative majority.

The real question isn't between having Obama or Mitt Romney as our next president. The choice is easy. However, the important question is how much effort are you willing to put into this election make that choice a reality so that the issues you care about receive the proper attention it receives in our judicial system?

Lessons From A Declining California

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Mon, 01 Oct 2012 02:19:00 +0000

I love the state of California. Its my home state. It is a state that has everything. Picture perfect beaches, amazing mountains and world famous deserts. It has a strong diversity of people and a wide range of activities for tourists and citizens to enjoy.

So, why are so many people leaving the state?

The Daily Beast provides us with some clues:

Californians needs to ask if the state has started a cycle of decline, in which a loss of jobs to other states leads to a loss of tax-paying residents, and in turn to a deterioration of the public services that make the state even less desirable for businesses. This “toxic state syndrome,” as it might be called, could be very difficult to shake. The businesses that bring jobs (or take jobs with them when they leave) look for certain things: a skilled work force, relatively low costs, sound infrastructure and public services, and—maybe most important of all—some assurance that these conditions will stay the same.

A state in chronic fiscal distress can’t offer such predictability, and California is a very distressed state. For most of the past decade, its credit rating has been at or near last place in the nation; currently it is rated the lowest by Standard & Poor’s, and Moody’s ranks only Illinois lower. Texas, on the other hand, is just one notch from the top on the S&P scale.

However, California could turn things around. But with Jerry Brown at the helm with a Democrat majority legislature, recovery will not happen if Jerry Brown's tax increases takes place:

Californians could make things worse this November when voters decide on a measure, backed by Gov. Jerry Brown, to raise its income tax rates (already near the highest in the nation) to prevent deep cuts in school spending. That might produce a temporary burst of revenue but leave the state even more dependent on a volatile revenue source. Then again, if the tax hike doesn’t pass, schools will take a hit that could leave California that much less attractive to employers and employees.

What may be most damaging about California’s tax debate is its tone of desperation. The state is like a man at the end of his rope who has taken hostages—in this case, the schools. Meanwhile, Texas and other states are poaching California jobs with tax incentives at a scale that California state and local governments can’t afford, most recently with the $36 million package of tax breaks and investment funds that convinced Apple Inc. to expand in Austin and add some 3,600 jobs.

Raising taxes is a good way to make a state's terrible financial situation even worse. Frank Rich in an article that appeared in the Wall Street Journal explains why:

Nearly half of California's income taxes before the recession came from the top 1% of earners: households that took in more than $490,000 a year. High earners, it turns out, have especially volatile incomes—their earnings fell by more than twice as much as the rest of the population's during the recession. When they crashed, they took California's finances down with them.
Mr. Williams, a former economic forecaster for the state, spent more than a decade warning state leaders about California's over-dependence on the rich. "We created a revenue cliff," he said. "We built a large part of our government on the state's most unstable income group."

Frank Rich discovers that California addicted to raising taxes on the rich because they think that the rich will stick around and continue to pay these taxes:

"These revenues have a narcotic effect on legislatures," said Greg Torres, president of MassINC, a nonpartisan think tank. "They become numb to the trend and think the revenue picture is improving, but they don't realize the money is ephemeral."

However, what California and other states don't realize is that raising taxes on the rich leads to the government receiving less revenue in taxes. As John Stossel mentioned in a television special , “Tax The Rich”, “Maryland’s millionaire tax was supposed to bring in $106 million. Instead revenue went down by $257 million. Many millionaires just left the state.”

The Democrats in California as well in other states and in our Federal government want to soak the rich because they believe that the myth that the rich don't pay their fair share is real.

Its a simple lesson that liberals, progressives and Democrats don't understand. Raising taxes doesn't fix a state's or a nation's financial problems. It only makes it worse for the following reasons: they rely on the rich to pay taxes while those in lower income taxes pay little to no income taxes at all, they spend more money than they earn in revenue and think they can sack the rich to atone for their irresponsible spending habits, the rich make money in good times but lose a lot of it in bad times, rich people will leave the state if they are taxes or demonized too much and create laws that make it harder for business to employ people to work.

California can turn around only if they learn the simple lesson of stop taxing the rich, spend with in your means and create a business friendly environment in which job creators, innovators, investors and rich people want to stay.

Which leads me to our current financial problems in the Federal Government. The United States is facing a huge tax increase that conservatives are calling "Taxmageddon" is a one-year $494 billion tax increase slated to strike the economy on January 1, 2013. The reason why taxes would be going up dramatically is because end of the Bush-era tax cuts that are scheduled to expire at the end of this year while its also the start of new taxes like ObamaCare and other taxes that target the rich. The Congressional Budget Office and International Monetary Fund have also both issued warnings regarding these incoming tax hikes.

Unless our elected officials in California and Washington D.C. learn the lessons above and engage in real tax reform, we will face a huge financial mess of our own making. As Paul Ryan said, these problems are avoidable and we can do something about it. But it must be done NOW.

The Truth About Mitt Romney's Taxes & Tithes

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Sat, 22 Sep 2012 02:14:00 +0000

Jason Alexander, who is famous for playing George Costanza on the television show "Seinfeld" believes that Mitt Romney won't release his tax records because he believes there may be evidence that he's cheating the LDS Church out of millions of dollars by not paying his tithing:

Its a similar claim to Harry Reid made in which he accused Mitt Romney of not paying taxes for 10 years:

Here's the transcript of Harry Reid's astonishing accusation:

He’s refused to release his tax returns, as we know. If a person coming before this body wanted to be a cabinet officer, he couldn’t be if he did the same refusal Mitt Romney does about tax returns. So the word’s out that he hasn’t paid any taxes for ten years. Let him prove that he has paid taxes, because he hasn’t.

Jason Alexander accuses Romney of avoiding paying tithing. Harry Reid says Romney hasn't paid his taxes.

Both claims are outright lies.

Today Mitt Romney released a detailed report of his 2011 tax returns and Romney's trustee, whose name is Brad Malt, gives us a summary of the 2011 data:

- In 2011, the Romneys paid $1,935,708 in taxes on $13,696,951 in mostly investment income.

- The Romneys’ effective tax rate for 2011 was 14.1%.

-The Romneys donated $4,020,772 to charity in 2011, amounting to nearly 30% of their income.

-The Romneys claimed a deduction for $2.25 million of those charitable contributions. The Romneys’ generous charitable donations in 2011 would have significantly reduced their tax obligation for the year. The Romneys thus limited their deduction of charitable contributions to conform to the Governor's statement in August, based upon the January estimate of income, that he paid at least 13% in income taxes in each of the last 10 years.

Brad Malt, the trustee of the Romney family, also gives us a breakdown of the taxes paid by the Romney campaign for the last 20 years:

- In each year during the entire 20-year period, the Romneys owed both state and federal income taxes.

-Over the entire 20-year period, the average annual effective federal tax rate was 20.20%.

-Over the entire 20-year period, the lowest annual effective federal personal tax rate was 13.66%.

-Over the entire 20-year period, the Romneys gave to charity an average of 13.45% of their adjusted gross income.

-Over the entire 20-year period, the total federal and state taxes owed plus the total charitable donations deducted represented 38.49% of total AGI.

-During the 20-year period covered by the PWC letter, Gov. and Mrs. Romney paid 100 percent of the taxes that they owed.

Its clear that Harry Reid's claim that Mitt Romney hasn't paid is any taxes is a LIE. Mitt Romney has paid 100% of his taxes for the past 20 years. What's even more important is to keep in mind that if you look at the numbers more closely, Mitt Romney paid 30% in taxes rather than the 13% to 14%.

As far Seinfeld actor Jason Alexander's claim that Mitt Romney hasn't paid tithing, the LDS Church does not publicly release how much tithing any member of the LDS Church has paid. That is a matter between the Bishop and the member. Mitt Romney has said that his tithing records should remain private even though by releasing his tax records, people can figure out how much he's given in tithing.

"Our church doesn't publish how much people have given," Romney is reportedly quoted as saying in the forthcoming edition of Parade. "This is done entirely privately. One of the downsides of releasing one's financial information is that this is now all public, but we had never intended our contributions to be known. It's a very personal thing between ourselves and our commitment to our God and to our church."

However, records show that Mitt Romney has actually paid more than 10% in tithes to the LDS Church:

The couple’s donations to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints appear to be almost double the 10 percent tithe faithful members are asked to give to the Salt Lake City-based faith.

In addition to Romney’s direct contributions to the LDS Church, he also gave to the faith through his charity for a total of $3.07 million last year, according to his campaign. The campaign also said Friday that the Romneys have given, on average, 13.45 percent of their income annually to charity, including the LDS Church.

Jason Alexander's claim that Mitt Romney is cheating the Church of tithing funds is also NOT TRUE. Its clear that Mitt Romney has been a faithful tithing payer all along.

For more information on the LDS practice of tithing, the LDS Newsroom gives a simple explanation on tithing and charitable donations while another official LDS website called Mormon.org explains what the Mormon Church does with these funds and why Mormons pay tithing.

Government Employees Died, Then Obama Lied

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Thu, 20 Sep 2012 03:04:00 +0000

It is now evident that the Obama administration lied about what happened in Benghazi. They insisted that it was a spontaneous and unscripted riot prompted by an obscure anti-Muslim video. They stuck with that narrative despite the fact that evidence was building that it was a planned attack designed maximize embarrassment and destruction on a day that is sacred to many Americans. We now know that the attacks were planned by Al Qaeda.

You didn't have to be an intelligence officer to discover that. If regular citizens with no access to intelligence agencies know that we were attacked and the President is telling the American people something else, its lying. Prior to this revelation by American intelligence agencies, Mark Steyn made the case for how the Obama was willfully turning a blind eye to the evidence of a terrorist attack:

As I say, I’m inclined to be generous, and put some of this down to the natural torpor and ineptitude of government. But Hillary Clinton and General Martin Dempsey are guilty of something worse, in the secretary of state’s weirdly obsessive remarks about an obscure film supposedly disrespectful of Mohammed and the chairman of the joint chiefs’ telephone call to a private citizen asking him if he could please ease up on the old Islamophobia.

Forget the free-speech arguments. In this case, as Secretary Clinton and General Dempsey well know, the film has even less to do with anything than did the Danish cartoons or the schoolteacher’s teddy bear or any of the other innumerable grievances of Islam. The 400-strong assault force in Benghazi showed up with RPGs and mortars: That’s not a spontaneous movie protest; that’s an act of war, and better planned and executed than the dying superpower’s response to it. Secretary Clinton and General Dempsey are, to put it mildly, misleading the American people when they suggest otherwise.

As the old saying goes, If you repeat a lie often enough, people will take it as truth." The Obama Administration was trying to get the American people to accept their lie as the truth despite the clear evidence that this was an attack on the U.S. Consulate because it would be a clear admission that Obama's foreign policy is a complete failure:

"The attacks on US embassies and consulates in the Arab world can not be justified in any way. If it turns out that al-Qaida is behind the attacks, as some US officials suspect, then they are acts of terrorism committed under the guise of religion. If they turn out to be uncoordinated actions by angry believers, then they are an expression of a frightening ignorance. A crazy individual US citizen has uploaded a movie onto the Internet which denigrates the Prophet Muhammad. The US government can not be held responsible for that. But that clearly does not help US President Barack Obama very much. He has to bear the political consequences of the recent events by himself."

"Four years ago, Obama pledged to seek reconciliation with the Muslim world. Now, it is doubtful whether he has succeeded. The US and its European allies now have to ask themselves how much support they still enjoy in the countries of the Arab Spring."

Obama must be held accountable for his policy of leading from behind in world affairs and how it has been a utter failure. The fact that the Obama Administration has openly and brazenly lied to the American people cannot be tolerated either. The best way to hold him accountable is to give him the pink slip on November 6, 2012.

Star Of Television Show Dirty Jobs Mike Rowe Posts An Open Letter To Mitt Romney

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Sun, 09 Sep 2012 19:19:00 +0000

Mike Rowe, the funny but hard working host of the television show, Dirty Jobs has posted an open letter to Mitt Romney. Here's an excerpt from that letter:

Though schizophrenic and void of any actual qualifications, my resume looks pretty impressive, and when our economy officially crapped the bed in 2008, I was perfectly positioned to weigh in on a variety of serious topics. A reporter from The Wall Street Journal called to ask what I thought about the “counter-intuitive correlation between rising unemployment and the growing shortage of skilled labor.” CNBC wanted my take on outsourcing. Fox News wanted my opinions on manufacturing and infrastructure. And CNN wanted to chat about currency valuations, free trade, and just about every other work-related problem under the sun.

In each case, I shared my theory that most of these “problems” were in fact symptoms of something more fundamental – a change in the way Americans viewed hard work and skilled labor. That’s the essence of what I’ve heard from the hundreds of men and women I’ve worked with on Dirty Jobs. Pig farmers, electricians, plumbers, bridge painters, jam makers, blacksmiths, brewers, coal miners, carpenters, crab fisherman, oil drillers…they all tell me the same thing over and over, again and again – our country has become emotionally disconnected from an essential part of our workforce. We are no longer impressed with cheap electricity, paved roads, and indoor plumbing. We take our infrastructure for granted, and the people who build it.

Today, we can see the consequences of this disconnect in any number of areas, but none is more obvious than the growing skills gap. Even as unemployment remains sky high, a whole category of vital occupations has fallen out of favor, and companies struggle to find workers with the necessary skills. The causes seem clear. We have embraced a ridiculously narrow view of education. Any kind of training or study that does not come with a four-year degree is now deemed “alternative.” Many viable careers once aspired to are now seen as “vocational consolation prizes,” and many of the jobs this current administration has tried to “create” over the last four years are the same jobs that parents and teachers actively discourage kids from pursuing. (I always thought there something ill-fated about the promise of three million “shovel ready jobs” made to a society that no longer encourages people to pick up a shovel.)

You can read Mike Rowe's entire letter HERE.

Mike Rowe is absolutely correct. American used to be a country that made things. We used to be a country where hard work was done in the fields under a hot sun or in a factory where machines and men banged and clanged on wood, steel and other items.America valued farming, mining, manufacturing, cleaning, or drilling. If America wants to get back on track, we need to encourage these industries to grow and expand. That means reducing burdensome regulations and lowering taxes so that business can hire workers to do these jobs. Quite frankly, we also need a national discussion on private sector unions since they can also hinder productivity, competitiveness, job creation and profits.

We also need to encourage society to value this kind of work and not disparage it. This kind of dirty work takes humility, strength, dedication and brains to do. It is not stupid work. Its common sense work. It is honorable work. It is American work.

This is what made America strong and competitive. If we want to make America work again, we need to get America to work.

Obama To Move DNC Convention Inside Due To Possible Severe Weather Is A Lie

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Thu, 06 Sep 2012 07:03:00 +0000

Tomorrow is the last day of the DNC convention. So far, its been an wild ride for Obama and the Democratic party. The convention hasn't gone as well as they hoped. The Democatic party somehow removed God and their support for Jerusalem as the capital of Israel from their platform and had to send out Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa to reinsert these items back into the platform despite loud opposition from the delegates. Perhaps the biggest problem for Obama and the Democrats is that this convention isn't filling up the seats like they used to during the 2008 election:

As a result, President Obama is giving his speech at the DNC convention but it won't be in the big stadium. It will be inside at a smaller venue. They claim the reason why he's giving his speech indoors is due to the possibility of severe weather However, that claim is false:

But in reality, the risk of thunderstorms and severe weather isn’t particularly high.

Brad Panovich, chief meteorologist for WCNC, the NBC affiliate in Charlotte, is questioning the decision.

“Severe threat is almost zero Thursday night & chance of rain is 20%” he tweeted.

He added: “It’s a simple question.. if you had a Panthers game, Concert or Soccer match with a 20% chance of storms would you cancel 24 hrs prior?”

The change in venue means means 65,000 people who had planned to attend the event won’t be able to do so.

“Feel horrible for all the people who had tickets to go see #POTUS speak,” Panovich tweeted.

NOAA’s Storm Prediction Center places Charlotte in broad area where “general” thunderstorms are possible and the risk of severe storms is not elevated.

The National Weather Service predicts a 30-40 percent chance of showers and thunderstorms in the afternoon and evening.

The real reason for why the Obama administration is moving the speech inside is to make it look like there is strong support for Obama. Remember, perception is more powerful than the truth and as long as they can get as many people to buy into the perception that Obama is still popular, that's all that matters. The fact that there's proof that Obama cannot fill the seats for the first two days of the convention doesn't matter. Its all about perception and getting you to believe it even if it contradicts the truth. Moreover, its designed to distract you from the real storm that has been hanging over Presidency:

Somethings For You To Think About As You Watch The DNC Convention

noreply@blogger.com (J) — Wed, 05 Sep 2012 00:17:00 +0000

Now that RNC Convention is over and Mitt Romney is the Republican nominee, tonight is the first night of the DNC convention. The point of the convention is not only for the either party to nominate their candidates, but to outline the party's vision for America as express by the that party's candidate.

It is clear that domestic issues are the most important issues in this election. The number one issue for almost all voters is the economy. However, these were the same issues in the 2008 election and Obama hasn't come up with anything new for the American voter to hear.

While Obama isn't telling anything new that the American people haven't heard, what has changed is that this isn't 2008 anymore. Obama now has a record and its something he cannot distance himself from, especially when it comes to the economy. The statistics reveal how badly Obama has managed our economy and why we have high unemployment.

As you watch the convention, think about Obama's leadership style, his economic record (and contrast it with Mitt Romney's record on the economy), his promises to create jobs, his plans for reducing the 16 trillion deficit, then ask yourself the following questions:

Obama has helped make better things for you from four years ago? As he made things better for America now than four years ago? Does this man deserve another four years in the White House? Should we elect the President who is offering the same message that he did in 2008?

Whatever you see and hear from the DNC convention, Obama cannot run away from his record and he doesn't deserve to have another four years in office.