Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Monday, January 30, 2012
Mitt Romney: The $1.5 Billion Lobbyist for 2002 Olympics
In 1999 Mitt Romney took control of the 2002 Winter Olympics operation after organizers in Salt Lake City were accused of providing more than $1 million in cash and gifts to members of the International Olympic Committee to secure the city's bid.
On the campaign trail, Governor Mitt Romney cites his efforts to rescue the Olympic by luring new corporate sponsors and fix a huge budget shortfall. Some recently discovered information may shed light on just how Romney helped fill the financial hole the Salt Lake Olympic organizers put themselves in.
The GAO (General Accounting Office) had initial planned for a budget of about 1.3 billion dollars in federal assistance to the 2002 winter Olympics, but before the opening ceremonies even began the operations was in a deep financial hole putting the entire Olympics in danger. The initial budget for the 2002 Olympics called for more then two times the amount of the 1996 Olympics games.
While Mitt Romney claims that his business experience was a key attribute in turning the Olympic planning around it may have had more to do with his political connections and influence peddling. Overstating his corporate experience and understated the government's financial assistance.
Mitt Romney lobbied congress hard for federal tax dollars effectively provided huge subsidies for each ticket sold, and that the largest corporate sponsorships were in place before he arrived. Once taking over the operations for the Olympic games, Governor Romney began to use his political leverage and relationship with Senator Bill Bennett of Utah to secure $1.5 Billion in tax payer dollars to bailout the failed Olympic operations.
On Sept. 19, 2000, Senator John McCain rose in the Senate to rail against what he called the "staggering" sums that the federal government planned to spend to help Salt Lake City stage the 2002 Winter Olympics.
"The American taxpayer is being shaken down to the tune of nearly a billion and a half dollars," “I think it is a disgrace,” McCain said, who, along with U.S. Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., asked the government agency to investigate the escalating expenditures for hosting the Olympic games in American cities.
“But this is a logical extension of what you get when you start pork-barrel spending.”
At the time Mitt Romney defended the request for additional federal dollars and made no mention in a portions of the profits from games going back to the federal government to help recover the costs.
“Recognizing that our government spends billions of dollars to maintain wartime capability, it is entirely appropriate to invest several hundred millions to promote peace,” Mitt Romney, the president of the Salt Lake City Organizing Committee, wrote in a letter in August to the GAO.
"I'm expecting the funding we need to host the Games," he said. "I'm quite confident."
Mitt Romney never explained how the project was costing the federal tax payer twice as originally budgeted our who benefited from the waste.
McCain's outrage put him at odds not only with Romney but with Sen. Robert F. Bennett, the Utah Republican who sat on the appropriations committee and who personally led the fight for federal aid to the Olympics. No discussion was give to the potential conflict of interest with Sen. Bennett serving on this committing and working with Mitt Romney to lobby the committee for a bailout.
In October 1999, Bennett took to the Senate floor to condemn a claim on McCain's website that called an allocation of $2.2 million to improve Salt Lake City sewers "a direct result of unlimited contributions from special interests." McCain's staff had found the sewer aid in an emergency appropriation to fund U.S. military operations in Kosovo.
With the final cost of the 2002 Winter Olympic games costing the tax payer 2.7 billion dollars and Mitt Romney personally lobbing congress for nearly most $1.5 billion in bailout money to help turn the Olympics around one must ask if this is that type of influence peddling the country needs in the Republican presidential candidate. The 2002 Winter Olympics profited over $100 Millions and there is no clear understand as to who received those profits.
On the campaign trail, Governor Mitt Romney cites his efforts to rescue the Olympic by luring new corporate sponsors and fix a huge budget shortfall. Some recently discovered information may shed light on just how Romney helped fill the financial hole the Salt Lake Olympic organizers put themselves in.
The GAO (General Accounting Office) had initial planned for a budget of about 1.3 billion dollars in federal assistance to the 2002 winter Olympics, but before the opening ceremonies even began the operations was in a deep financial hole putting the entire Olympics in danger. The initial budget for the 2002 Olympics called for more then two times the amount of the 1996 Olympics games.
- 1984 Summer Games in Los Angeles -- $75 Million
- 1996 Summer Games in Atlanta -- $609 Million
- 2002 Winter Games in Salt Lake City -- $2.7 Billion
While Mitt Romney claims that his business experience was a key attribute in turning the Olympic planning around it may have had more to do with his political connections and influence peddling. Overstating his corporate experience and understated the government's financial assistance.
Mitt Romney lobbied congress hard for federal tax dollars effectively provided huge subsidies for each ticket sold, and that the largest corporate sponsorships were in place before he arrived. Once taking over the operations for the Olympic games, Governor Romney began to use his political leverage and relationship with Senator Bill Bennett of Utah to secure $1.5 Billion in tax payer dollars to bailout the failed Olympic operations.
On Sept. 19, 2000, Senator John McCain rose in the Senate to rail against what he called the "staggering" sums that the federal government planned to spend to help Salt Lake City stage the 2002 Winter Olympics.
"The American taxpayer is being shaken down to the tune of nearly a billion and a half dollars," “I think it is a disgrace,” McCain said, who, along with U.S. Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., asked the government agency to investigate the escalating expenditures for hosting the Olympic games in American cities.
“But this is a logical extension of what you get when you start pork-barrel spending.”
At the time Mitt Romney defended the request for additional federal dollars and made no mention in a portions of the profits from games going back to the federal government to help recover the costs.
“Recognizing that our government spends billions of dollars to maintain wartime capability, it is entirely appropriate to invest several hundred millions to promote peace,” Mitt Romney, the president of the Salt Lake City Organizing Committee, wrote in a letter in August to the GAO.
"I'm expecting the funding we need to host the Games," he said. "I'm quite confident."
Mitt Romney never explained how the project was costing the federal tax payer twice as originally budgeted our who benefited from the waste.
McCain's outrage put him at odds not only with Romney but with Sen. Robert F. Bennett, the Utah Republican who sat on the appropriations committee and who personally led the fight for federal aid to the Olympics. No discussion was give to the potential conflict of interest with Sen. Bennett serving on this committing and working with Mitt Romney to lobby the committee for a bailout.
In October 1999, Bennett took to the Senate floor to condemn a claim on McCain's website that called an allocation of $2.2 million to improve Salt Lake City sewers "a direct result of unlimited contributions from special interests." McCain's staff had found the sewer aid in an emergency appropriation to fund U.S. military operations in Kosovo.
With the final cost of the 2002 Winter Olympic games costing the tax payer 2.7 billion dollars and Mitt Romney personally lobbing congress for nearly most $1.5 billion in bailout money to help turn the Olympics around one must ask if this is that type of influence peddling the country needs in the Republican presidential candidate. The 2002 Winter Olympics profited over $100 Millions and there is no clear understand as to who received those profits.
Club for Growth Gives Mitt Romney an "F"
Andy Roth from Club for Growth Discusses Presidential Candidates Economic Plans With Fox News Neil Cavuto.
Rick Perry - A
Ron Paul - A
Newt Gingrich - C
Rick Santorum - C
Jon Hustman - Incomplete
Mitt Romney - F
Saturday, January 28, 2012
Newt Gingrich Wins: Best Unintentional Singer.
Newt Gingrich inspired many people, rich and poor in the South Carolina debate when he spoke about the need of poor kids to earn "cash money" through hard working. Every job that a person earns money from helps a person learn the value of hard work and gives them the dignity of receiving a pay check for that hard work. Many kids in poor communities have very few save and legal job opportunities. Newt's idea of giving kids job entry level jobs at a young age will go a long way in helping them earn a higher paying job after school. The values of self discipline, hard work and commitment to a job will encourage a whole generation of young people.
Newt's speech was encapsulated in this video starting at 1:20.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Did Newt Gingrich really bash Ronald Reagan?
There's a short excerpt of a 1988 C-SPAN video purportedly showing Newt Gingrich bashing Reagan when talking about how Bush, Sr. should run. As I suspected, it's edited to give a false impression. What you don't see is immediately after when Gingrich praises Reaganism and the Reagan platform. If you can't watch it all, it begins at about 2:30 in to confirm it's the same segment. It's the minute or two afterward you also need to hear to understand that Newt wasn't bashing Reagan at all.
He was merely saying, Bush isn't Reagan and the GOP needs something new to sell. He even points out the Reagan landslide, saying Reagan's platform won 48, or whatever states and was inclusive.
Watch here: http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2012/01/video-of-newt-bashing-reagan-is-bogus.html
He was merely saying, Bush isn't Reagan and the GOP needs something new to sell. He even points out the Reagan landslide, saying Reagan's platform won 48, or whatever states and was inclusive.
Watch here: http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2012/01/video-of-newt-bashing-reagan-is-bogus.html
Is Newt Attacking Capitalism?
Question for those that think Newt Gingrich is attacking capitalism:
Can a person be a part of the free market system and capitalism and then do it in a unfair or corrupt way?
We have seen it in Enron and Bernie Madoff. If Newt was critical Ken Kay or Bernie Madoff for stealing money and the future of their employees would that be an attack on capitalism or on the individuals and the way they participated in the free market?
Mitt Romney has a terrible Governing record from a conservative stand point. So he is trying to run solely on his business experience. With that fact, it is completely fair to ask what type of business man was he. Are his business dealings reflective of the type of leader we want to represent the people? What has Mitt Romney and Bain Capital done that we need to know?
The free market system is the most successful economy in the world's history. But whether you have a free market system or socialist system it all comes down to how people operate in the system.
Today, would it be an attack on capitalism to criticize Enron or Bernie Madoff?
Can a person be a part of the free market system and capitalism and then do it in a unfair or corrupt way?
We have seen it in Enron and Bernie Madoff. If Newt was critical Ken Kay or Bernie Madoff for stealing money and the future of their employees would that be an attack on capitalism or on the individuals and the way they participated in the free market?
Mitt Romney has a terrible Governing record from a conservative stand point. So he is trying to run solely on his business experience. With that fact, it is completely fair to ask what type of business man was he. Are his business dealings reflective of the type of leader we want to represent the people? What has Mitt Romney and Bain Capital done that we need to know?
The free market system is the most successful economy in the world's history. But whether you have a free market system or socialist system it all comes down to how people operate in the system.
Today, would it be an attack on capitalism to criticize Enron or Bernie Madoff?
Mitt Romney's Abortion Problem: The Multiple Choice Candidate
The following is a full clip of Mitt Romney's Debate for Massachusetts Governor in 2004. Mitt Romney says that he agrees with Massachusetts law allowing a minor to have an abortion without the permission of the parents as long as they have the permission of a judge. He then defends this position by saying that a judge as never refused a minor's request for an abortion. Later in the debate at one point tries to accuse Shannon O'Brian of being Pro-Life. Now there is a twist on positions. A Republican governor criticizing a democrat for being pro-life.
Here is a statement from Mitt Romney's 2002 campaign website:
On Abortion Rights
As Governor, Mitt Romney would protect the current pro-choice status quo in Massachusetts. No law would change. The choice to have an abortion is a deeply personal one. Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not the government’s.
Here is a statement from Mitt Romney's 2002 campaign website:
On Abortion Rights
As Governor, Mitt Romney would protect the current pro-choice status quo in Massachusetts. No law would change. The choice to have an abortion is a deeply personal one. Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not the government’s.
Who is Mitt Romney on the Issues?
Through is political career we have seen Mitt Romney all over the place on the issues. Depending on the audience and electorate Mitt Romney will change is opinions and answers to questions of the issues.
In 1994 when running for Massachusetts Senator Mitt Romney ran as an alternative liberal to Ted Kennedy.
This following snapshot was take from then Governor Mitt Romney Website in 2002. This content was from is "Issues" section of the site. Notice the highlighted areas. We wonder if he feels the same way today. Sure looks like he was a democrat.
MITT ROMNEY ON THE ISSUES
In 1994 when running for Massachusetts Senator Mitt Romney ran as an alternative liberal to Ted Kennedy.
This following snapshot was take from then Governor Mitt Romney Website in 2002. This content was from is "Issues" section of the site. Notice the highlighted areas. We wonder if he feels the same way today. Sure looks like he was a democrat.
MITT ROMNEY ON THE ISSUES
On Running for Governor
Mitt Romney is convinced that Massachusetts can translate its extraordinary human and natural resources into better education, better health care and a better environment for our state’s families and citizens. The key is leadership. From his experience in the private sector and in the nonprofit world running the 2002 Winter Olympic Games in Salt Lake, Mitt Romney has the background and management skills to end politics as usual on Beacon Hill and make Massachusetts great.
On Taxes
Mitt Romney is in favor of low taxes and opposes repeal of the voter-approved tax rollback.
On Education
Romney/Healey Unveil Education Agenda for Massachusetts
K-Job PowerPoint Presentation
K-Job PowerPoint Presentation
On Gay Rights
All citizens deserve equal rights, regardless of their sexual orientation. While he does not support gay marriage, Mitt Romney believes domestic partnership status should be recognized in a way that includes the potential for health benefits and rights of survivorship.
On Abortion Rights
As Governor, Mitt Romney would protect the current pro-choice status quo in Massachusetts. No law would change. The choice to have an abortion is a deeply personal one. Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not the government’s.
On Minimum Wage
The minimum wage is important to our economy and Mitt Romney supports minimum wage increases, at least in line with inflation.
On Gun Control
Mitt Romney supports the strict enforcement of gun laws. He is a supporter of the federal assault weapons ban. Mitt also believes in the rights of those who hunt to responsibly own and use firearms.
On Capital Punishment
In the most grievous cases, Mitt Romney supports the death penalty.
On the Big Dig
Romney/Healey Unveil Plan for Big Dig and Beyond
Big Dig and Beyond PowerPoint Presentation
Mitt's Work Day on the Big Dig
Big Dig and Beyond PowerPoint Presentation
Mitt's Work Day on the Big Dig
On Housing
Romney/Healey Unveils Innovative Housing Policy
Unlocking the American Dream PowerPoint Presentation
Content from http://www.romney2002.com
Unlocking the American Dream PowerPoint Presentation
Content from http://www.romney2002.com
GM : Government Motors Steals #1
In the State of the Union address last night President Obama announced, "General Motors is back on top as the world's #1 auto maker." Is this statement suppose to make everyone happy? Image you own stock in Ford and you hear that GM is the #1 auto company. Ford chose to work through their financial difficulties and and they are now #2 to GM.
For year GM was mismanaged and allowed the unions dictate the direction and quality of their product. Union bosses and leaders where more concerned about employee benefits then product quality. When the company was about to go bankrupt and liquidate the strongest parts of the company, employees and assets they where bailed out by the federal government.
Ford, through some poor decisions was also in need of a bailout, but they decided to work though the problems and right their ship. They did right and now have to listen the the CEO of GM, President Obama talk about how great GM. Did GM have to pay for that free advertisement?
Imagine yourself as the owner of a business in another industry and your lagest competitor is now owned by the government. You knew they where in financial trouble and where considering acquiring the best people and parts of the business to strengthen your company. But not your largest competitor is own and managed by the federal government. Would you feel like you are at a disadvantage? Would you think that this same government may look the other way when running safety tests on their products (Chevy Volt). Do you think you lost your competitive edge. What happens when the government rules in favor of their business and not yours? Who are the impartial legislators and judges? They are have a vested intrest in seeing the government run business working. Why else did they invest in it?
You see the biggest problem with government owning and operating companies in the private sector is not that they broke the law, but it is that they are now creating conflict of interests. How do they fairly represent GM and the auto safety agency that oversees the safety all products in the industry? How do they say to you as a private business owner, "Compete with us?"
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
IRS Exonerates Newt Gingrich Over Ethics Charges in 1999
A 1999 report from CNN's "Inside Politics" reports of how the Democrats tried to accues Newt Gingrich of Ethics Violations, all of which were later dropped.
Now Mitt Romney is trying to attack Newt on this same issues. Read and watch for yourself:
CNN February 3, 1999
NOTE: Of the 84 ethics charges filed (exclusively by Democrats) against Newt Gingrich, 83 were subsequently dropped due to a complete lack of merit or foundation in fact. The remaining charge is the subject of the below video. It too proved to be utterly baseless.
It's always good to keep the record straight.
TRANSCRIPT BELOW beginning with CNN's Brooks Jackson:
JACKSON (voice-over): It was legal after all. Newt Gingrich's oh-so-controversial college course that he started back in 1993, before he was speaker.
Remember how Democrats denounced it?
REP. DAVID BONIOR (D), MICHIGAN: Mr. Gingrich engaged in a pattern of tax fraud.
REP. JOHN LEWIS (D), GEORGIA: We now have a speaker under investigation for lying to the council, investigation his involvement in a massive tax-fraud scheme.
JACKSON: Tax fraud? Well, never mind. After a three-and-a-half year examination, the Internal Revenue Service -- Bill Clinton's IRS -- hasissued an official finding: no violation of tax laws. Critics said the course, which was videotaped and widely distributed, was too political; a scheme to use a tax-exempt educational foundation to promote a Republican agenda and elect Republican candidates.
But in a 74-page memorandum, the IRS said otherwise, quote: "The taught principles from American civilization that could be used by each American in everyday life, whether the person is a welfare recipient, the head of a large corporation or a politician." It said: "The course was not biased toward particular politicians, or a particular party. The facts show the class was much more than a political platform."
There was no comment from Congressman Bonior, who had accused Gingrich of tax fraud, but there was comment from the president of the foundation that sponsored Gingrich's course.
JEFF EISENSACH, PROGRESS AND FREEDOM FOUNDATION: To be vindicated, as we have been by the ultimate authority, really, the InternalRevenue Service, is about as sweet as it gets.
JACKSON: Gingrich issued a statement: "I consider this a full and complete vindication. I urge my colleagues to go back and read their statements and them, with no fact, based on nothing more than a desire to politically destroy a colleague." But ruling comes too late to help much: Gingrich has resigned from Congress, and already paid a $300,000 fine to settle House Ethics Committee charges that he made misleading statements during an investigation of the college course.
(on camera): When he settled those charges, Gingrich also agreed he should have sought better legal advice about the course, but it turns out he was right, and those who accused him of tax fraud were wrong.
Brooks Jackson, CNN, Washington.
JACKSON (voice-over): It was legal after all. Newt Gingrich's oh-so-controversial college course that he started back in 1993, before he was speaker.
Remember how Democrats denounced it?
REP. DAVID BONIOR (D), MICHIGAN: Mr. Gingrich engaged in a pattern of tax fraud.
REP. JOHN LEWIS (D), GEORGIA: We now have a speaker under investigation for lying to the council, investigation his involvement in a massive tax-fraud scheme.
JACKSON: Tax fraud? Well, never mind. After a three-and-a-half year examination, the Internal Revenue Service -- Bill Clinton's IRS -- hasissued an official finding: no violation of tax laws. Critics said the course, which was videotaped and widely distributed, was too political; a scheme to use a tax-exempt educational foundation to promote a Republican agenda and elect Republican candidates.
But in a 74-page memorandum, the IRS said otherwise, quote: "The taught principles from American civilization that could be used by each American in everyday life, whether the person is a welfare recipient, the head of a large corporation or a politician." It said: "The course was not biased toward particular politicians, or a particular party. The facts show the class was much more than a political platform."
There was no comment from Congressman Bonior, who had accused Gingrich of tax fraud, but there was comment from the president of the foundation that sponsored Gingrich's course.
JEFF EISENSACH, PROGRESS AND FREEDOM FOUNDATION: To be vindicated, as we have been by the ultimate authority, really, the InternalRevenue Service, is about as sweet as it gets.
JACKSON: Gingrich issued a statement: "I consider this a full and complete vindication. I urge my colleagues to go back and read their statements and them, with no fact, based on nothing more than a desire to politically destroy a colleague." But ruling comes too late to help much: Gingrich has resigned from Congress, and already paid a $300,000 fine to settle House Ethics Committee charges that he made misleading statements during an investigation of the college course.
(on camera): When he settled those charges, Gingrich also agreed he should have sought better legal advice about the course, but it turns out he was right, and those who accused him of tax fraud were wrong.
Brooks Jackson, CNN, Washington.
Fred Thompson Endorses Newt Gingrich
Former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson is endorsing Newt Gingrich for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012.
“I have come to the growing realization that Newt Gingrich is the guy who can articulate what America is all about,” Thompson said Monday in a spot on Fox News.
Newt Gingrich is the guy who can articulate what America is all about--American Exceptionalism. He can make the case, not just read the talking points, or do it off a teleprompter. He can make the case for free markets, and our basic case that lower taxes can be good for everybody, and bring about growth. It's good for everybody. He's not afraid, and he's tough, and he's experienced. I don't think anymore that it's an advantage to be able to say I know nothing about the operation of the Federal government. - Fred Thompson
“I have come to the growing realization that Newt Gingrich is the guy who can articulate what America is all about,” Thompson said Monday in a spot on Fox News.
Newt Gingrich is the guy who can articulate what America is all about--American Exceptionalism. He can make the case, not just read the talking points, or do it off a teleprompter. He can make the case for free markets, and our basic case that lower taxes can be good for everybody, and bring about growth. It's good for everybody. He's not afraid, and he's tough, and he's experienced. I don't think anymore that it's an advantage to be able to say I know nothing about the operation of the Federal government. - Fred Thompson
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Mitt Romney "I Like Firing People", Nashua, NH
Mitt Romney "I Like Firing People", Nashua, NH
Mitt Romney made the comment while touting a health care approach that would allow people to purchase their own insurance, in which he said would give the companies an incentive to keep their customers happy and healthy. His statement has been take out of context completely. While we do not support Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee, we would like to say that on this topic he is right on.
Real health care reform is not best solved by allowing the government to take it over. Real reform will start when we apply more competition in the market place. If people could transition their coverage from one employer to another this would the consumer in greater control of their coverage and the decision.
Another very important change will be to allow health companies to compete accros state lines and allow people to keep their current coverage when the move to another state. One reason health coverage is so expense is high turn over rate of their, "Health Care Companies" customers. There is very little certainty of the type of person they are insuring and this increases their potental risk.
Think about how crazy auto insurance would be if you had to change companies every time you moved or changed jobs. You wouldn't know your agent and they wouldn't know you very well. As it is know you see auto insurance companies competing big time for your business. And while the risk of liability has increased and the cost of vehicles have increased the cost of auto insurance premiums have increased at a much lower rate. Imagine having as many health insurance company commercials as you see auto insurance commercials. At that point you would feel very empowered to fire you current health insurance company.
His statement, "I Like Firing People" was made toward our ability as consumers to buy from the business that best service the consumers needs. If you are unhappy with the product or services you receive from a company you can fire them and take your business else where.
Let's be far on this issue with Mitt Romney, while we disagree with him on many issues this was a very, "the consumer has the power" statement.
Mitt Romney made the comment while touting a health care approach that would allow people to purchase their own insurance, in which he said would give the companies an incentive to keep their customers happy and healthy. His statement has been take out of context completely. While we do not support Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee, we would like to say that on this topic he is right on.
Real health care reform is not best solved by allowing the government to take it over. Real reform will start when we apply more competition in the market place. If people could transition their coverage from one employer to another this would the consumer in greater control of their coverage and the decision.
Another very important change will be to allow health companies to compete accros state lines and allow people to keep their current coverage when the move to another state. One reason health coverage is so expense is high turn over rate of their, "Health Care Companies" customers. There is very little certainty of the type of person they are insuring and this increases their potental risk.
Think about how crazy auto insurance would be if you had to change companies every time you moved or changed jobs. You wouldn't know your agent and they wouldn't know you very well. As it is know you see auto insurance companies competing big time for your business. And while the risk of liability has increased and the cost of vehicles have increased the cost of auto insurance premiums have increased at a much lower rate. Imagine having as many health insurance company commercials as you see auto insurance commercials. At that point you would feel very empowered to fire you current health insurance company.
His statement, "I Like Firing People" was made toward our ability as consumers to buy from the business that best service the consumers needs. If you are unhappy with the product or services you receive from a company you can fire them and take your business else where.
Let's be far on this issue with Mitt Romney, while we disagree with him on many issues this was a very, "the consumer has the power" statement.
Monday, January 9, 2012
Mitt Romney Receives an "F" for Economic Plan
Andy Roth from Club for Growth Discusses Presidential Candidates Economic Plans With Fox News Neil Cavuto.
Rick Perry - A
Ron Paul - A
Newt Gingrich - C
Rick Santorum - C
Jon Hustman - Incomplete
Mitt Romney - F
Rick Perry - A
Ron Paul - A
Newt Gingrich - C
Rick Santorum - C
Jon Hustman - Incomplete
Mitt Romney - F
Saturday, January 7, 2012
Electable? We want a Conservative Candidate
A Tale of Two Moderates
In 2008 the media pulled a fast one on the Republican party. They caused most people to believe that a true conservative could not win the presidential election. They pushed hard for John McCain to be the Republican nominee.
The result, President Obama won the election because the country thought it would be better to vote for a true Democrat then a diluted Democrat/Republican.
We will not make this mistake twice. Please remember when you vote to select the best qualified candidate. Do not vote because you think they can win. When we compare ideas we want someone who can articulate the conservative values.
Friday, January 6, 2012
Newt Gingrich helps Mitt Romney Understand Why He is Angry
During the Iowa campaign Newt Gingrich was very positive in all of his messages and focused on how the policies of the President Obama administration where hurting our country. Due to how knowledgeable Newt was on the issues, his strong ideas about how to improve America's future and his ability to articulate this message in a very candid and clear way, he steadily rose to the top of nearly all the polls.
This rise threatened what Mitt Romney felt he was entitled to, a Republican nomination. So without provocation he unleashed the so called "Scorched Earth" campaign on Newt Gingrich. The messages that Mitt Romney's team communicated where full of deception and lies.
Newt raised the distortion of these ads to Mr. Romney on several occasions and received no reply. Then after about two weeks of requests from Newt to have the deceptive messages removed, Mitt Romney had an idea. Call Newt "Angry." Mitt thought that this would cause people to focus on Newt's anger about campaign strategy and the commercials. It could also distract Newt's focus from policy ideas, his obvious strength. In an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer, Mitt Romney was asked to respond to Newt Gingrich's request:
Newt: "All I'd say, Mitt, is if you want to run a negative campaign and you want to attack people, at least be man enough to own it. That's your staff and that's your organization. Those are your millionaire friends paying for it and let's be clear. I am willing to fight for real job creation with a real Reagan Kemp-style job creation program.
You are a moderate Massachusetts Republican who, in fact, is very timid about job creation. Let's get it on together and let's compare our two plans."
Mitt's response was, "I don't know why he is so angry?"
When I heard that, it was so clear to me that he was arrogantly and shrewdly trying to belittle Newt Gingrich by attaching anger to the plea, therefore making his need to comply unnecessary.
Newt Gingrich wanted to compare and contrast ideas.
Mitt knew and we all know why Newt Gingrich was angry about those ads, but Newt was staying above the low blows by requesting a chance to "Compare our two plans."
Guess what Mr Romney, this election is not about you our your deceptive strategy. It's about our country and we will focus on the frustration that Newt Gingrich and all of us have toward the policies hurting our nation.
So, in response we decided to turn the tables and use those words to help Mitt understand why Newt is "so angry," and for that matter all of us are angry. I hope you enjoy.
This rise threatened what Mitt Romney felt he was entitled to, a Republican nomination. So without provocation he unleashed the so called "Scorched Earth" campaign on Newt Gingrich. The messages that Mitt Romney's team communicated where full of deception and lies.
Newt raised the distortion of these ads to Mr. Romney on several occasions and received no reply. Then after about two weeks of requests from Newt to have the deceptive messages removed, Mitt Romney had an idea. Call Newt "Angry." Mitt thought that this would cause people to focus on Newt's anger about campaign strategy and the commercials. It could also distract Newt's focus from policy ideas, his obvious strength. In an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer, Mitt Romney was asked to respond to Newt Gingrich's request:
Newt: "All I'd say, Mitt, is if you want to run a negative campaign and you want to attack people, at least be man enough to own it. That's your staff and that's your organization. Those are your millionaire friends paying for it and let's be clear. I am willing to fight for real job creation with a real Reagan Kemp-style job creation program.
You are a moderate Massachusetts Republican who, in fact, is very timid about job creation. Let's get it on together and let's compare our two plans."
Mitt's response was, "I don't know why he is so angry?"
When I heard that, it was so clear to me that he was arrogantly and shrewdly trying to belittle Newt Gingrich by attaching anger to the plea, therefore making his need to comply unnecessary.
Newt Gingrich wanted to compare and contrast ideas.
Mitt knew and we all know why Newt Gingrich was angry about those ads, but Newt was staying above the low blows by requesting a chance to "Compare our two plans."
Guess what Mr Romney, this election is not about you our your deceptive strategy. It's about our country and we will focus on the frustration that Newt Gingrich and all of us have toward the policies hurting our nation.
So, in response we decided to turn the tables and use those words to help Mitt understand why Newt is "so angry," and for that matter all of us are angry. I hope you enjoy.
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Mitt Romney Narrowly Wins the Iowa Caucuses
The Republic Truth has called the Iowa Caucuses.
After a bizarre set of circumstances Mitt Romney will win the Iowa Caucus for the republican presidential nomination by a total of 8 votes. With over 99% of the precincts reporting we have called the Republican Iowa caucus race for Mitt Romney, with Rick Santorum and Ron Paul placing second and third. Rick Santorum came back from just single digit support just a few weeks back and finished just short of a victory in Iowa that would have shocked the GOP process. Any chance of a victory was very unprobable just last week.
After spending over 7 million dollors in Iowa, Mitt Romney used a very negative campaign to win the first test of his presidential bid. The question of how many people really want Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee is still out standing. Mitt Romney has failed to break through the 25% threshold that has been his ceiling for over four years now. Buying TV ads and using Robo calls cannot be the way Mitt breaks through. He will need to find a way to break through to the American people if he wants the nomination.
Gov. Rick Perry may have had the most disappointing finish of the night. After spending millions of dollars in Iowa for his campaign he finished a distant 5th with only 10% of the vote.
Ron Paul finished 3rd in the race and it is suspected that he may have lost the votes he needed for a victory in recent days over his views on foreign policy. Ron Paul has galvanized his base through a fiscal message and an isolationist view of US involvement overseas. Other candidates would be wise to take hold of his economic message and the fact that many in the country are war weary.
Newt Gingrich who finished in a disappointing 4th with 13% may have the most potential of the 2nd tier candidates in the Iowa caucus results. While he took a betting from the deceptive campaigning from the Romney camp it may be that this did not hurt him as much as it first appears. While the Romney advertisement killed the momentum of Newt Gingrich it did not draw support to the Romney campaign. Newt Gingrich congratulated Rick Santorum on his big night, "He ran a great positive campaign."
Moving on to the New Hampshire primary Mitt Romney may won the Iowa race but with his false attacks on Newt Gingrich the momentum may have shifted to Ron Paul and Rick Santorum in the Granite state. Mitt Romney must win New Hampshire to have a shot at the nomination and with Ron Paul riding the wave of momentum this may derail his chances to win New Hampshire and setting up Newt Gingrich to win the South Carolina and Florida primaries.
Rick Santorum Wins the Iowa Caucus 2012
The Republic Truth has called the Iowa Caucus.
Senator Rick Santorum will win the first in the United States Caucus for the republican presidential nomination. With over 95% of the precincts reporting we have called the Republican Iowa caucus race for Rick Santorum, with Mitt Romney and Ron Paul placing second and third. Rick Santorum came back from just single digit support just a few weeks back. His victory was very improbable just last week.
After spending over 7 million dollars in Iowa Mitt Romney was still unable to produce a victory. Raising the question of how many people really want Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee. Mitt Romney has failed to break through the 25% threshold that has been his ceiling for over four years now. Buying TV ads and using Robo calls cannot be the way Mitt breaks through. He will need to find a way to break through to the American people if he wants the nomination.
Gov. Rick Perry may have had the most disappointing finish of the night. After spending millions of dollars in Iowa for his campaign he finished a distant 5th with only 10% of the vote.
Ron Paul finished 3rd in the race and it is suspected that he may have lost the votes he needed for a victory in recent days over his views on foreign policy. Ron Paul has galvanized his base through a fiscal message and an isolationist view of US involvement overseas. Other candidates would be wise to take hold of his economic message and the fact that many in the country are war weary.
Newt Gingrich who finished in a disappointing 4th with 13% may have the most potential of the 2nd tier candidates in the Iowa caucus results. While he took a betting from the deceptive campaigning from the Romney camp it may be that this did not hurt him as much as it first appears. While the Romney advertisement killed the momentum of Newt Gingrich it did not draw support to the Romney campaign. Newt Gingrich congratulated Rick Santorum on his big night, "He ran a great positive campaign."
Moving on to the New Hampshire primary Mitt Romney may have created to much momentum for Ron Paul and Rick Santorum in the Granite state. Mitt Romney must win New Hampshire to have a shot at the nomination and with Ron Paul riding the wave of momentum this may derail his chance to win New Hampshire and setting up Newt Gingrich to win the South Carolina and Florida primaries.
But, on this night Rick Santorum is the big winning and has much to look forward to over the next few weeks.
Senator Rick Santorum will win the first in the United States Caucus for the republican presidential nomination. With over 95% of the precincts reporting we have called the Republican Iowa caucus race for Rick Santorum, with Mitt Romney and Ron Paul placing second and third. Rick Santorum came back from just single digit support just a few weeks back. His victory was very improbable just last week.
After spending over 7 million dollars in Iowa Mitt Romney was still unable to produce a victory. Raising the question of how many people really want Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee. Mitt Romney has failed to break through the 25% threshold that has been his ceiling for over four years now. Buying TV ads and using Robo calls cannot be the way Mitt breaks through. He will need to find a way to break through to the American people if he wants the nomination.
Gov. Rick Perry may have had the most disappointing finish of the night. After spending millions of dollars in Iowa for his campaign he finished a distant 5th with only 10% of the vote.
Ron Paul finished 3rd in the race and it is suspected that he may have lost the votes he needed for a victory in recent days over his views on foreign policy. Ron Paul has galvanized his base through a fiscal message and an isolationist view of US involvement overseas. Other candidates would be wise to take hold of his economic message and the fact that many in the country are war weary.
Newt Gingrich who finished in a disappointing 4th with 13% may have the most potential of the 2nd tier candidates in the Iowa caucus results. While he took a betting from the deceptive campaigning from the Romney camp it may be that this did not hurt him as much as it first appears. While the Romney advertisement killed the momentum of Newt Gingrich it did not draw support to the Romney campaign. Newt Gingrich congratulated Rick Santorum on his big night, "He ran a great positive campaign."
Moving on to the New Hampshire primary Mitt Romney may have created to much momentum for Ron Paul and Rick Santorum in the Granite state. Mitt Romney must win New Hampshire to have a shot at the nomination and with Ron Paul riding the wave of momentum this may derail his chance to win New Hampshire and setting up Newt Gingrich to win the South Carolina and Florida primaries.
But, on this night Rick Santorum is the big winning and has much to look forward to over the next few weeks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)