Posts

Video: One Day Before Election, Biden Forgets Obama’s Name

By Toby Harnden. Vice President Joe Biden, who has previously misremembered what state and what century he was in, now seems to have forgotten that Barack Obama is the president.

Speaking to a crowd of 1,200 people at a high school in Lakewood, Ohio, Biden was slamming a ‘pernicious’ Mitt Romney ad claiming that Jeep will move jobs out of Ohio to China.

The vice-president said that the ad claimed that ‘President Clinton bankrupted Chrysler so that Italians could buy it to ship jobs overseas to China.’

Bill Clinton was the 42nd president of the U.S. and left office in January 2001. Barack Obama became the 44th president in January 2009 and for the past nearly four years Biden has served as his vice-president.

In Biden’s defense, there was perhaps a Freudian element to the slip. Clinton, who previously enjoyed testy relations with Obama, has been mobilised by the current president to be his most prominent campaigner and the two men made joint appearances in Virginia on Saturday and New Hampshire on Sunday. Read more from this story HERE.

Mother of SEAL: ‘I Believe that Obama Murdered My Son’

photo credit: roberthuffstutterA father and a mother used the word “murder.” A brother said he won’t second-guess decisions made in the heat of battle.

The families of three Americans killed in the Sept. 11 U.S. consulate attack in Benghazi, Libya, are offering widely different reactions to recent reports that U.S. personnel issued several requests for help that were turned down.

Patricia Smith, the mother of slain State Department employee Sean Patrick Smith, is now blaming President Barack Obama for her son’s death.

“I believe that Obama murdered my son,” she said Thursday from the living room of her Clairemont home. “I firmly believe this.”

Patricia Smith, who voted for Obama in 2008 at the insistence of her son, said reporting by Fox News is the basis for much of her belief that Obama is ultimately responsible for her son’s death. She said Sean, who went to Mission Bay High School but lived abroad, was a fervent supporter of the president.

Read more from this story HERE.

If Romney Supporters Don’t Vote in Record Numbers, Obama Will Win

It’s all a matter of perspective.

All along most of my fellow conservative pundits have been framing the 2012 election as a replay of 1980, with a former Republican governor earning a landslide mandate from an American people languishing under the failures of an unprepared liberal incumbent. While my ideology may put the fun in fundamentalist, all along I have disagreed with that narrative.

While Obama’s amateurish escapades may resemble Carter’s futility, Romney is not another Reagan. In fact, until the first debate in Denver when he routed Obama, Romney was on pace to be the most disliked major party challenger for president in the history of modern polling.

In addition, an entire generation that still believed in rugged individualism and Judeo-Christian morality has left us since Reagan’s era. They have been replaced by a generation far more conditioned to see government as the solution to our problems rather than an impediment to them.

For example, my home state of Iowa is a socially conservative state but since Reagan it’s only gone Republican in a presidential election once, and that was by fewer than 10,000 votes. Why? Because my home state is one of the oldest in the country (which means lots of folks on entitlement programs), and its biggest industry is agriculture (which is essentially a complete subsidy of the welfare state). Thus, Iowa has been voting Democrat out of personal financial vested interest for decades.

Furthermore, the nation is far more Balkanized culturally than it was in 1980. No Republican presidential candidate – let alone a conservative – could still win California. Now the Electoral College is essentially down to just a handful of states every four years, with most of the country entrenched as red or blue no matter whom the nominee of each party is or where the country is at. That makes obtaining the kind of national mandate Reagan twice received more difficult. Nowadays a Democrat has 200 Electoral College votes in the bank just by showing up on the ballot come Election Day, and that wasn’t true in Reagan’s time.

Because of this, since January I have been analyzing this election with 2004 as its predecessor for three reasons:

1. Obama’s approval ratings are roughly where Bush’s were then. Though the Obama economy is worse than Bush’s (and not as bad as Carter’s), Bush was also saddled with an unpopular war in Iraq that makes that a wash.

2. As a challenger Romney was saddled with many of the same negatives as Kerry. He didn’t excite his base, which is why Kerry and Romney each set the record for earliest to name a running mate, and each selected a younger more charismatic vice presidential nominee. Also the attempt by Obama to make the election a referendum on Romney instead of himself, by characterizing Romney as a wealthy socialite elitist out-of-touch with mainstream values, is exactly what Karl Rove successfully did to Kerry for Bush in 2004. And do you remember the flip-flops on display at the 2004 Republican Convention to remind voters of Kerry’s penchant for taking each side of each issue? Apparently there’s something in the water in Massachusetts because that has been a problem for Romney as well. Romney’s own campaign confidant perpetuated the label with his infamous “etch-a-sketch” remarks.

3. The framework of the Electoral College is virtually the same as it was in 2004, except for GOP states Indiana and North Carolina that were surprise pick-ups for Obama in 2008.

The metric of this race, with Obama getting a big post-convention bounce just like Bush did, Romney then getting a big post-debate bounce just like Kerry did, and the election essentially coming down to Ohio, is eerily similar to 2004 as well.

Polling

For the purpose of my analysis, I’m going to rely on the Real Clear Politics polling average for my polling information because it’s been proven to be the most accurate tool for public consumption out there. The final RCP polling average flat out nailed the last two presidential elections (and I urge you to go back and read this link to find out why it did so).

That doesn’t mean RCP is right this time. In fact, we won’t know who is right until after the people (or the lawyers) have their ultimate say. But in the past two election cycles no one has been more accurate than RCP.

Read more from this story HERE.

Video: Romney’s “Vote for Revenge” or “Vote for Love of Country” Ad

At a campaign stop, President Obama encouraged his supporters – who were booing Romney – to vote on Tuesday out of revenge.

This off-teleprompter comment has spun out a new offensive from Romney, including this “Revenge or Love of Country” ad:

Sean Hannity and Sarah Palin discuss Obama’s revenge comment, as well as predictions as to who will win on Tuesday.

Hannity also shows an RNC ad that highlights Obama’s failed record and discusses this with Sarah, too:

Pennsylvania and Ohio will become rich states if they vote for Romney

Voters in Pennsylvania and Ohio have a unique opportunity to make themselves energy producing giants this Tuesday, if they vote for the right candidate.

As geologists and energy experts probe what’s under the ground in these two states, it is becoming apparent they are sitting on huge reserves of natural gas. In addition to gas, they already have huge reserves of other forms of fossil fuels.

But in particular, the gas is near the surface and easy to obtain. If there is willing government cooperation from Washington DC, these states will be booming due to energy production. State treasuries would be overflowing with royalties from the billions in energy sold.

Thousands of jobs would be created on exploration, recovery, pipelines, transportation and infrastructure. Long-term employment would necessarily increase as companies look for qualified employees to help in recovering & marketing these resources.

North Dakota is a prime example of what a state can do when they pursue their energy resources. With a 3% unemployment rate, they are the lowest rate in the nation.

Under the last four years of the Obama administration, there has been a concerted effort to wage war on our energy sector. One of the key Obama EPA administrators was caught saying he wanted to crucify the energy industry. One of the biggest foes of Americas fossil fuel reserves, Bill McKibben, has the Presidents ear and was said to play a key role in his rejection of the Keystone Pipeline.

See McKibben Epstein ultimate energy debate November 5, at Duke University.

For the last 4 years, the Obama administration has been quietly crucifying andhamstringing our energy sector.

The stark, easy to see result of this policy, is to pull into the gas station and fill up your car for $100.00, when it only cost $50.00 four years ago.

Governor Romney has already promised he will encourage responsible recovery of our energy resources the first day he takes control of the reins of government.

We have already seen what 4 years of Obama policies have done to our energy sector. Energy plant shut downs-Coal mine bankruptcies-Huge tracts of federally controlled land barred from energy exploration-Billions in losses on taxpayer funded green energy schemes. The next 4 years will be all of the above, but on steroids, as he will not have to answer to the voters again.

The choice is clear for the voters in Ohio and Pennsylvania. With Romney you have the opportunity to become energy rich and create hundreds of thousands of new jobs. At the same time you can help our country become energy self sufficient.

____________________________________________

Ed is the conservative columnist at IrishCentral, where he has been writing on the need for energy independence, strong self defense, secure borders, 2nd amendment, smaller government and many other issues. His articles appear in many publications throughout the USA and world. He has been a guest on Fox News and a regular guest on radio stations in the US and Europe.

Tuesday: Don’t Vote for Revenge, Vote for Love of Country

Speaking in Springfield Ohio, Barack Obama mentioned Mitt Romney. As soon as he mentioned Romney’s name, the crowd began to boo. Obama told the crowd:

“No, no, no. Don’t boo, vote. Voting is the best revenge.”

Speaking in New Hampshire, Romney told supporters how Obama had said that voting would be their “best revenge” against Romney:

“Vote for revenge? Let me tell you what I’d like to tell you: Vote for love of country. It is time we lead America to a better place.”

This is but one snapshot highlighting the difference between Americans and “progressives”.

The choices Americans have on Tuesday November 6, 2012 fall into two distinct categories. The difference between these two philosophies is so clearly defined that it should be easy for Americans to decide where their sentiments lie.

The Declaration of Independence was a radical document because for millennia mankind had been ruled by monarchs, Caesars, Czars, or similar forms of dynastic oligarchies determined by bloodline.
The universally accepted school of thought was that Kings, Queens, Emperors or Caesars were anointed by God, or were even gods themselves. Only monarchs or nobilities appointed by monarchs owned anything. They “allowed” the “common people” to work the land as serfs, indentured servants or as slaves. But “common people” were never “allowed” to own property. All they produced belonged to the monarch and was the monarch’s for the taking.

America’s Founding Fathers disavowed this view of society.

They declared that all men are created equal, that in effect, all men are kings. That they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. Among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. They declared that people could govern themselves without a monarch or an oligarchy ruling over them.

This was a radical departure from centuries old norms. They envisioned a system which allowed “common people” to own property without first obtaining permission from a “divine” ruler. Anyone could come to America, work hard, earn money, save it and buy property.

Those who rebelled against the Royal British Crown knew that if they failed in their endeavor, they would all hang. Yet, “with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence” they pledged to each other their Lives, their Fortunes and their sacred Honor.

The Declaration of Independence was the mission statement for the United States Constitution.

Yes, the Constitution established an imperfect government, which among other flaws still allowed slavery. Yet at that point in history, the original 13 colonies could not have formed one nation capable of maintaining a semblance of unity had they not reached the 3/5ths compromise. But the Founding Fathers were wise when they wrote the Constitution. They ensured that the Constitution could be amended, so that in time slavery and other injustices could be altered through an orderly process which provided change that enjoyed overwhelming bi-partisan support.

The Marxist school of thought is in direct opposition to the uniquely American concept that everyone has the right to own private property. How would Americans react if, after years of struggle, they finally owned their own home, then government “informed” them that it did not belong to them, that it belonged to “all the people” and Americans had to let strangers live on their property whether they liked it or not?

If an all-powerful, big government oligarchy is allowed to seize private property in this manner, as in the concept of “social justice” or “economic justice”, America is dead.

The real philosophical divide in the United States lies between the intent of America’s Founding Fathers and the intent of “progressives”, who favor the Marxist view.

The American idea, the shot heard round the world, is that We the People can govern ourselves. By the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God we are entitled, by virtue of our humanity, to the maximum amount of Individual Liberties consistent with law and order, and to the Right of private ownership, not the least of which is the Right to own and decide for ourselves. These Liberties and Rights are to be equally protected by a constitutionally limited, representative government that derives its just powers from the consent of the governed.

This is a distinctly exceptional American idea.

The “progressive” idea is that an all-powerful centrally planned government, with extreme hostility towards private ownership, forces redistribution of wealth in the name of social or economic “justice”. In order to ensure “fairness”, an oligarchy of self-imagined, self-appointed “intellectual elites” will control businesses, industries and people who are incapable of governing themselves. This was the position of a fringe minority who called themselves “progressives” until early twentieth century Americans saw for themselves exactly how bad “progressive” ideas were.

The “progressive” idea came to America from Britain’s Fabian Socialists, who advocate socialistic democracy, and from Germany’s Frankfurt School, who came to America after fleeing Adolph Hitler because they knew Hitler would kill them for being Communists.

These ideas are European, not American.

The settlers who founded America rejected European ideas in fleeing Europe searching for a better future. America has been a success and a beacon to freedom seeking people for over two centuries because the American idea is the better idea.

Among Americans unpolluted by “progressive” ideas, there is little debate that the United States of America is the most inventive, productive, prosperous and charitable nation in the history of the planet. There has yet to be put forth one rational, logical argument to support abandoning the highly successful American idea in favor of a European idea that is currently failing in Europe itself.

Before voting on Tuesday, November 6, 2012, decide which fate America deserves.

Then vote not for revenge, but for love of country.

____________________________________________________________________

Michael Fell is a former MCA recording artist from the seminal punk rock era who toured America from coast to coast. Today, he’s a leading voice in the L.A. Tea Party movement, active since the February 2009 inception. Mr. Fell currently chairs the Westwood Tea Party, is a founding member of the L.A. Metro Tea Party Coalition, serves as the Vice Chairman of the Westside Republicans Club in L.A. CA, and is an elected Republican delegate to the L.A. 47th AD Central Committee. He’s been Campaign Manager for a primary winning Congressional candidate, as well as Santa Monica and L.A. City Council candidates. Mr. Fell is a contributing writer for https://conservativedailynews.com/, https://rightwingnews.com/, https://www.hollywoodrepublican.net/, https://beforeitsnews.com, https://www.redcounty.com/, https://www.uspatriotpac.com and, https://westsiderepublicans.com/. His opinions on today’s news events and political climate can be found on his blog: https://mjfellright.wordpress.com/

Video: Official Obama Ad – “President is a Man of Deep Christian Faith”

By Fox News. A new video released by the Obama campaign claims the president has been leading the nation with faith values. Several religious minsters and scholars said Obama is a “man of deep Christian faith.”

The video fails to mention that the Democratic Party booed God at their national convention in Charlotte — and at one point voted to remove the Almighty from the party platform. God was eventually reinserted into the platform in a controversial vote with strong opposition and jeers coming from the audience.

Obama’s video, which was posted Saturday morning, implies that Obamacare and his automobile industry bailout are moral policies based on religion. Read more from this story HERE.

Video: You Can’t Vote for Obama After Seeing This

This is one of the exceptional videos of this election season, with hundreds of thousands of views over the last week.

The first half of the clip very effectively uses Obama’s own 2008 campaign rhetoric against him, something that would have been very effective in the debates.

It then describes the nations’s debt crisis, providing definition to the enormous numbers burdening our nation.

Finally, it gives a brief history on conservatism and conservative ideals.

It’s a catchy, fast-paced, and otherwise well done video. If you don’t have time for the whole clip, you should watch at least the first half.

Obama Demonizes Tea Party in Final Days of Campaign

After failing to mention the Tea Party by name on the stump in 2012, President Barack Obama mentioned the movement during at least five stump speeches on Thursday and Friday.

Running against the Tea Party movement that successfully stymied his grassroots agenda and energized conservatives and independents to give Republicans in the House a majority, Obama said Mitt Romney would “rubber-stamp the Tea Party agenda in Congress.”

Jenny Beth Martin, National Coordinator of Tea Party Patriots, said Obama was continuing to divide Americans by badmouthing “millions of grassroots” Tea Party activists across the nation.

“In a single speech today, our current President demonized Americans who have achieved the American Dream and badmouthed millions of grassroots Tea Party activists in every state in the nation,” Martin said on Thursday. “If he spent as much time uniting Americans as he does dividing Americans and attacking them, his presidency might have been a success.”

Politico reviewed a transcript of all of Obama’s speeches and found Obama had only mentioned “tea party” once — in a campaign appearance in Virginia in October — on the stump in 2012 before this week.

Read more from this story HERE.

Washington Post: October’s Higher Unemployment Shows ‘Job Growth’

Just before Election Day, the Washington Post is super excited about Friday’s unemployment numbers showing “job growth” for October, despite unemployment increasing from 7.8% in September to 7.9%. The paper describes this change as the unemployment rate staying “flat.”

The Post tries to give Obama cover even as it ultimately notes that there really wasn’t much improvement in jobless figures for October. In fact, the Post almost admits that its report is intended to help Obama right in its first paragraph.

The U.S. jobs market in October sustained its slow trudge toward better times, the government reported on Friday, in the last major report card on the economy before the presidential election.

Despite all the happy talk sprinkled through the article, the Post is forced to note that much of this “good news” is closer to treading water as opposed to any “slow trudge toward better times.”

Absurdly, the Post tried hard to spin the actual increase in unemployment as a good thing.

The unemployment rate in October did rise to 7.9 percent, up from 7.8 percent, but the reason behind the uptick suggested an improved job market: More Americans decided to look for work, though not all of them found jobs.

Read more from this story HERE.