An Indictment of Barack Obama’s Economic Record – Daniel J. Mitchell – Townhall Finance Conservative Columnists and Financial Commentary

An Indictment of Barack Obama’s Economic Record – Daniel J. Mitchell – Townhall Finance Conservative Columnists and Financial Commentary.

In a recent post comparing Reaganomics and Obamanomics, I explained why I think Barack Obama’s policies have been hurting the economy.

In today’s New York Post, I do a full-scale indictment. Here are my bullet points.

* The unemployment rate is still above 8 percent, even though the White House promised it would drop to about 6 percent today if the stimulus was enacted.

* Several million fewer Americans have jobs today than five years ago.

* The poverty rate has jumped to more than 15 percent, with a record number of Americans living below the poverty level of income.

* According to the most recent data, median household income is lower than when the recession began.

* The burden of government spending remains high, and record levels of red ink are a symptom of that bloat in Washington.

* The threat of higher taxes is omnipresent, serving as a Sword of Damocles over the economy’s neck

* Continued weakness in the housing and financial sectors reminds people that bailouts and intervention have left lots of problems unsolved.

I also explain that some of  the recent good news is in spite of the President’s statist policies.

* The recovery began just as Obama’s stimulus spending ended, thus confirming suspicions that lots of money was wasted as part of a process that hindered the economy’s growth.

* The job numbers only began to improve at the end of 2010, right as Republicans took control of the House and presumably ended Obama’s ability to further shift the nation’s course.

The final point is one deserving of elaboration. People in the private sector necessarily have to make educated guesses about the future economic environment. With this in mind, I think it’s quite reasonable – as I commented last month – to argue that the GOP takeover on Capitol Hill boosted the economy since entrepreneurs could feel more comfortable that the federal government wasn’t going to be imposing additional burdens.

This indictment of Obama’s dismal economic track record does not suggest, I should hasten to add, that Mitt Romney or Rick Santorum would be any better. Both of them seem closer to Bush than Reagan, so it’s not clear they would make any substantive changes in the burden of the federal government.

A Simple Choice: Barack Obama or Rutherford Hayes?

Other than my ongoing adulation for Ronald Reagan, occasional praise for Calvin Coolidge, and one post about John F. Kennedy, I don’t have many nice things to say about previous Presidents.

But I feel the need to rise to the defense of Rutherford B. Hayes, who was mocked recently by the current President. This Mark Steyn column is a deliciously vicious commentary on Obama’s speech, so no need for me to delve into the details.

Instead, I want to jump on the bandwagon and produce some posters comparing the 19th President and the 44th President (if you’re not aware, posters of Pres. Hayes with self-created captions have been all over the Internet).

You won’t be surprised to learn that I’m focused on the policy differences between Hayes and Obama.

Most important, Hayes largely was true to the Founding Fathers’ vision of a limited central government. Government spending averaged only about 6 percent of economic output during his tenure (probably less, the data are not very robust, so I took the worst-case numbers) and America was blessedly free of the income tax.

Obama, on the other hand, is repeating all of Bush’s mistakes and making government an even bigger burden, and then compounding his error by pursuing class warfare tax policy.

So which President would you prefer, Hayes or Obama?

The ‘Inevitability’ Vote – Thomas Sowell – Townhall Conservative Columnists

The ‘Inevitability’ Vote – Thomas Sowell – Townhall Conservative Columnists.

Many people may be voting for Mitt Romney because of the view in some quarters that he is the inevitable Republican candidate for President of the United States and the candidate with the best chance of beating Barack Obama, rather than because they actually prefer Romney to the other candidates.

Inevitability has a very unreliable track record. Within living memory, totalitarianism was considered to be “the wave of the future.” During the primary season, people should vote for whomever they prefer, on their own merits, not because pundits have pronounced them inevitable.

Regardless of what the polls or the pundits say about Mitt Romney’s chances of winning the Republican nomination, the conditions that made him the front runner in the primaries are the direct opposite of the conditions for the general election.

The biggest single reason why Governor Romney is the front runner is that he has had the overwhelming advantage in money spent and in “boots on the ground” running his campaign in states across the country.

Romney has outspent each of his rivals — and all of his rivals put together. His campaign organization has been operating for years, and it has put his name on the ballot everywhere, while neither Santorum nor Gingrich had a big enough organization to get on the ballot in an important state like Virginia.

In the general election, President Obama will have all the advantages against Romney that Romney currently has against his Republican rivals. Barack Obama will have boots on the ground everywhere — not just members of the Democratic Party organization but thousands of labor union members as well.

Incumbency alone guarantees the president plenty of money to finance his campaign, not only from enthusiastic supporters but also from businesses regulated by the government, who know that holders of political power demand tribute. And the mainstream media will give Obama more publicity than Romney can buy.

How does anyone ever defeat a sitting president then? They do it because they have a message that rings and resonates. The last Republican to defeat a sitting president was Ronald Reagan. He was the only Republican to do so in the 20th century.

He didn’t do it with polls. At one point during the election campaign, President Jimmy Carter led Ronald Reagan with 58 percent to 40 percent in the polls. So much for the polls that so many are relying on so heavily today.

The question is not which Republican looks better against Barack Obama in the polls today, before the general election campaign begins. The question is which Republican can take the fight to Barack Obama, as Reagan took the fight to Carter, and win the poll that ultimately matters, the vote on election day.

The biggest fighting issue for Republicans is ObamaCare. Can the author of RomneyCare as governor of Massachusetts make that an effective issue by splitting hairs over state versus federal mandates? Can a man who has been defensive about his own wealth fight off the standard class warfare of Barack Obama, who can push all the demagogic buttons against Mitt Romney as one of the one-percenters?

Rick Santorum, and especially Newt Gingrich, are fighters — and this election is going to be a fight to the finish, with the fate of this country in the balance. Mitt Romney has depended on massive character assassination advertising campaigns to undermine his rivals. That will not work against Barack Obama.

Even a truthful account of the Obama administration’s many disastrous failures, at home and abroad, will be automatically countered by the mainstream media, 90 percent of whom voted for Obama in the 2008 election.

It is truer in this election than in most that “it takes a candidate to beat a candidate.” And that candidate has to offer both himself and his vision. Massive ad campaigns against rivals is not a vision.

Some, like President Bush 41, disdained “the vision thing” — and he lost the presidency that he had inherited from Ronald Reagan, lost it to a virtual unknown from Arkansas.

The vision matters, more than the polls and even more than incumbency in the White House.

Gas pains – Tea Party Nation

Gas pains – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Judson Phillips

There is a ticking time bomb that is slowly exploding over the American electorate.  This is the time bomb that will be one of the primary causes for Barack Obama being a one-term blunder.

 What is it?

 It is the rising gas prices we are all seeing.

 Gas prices started this year at $3.13 a gallon.  Today they are $3.67 a gallon.   Predictions are we will see $5 a gallon by this summer.  All over real America, rising gas prices are causing Americans real pain.  Higher gas prices not only cost Americans more money at the pump, but the ripple effect will push up prices, such as food.

 I was on MSNBC today and Martin Bashir and I discussed this.  Bashir, like all of the hosts on MSNBC is a liberal and he was shocked that Newt Gingrich’s $2.50 a gallon gas plan is resonating with real Americans.

 While the Obama regime pushes high gas prices, Americans want lower gas prices. 

 From the Los Angeles Times:

 President Obama’s approval rating has taken a hit in a new poll that shows a growing frustration with the president’s handling of the economy.

 The Washington Post/ABC poll found that 46% of people approve of the Obama’s job performance, while 50% disapprove. That’s a reversal of the president’s ratings just last month, when his approval hit 50% for the first time in that survey in nearly a year.

 The quick drop coincides with a spike in gas prices and an increase in criticism from Obama’s Republican rivals on the issue, even as the economy has shown noticeable signs of growth.

 But the poll underscored how rising gas prices – always a political peril for presidents — threaten to keep Obama from reaping the rewards of the good economic news. Obama’s top rivals, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum, were running roughly even with the president.

 The poll found 65% of those surveyed disapproved of Obama’s handling of gas prices.

 Newt Gingrich has the right idea when he says we can push the price down to $2.50 a gallon.   If anything, Newt’s plan lacks some ambition.  Based on history, there is no reason to doubt that if we tried; the price of gas could be pushed down much further.

 Obama is never going to do this.  He does not believe in America nor does he believe that Americans should have cheap energy.

 The bad news is America is suffering under the policies of the Obama regime and is having to pay for the high gas prices he wants us to have.   The good news is, they higher the gas prices go, the chances of Obama’s reelection go down.

WOLF: Mitt beat Rick, but Newt beat Barack – Washington Times

President Ronald Reagan meets with Congressman...

Image via Wikipedia

WOLF: Mitt beat Rick, but Newt beat Barack – Washington Times.

Only one Republican has made Obama squirm

By Dr. Milton R. Wolf – The Washington Times

This wouldn’t be the first time the media missed the real story. In the wake of a split Super Tuesday, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum scored wins against each other, but it was former Speaker Newt Gingrich who single-handedly drove President Obama into panic mode.

Mr. Romney deserves enormous credit for his success in the early primaries, but the undeniable fact remains that he has not demonstrated the ability to win a race without vastly outspending his opponents, often by 5-to-1 and even 12-to-1. He will not enjoy this luxury against the sitting president and the billion-dollar Obama machine. Veteran political writer John Fund says Republicans are “fooling themselves” if they ignore this sobering reality.

Mr. Santorum has outperformed expectations but continues to make himself an easy target for Democrats. Eagerly taking the bait, the former senator declared of birth control, “It’s not OK.”

Mr. Santorum offered up the verbal equivalent of former President Lyndon B. Johnson showing off his gallbladder surgical scar by doubling down on his prior assertion that former president John F. Kennedy’s speech on the separation of church and state makes him want to “throw up.” Sigh. The commercials write themselves.

And Ron Paul. Few love our Constitution as much as Mr. Paul, and for that, many of us love him dearly. If only we could convince him that a nuclear Iran poses as much of a threat to our Constitution as does the Federal Reserve. Should Mahmoud Ahmadinejad successfully launch a strike against Israel, or worse yet, America, brace yourself for a beefed-up Patriot Act 2.0 and a military budget that expands faster than Terry Bradshaw’s waistline before Nutrisystem.

And then there was Newt Gingrich, the Lazarus of the presidential campaign, as the Drudge Report recently called him, ready to rise once again. While the mainstream media stayed focused on the game of checkers between Mr. Romney and Mr. Santorum, Mr. Gingrich forced President Obama into an astonishing game of chess.

In a 30-minute video titled “$2.50 per Gallon Gasoline, Energy Independence and Jobs,” Mr. Gingrich unveiled his vision for renewed American prosperity centered around oil and natural-gas production. He demonstrated his unparalleled insight into the intersection of energy, security and prosperity. Mr. Gingrich rightly declared that never again should an American president bow before a Saudi king. Meanwhile, Mr. Obama, stung by his recent half-billion-dollar failed Solyndra boondoggle, began floating his latest green fantasy of harvesting algae to cure the pain at the pump.

Panicked by Mr. Gingrich, Mr. Obama was forced off his game and repeatedly tried to respond, only making matters worse for himself. He stayed true to the Democrats’ anti-energy agenda and mocked Republicans for wanting to drill for new oil. This made the president the butt of a joke for Jay Leno on “The Tonight Show”: Democrats claim that new drilling for oil won’t help us for at least 10 years, but haven’t they been saying that now for more than 10 years?

Mr. Obama boasts that oil production is up under his administration. True, but only because the president hasn’t yet stopped production on privately owned land. Mr. Gingrich cut right through his profound dishonesty: “Under President Obama, because he is so anti-American-energy, we have actually had a 40 percent reduction in development of oil offshore, and we have had a 40 percent reduction in the development of oil on federal lands,” Mr. Gingrich pounced. “So in the area he controls, production is down and the area that is hard at the free enterprise stuff where people get rich, production is up. So he is now claiming credit for the area he can’t control in order to have us think he is actually for what he opposes.”

Mr. Gingrich reduced the once-confident “Yes, we can!” 2008 version of Mr. Obama into the backpedaling “It’s not my fault” 2012 version right before our eyes. A defensive Mr. Obama dissembled: “We know there’s no silver bullet that will bring down gas prices or reduce our dependence on foreign oil overnight.” Wait, what about that algae?

Newt had Barack right where he wanted him.

“A presidential pen could today sign approval of the Keystone pipeline. That’s 700,000 barrels a day. A presidential pen could today sign approval to go back to the Gulf of Mexico. That’s about 400,000 barrels a day. A presidential pen could today approve areas of Alaska that we know have oil.” With three signatures, Mr. Gingrich instructed the president, “you would have 2.3 million barrels a day of additional energy in the United States. So I would say, we’re not looking for silver bullets. We’re looking for presidential leadership.” Check and checkmate.

With this, Peter Ferrara, former adviser to President Reagan, declared that Mr. Obama had just lost his first debate. The GOP race remains open. So ask yourself this: Which Republican candidate beside Newt Gingrich has demonstrated the ability to make Barack Obama squirm?

Dr. Milton R. Wolf, a Washington Times columnist, is a radiologist and President Obama’s cousin. He blogs at miltonwolf.com.

Useful idiots, Republican Pets and Alinsky – Tea Party Nation

Cover of "Rules for Radicals"

Cover of Rules for Radicals

Useful idiots, Republican Pets and Alinsky – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Judson Phillips

George Will is one of those useless Washington Republicans who believes conservatives should be a minority, too polite to make problems for the liberals.  Rush Limbaugh has his finger on the pulse of real America.

 What is wrong with Will, right with Rush and how does Alinsky fit into all of this?

 Yesterday I referred to George Will in a video blog as “the pet republican for the liberal media establishment.”  George Will went onto ABC News and as usual, made a fool of himself.

 From the Daily Caller:

 “This Week” host George Stephanopoulos speculated that conservative talker Rush Limbaugh had been under enormous pressure to apologize for his remarks about Fluke, which included calling her a “slut.” But Will hinted that he was actually underwhelmed by the reaction of some Republicans.

“Well, it would have been nice if [GOP leaders] shared that with the larger public,” Will said. “Instead, Mr. Boehner said that Rush’s language was inappropriate. Using a salad fork for your entree — that is inappropriate. Rick Santorum says, ‘Well, what he said was absurd and an entertainer is allowed to absurd.’ No, it is the responsibilities of conservatives to police the right excesses on their side just as the liberals unfailingly fail on their own side.”

 “It was depressing because what it indicates is, the Republican leaders are afraid of Rush Limbaugh

 Of course George Will is underwhelmed.  Wait, we are talking about his intelligence, not his response. Will is just one of those beltway Republicans who believes the natural order of life is they are subservient to liberals.  He believes he should show up, articulate the moderate Republican talking points that conservatives are the focus of all evil in the world and then sit back and nod like a bobble head as the liberals slander conservative Republicans. 

 What Will and most liberals do not get is that people do not follow Rush Limbaugh.  Rush Limbaugh follows real America.   If Rush Limbaugh simply had millions of mind numbed robots that followed his every word, the liberals would have long ago created their version of Rush Limbaugh.  They have not because none of the liberals can touch America’s pulse

 If a liberal were going to be able to touch the pulse of America, they would first have to stop hating America and real Americans.   They are singularly incapable of doing that.

 That is why Rush has millions of followers. That is why Hanity and Beck have millions of followers.   That is why liberal talk radio cannot succeed. 

 Some on the far left understand that Rush is not just a hot shot talk show host but he represents the thoughts and opinions of millions of real Americans.  Which is why Rush must be destroyed.

 The Sandra Fluke “Slut-gate” fight has been nothing but a pure Alinsky attack on Rush.   Saul Alinsky promulgated his “Rules for Radicals.”  It is the far left playbook and the attack on Rush.

 Rule 12 of Alinsky’s rules is Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.  Call it divide and conquer. 

 Rush, whose political instincts are extraordinary, did step into this one.  He has always been a top target of the left for years.  Because of his comments, they have frozen him or made him deal with the issue.  They made the issue personal, poor little Sandra Fluke versus the big, rich, bad Rush Limbaugh.  Then they tried to polarize him.  They have tried to make Rush so unacceptable that he would be forced out.

 They attacked his advertisers and had 7 of them drop advertising.  Even the Republican Presidential candidates acted as if Rush was toxic.  Then pet Republican George Will jumped in parroting the liberal talking lines. 

 If the Twitter response is any indication, most of those advertisers will regret their decisions.  Meanwhile Rush continues to be the top rated radio talk show host in history.

 George Will just continues to be the pet Republican of the liberal media establishment.

 Good dog.

The Myth of Romney – Tea Party Nation

English: Governor Mitt Romney of MA

Image via Wikipedia

The Myth of Romney – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Judson Phillips

Myths have this habit of hanging around, growing and even be repeated and believed.  Mitt Romney is the center of one of the biggest myths going around.

 What is the myth of Romney?

 The myth of Romney is that he is electable.  It is right up there with the myth he is a conservative. 

 The headlines for today by the Romney friendly media are that Romney one two states.   As always the drive by media does not go into the story the way it should be delved into. 

 Romney won Arizona handily.   He took 47% to Santorum’s 26%, Gingrich’s 16% and Paul’s 8%.  That sounds impressive until you realize the other three did not challenge Romney in Arizona.   Romney had the endorsement of the sitting governor, was not really contested by the other candidates and he still could not break 50% of the vote. 

 In Michigan, even though Romney won, the results can only be called a disaster.  Romney calls Michigan his home state.   He was raised there and his father was a popular governor there.  He went in, as always out spending his opponents.  In this case, he only had one real opponent, Rick Santorum.   Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul both passed on Michigan to concentrate on other contests.  Once again, Romney one but he only won by three percent and while this time his vote total exceeded what he had four years ago, this is the first contest in a while where that has happened.  Even with two candidates basically sitting Michigan out, Romney could only barely break 40%.  Almost 60% of the voters of what is allegedly Romney’s home state do not want him. 

 That says something.

 There is a trend here that even Myth Romney should be able to figure out. 

 When Romney wins he must outspend his opponents five or ten to one and he is depressing the Republican voting base.  If Romney cannot, even with a huge financial lead, draw more voters than he did four years ago in the primary, what is he going to do this fall when he is the one being outspent five to one? 

 It is time for the Republican Party to act.   It is time for the Party hierarchy to sit down with not only the establishment but with Tea Party and conservative activists to find a consensus candidate who can in fact beat Barack Obama this fall. 

 Myth Romney is not that candidate.  He has proven that repeatedly.  The GOP electorate has not really fallen in love with any of the candidates this year.  The closest candidate who has excited the GOP base is Newt Gingrich.  This is because where Gingrich has won, the voter turnout was up.  This is something that will be desperately needed this fall.

 Last week I said that I would support the GOP nominee this fall, even if it was Romney because Obama is simply so bad. 

 I am now rethinking that. 

 Obama must be beat.  I am willing to support almost any Republican who can get in there and beat Obama.  But that is the rub.  I am willing to support almost any Republican who has a chance to beat Obama. 

 Romney has no chance. 

 The Republican Party needs to realize this train is going down the rails and off the cliff.

 If the Republican Party wishes to commit ritual political suicide, why should any conservative activist waste their time playing Doctor Kevorkian to the GOP?

 Meanwhile, perhaps we conservative activists should be asking the GOP, if you don’t want to win, could we borrow your party for a little while?

Pettiness and Mud – Thomas Sowell – Townhall Conservative Columnists

Pettiness and Mud – Thomas Sowell – Townhall Conservative Columnists.

The only good news for the Republicans coming out of the seemingly endless presidential candidate “debates” is that some Republican leaders are now belatedly thinking about how they can avoid a repetition of this debacle in future elections.

What could they possibly have been thinking about, in the first place, when they agreed to a format based on short sound bites for dealing with major complex issues, and with media journalists — 90 percent of them Democrats — picking the topics?

The conduct of the candidates made things worse. In a world with a record-breaking national debt and Iran moving toward creating nuclear weapons, they bickered over earmarks and condoms. I am against earmarks, but earmarks don’t rank among the first hundred most serious problems facing this country.

Mud-slinging has replaced rational discussions of differences on serious issues — not only during the debates themselves, where the moderators sic the candidates on each other, but even more so in the massive television character assassination ads in which Romney supporters seem to specialize.

Groups supporting Mitt Romney have turned character assassination almost into a science. You take something that most people, outside of politics, do not understand and twist it to sound terrible to those who are unaware of the facts.

Blanketing Florida with misleading ads attacking Newt Gingrich won that state for Romney, after Gingrich scored an upset victory in South Carolina. The ads made a big deal out of charges that the former Speaker broke tax laws — charges that the Internal Revenue Service exonerated him of, after a long investigation.

When Rick Santorum suddenly surged after his upset victories in Minnesota, Missouri and Colorado, the Romney character assassination machine attacked him for having voted in the Senate for various things that conservatives don’t like.

But, when it comes to voting in Congress, seldom do you get a pure bill that you can agree with in all its parts. If you never voted for bills containing anything you didn’t like, you might get very little voting done.

But, if it is a bill to provide American soldiers with the equipment they need to fight a war, and somebody has put into it an earmark for a federal boondoggle in his district, are you going to vote against that bill and let American soldiers go into battle without all the equipment and supplies they need?

Taking advantage of the public’s lack of knowledge is something that Barack Obama already does very effectively in his political propaganda. But is that something the Republicans want to imitate?

It has worked during the primary season, when the media are perfectly happy to see Republicans destroying each other. But it will not work in the general election campaign, when even truthful criticisms of the president will have a hard time getting out through the media, which hear no evil, see no evil and speak no evil when it comes to Obama.

The pettiness and mud-slinging during the Republican primary campaigns is especially irresponsible during a time when there are very serious problems, at home and abroad, that need to be addressed in a serious way.

Discussions of particular issues, one by one, often miss the larger point that goes beyond the issue at hand — namely, this administration’s steady movement toward arbitrary government that circumvents the restrictions of the Constitution.

Nothing demonstrates this more starkly than the president’s arbitrary power to waive the requirement that employers have to provide ObamaCare coverage for their workers. That can be the difference between paying, or not paying, millions of dollars. What does that mean for anybody’s other rights?

What does freedom of speech mean if criticizing the administration can mean you get no exemption, while your competitor who keeps quiet, or who praises the administration, gets a waiver? The Constitution requires “equal protection of the laws” for a reason.

And what about nuclear weapons in the hands of Iran, the world’s leading sponsor of international terrorism? Is that not worth discussing in something other than sound bites?

Proof Voters Are Smarter Than Media and Washington Elite – Chuck Norris – Townhall Conservative

Proof Voters Are Smarter Than Media and Washington Elite – Chuck Norris – Townhall Conservative.

I think the mainstream media and Washington elite think the majority of voters just fell off the turnip truck. But the South Carolina primary and other current voting trends show otherwise.

The MSM are working double time to get us to forget about the unprecedented results of the South Carolina primary, but they are a sign of what could be in Florida, Nevada and beyond. They are also proof that American citizens will not be outwitted by the political shenanigans of the powers that be. Let me give you a few examples.

Despite the fact that ABC paraded Newt Gingrich‘s bitter ex-wife across its airwaves two nights before the South Carolina primary, Newt won women’s votes 36-30 percent over Mitt Romney. And married women and evangelical women both backed Gingrich with 40 percent support.

Despite (or maybe on account of) Mitt’s creation of Romneycare in Massachusetts and promises for Social Security’s perpetuity, Newt gained 47 percent of the vote (to Mitt’s 36 percent) among those 65 or older.

Despite the MSM’s attempt to convey Newt as old and outdated, he received 27 percent of votes from those between 18 and 29 years old, only being beaten by Ron Paul’s 32 percent.

Despite the MSM and Washington elite’s campaign to convey that Newt would be dangerous to the country and world, 39 percent of U.S. veterans voted for Newt, compared with 32 percent for Romney.

Despite Romney’s spending millions on ads in South Carolina to convince voters that Newt is an ethically compromised Washington insider, Newt won 45 percent of the votes from very conservative voters, while Rick Santorum and Romney trailed with 23 and 20 percent, respectively.

Despite the MSM’s pro-Romney coverage and six years of Romney’s campaigning, Newt stole 31 percent of moderates’ votes from the Massachusetts moderate.

Despite Romney’s often-flaunted business credentials, 8 in 10 voters who said they were very worried about the direction of the economy also voted for Newt.

Despite the fact that 120 evangelical leaders met recently in Texas and claimed to have come to a consensus backing Santorum, the initial vote of those leaders split almost evenly between Santorum and Newt, 57-48, according to CBN News’ chief political correspondent. I don’t think it’s coincidental that a similar amount, 45 percent, of evangelicals also voted for Newt in his landslide South Carolina victory. Forty-five percent of pro-lifers also voted for Newt, compared with just 21 percent for Romney.

Even in Florida, Newt’s popularity is evident by the sizes of his audiences. Despite the fact that Washington heavyweights John McCain and Bob Dole have come out to endorse Romney — in a drive that The Boston Globe described as “GOP insiders (rising) up to cut Gingrich down to size” — the Los Angeles Times reported this past week that “Newt Gingrich (is) winning the crowd contest in Florida.”

And despite the fact that Romney and his cronies have and will spend millions more dollars in Florida and Nevada to perforate Newt’s character and record again — according to Newsmax, in Florida 20 times more money has been spent for Romney than has been spent there in support of any other Republican candidate — I believe that voters will be neither bought by his money nor directed by his political spin and rhetoric, just as those in South Carolina didn’t fall for the fool’s gold.

More proof came this past week via the triple-gang of the MSM, Romney and Washington elite. They all pounced again on Newt, claiming he is not a Reagan conservative. But they were discounted again, as former President Ronald Reagan‘s eldest son, Mike, who also has endorsed Newt, joined radio talk show legend Rush Limbaugh by lambasting Newt’s critics. Mike said, “I am deeply disturbed that supporters of Mitt Romney are claiming that Newt Gingrich is not a true Reaganite and are even claiming that Newt was a strong critic of my father.” And Limbaugh added, “That kind of stuff is why people hate Romney so much.”

Newsmax reported that in a 1995 speech at a dinner honoring Reagan, former first lady Nancy Reagan said: “The dramatic movement of 1995 is an outgrowth of a much earlier crusade that goes back half a century. Barry Goldwater handed the torch to Ronnie, and in turn Ronnie turned that torch over to Newt and the Republican members of Congress to keep that dream alive.”

There’s a reason 34 percent of those who voted for Newt in South Carolina said they “strongly supported” the tea party, dispelling another MSM myth (or is that a wish?) that the tea party’s influence has dwindled. Thirty-one percent of independents also voted for Newt.

To the naysayers of Newt, these words from Theodore Roosevelt are appropriate: “It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause, who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat.”

I think it’s time again that “we the people” showed the media and Washington elite exactly who is in charge.

South Carolinians were not duped by the titans of political swing.

Floridian and Nevadan patriots, don’t you let them manipulate and muscle your votes, either.

MORE NEWT HISTORY – THOSE PESKY ETHICS “VIOLATIONS” – Tea Party Nation

MORE NEWT HISTORY – THOSE PESKY ETHICS “VIOLATIONS” – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Laura Lloyd

We’ve already heard Debbie what’s-her-face of the DNC trying to mention that Newt committed ethics violations when he was Speaker of the House.  Lest any of us believe this nonsense and accept it on face value, I’ve found two really great articles from Carolyn Gorgoran, co-founder of Rightgrrl on just the topic.

In short, Newt was charged with 75 eithics violations by Democrat David Bonior and other democrats after Newt successfully caused the resignation of the former Democrat Speaker Jim Wright.  Of the 75 charges, 74 were found to have NO MERIT WHATSOEVER.  Get the correct history and some background here: http://www.gargaro.com/newtmoney.html

And, even though Newt did pay a $300,000 fine on the 75th charge – read what happened on it after a 3.5 year probe: http://www.rightgrrl.com/carolyn/newt.html

It’s clear that the Republican establishment does not want Newt and have labeled him as “undisciplined” based on this past history and for EXACTLY the same reason that they don’t like TEA Party candidates!!  THEY CAN’T CONTROL THEM!

Remember that Mr. Rick Santorum was a part of that Republican establishment — he said so at the SC Debates!

If this doesn’t open your eyes, nothing will!

An Open Letter to Rick Santorum supporters – Tea Party Nation

 

Česky: Oficiální portrét amerického prezidenta...

Image via Wikipedia

An Open Letter to Rick Santorum supporters – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Judson Phillips

The time has come for hard decisions and now each of you needs to make that hard decision.

 

I understand why you like Santorum.   He’s a decent guy.  What he did in Iowa was nothing short of incredible.  Unfortunately for him the game is now over.

 

Right now, Rick Santorum is in a distant fourth place.  He will not be able to continue after South Carolina

 

His race is over.

 

If you support Santorum, it says something about you.  It says you are conservative.  If you are a conservative, you want to see the Republican Party nominate a conservative and if you are a conservative, you agree Mitt Romney is not a conservative.  He is a liberal.

 

Santorum can no longer win the race.  There are a number of states where he is not even on the ballot and even some states where he is on the ballot but has no slate of delegates.    In other words, no matter what, he cannot win.

 

By staying in the race, all Rick Santorum does at this point is to divide the conservative vote.   This has been the Mitt Romney strategy all along.  See the conservative vote divided and shattered so that by the time conservatives can unite behind one candidate, it is too late.

 

The question each and every Santorum supporter has to ask themselves today is, if I vote for Rick Santorum in South Carolina, what will that vote mean? 

 

The painful answer to that question is, all it will mean is a greater chance that Mitt Romney will be the nominee. 

 

Rick Santorum has run a good race.   Rick Santorum’s life in public service is not over, but he will not be President this year.  The only candidate left now, with any chance of becoming the Republican nominee are Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney.

 

Mitt Romney is a northeastern liberal.  The Republican Party is the party of Reagan, not the party of socialism.  The Republican Party is the party of conservatism, not the party of tax, borrow and spend liberalism.   The Republican Party is the party of freedom and liberty and not the party of having the government run our lives. 

 

If you are a conservative, you must agree that Mitt Romney is not a conservative and must be stopped from getting the Republican nomination.

 

The only candidate left who can stop him is Newt Gingrich.  Do not let Mitt Romney continue to divide the conservative movement just so he can become President and destroy what Ronald Reagan and our founding fathers stood for.

 

Join me and support Newt Gingrich for President.  Join me in voting for Newt Gingrich in the Republican Primary for President. 

 

Join me and let’s stop a liberal from destroying the Party of Reagan.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,561 other followers