Before the mike got cold at Dartmouth this afternoon, Chris Christie has already landed an email in my box shilling for Mitt Romney and asking for money no less. Well, you’ve got to hand it to the Republican establishment, folks. When they go all in for one candidate, they do know how to twist the right arms.
I can’t help wondering how these blue-state guys think they can turn around America when it’s the rest of us in the red states bailing them out hand over fist — right now. The American taxpayers are already on the hook for a large portion of RomneyCare.
Well, brother, can you spare a buck for poor, unemployed Mitt Romney?
Here’s the pitch…to soften you up…New Jersey/Massachusetts style.
This is the most important election in generations. Whether we are able to fix our economy and get our country on the right track will have ramifications for decades. We cannot afford to continue on our current path.
Mitt Romney has a life history of coming into struggling organizations and turning them around. Right now, we need someone like him in the White House to fundamentally change our economy and reverse three years of failed policies. Unlike our current President, Mitt Romney understands the economy from the inside out.
Fixing the economy will not be easy, but Mitt has shown throughout his life that he has the leadership ability and expertise to lead our country toward a recovery. Republicans should recognize the importance of this election and realize that if they are serious about regaining the White House, Mitt Romney is the only candidate to back.
I hope you’ll join me and stand with Mitt today http://mittromney.com/donate
This is sad. Really sad. Evidently there just aren’t enough losers, ingrates and enviers in the country to fill out the ranks of the supposed “99%” of Americans who prefer class warfare to work.
The S.E.I.U. is teaming with the Daily Kos to beg for bodies to occupy Wall Street and any business district out in the heartland.
From the S.E.I.U. email that just landed in my hotmail box:
By now you’ve seen the thousands of brave students, workers and the unemployed occupying Wall Street.
But did you know that as of yesterday, there are over 300 solidarity “occupy events” happening across the country and around the clock?
In Philadelphia, 1,000+ individuals took to City Hall on Tuesday night.
In Washington, D.C., people have camped out in McPherson Square, symbolically located on K Street, since last week.
In L.A., citizens have spent six straight days and nights outside City Hall protesting against income inequality and joblessness.
The crowds and peaceful demonstrations will only get larger and louder as more Americans find the courage to stand up and demand Wall Street, CEOs and millionaires pay their fair share to create good jobs now.
This is the moment that determines whether this movement succeeds or falls flat. Will you pledge to help the movement spread by visiting an Occupy event in Alpharetta? You can sign up and find a comprehensive list of events here:
Let’s see now. Wouldn’t this fit the definition of “astro-turf”? And how about racial diversity? I’ve been looking at the photos of these mobs and they look almost all-white to me. Not to mention the fact that these rent-a-mobs are disturbing the peace, interfering with people actually trying to get to work and often breaking the law.
At any rate, when you have to use big labor to beg for warm bodies, then I think you’re not quite representative of any “99%” of Americans.
What do you think?
Obama supporter, multi-billionaire, hedge-fund director Warren Buffet has been quite vocal in his calling for higher taxes on the “wealthy.” Buffet put his name to an August 15theditorial on “shared sacrifice” in the New York Times, writing:
While the poor and middle class fight for us in Afghanistan, and while most Americans struggle to make ends meet, we mega-rich continue to get our extraordinary tax breaks. Some of us are investment managers who earn billions from our daily labors but are allowed to classify our income as “carried interest,” thereby getting a bargain 15 percent tax rate. Others own stock index futures for 10 minutes and have 60 percent of their gain taxed at 15 percent, as if they’d been long-term investors.
These and other blessings are showered upon us by legislators in Washington who feel compelled to protect us, much as if we were spotted owls or some other endangered species. It’s nice to have friends in high places.
Let’s try to forget for a moment, dear readers, how many millions (billions?) these mega-wealthy individuals and corporate conglomerates spend yearly on lobbying congress for those showered “blessings,” as well as how many millions more they pump into campaign coffers on the strength of promised “blessings.” Let’s try to give Warren Buffet the benefit of doubt on the patriotic mantle he’s assuming here. And let’s try to remember that he could just be indulging a guilty conscience and trying to do something he perceives as “good for the little people” before he dodders off to his final reward or lack thereof. Benefit of doubt hereby granted.
Let’s just stick to the facts of the matter at hand here.
Following a personal call from President Obama from his Vineyard-vacation hideaway, Buffet has pumped a cool $5 billion into a floundering Bank of America. And it has today been reported that Mr. money-bags Buffet made a cool $280 million dollar profit in a single day on this personal investment.
So, surely, Warren Buffet’s $280 million dollar gift check is in the mail – as we speak – to the U.S. Treasury.
In fact, I expect patriotic Democrats to be following Buffett’s example immediately and they can find all the info they need right on the U.S. Treasury website, like I did:
Gifts to the United States Government
How do I make a contribution to the U.S. government?
Citizens who wish to make a general donation to the U.S. government may send contributions to a specific account called “Gifts to the United States.” This account was established in 1843 to accept gifts, such as bequests, from individuals wishing to express their patriotism to the United States. Money deposited into this account is for general use by the federal government and can be available for budget needs. These contributions are considered an unconditional gift to the government. Financial gifts can be made by check or money order payable to the United States Treasury and mailed to the address below.
Gifts to the United States
U.S. Department of the Treasury
Credit Accounting Branch
3700 East-West Highway, Room 622D
Hyattsville, MD 20782
It has also been reported today that Warren Buffett will be hosting a September 30 fundraiser for President Obama in New York, where he is sure to pass the hat. And surely the reporter who said this will be a political fundraiser to plump the personal campaign chest of Barack Obama got it wrong.
Surely – oh, surely – Mr. Buffett will actually be passing the hat amongst his mega-rich friends for patriotic gifts to our sad and beleaguered U.S. Treasury instead.
If personal gift checks are not immediately forthcoming, then I am hereby declaring all of these Democrat “patriots” are, in reality, cowards and liars. Actions speak louder than words, honey. And that’s true whether one is rich as sin or poor as dirt. Time to call the bluff of every one of these hypocrites.
Put your own money where your mouth is, or shut the heck up.
From the moment she raised her dainty foot to the national stage, Sarah Palin has intrigued Americans.
She has been a lightning rod in the fight for the soul of feminism, incurring the wrath and scorn of now-dominant leftist feminists, even as she has rallied the usually silent forces of traditional women. The struggle for the hearts and minds of young women is ongoing, but Palin’s Momma Grizzly feminism has at least made it a real fight, in which traditional women have got a shot at reigniting the “we want both” (family and paying careers), genuine feminism.
Palin has attracted a sizable swath of male supporters, not only because of her obvious appeal and coy charisma, but also on the strength of her feisty record against entrenched interests in her home state. Palin’s earthy, down-home persona seems perfectly fit for the citizen government our founders designed. She is enormously popular in the heartland, as evidenced again and again by her hugely successful bus tours and public appearances.
And there is no question that vast numbers of Americans are yearning for a return to constitutional populism. This can be summed up in two words: Tea Party.
These factors, along with Palin’s motherly, yet all-American-girl-next-door image, have made her one of the most popular women ever to enter our national psyche.
But as Sarah Palin contemplates a run for the presidency, she must surely be asking herself whether her immense popularity will indeed translate into real votes in the hotly contested Republican primaries.
I think it is very possible – perhaps even likely – that if Sarah Palin runs for president now, she will be disappointed. Americans voted for the cult of personality last time around and the results have been so disastrous that there has been a national sobering since 2008. Americans voted for a “first” black president, only to see once again that no man ought to be judged by the color of his skin, that character does indeed count and that proven competence counts even more.
This national growing-wiser from painful, rash decisions will affect votes for Palin in ways that may seem unfair. But are Republican primary voters really going to run out in big numbers to hoist another “first” – the first woman – onto the national ticket? I just don’t see that happening. But life is not fair.
Michele Bachmann has enormous appeal as a very conservative female candidate too, but her leadership bona-fides are restricted to a mere 2-1/2 terms in the U.S. House. Despite having won the Iowa straw poll, and having herself declared the “smart Sarah Palin” by some influential media people, Bachmann’s candidacy has been quickly eclipsed by the very experienced and successful governor of Texas. The other governor in the race, Mitt Romney, is in 2nd place. Governor creds are stacking up as all-important.
Palin’s resume is almost as thin as Bachmann’s. Being governor of Alaska, the least populous state in the union, with only a little more than 700,000 residents, for a mere 2 years, does not really seem to hold enough weight this time around. For instance, the single city of Austin, Texas has more residents than the entire state of Alaska. Would Americans vote for a guy or gal who had nothing real on his/her resume but a resigned position as Mayor of Austin as president? I don’t think so. This isn’t 2008.
When Sarah Palin resigned the governorship of Alaska and traded real political office for celebrity status, many of those who still admire her and listen to her on political matters marked her off a list of those they would consider for the job of president. And Palin’s rather defiant thin-skin seems to many all too similar to Barack Obama’s. Not a few conservatives have even said that Palin seems the mirror image of Barack Obama – young, charismatic, appealing – but thin on real experience.
I sincerely hope Sarah Palin decides to keep doing the job she has now, which is of huge benefit to conservatives, most especially conservative women. But if she does decide to run, I believe she will find that popularity will not translate into substantial numbers of real votes among a sober, looking-for-proven-substance electorate.
I might be completely wrong. Been wrong so many times I lost count at about age 20. I remain a stalwart admirer of Sarah Palin’s many gifts. But I can’t help thinking that if even I would not vote for Sarah, how about those who never really warmed to her in the first place?
Would love to know others’ thoughts on this.
Small victories for the integrity of American government must now be celebrated. Yes, it’s come to this.
But, at last, Weiner’s ignominious resignation is a welcome sign that the era of the sex addiction scam is over.
Personally, I did not think the man would be forced to resign. In fact, following the Democrat Party’s past trajectory on sex scandals involving their own, I predicted that Rep. Weiner — forced into the light of public glare by patriot extraordinaire, Andrew Breitbart — would cower behind the skirts of Nancy Pelosi and Debbie Wasserman-Whatever, which he actually did do for a bit. I mean, honestly, Democrats have always stood by their perverts with unabashed glee, covering them with the stained skirts of faux-feminist proclaimed “empathy.” The Democrats rallied ’round Barney Frank and his boy-toy. The Democrats threw down every remaining vestige of their moral fiber to save their sexually-harassing, fellatio-king, Bill Clinton. They stood by John Edwards until the tabloids forced them to retreat. Who would have believed that they would all join hands at this juncture to declare that the era of the sex addiction scam is over? Not I, that’s for sure.
I really did think that they would rehabilitate Weiner in precisely the same fashion they have done with Frank and Clinton, perhaps many more. I’ve honestly lost count. The morally-challenged public has become quite desensitized. I believed that by the time election day rolled around again, Weiner would have been photo-opped to nauseating levels with his pregnant wife standing beside him just as other Democrat wives have always done — going back to Houndog Jack Kennedy. By election time, I fully expected Weiner to emerge from his sex addiction rehab, holding a new baby in his arms and surrounded by a host of his district’s proud Jewish mothers pronouncing their absolution to full court press adulation for the man’s uncommon bravery in the face of titillation too much to bear.
Well, here’s another Obama first, ladies and gents. Like the Peace Prize awarded on the wings of hope in Obama’s ethereal glow, now various open-government organizations have given the One an award for — hold your breath and count slowly to ten — hoped for “transparency.” A mere week after the most transparent administration in the history of the world was trying to explain why a Biden advance team would confine a lone reporter to a storage room to keep him from mingling with Party fat-cats in Florida, the glorious bastion of open-government moguls decide to preemptively award President Obama with the “transparency” award.
But that’s not the juiciest bit of this. The award was supposed to be given at a public ceremony at the White House with press pool and photographers, but the president decided to cancel all that “transparency” and go with a closed-door, private meeting without a single member of the press in attendance to receive his “transparency” award.
Politico has the whole story here.
Just got this email from the Tea Party Express on a new ad they’re launching in Wisconsin:
TEA PARTY EXPRESS LAUNCHES TV AD CAMPAIGN IN WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT FIGHT
The Tea Party Express (www.TeaPartyExpress.org) launched an new ad campaign today targeting the Wisconsin Supreme Court race, where well-funded union groups are running attack ads against the sitting justice, David Prosser, and instead supporting a state prosecutor with zero judicial experience and a history of suing homeowners and businesses over environmental regulations.
As I’ve always been one to believe in the old axiom about keeping your enemies even closer than your friends, I subscribe to a number of Democrat and ultra-liberal PAC and non-profit email lists. And I get a good bit of reader email, especially from Tea Party supporters, which gives me a glimpse into thinking among the conservative ground troops.
Immediately following the 2010 election — a great victory, to be sure — conservative grassroots hopes were very high. Now, however, a bit of weariness seems to have set in as many Republicans seem all too eager to give away gained ground and make too many compromises with the forces set to destroy the Republic.
If you happen to be one of those still believing that the fight has gone out of the Democrats because of their trouncing at the polls in 2010, you need to be aware that liberal/socialist Democrats are nothing like Republicans. These people live politics as their true religion. They see themselves as saving the world by sending America towards socialist utopia. They’re not going to quit. They never will.
Grab your wallets ladies and gents. Moveon.org has called for “emergency” protests against Americans’ rights to fiduciary responsibility in cities this Saturday. The Soros-backed organization that brought us such works of wonder as the “General Betray-Us” ads and the “Bush Is Hitler” campaigns is now on the march against our right to balance our budgets and save our country.
Once again, adopting the European model and trying to sell it as American apple-pie “solidarity,” MoveOn has put out the following beg-o-gram to its army of budget-busting unionists (and their families and friends and every other socialist they can equip with a manufactured sign):
“We call for emergency rallies in front of every statehouse this Saturday at noon to stand in solidarity with the people of Wisconsin. Demand an end to the attacks on workers’ rights and public services across the country. Demand investment, to create decent jobs for the millions of people who desperately want to work. And demand that the rich and powerful pay their fair share. “
Note the president’s code word for additional liberal dream-scheme folderol: “investment”
Note, too, the liberals’ favorite socialist code words from their gospel of envy: “demand that the rich and powerful pay their fair share.”
They’re calling this march against American fiscal responsibility “patriotic.” Well, here’s a suggestion. Let the rich and powerful Democrats lead the march of beneficent givers to the state. John Kerry can start by paying property taxes on his new $7 million yacht. Nancy Pelosi can start by donating all her Gucci accessories to the Wisconsin for auction. Let all the Democrat-supporting Hollywood celebs give their mansions to help Ohio. You see where this is going. Add your own suggestions to this list.
It’s bound to be a long one.
Now that the executive branch has unilaterally decided to no longer enforce the Defense of Marriage Act, we must conclude that President Obama either hates children and wishes poverty upon them, or that he remains as clueless about economics as he has proven since day one.
Perhaps they don’t teach about the principal cause of child poverty over there at Harvard Law. No matter. The Heritage Foundation has generously compiled a study accessible to all citizens on exactly how the absence of married fathers in the home produces the child poverty to which Democrats are constantly espousing a dedication to eradicate. It’s available here for easy reference by the president and his attorney general:
“According to the U.S. Census, the poverty rate for single parents with children in the U.S. in 2008 was 36.5 percent. The rate for married couples with children was 6.4 percent. Being raised in a married family reduced a child’s probability of living in poverty by about 80 percent.”
I’m sick and tired of educated fools espousing gibberish about wanting to end poverty while they go around attacking the very institutions which actually prevent it. For the president’s information, the Judeo-Christian institution of monogamous marriage, with its own biological offspring under its wing is the cheapest-to-society invention of civilization to date. Pragmatically speaking, a society which wishes to remain financially viable for the next generation must do all it can to preserve this gift that just keeps on giving.
Since when did being a dimwit qualify one for high office? Oh, right. 2008. A year to remember.