comMITTed to Romney!

When I read the article written by the editorial staff of IBD and saw the multi-trillion dollar give aways proposed by Barack Obama it only took a couple of seconds to figure out what Obama is trying to do.

The last thing he wants is to do is start making direct cash payments to the offended parties. He wants to engineer a massive shift in wealth that will be administered by……you guessed it, him and his buddies in the federal bureaucracy. Thereby assuring relevancy and employment for the income redistributers for generations to come, assuming, of course, that they don’t wreck the American economy for themselves and everyone else in the process.

~~John Cronin~~

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=303088377885894

By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY

Election ‘08: Barack Obama says Washington shouldn’t just offer apologies for slavery, but also “deeds.” Don’t worry, he says, he’s not talking about direct reparations. Relieved? Don’t be.

‘I consistently believe that when it comes to . . . reparations,” Obama recently told a gathering of minority journalists, “the most important thing for the U.S. government to do is not just offer words, but offer deeds.”

A few days later, he clarified his remarks, saying he’s not calling for direct cash payments to descendents of slaves, but rather indirect aid in the form of government programs that will “close the gap” between what he sees as white America and black America.

He says government should offer “universal” programs — such as universal health care, universal mortgage credits, college tuition, job training and even universal 401(k)s — that “disproportionately affect people of color.”

In other words, reparations by another name.

Share on Facebook

Share This

Back in those dark days of early 2007 when the MSM informed us that the nomination of Hillary Clinton was “inevitable” and that she had the “biggest and most professional campaign staff in U.S. history,” I used to say that the best defense against a Hillary Clinton presidency was an open microphone.

Ditto for a Barack Obama presidency as well. The Pubbies can’t make up anything better than what BO comes up with himself. Check out Obama’s latest wild hair as he positions himself to the left of Karl Marx.

~~John Cronin~~

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=302222641317480

By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY

Election ‘08:

A plan by Barack Obama to redistribute American wealth on a global level is moving forward in the Senate. It follows Marxist theology — from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

We are citizens of the world, Sen. Obama told thousands of nonvoting Germans during his recent tour of the Middle East and Europe. And if the Global Poverty Act (S. 2433) he has sponsored becomes law, which is almost certain if he wins in November, we’re also going to be taxpayers of the world.

“We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times . . . and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK,” Obama has said. “That’s not leadership. That’s not going to happen.”

Oh, really? Who’s to say we can’t load up our SUV and head out in search of bacon double cheeseburgers at the mall? China? India? Bangladesh? The U.N.?

In an Obama White House, American sovereignty will become an endangered species. The Global Poverty Act is the first toe in the water of global socialism.

Share on Facebook

Share This

If Obama and McCain really believe what they are saying about the oil companies, they both need to re-open their studies of Economics 101. The quotes below show a stunning lack of understanding about both economics and human nature. Although I am not a big fan of McCain, Obama’s policies are radioactive. What he says in the quote below is just good old fashioned socialism and I don’t use that term lightly. He proposes to take money from Exxon, in other words from American citizens who own Exxon stock and then redistribute it to other Americans to use however they see fit. The implication, of course, is that if you will vote for me, I’ll confiscate someone else’s property and turn it over to you.

This attitude is flat out dangerous. Mr. Obama must be defeated at the polls this November. You might be tempted to think, well, I don’t own any Exxon stock, so his policy won’t adversely affect me. Don’t think for one moment that he will stop with Exxon. To politicians who think like Obama, the U.S. Treasury is their very own gigantic piggy bank and it exists only to fund whatever ideas emanate from their fevered brains.

~~John Cronin~~

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121383441884986739.html?mod=googlenews
_wsj

By KARL ROVE

June 19, 2008; Page A13

Barack Obama and John McCain are busy demonstrating that in close elections during tough economic times, candidates for president can be economically illiterate and irresponsibly populist.

In Raleigh, N.C., last week, Sen. Obama promised, “I’ll make oil companies like Exxon pay a tax on their windfall profits, and we’ll use the money to help families pay for their skyrocketing energy costs and other bills.”

Set aside for a minute that Jimmy Carter passed a “windfall profits tax” to devastating effect, putting American oil companies at a competitive disadvantage to foreign competitors, virtually ending domestic energy exploration, and making the U.S. more dependent on foreign sources of oil and gas.

This past Thursday, Mr. McCain came close to advocating a form of industrial policy, saying, “I’m very angry, frankly, at the oil companies not only because of the obscene profits they’ve made, but their failure to invest in alternate energy.”

Share on Facebook

Share This

More good news on the common sense in energy policy front. Two Republicans have changed their minds about drilling in ANWR.

~~John Cronin~~

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=298251904169099

By INVESTORS BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Friday, June 13, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Oil: Exxon Mobil is selling its gas stations because there’s no money in it. Meanwhile, two GOP congressmen do what John McCain should do — change their position on drilling in ANWR.

We already drill in Alaska. More than 15 billion barrels of oil have been sent down the Alaska pipeline from Prudhoe Bay, just 60 miles west of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, over the last three decades, much more than the six months’ supply predicted by critics.

As Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman notes, the development “footprint” would be minimal: “ANWR, in its totality, is about the size of South Carolina, and the area where we believe the hydrocarbons are located is about the size of Delaware, not to mention the exploration site would be no larger than about the size of (Boston’s) Logan International Airport.”

As for the “pristine” wilderness, the tiny portion of ANWR where drilling would occur is what hell would look like if it ever froze over. Winter on the coastal plain lasts for nine months. Total darkness reigns for 58 days. The temperature drops to 70 degrees below zero without the wind chill. Your spit freezes before it hits the ground.

Unfortunately, GOP nominee John McCain’s energy policy has been, well, inconsistent. He opposes drilling in ANWR because he considers it a historical treasure like the Grand Canyon.

Two House Republicans previously opposed to drilling in ANWR, Reps. Jim Walsh of New York and Roscoe Bartlett of Maryland, announced Thursday that they’d now support drilling there. Some would call it flip-flopping. We’d call it coming to your senses.

Share on Facebook

Share This

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=297990974123443

By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, June 10, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Energy:

America was saved Tuesday from a Democratic Congress determined to do more damage to our economy and raise oil prices still higher. Energy taxes and eco-extremism make Democrats the real oil gougers.

The most absurd provision in the thoroughly ridiculous energy package offered by Senate Democrats this week was to make price gouging on oil and gas a federal crime, punishable by a fine of $5 million if an energy emergency has been declared by the president at the time of such price fixing.

The DNC needs to make a remedial class on Economics 101 a pre-requisite for all freshmen Democratic Senators. One key economic concept that must be hammered home in this class is: “IF DEMAND REMAINS CONSTANT AND SUPPLY INCREASES, THE PRICE OF A COMMODITY WILL DECLINE.”

Oh, but why spoil the fun of being a camera-loving demagogue with silly old supply and demand!

~~John Cronin~~

Killing the geese that provide our economy with black gold is no answer to high energy prices. Developing more of our own energy is vital not just for relief at the pump, but for our national security in the global war on terror. At least one party in Congress gets it.

Share on Facebook

Share This

Share on Facebook

Share This

There are a few things that are important to me in a President.

First, that he (or she) be someone I can trust. Second, that they share some core conservative principles that I do, like family values and being pro-life. Third, that they be conservative fiscally so as to promote the economy and not have to raise taxes. Finally, I want someone who will support the military. To me, Romney does the best on all these tests.

Someone I Can Trust

On the “someone I can trust” scale, I’ve met some of Mitt’s family and have been impressed without exception at the quality of their character. I trust Mitt will make the right decision for our country, even when no one is looking.

I’ve heard the charges Mitt’s changed his position on issues, but I’ve been paying attention and the only meaningful change was on abortion, where he had been pro-choice on the theory the government shouldn’t get involved, and changed to pro-life when presented with an issue about embryonic research. He realized that Roe v. Wade had cheapened our view of human life, and that life needed to be protected. He didn’t need to make that change: Rudy Giuliani, for example, was comfortable running as a pro choice Republican. To me, the fact he changed shows he was thoughtful, honest and not sticking to a position out of political expediency. And I believe his sincerity on this issue. Readers should note that Reagan started life as a pro-choice politician, but ended up one of the strongest supporters the pro-life movement has seen. As I watch the debates I feel I can get a sense of Mitt’s genuineness. He’s very business-focused, the best-spoken and the most presidential, and I see him as sincerely wanting to debate the issues and do what’s best for our country, while other candidates, McCain and Huckabee in particular, seem to be jockeying for jokes or personal attacks. I trust Mitt, but I don’t trust Huckabee or McCain. Particularly after McCain’s vacation from the truth this weekend in distorting Mitt’s position on any number of issues (see George Will’s article about this, calling McCain’s move Clinton-esque). I trust Mitt so much I’m up at 1 a.m. writing this, flew myself to Iowa on my own nickel to help the campaign, and drove to Vegas to help again. Mitt inspires that sort of loyalty.

Conservative Principles

On conservative principles, he has pledged to appoint conservative judges to the Supreme Court. I don’t believe any other candidate left in the race has Mitt’s commitment on this point. See above.

The Economy

On fiscal matters, I think Mitt Romney stands head and shoulders above the other candidates. With his experience in business, the Olympics, saving a liberal state from a $3 billion deficit without raising taxes and his current economic plan (which I’ve said before I consider to be genius in certain respects, such as the 2 year window to expense capital purchases, which would incent businesses to make large purchases now, creating jobs), he’s got an expertise no other candidate can come close to. And with the economy’s current state, I think this expertise will become even more important. I don’t trust the other candidates to learn how to run the world’s biggest enterprise on the fly, particularly McCain (who’s been inside government his whole life and whose economic stimulus package was roundly criticized as doing as much to harm the economy as help it).

The Military

Finally on the military, I know McCain would support the military but I view that as his only strength, and in some ways this could be a weakness. Pat Buchanan said tonight he believes that if McCain is the nominee, we will go to war with Iran. That’s not what we need after being bogged down in Iraq, but McCain’s likely too stubborn to see that, and too likely to get upset and do something rash. Don’t think that will be lost on the Democrats, either. And we need someone with a broader skill set than just defense. Romney has said he’d build up the military, replace aging machinery and provide better veteran care. And I trust his judgement and temperament much more than McCain’s.

Summing Up

Some of the biggest problems our nation faces have been ignored and festered during McCain’s 24 years in Congress, such as illegal immigration, failure to preserve manufacturing jobs, etc., so I don’t view him as a solution, but part of the problem. He’s not an agent of change, he’s a symbol of the status quo. If he really were a leader, I think he’d have found a way to address some of these issues in Congress. I don’t want to send McCain back as President when he admitted he came to change Washington, but Washington changed him. I trust Mitt to go to Washington, cut the pork, raise military spending, cut taxes and balance the budget. Mitt will lead, he will carry the flag on conservative principles, fix the economy the right way, make our military strong and preserve our national security both economically and militarily. That’s why I think he’s the right man for the job.

Share on Facebook

Share This

More good news from our friends who supported Fred Thompson in his run for the Republican nomination. If you haven’t seen the YouTube clip of FT hammering Huckabee on the alleged demise of “the Reagan coalition” you are missing the quintessential defense of modern conservatism.

~~John Cronin~~

From the Desk of Richard Rios
California Political Director, Fred ‘08

Friends and supporters of Senator Thompson;

By now you have been inundated with the news of Senator Thompson’s decision to not pursue the office of the President of the United States. I have received many emails and phone calls asking what the next steps for Senator Thompson are and who is the best candidate to
support?

As far as Senator Thompson plans I cannot answer for him. Nor do I have any information that indicates what he will do next. But this is what I do know.
The conservative movement is based on several tenants. These include fiscal conservatism, social conservatism and support of a strong military. These principles that are the base of the Reagan coalition live beyond any single candidate or presidential term. The soundness of their doctrine will continue to provide a light for generations to come.

With the departure of Senator Thompson we as conservatives must focus on who is promoting those principles we hold dear and put aside any bias we have held in the past or hear in the main stream media. It is my belief and opinion that Governor Romney is the only candidate in the race that can carry that torch.

I have not accepted any position with any campaign. I offer you this assessment and ask that you join me in supporting Governor Romney as a fellow grass roots leader.

On Monday, January 22nd, we saw near 500 drop in the DOW and the week continued to show volatility in world markets. China has effectively manipulated the valuation of the dollar by mass liquidating US Treasuries. Our leaders have publically stated that we are either in or headed for a recession. Governor Romney is by far the best Presidential candidate on either side of the aisle who can address the economic perils ahead. He brings years of successful business Executive experience understanding a balance sheet. Some of the other candidates attribute their success political achievements. This is not difficult to do when the government can just raise taxes or print more money. We need someone who understands finances like you and me. That when the checking account is empty you stop writing checks.

Governor Romney believes in the sanctity of family. He supports a constitutional amendment that defines marriage between one man and one woman. He also believes that Roe v. Wade should be overturned to protect the unborn. Many of you may have the same concerns I had in the past regarding Governor Romney’s prior stand on these issues. As a Christian, I do believe in second chances for those who see the errors of their ways. I believe Governor Romney realizes that his past statements were wrong and is working hard to make right the injustice being done against the unborn.

Would I prefer to have a consistent stand on one of the most crucial social issues we face? Yes. I ask that you look into yourself. Is there anyone of us that can honestly say they have never changed a position for the better when the facts were presented to us? I don’t think so.

Governor Romney’s support has never wavered. He has outlined a plan to increase our military personnel and give them the weapons support they need to get the job done. A CEO knows how to let competent leaders do their job and Governor Romney will let the Generals and Field Commanders do their job without the political posturing we have seen in the past.

Finally, one last note for this endorsement. As grassroots activists we have seen the affects that McCain-Feingold has had on our ability to freely speak and support our candidates. Governor Romney has publically stated he wants to repeal that law and support the first amendment. The last thing we need is a candidate who thinks stifling the voice of the American people is a good thing and puts his name on it.

Please visit www.mittromney.com and look at the issues section. Make an informed and comprehensive decision.

Best wishes and thank you for all your support in the past promoting and advancing the conservative platform.

This represents the views and opinions of Richard Rios and should not be considered an endorsement of the Fred Thompson presidential campaign or other members of the California for Thompson team.

Richard Rios
former California Political Director, Fred08

Founding Director Arizona for Fred Thompson, Nevada for Fred Thompson, Oklahoma for Fred Thomson grassroots organizations

Share on Facebook

Share This

From The Wall Street Journal

He Touts Expertise as Focus Shifts to Economy
By ELIZABETH HOLMES
January 26, 2008; Page A4

The bad economic outlook might be good news for Mitt Romney, the millionaire venture capitalist who is in a tight race here for the Republican presidential nomination.

As voters’ worries have shifted away from the war in Iraq and turned to the roiled markets, Mr. Romney, with his fixation on PowerPoint slides and fever lines, has come into his own on the stump just ahead of Tuesday’s primary. Armed with a stimulus plan that favors big business, a reputation for hard-line cuts and even a sign that boasts “Economic Turnaround,” Mr. Romney has shifted his campaign rhetoric back into his comfort zone.

The new focus has put his opponents on the defensive — but also helped them step up their jabs at the perpetually stiff and rehearsed Mr. Romney. “Gov. Romney is touting his qualifications and his experience and his résumé as a manager,” said Arizona Sen. John McCain. “I am telling the American people, and they know it, that I am a leader.”

His punches didn’t stop there. “You can hire managers all the time. People who do the mechanics, people who implement policies. People who are good with assets,” Mr. McCain told reporters Friday. “Leadership is people who have had the hands-on experience and patriotism in service to our country and the nation.”

Starting at the southern tip of the Sunshine State before flying north Friday to the Panhandle, Mr. Romney, a former head of Bain Capital, was every bit the confident executive. To a crowd standing in the parking lot outside a military-technology manufacturer, Mr. Romney heralded the focus on the economy. “I particularly like the fact that the other candidates are increasingly talking about the issues that you want to have talked about,” he said.

It is what he has wanted to talk about all along. Mr. Romney has served up the economy as part of his stump fare for months. At a debate in Iowa in August, he was asked about fixing roads and bridges following the Minneapolis bridge collapse. As part of his answer, he prescribed: “Invest in the future of the economy.” In December, the first slide of a PowerPoint presentation in Manchester, N.H., was titled, “What is the future of the U.S. economy?”

Now, with troubles from the housing sector spilling over into other markets, Mr. Romney’s financial background gets a warmer reception. “What you want is someone that’s competent,” said Luis Espino, a 38-year-old attorney from Miami and undecided Republican, “someone that’s able to engage with the people that make decisions about the economy.” He paused before adding: “Just like the president does when he’s talking to generals to make military decisions.”

Mr. Romney’s economy-heavy stump speech plays well in Florida, the state with the highest population — roughly 17% — of residents 65 years and older. Many are retirees who worry about their income. “I live on a fixed income, mostly from investments in the Wall Street,” said Mildred Klemp, an 80-year-old Republican living in Naples, who hasn’t decided between Messrs. Romney and McCain. “The bulk of my estate is in the stock market, and I don’t know about that,” she said of the turbulent markets last Tuesday. “Had me worried.”

It also doesn’t hurt that Mr. Romney, with his tanned face and slicked-back hair, looks the part of a successful investor. Mr. Romney also has plenty of experience asking people to trust him with their money. In Iowa and New Hampshire — two early contests he poured resources into only to place second — the 60-year-old regularly brought out PowerPoint presentations with bar charts and bullet points to delve deep into the wonky side of politics.

Mr. Romney touts himself as a turnaround artist, and is a staunch defender of big business. Earlier this month, he held an impromptu news conference outside a General Motors Corp. facility in Ypsilanti, Mich., to talk about the auto industry’s troubles, not to slam the corporate giant for job cuts. “General Motors is taking action to remain competitive, to remain profitable, and that’s essential for the survival of that company,” he said.

Those kinds of comments have opened him up to attacks from his rivals. Mike Huckabee, who came from behind to trounce Mr. Romney in the Iowa caucuses, has repeatedly said voters don’t want a White House run by the “guy who laid them off.” And Mr. McCain has said that running the Senate Commerce Committee, as he has done, is better experience than running an investment company.

Mr. Romney directly responded to those attacks Friday. At an outdoor rally in Pensacola, he ticked off several quotes from Mr. McCain’s past in which the Arizona senator admitted to knowing more about foreign policy than the economy, including when Mr. McCain told reporters in December, “the issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should.”

At a meeting of the Latin Builders Association in Miami Friday morning, Mr. Romney subtly addressed Mr. Huckabee’s critiques — without naming his opponent. Mr. Romney called layoffs “the hardest thing I’ve done in business” and said it was “awful, feels terrible.”

Mr. Romney, speaking to a crowd of executives, sought to turn around the critiques of his business record. “I hear people now and then say not every business that you invested in or managed was successful,” he said. “It’s like, yeah, of course — have you ever been in business before?” He continued: “They don’t all work. That’s the nature of risk and return.”

Mr. Romney’s handling of the touchy subject impressed Israel Velasco, a regional executive for Banco Popular and an undecided voter. “It’s bad times — the experience with those bad times — that help you grow a business,” said Mr. Velasco, a 43-year-old from Coral Gables, Fla. “He was dead on the money when he talked about that.”

Even Republican voters who support other candidates don’t doubt Mr. Romney’s capabilities when it comes to the economy. Daniel Diaz Leyva, a 28-year-old attorney from Coral Gables, said he has great respect for Mr. Romney’s economic expertise but plans to vote for Mr. Giuliani on Tuesday. “You can’t be one-track minded,” he said. “The economy obviously is a huge issue but…experience in foreign affairs, I think, is a big issue.” He’s still holding out hope for Mr. Romney elsewhere in the new administration.

“I hope they appoint him Secretary of the Treasury,” he said.

Write to Elizabeth Holmes at elizabeth.holmes@wsj.com

Share on Facebook

Share This

How do you defend against attacks that are purely dishonest? Barack Obama had to struggle with that issue last week when the Clinton machine went after him. Perhaps we can take solace in his resounding win in the Democratic contest that took place yesterday. But I believe the short answer to that question is: control the message (i.e., change the subject).

Readers here know what McCain said about Mitt’s comments weren’t true. I’d seen the clip McCain was referring to weeks ago, and there was nothing in there about Mitt proposing or supporting a timetable for withdrawal: it was about whether there may be a Bush administration timetable and how if there was one it was important not to share any such timetable with our enemies. So why the manipulation of the facts by McCain? As others have said here, it’s likely that he’s seen his lead slip in Florida and felt he needed to do something to change the subject. So let’s change it back.

Unfortunately, as Senator McCain likes to say when he’s not the source of the attack, “you don’t mud wrestle with a pig, because you both get dirty and the pig likes it.” Of course it’s quite hyporcritical for McCain to be doing what he did today (e.g., abandoning “straight talk” and his “principles,” going negative, criticizing Mitt for a position McCain endorsed, etc.). But it’s apparent a discussion of any topic but the economy would be an improvement for him.

So let’s remind ourselves of what Mitt’s message is:

1. Washington is broken. Nothing serves as better evidence of this than McCain’s recent attacks. If we want more of the same we can send the same sorts of people back to Washington. McCain has been there 24 years; now he wants to be President. If we obliged, it’s hard for me to see how things would change, in particular given McCain’s legendary inability to work well with others in the Senate and the vendettas / back room favors he’ll owe if he goes back.

2. The economy needs Mitt. Since the days of Clinton and before, it’s always been about the economy. You can’t have a strong national defense if we dont have manufacturing and a strong economy at home. You can’t be a strong nation if you have to buy all your equipment from your enemies. And the American economy won’t be strong if we can’t keep the jobs from flowing out to our overseas competitors. So we need to send someone to Washington who has an intimate knowledge of the economy and can fix the many manifestations of problems we’ve had recently: stock market crashes, surging oil prices, real estate collapse, mortgage melt down, etc. Unfortunately, John McCain does not have the requisite experience, and has repeatedly said he’d have to find someone else to help him with this issue. McCain didn’t support the Bush tax cuts, then he did. Then he said he wanted to cut government spending to stimulate the economy. Unfortunately in the short run cutting spending would harm the economy and make it more likely to push the country into recession, or at least offset the benefits of any tax rebates. Unfortunately, as he’s said himself, he just doesn’t know enough about economics.

3. Mitt stands for strong families, and he wants to appoint judges to the Supreme Court that will read the Constitution as the framers intended it, not in a manner that creates new laws without a democratic process. Not all the other candidates have this same priority. McCain in fact has gone up against his own party on the issue of judges being appointed, and has a very spotty record on issues of family values.

4. Mitt stands for legal immigration, but “turning off the magnet” on illegal immigration. McCain very recently proposed a bill that would have allowed illegal aliens to stay in the country indefinitely. His own party rejected this stance only a few months ago, but he seems ill-at-ease saying he was wrong.

We’ve got lots of positive parts of our own message to spread without getting distracted by McCain’s attack. I’m positive that staying on message will benefit Mitt incredibly (as it’s done in Florida so far), while indulging in mud wrestling allows the media to just report on the wrestling match. I’m hoping that the media really gives it to McCain today for his intentional misrepresentations, but even if they don’t, let’s keep on task and keep spreading our own message.

Share on Facebook

Share This

There are tons of John McCain supporters out there. Frankly, I am baffled by the fact there are more than a 10% of the electorate supporting the man. Following is one of dozens of examples where John McCain isn’t very sure of what he knows. I don’t know if this is simply a sign of memory lapses or what. I honestly believe it is both a memory lapse issue and a sign he really does not know much about economics. His huge face-plant the other night in the debate, when asked a simple question involving the President’s Group on Financial Markets in the executive branch, was stunning.

My question to all you John McCain supporters: What are we all missing with Senator McCain? You all obviously still support him, but why don’t these enormous missteps cause you to change course to support someone else in the race?

McCain Said That Because Of His Experience On The Senate Commerce Committee, He Wouldn’t Need A Vice President With Economic Experience.

“Noting that he also later ran the Senate Commerce Committee, Mr. McCain said in the interview that he would feel no need to select a vice president with expertise in economic policy to balance his own foreign-policy experience.”

(David Leonhardt, “Fiscal Mantra For McCain: Less Is More,” www.nytimes.com, The New York Times, 1/26/08)

You will recall that he challenged Tim Russert in the debate for using one of his quotes that he really does not know much about economics. Then, check this:

However, In November, McCain Said He Would Choose A Vice-President Who Understands Economics Because He Doesn’t.

“On at least one occasion, McCain has raised the matter himself. On Nov. 10, while traveling through New Hampshire on his Straight Talk Express bus, McCain was asked what he would seek in a vice presidential candidate if nominated. After mentioning the ability of a potential running mate to replace the president, McCain said, ‘You also look for people who maybe have talents you don’t, or experience or knowledge you don’t, as well.’ ‘What are those qualities that you don’t - that you wouldn’t mind complementing?’ asked David Brooks, a columnist for The New York Times. McCain paused. ‘Uh, maybe I shouldn’t say this, but, somebody who’s really well grounded in economics,’ he said.”

(Sasha Issenberg, “McCain Tested On Economy,” The Boston Globe, www.boston.com, 1/26/08)

Senator McCain’s “straight talk express” is turning and over-correcting at every turn these days. “Straight talk”? I don’t think so.

~ Vic

Share on Facebook

Share This

This was not one of McCain’s better moments during last night’s debate.

Here’s the complete video of Miss Teen South Carolina’s flopping during her beauty pageant. It’s hilarious how badly she demonstrated her ignorance. If you haven’t seen this, you gotta watch it.

McCain performed in a similar manner. Let’s say together, “John McCain doesn’t understand economics.”

(This is a pro-Ron Paul production, but Mitt fans can enjoy it just as much.)

Share on Facebook

Share This

Share on Facebook

Share This

Mitt Romney stands head and shoulders above McCain when it comes to the economy.

End of story. Well, okay, here’s some background.

McCain and the Bush Tax Cuts

John McCain is constantly being asked about why he voted against the Bush tax cuts (twice), an act Mitt called “failing Reagan 101.” His explanation is that the cuts needed to be accompanied by cuts in spending. He continues to justify his actions with this rationale, prompting George Will to encourage Governor Romney to make the following question central to his campaign: “When the Bush tax cuts expire in 2010, who do you want to be President: Mitt Romney or John McCain?” I personally am hoping to keep my taxes low, thanks, so I’m voting for Mitt. But it’s clear: tax cuts help the economy, and restraining spending in the short term will harm the economy. McCain gets an F for his first (and second) tries at Reagan 101.

Mitt vs. McCain on Today’s economic issues.

But there’s more to this story. The economy is teetering on the brink of potential disaster. We’ve all seen the signs: financial markets tumbling; oil prices surging; a mortgage market meltdown; banks writing down huge amounts of assets; American manufacturing jobs being lost to overseas competitors who aren’t playing fair; the trade deficit; the weak dollar. The list goes on and on, prompting the head of the Federal Reserve to nearly use the R word (recession) in front of Congress a few days ago, and prompting the Fed to slash rates early yesterday. But hope is not lost: we have a presidential candidate with experience in the economy, having made his investors hundreds of millions of dollars. And he has a few good ideas.

Mitt’s Economic Stimulus Package

To these troubling economic signs Mitt Romney has responded with a stimulus package of nearly a quarter of a trillion dollars. It includes rebates like President Bush’s plan, but also exempts seniors from paying social security taxes. And in a stroke of pure genius that’s truly Reagan-esque, highlighting why we need a man of Mitt’s expertise and intellect in the White House, Mitt’s plan also includes a proposal that would give the economy the kick in the shorts it needs: it would allow companies to expense capital purchases for two years.

More »

Share on Facebook

Share This

I wrote the following blog back on Jan 5th . . . and the issue has only become more and more important. However, with the worldwide stock market crashes today (here too) and Wall Street likely to suffer as well (the Dow Futures look dismal) it bears repeating now. I think it’s becoming clearer and clearer that we NEED Mitt Romney at the helm of our country and economy. And we absolutely DON’T NEED John McCain anywhere near the control panel of our economy . . . . :

So “The Economy” constantly ranks up there among the top issues/concerns among voters of BOTH parties. With the Iraq issue being far less polarizing of late, the Economy, Illegal Immigration, and Healthcare look to be the key issues for the general election. Additionally, this New Hampshire Fox News Poll last month had the Economy and Illegal Immigration as the two most important issues to GOP voters with the Economy being by far the most important issue.

Additionally, unlike many issues listed, the status of the economy is something that touches EVERY American in some real and powerful way (as opposed to Iraq, or abortion, or foreign policy, or those without healthcare insurance).

In the financial world, the news of an imminent recession has been dominating the headlines (including the sinking strength on Wall Street). Just yesterday, Bush met with the economic advisors and the Fed Chairman to discuss these issues. The press conference afterwards was not terribly positive.

So is a McCain presidency a good fit for a good economy? Back in 2003 many didn’t think so. His new economic plan isn’t impressing many. And let’s not forget what the Club for Growth thinks about McCain’s economic record (Their main points are that “John McCain is No Supply-Sider” and that he has a “Tenuous Record as an Economic Conservative”)

Those are the words of others . . . but what does McCain think of himself in relation to the ecomony?

Just one month ago, a piece from the Boston Globe (who has since endorsed McCain) led off with this:

SALEM, N.H. — John McCain, who happily volunteers he doesn’t know much about economics . . .

Later in the piece:

McCain stood before a line graph showing the increase of the alternative-minimum tax, a low-budget campaign’s alternative to the PowerPoint presentation Mitt Romney uses when talking about economic policy, a subject McCain has said he feels he is unknowledgeable and that filling the void would be a priority when selecting a vice-presidential nominee.

So McCain wants to bolster the ticket because he’s weak on the #1 issue and at a time that recession is a real concern? Sounds scary to me.

Yet further:

Like Mike Huckabee, who joked recently that he “may not be the expert that some people are on foreign policy, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night,” McCain suggested to reporters Monday that American consumer culture offered a short cut to expertise. “The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should,” McCain said. “I’ve got Greenspan’s book.“

Sorry John, but if you haven’t gotten a grasp of economic issues after 71 years of life, and after 3+ decades in politics, something tells me that you’re not ever going to “get it” . . . even if Greenspan’s book is really good.

If we really are headed toward recession in the next few months, do we really want John McCain as our nominee to put up against Hillary or Obama? I think we have much better options to have at the TOP of the ticket.

Update Jan 14th:
I was just watching Road to the White House 2008 on C-Span (DVR’d) and John McCain, in a Saturday town hall meeting in MI, got a question about the economy and the sub-prime mortgage crisis.

He promptly said he knew it was a problem, but didn’t know much about the details and so he brought up Carly Fiorina, former CEO of Hewlett Packard to discuss the issue. After she answered the question, McCain mentioned that he wasn’t an expert on every issue, but that he’d get people like her to advise him. I mean, this is a major issue in our economy and every other POTUS candidate can grasp it enough to say a few nice lines. Even Huck can sound conversant on the issue!

Update Jan 20th:
McCain is showing his lack of depth on economic understanding . . . and is proposing policy based on his faulty logic. It’s SCARY folks!

I also noticed that the Romney campaign has been reading my blog
Jeff Fuller

Share on Facebook

Share This