comMITTed to Romney!

The numbers are surprisingly poor results for the party now in control of the White House and both houses of Congress…

Click Here for More

Share on Facebook

Share This

It’s not my usual practice to quote the HUFFINGTON POST, but occasionally I stray into the unfamiliar precincts of the Left, to get a feel for what the competition is doing and thinking.
Mr. Littman devoted the first half of his article to venting about how the country’s and the world’s problems can be traced directly back to George W. Bush. He glossed over the obvious facts that Obama has been in charge for about six weeks and the economy is hemorrhaging jobs, the stock market is in free-fall, anti-tax and anti-pork Tea Parties are springing up all over the country and on conservative blogs some people are already starting to wonder whether it’s too soon to start impeachment proceedings, asking the question tongue-in-cheek of course, since so far we haven’t been able to slow down the spending spree, much less stop it and with the anemic number of Pubbies in the Senate, Obama is safe from any attempts at impeachment.

With all that in mind, it is interesting to me that two Republicans are getting a lot of ink recently and not just on the conservative blogs, but in publications like the New York Times, the Washington Post and the Huffington Post.

Those two Republicans are Mitt Romney and “Cot Guy” Jason Chaffetz. Both are known for their personal as well as public frugality, both are tax and budget hawks, favor a muscular foreign policy and want a federal government that is, in Mitt Romney’s words: “Smaller, simpler and smarter.”

In the excerpt from the article, Mr. Littman has some interesting takes on where the Republican Party is and where it needs to go. I don’t agree with everything he says, especially the old lefty trick about “rejecting Republican Party orthodoxy,” but it is instructive to see how even a hard left source like the Huff. Post can see Gov. Romney’s appeal in this time of financial crisis.

~~John Cronin~~

By: Matt Littman
Huffington Post

Now, here’s where today’s Republicans come in: the point isn’t that their new spokespeople are charismatic like Obama; young like Obama; of color like Obama. The point should be that they are sober leaders who can speak with authority on the situation that we are in today, and speak with authority on the changes that should be made so we can get out of this mess. That’s what the American people want right now.

Michael Steele is not an authority on the issues facing the country, and he has proven to be a disaster on TV. Bobby Jindall had a shot, but his ideas were the same old same old, and he was awful on TV, so he’s out, too. Who’s left?

Rudy Giuliani flew off the deep end years ago, and now he’s a punch-line. He’s out. Obviously, the moderates don’t take Sarah Palin seriously. Out. I know Rush Limbaugh is intimidating to the Republicans in Congress, but seriously, folks. He’s out. Eric Cantor, the Congressman, may be a power on the Hill, but he’s putting the Republicans in a deep hole. Paul Ryan is a young Congressman with credibility - maybe he can be the person Republicans need, but he may be too new to be an authority.

There are two that I can think of for the Republicans right now: Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich. The rise of Newt has been well chronicled lately. Newt has more ideas in his head than any other leader out there. But Newt still remains a divisive figure.

And Mitt - well, here’s the thing. Mitt ran a horrible campaign for president. He ran against his own previously stated positions. He ran a campaign that was appropriate for 1988, not 2008. He missed the yacht on what the country was looking for, and he was passed in the race by John McCain.

But Mitt can speak with authority on the economic crisis facing the country. Now, as a Democrat, I don’t agree with much of what Mitt would say. But if I’m a Republican, or one who recently left the Party, I may listen to Mitt, given his previous positions of power in the business world. Certainly, he speaks with more authority than the radical righties on Capitol Hill, who speak of nothing but tax cuts.

If Mitt is willing to reject Republican Party orthodoxy, and I don’t believe Mitt is as “conservative” as he pretended to be in 2008, he may have some ideas that voters would find palatable. This is his opportunity, to be Mitt, the guy who brought health care to Massachussets, the guy who turned around the Olympics, the guy whose father led Michigan and who knows the auto industry.

And so, Republicans, do not look for Obama-lite as your spokesperson. Look to Mitt Romney. He could not answer the call in 2008, but maybe he can do so now. He is your best bet.

Share on Facebook

Share This

There has been talk in some circles that Michael Steele, the Chairman of the RNC, isn’t conservative enough for their tastes. Here is a YouTube vid showing a Michael Steele/Chris Wallace interview where Mr. Steele unequivocally states that “I am a Pro Life Catholic” and takes other conservative stands that should put to rest the idea that Mr. Steele is “squishy” on certain issues very important to us in the center-right area of the political spectrum.

~~John Cronin~~

Share on Facebook

Share This

Along with Mitt Romney, Eric Cantor is another articulate voice of reason in a political culture that has lost it’s bearings. His call for leaner government and tax cuts for the small businesses that generate 70% of NEW JOBS is the way we should be heading, but it’s going to take adding a small army of Republicans to the Congress in 2010 if we are going to start to put the brakes on this runaway freight train called the federal government.

~~John Cronin~~

Share on Facebook

Share This

RNC Chairman Michael Steele Debates Gov. Tim Kaine

Share on Facebook

Share This

The Business and Media Institute has a YouTube of Congressman Tom Price, (R) Georgia, standing outside the internationally acclaimed rocket scientist Nancy Pelosi’s office complaining that when the House was marking up their version of the stimulus bill and reconciling their version with the Senate’s version, the Republicans were barred from the room and no media was allowed.

I like Rep. Price’s chutzpa. Unfortunately there is no embed code for the YouTube vid, so please go over to the site and have a listen.

BTW, is it any wonder the Pubbies are boycotting the Dems on this bill? Would you just go with the flow and vote for a bill when you had been consistently barred from any participation in the process?

~~John Cronin~~

http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2009/20090211135318.aspx

By: Jeff Poor Business and Media Institute

President Barack Obama has proclaimed his administration will be more open than the previous administration. However, his counterparts in the House and the Senate aren’t following suit.

The Washington Post has reported that negotiations between House and Senate Democrats have resulted in a stimulus bill with a price tag of “about $789.5 billion.” This agreement raised the ire of Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., and he went outside of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office to express it.

“My name’s Tom Price and I represent the Sixth District of Georgia and [am] the privileged chair of the Republican Study Committee,” Price said. “It’s now noon on Wednesday. I’m standing outside the office of the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi. The door is closed. We just heard news break there’s been an agreement between the House and the Senate on the non-stimulus bill.”

Negotiators were slated to meet later in the day. However, since news of a deal was leaked to the media, Price questioned if there were “shady deals” going on.

“It’s curious because Republicans were invited to a meeting they said at 3 o’clock this afternoon,” Price continued. “What this means is there are more shady deals going on behind closed doors — without the public, without Republicans in attendance.”

The Georgia congressman had also called on congressional leaders to televise the House-Senate negotiations. However, as much as the press has helped the Obama administration trumpet a new era of transparency, there has been little call from the television media for these negotiations to be televised publicly.

“As the House and Senate move to negotiate the final text of the so-called stimulus bill, I have called on Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to make good on that promise and allow any and all House and Senate negotiations to take place in an open and public forum,” Price wrote in a Feb. 11 blog post for Red State. “By allowing television cameras in the room as negotiations take place, we can provide the transparency American taxpayers expect.”

Price also urged people to visit the Republican Study Committee’s Web site.

Share on Facebook

Share This

http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/republicans_stimulus/2009/02/08/179583.html?s=sp&promo_code=79C7-1

NEWSMAX.COM

Three liberal Republican senators — Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine, and Pennsylvania’s Sen. Arlen Specter — who pledged their support this weekend to President Barack Obama’s massive stimulus bill are drawing the wrath of many conservatives.

As news filtered through the media that a “deal” had been cut with the defecting GOP Senators — giving Democrats the 60-plus votes they need to overcome a Republican filibuster — Republican officials and pundits expressed outrage.

The bolting senators cited soaring unemployment numbers, the country’s worsening recession and the fact they cut about $100 billion off of the Senate Democrats’ proposed plan as key factors for their decision to betray the GOP Senate caucus to join with the Democrats.

But critics note that the Democratic “compromise” plan comes in at $827 billion — $8 billion more in spending than the already bloated House bill that called for $819 billion in new spending. They also note the so-called stimulus bill offers little immediate relief to the economy. According to a Congressional Budget Office report issued last week, only a fraction of the stimulus will be spent in 2009.

Though weekends are noted for slow news cycles, Collins, Snowe, and Specter already are finding they are under hostile fire, lambasted on conservative Web sites throughout the weekend and the subjects of angry calls by many of their constituents, according to reports.

“Arlen Specter is DONE,” wrote a blogger named steelfish on the FreeRepublic Web site. “He won his last primary by less than 1 percent against a real conservative of Pat Toomey. And only because the President Bush came to PA and campaigned for him. He is DONE.”

Specter is up for re-election in 2010. Washington Republican strategists tell Newsmax this weekend that Specter’s defection has sealed the deal: he will face a primary for the GOP nomination.

“We don’t care if we lose the Pennsylvania Senate seat to the Democrats,” one Washington strategist told Newsmax. “Better to remove Fifth columnists from the party.”

The sentiment was echoed in chat rooms and blogs across the web.

“They are frauds. RINOS” Republicans in Name Only, wrote a blogger named Croupier101 on the Fox News blog site.

On TV news shows Sunday, their Republican colleagues distanced themselves from the defecting troika — arguing that the small GOP support for the plan did not suggest Congressional Democrats or the White House sought a bipartisan stimulus.

“This agreement is not bipartisan,” Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., told CBS’ “Face the Nation.”

“I’ve been in bipartisan agreements, many. This is three Republican senators. Every Republican congressman voted against it in the House, plus Democrats. And all but three Republicans stayed together on this. That’s not bipartisanship. That’s just picking off a couple of senators,” McCain said.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, head of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, said the trio’s support must have been disappointing to Obama, who has staked much on his ostensible ability to transcend the partisan divide.

“Having three Republicans, potentially, support it in the Senate out of 535 members of Congress is hardly a bipartisan effort. I think it’s a disappointment — surely must be for President Obama,” Cornyn told “FOX News Sunday.” He added he fully expects the bill to pass “with almost exclusively Democratic support.”

The three were the target of a furious national campaign by liberal groups, who besieged their offices with phone calls and emails urging them to support the stimulus plan. Without Democrats controlling a supermajority of 60 votes in the Senate, the trio’s support was essential in advancing the contentious plan to a final vote next week.

Their help more than likely will result in pushing the stimulus over the finish line.

In a video posted on YouTube, Republican Rep. Ron Paul said the three “caved in and went with the Democrats.”

The former presidential candidate, who has a sizable libertarian following on the Internet, especially among college students, praised his fellow House Republicans for unanimously opposing the stimulus. But he lamented that after eight years of the massive spending done under the Bush administration, Republican opposition was too little, too late.

“It is like they’re born-again budget conservatives,” Paul said. “Where were we in the past eight years, when we could have done something? And you see our last eight years that has set this situation up. So we can’t blame the Democrats for the conditions we have.

“We have to blame both parties and presidents of the last several decades to have generated this huge government.”

The stimulus package, which is expected to come in at about $827 billion when the Senate votes, includes tax cuts and credits and spending on infrastructure, education and other projects that supporters say will create and save jobs.

But critics contend the stimulus is nothing more than a laundry list of political payback to groups that supported the Democrats in the last election. They note that less than 5 percent of the spending goes to infrastructure projects.

Collins said she broke ranks with her party because of the progress congressional negotiators had made on the bill.

“Well, I know that some of my Republican colleagues are unhappy with the position that I’ve taken,” Collins told reporters Saturday. “I hope they will look at the fact that we were able to cut $110 billion of unnecessary spending from this bill. I think that’s a good accomplishment. I also think that it’s important that we do pass a stimulus bill to help turn the economy around.”

But Snowe and Specter have kept a low profile since the deal was struck. Despite their huge role, none made the rounds of the Sunday talk shows. Specter said Friday night that the agreement wasn’t perfect but it was necessary.

That assertion was greeted with wild derision on the Internet and with veiled scorn by other Republican leaders.

Julie Ann O’Brien, executive director of the Maine Republican Party, said she already has received plenty of e-mails from people across the country, the majority scolding the two Senators for their support of the bill.

“We have heard from both sides,” she told FOXNews.com. “We’ve heard from those who are pleased that Sen. Collins, in particular, has been willing to play and negotiate. And there are others who feel strongly that they are not acting like Republicans are supposed to act.”

O’Brien doesn’t anticipate any local political fallout for Snowe or Collins, noting that both won’t face re-election for several years and that voters are familiar with them.

“People know what they’re getting when they vote for them,” she said. “They lean conservative on most issues — that’s why they’re Republicans. But they really do, I feel, do what is right — not politically right but morally right.”

On Sunday, a liberal, union-supported issue advocacy group initially founded in 2005 to rally against President Bush’s Social Security reform plan was praising the three in ads in Maine and Pennsylvania.

“Senators Snowe and Collins have worked with President Obama and other senators to reach agreement on a plan that has support from a broad range of groups, including the US Chamber of Commerce and organized labor,” says the version of the ad in Maine.

“Call Senators Snowe and Collins today at 202-224-3121. Thank them for their leadership and tell them to keep fighting for a plan to get our economy moving again.”

But Collins, at least, has left herself some wiggle room on the final bill that emerges after House-Senate negotiations.

“Well, I know that some of my Republican colleagues are unhappy with the position that I’ve taken,” Collins told FOX News. “I hope they will look at the fact that we were able to cut $110 billion of unnecessary spending from this bill. I think that’s a good accomplishment.”

Yet she conceded that if a bill comes back from the conference committee with the House “once again bloated with wasteful spending and it’s too expensive, then I’ll vote against it.”

Share on Facebook

Share This

I am shocked, shocked, I tell you!! Ahhnoold is backing the “stimulus” bill?? Of course he is. When you are the RINO head of the freest spending state in the Union and have a $40 billion plus deficit to finance, you are going to be out on the street corner at noon, shaking the tin cup. Disgraceful.

~~John Cronin~~

http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/gop_governors_stimulus/2009/02/03/177985.html

NEWSMAX.COM

President Obama plans Tuesday to release a letter from 19 governors, including several Republican governors from large states, supporting the $1.17 trillion stimulus bill now making its way through Congress. The letter is part of an ongoing strategy to put pressure on GOP senators opposed to the deal.

Only four of the 19 governors are Republicans, but their states represent 92 votes in the Electoral College. GOP governors supporting the plan are: Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California; Gov. Jody M. Rell of Connecticut; Gov. Charlie Crist of Florida; and Gov. James H. Douglas of Vermont.

Share on Facebook

Share This

Here is a list of some of the GOP Governors who are on record as saying they will accept federal money from the “stimulus” bill before the Senate. Some of us might want to reconsider our support of these folks as possible VP candidates in 2012. They talk the talk, but they don’t walk the walk.

~~John Cronin~~

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090201/ap_on_go_co/stimulus_gop_governors

NEW YORK – Most Republican governors have broken with their GOP colleagues in Congress and are pushing for passage of President Barack Obama’s economic aid plan that would send billions to states for education, public works and health care.

Their state treasuries drained by the financial crisis, governors would welcome the money from Capitol Hill, where GOP lawmakers are more skeptical of Obama’s spending priorities.

The 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, planned to meet in Washington this weekend with Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and other senators to press for her state’s share of the package.

Florida Gov. Charlie Crist worked the phones last week with members of his state’s congressional delegation, including House Republicans. Vermont Gov. Jim Douglas, the Republican vice chairman of the National Governors Association, planned to be in Washington on Monday to urge the Senate to approve the plan.

“As the executive of a state experiencing budget challenges, Gov. Douglas has a different perspective on the situation than congressional Republicans,” said Douglas’ deputy chief of staff, Dennise Casey.

Not a single Republican voted with the majority last week when the House approved Obama’s $819 billion combination of tax cuts and new spending. The president’s goal is to create or preserve 3 million to 4 million jobs.

Republicans led by House Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio complained that the plan is laden with pet projects and will not yield the jobs or stimulate the economy in the way Obama has promised.

The measure faces GOP opposition in the Senate, where it will be up for a vote in the week ahead.

But states are coping with severe budget shortfalls and mounting costs for Medicaid, the health insurance program for the poor. So governors, including most Republicans, are counting on the spending to help keep their states afloat.

This past week the bipartisan National Governors Association called on Congress to quickly pass the plan.

“States are facing fiscal conditions not seen since the Great Depression — anticipated budget shortfalls are expected in excess of $200 billion,” the NGA statement said. “Governors … support several key elements of the bill critical to states-increased federal support for Medicaid and K-12 and higher education; investment in the nation’s infrastructure; and tax provisions to spur investment.”

Clyde Frazier, a professor of political science at Meredith College in North Carolina, said it wasn’t politically inconsistent for Republican governors and members of Congress to part ways on the stimulus plan.

“For governors, it’s free money — they get the benefits and they don’t have to pay the costs of raising the revenues,” Frazier said. “Senators and representatives get only some credit for the expenditures, and they have to pay the bill.”

That’s not to say Republican governors are entirely enthusiastic about the plan. Some worry about the debt incurred through so much federal borrowing.

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, a former member of the House, said he would accept the stimulus money but would have voted against the bill if he were still in Congress. Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, a former chairman of the Republican National Committee, said he wasn’t sure whether he would accept the approximately $3 billion his state would be in line for.

“Yes, we need some help and we appreciate the help,” Barbour said in an interview. “But I don’t know about the details and the strings attached to tell you if I’ll take all of it or not.”

The most outspoken critic has been South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford, who has warned for months of a steep spike in inflation and a severely weakened dollar if Obama’s plan passed. His state is on track to receive $2.1 billion of the stimulus money; Sanford has not yet said whether he would accept it.

“It’s incumbent on me as one of the nation’s governors to speak out against what I believe is ultimately incredibly harmful to the economy, to taxpayers and to the worth of the U.S. dollar,” Sanford said in an interview. “This plan is a huge mistake and is going to prolong and deepen this recession.”

Sanford outlined his concerns in December when the then-president-elect met with governors in Philadelphia to discuss the stimulus proposal. Sanford said he had heard nothing from the White House since then.

Associates say Sanford, who recently was elected chairman of the Republican Governors Association, has been disappointed in how few of his GOP colleagues have joined him in speaking out against the size and scope of Obama’s plan.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who is widely viewed as a potential presidential contender in 2012, said governors have little choice but to accept the relief being offered. “States have to balance their budgets,” he said. “So if we’re going to go down this path, we are entitled to ask for our share of the money.”

But Pawlenty expressed reservations about the cost of the plan and its impact on the federal deficit, which has already grown to over $1 trillion.

“I’m quite concerned about the federal government spending money it doesn’t have,” Pawlenty said. “We’re on an unsustainable path of deficit spending and borrowing.”

Share on Facebook

Share This

Share on Facebook

Share This

Governor Romney today delivered the following remarks to the House Republican Conference Retreat hosted by the Congressional Institute at the Homestead in Hot Springs, Virginia.

As prepared for delivery

January 30, 2009

Thank you for the warm welcome. And thank you for the vote you took this week. You stood strong. You stood for principle. You put the best interests of the American people ahead of politics. I got some calls yesterday, after the news. They said what I feel. We want you to know that we’re proud of you.

It sure feels good to be in a room full of Republicans who came out ahead on Election Day. You can be proud of your success. And don’t be afraid to remind the President of this: you, too, won your election.

After my own campaign was over, Ann and I just wanted to get away from it all. We ended up in Beijing, about as far away as you can get. We went to the Olympic Games, and one of the events we attended was women’s beach volleyball. I noticed a lot of people looking in our direction, pointing toward us and taking pictures. It’s always nice to be recognized, and I told Ann, let’s be sure to smile and look our best. Ann said, they might like us even more if we got out of the way—Kobe Bryant is standing right behind you.

A few months have passed since the election. It’s enough time to consider the outcome and take stock of our party’s future. I want to make clear that I’m optimistic: our ideas are good, our agenda will make America stronger, and your action this week showed that we have the kind of leaders who will stand up for what they believe in.

I have often been asked what I think the Republican Party must do to recover. What I’ve said is this: My first concern isn’t about our party—it’s about our country.

In fact, the two are closely related. The best way for us to advance the prospects of our party is to do what we know is right for the country. This is what the American people expect of us. And that’s what we should expect of ourselves.

This is a time of hardship and uncertainty for millions of Americans. The question is: whose leadership and ideas will turn things around. And in such a moment, it’s our job to offer the clear answers, the proven solutions, and resolute leadership that will make this country strong again.

The new President and the Congressional majority are having a difficult time doing that. After all, they have a lot of campaign rhetoric to make good on. And they’ve got plenty of special interests to pay back. As the opposition party, we’re entirely free to do what is right for the country. There are certain advantages to that kind of freedom, and I suggest we make the most of them.

That begins with a clear analysis of what’s needed to get the economy moving again. Predictions that we are almost out of the woods, based on the length of prior recessions, are wishful thinking. Americans have lost some 11 trillion dollars in net worth. That translates into about 400 billion dollars less annual consumer spending in the economy.

There’s something else people don’t talk much about: The pool of investment capital—all the money available for new investments, business start-ups, business expansions, capital expenditures, and new hiring. The size of that pool has shrunk by trillions of dollars. This was a huge loss in value, and the effect could be felt for years—in businesses that don’t start up or grow, in jobs that don’t get created.

Given these extraordinary conditions, I am convinced that a stimulus is needed.

So why not just spend and borrow with reckless abandon? Because we’re in a very delicate situation that could easily get worse if Washington does the wrong thing. The package which passed the House is a huge increase in the amount of government borrowing. And we’ve borrowed so much already, that if we add too much more debt, or spend foolishly, we could invite an even bigger crisis. We could precipitate a worldwide crisis of confidence in America, leading to a run on the dollar … or hyper-inflation that wipes out family savings and devastates the middle class.

We’re on an economic tightrope. That’s why it is so important to exercise extreme care and good judgment.

So far, the Democratic leadership hasn’t shown a great deal of that. They’ve passed 355 billion in infrastructure spending, 60% of which won’t be spent by the end of 2010. Billions for electronic medical health records—it’s a fine idea, but it won’t produce jobs for years and years.

Even worse are the liberal payoffs—50 million dollars for the National Endowment for the Arts, hundreds of millions of dollars to the states for STD prevention and education. Until your loud protests got it dropped from the bill, there even was 200 million dollars for the DC Mall. That might have grown some grass, but it wouldn’t have grown the economy. And they’re doing this when the economy is on a tightrope.

It’s still early in the administration of President Obama. Like everyone who loves this country, I want him to adopt correct principles and then to succeed. He still has a chance to step in and insist on spending discipline among the members of his own party. It’s his job to set priorities. I hope for America’s sake that he knows that a Chief Executive can’t vote “present.” He can’t let others run the show. He has to say yes to some things and no to a lot of others.

We need to stimulate the economy, not the government. A true stimulus package, one that respects the productivity and genius of the American people, could lift this country out of recession. And experience shows us what it should look like.

First, there are two ways you can put money into the economy, by spending more or by taxing less. But if it’s stimulus you want, taxing less works best. That’s why permanent tax cuts should be the centerpiece of the economic stimulus. Even Christine Romer, the President’s own choice to lead the Council of Economic Advisors, found in her research that tax cuts are twice as effective as new spending.

Second, any new spending must be strictly limited to projects that are essential. How do we define essential? Well, a good rule is that the projects we fund in a stimulus should be legitimate government priorities that would have been carried out in the future anyway, and are simply being moved up to create those jobs now.

As we take out non-essential projects, we should focus on funding the real needs of government that will have immediate impact. And what better place to begin than repairing and replacing military equipment that was damaged or destroyed in Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan?

Third, sending out rebate checks to citizens and businesses is not a tax cut. The media bought this line so far, but they’ve got it wrong. Checks in the mail are refunds, not tax cuts. We tried rebate checks last year and they did virtually nothing to jump-start the economy. Disposable income went up, but consumption hardly moved. Businesses aren’t stupid. They’re not going to invest in equipment and new hires for a one time, short term blip.

You know, by proposing tax rebates, the Democrats are admitting that relief to families and employers works. Why can’t they shed their ideological bias and give the American people the kind of permanent, broad based tax relief that even they must know will relieve the suffering our country is going through?

Fourth, if we’re going to tax less and spend more to get the economy moving, then we have to make another commitment as well. As soon as this economy recovers, we have to regain control over the federal budget, and above all, over entitlement spending. This is more important than most people are willing to admit. I mentioned the economic tightrope before. There is a real danger that with trillions of additional borrowing—from the budget deficit and from the stimulus—that world investors will begin to fear that the dollars won’t be worth much in the future. They may fear hyper-inflation. It is essential that we demonstrate our commitment to maintaining the value of the dollar. That means showing the world that we will put a stop to runaway spending and borrowing. Senator Judd Gregg is rightly proposing a new bipartisan approach. It should be part of this bill.

Fifth, we must begin to recover from the enormous losses in the capital investment pool. And the surest, most obvious way to get that done is to send a clear signal that there will be no tax increases on investment and capital gains. The 2001 and 2003 tax cuts should be extended permanently, or at least temporarily.

And finally, let’s exercise restraint in the size of the stimulus package. Without restraint, it may grow as the days go by. Last year, with the economy already faltering, I proposed a stimulus of 233 billion dollars. The Washington Post said, and I quote: “Romney’s plan is way too big.” So what critique do they have for the size of the Democrat’s package? I’m afraid they’ve caught a bad case of liberal laryngitis. It’s everywhere these days.

In the final analysis, we know that only the private sector—entrepreneurs and businesses large and small—can create the millions of jobs our country needs. The invisible hand of the market always moves faster and better than the heavy hand of government.

The difference between us and the Democrats is this: they want to stimulate the government, and we want to stimulate the economy.

Government does have an obligation to address some of the abuses we’ve seen in the markets, particularly in the mortgage finance market and the mortgage guarantee sector. But when markets work as they should, when they are effectively and efficiently regulated, free markets create jobs and boost incomes.

As Republicans, we remain the confident voice of limited government and free enterprise. These principles are going to face another test when it comes to healthcare.

We should be first to propose a Republican plan to bring health insurance to all Americans, one based on market dynamics, free choice, and personal responsibility. I think what we did in Massachusetts is a good model to start from, but whatever direction we take, let’s not simply react to what the Democrats do. Their own plan would undoubtedly create a vast new system of costly entitlements and bureaucratic dictates, burdening the people and threatening the economy. Americans will be looking for a better alternative. Let’s give it to them.

Let’s also defend the rights of workers—against coercion and intimidation. The working people of this country should be able to unionize the way their fathers and mothers did – by free choice and secret ballot. The Democrats’ plan to take away those rights would result in economic calamity. More than that, it’s an insult to the dignity and common sense of working people. We’re going to defend the freedom of workers and the rights of labor. Interesting, isn’t it, which party stands up for workers and which one jumps for union bosses.

Ours is the party of freedom and enterprise, and we are the party of life. I know that I’m not alone in wondering why our new president, in the earliest hours of his administration, directed that international groups that promote and provide abortions be funded with American taxpayer dollars. Is that really what the world needs, more abortions?

In our party, we don’t have perfect agreement on the life issue. But with an administration that is firmly on the side of abortion, that answers to the most extreme wing of the abortion lobby, our duty is clear. We should be a voice for moderation and compassion. And even if the administration will say nothing on behalf of the child waiting to be born, we must take the side of life.

The new administration has also gained the favor of liberal commentators by pledging what it calls reform in the treatment of detainees who have taken up arms against America. And of course, President Obama says he will close Guantanamo.

But I wonder if he noticed that some of the men already released from Guantanamo have turned up in new al Qaeda tapes? I also wonder where the President now intends to send the terrorists we capture. Will he send them to nations that will release them to kill Americans? Or will he send them to US prisons, to infect our own criminal population?

There may be more steps like closing Guantanamo—and they will receive the predictable applause from law professors, editorial boards, and others who have no responsibility for protecting American lives. The Washington Post last week announced President Obama’s actions with this headline: “Bush’s War on Terror Comes to a Sudden End.” I hope this President knows that the terrorists are still fighting and killing Americans, and that they plan to keep killing Americans.

Here, too, our party will speak confidently. We have no greater duty than a vigilant defense.

This great party of ours has seen setbacks before. They have never defined us. For our party, I believe this will be remembered as the time when we demonstrated the strength of our convictions, when we defended the foundations of America’s prosperity, security and liberty.

America will be tested. It’s not for us to choose every new test that may arise. But we’re entirely free to choose how we will face those tests. We’ll face them as you did this week. And we’ll face them as Republicans have done before in our finest moments—with the clarity and the confidence of those who put their country first.

That is the work you have undertaken as Republican members of the 111th Congress. You gather in smaller numbers than last year, but you have ideas, energy, and convictions—and the resolve to lead America to a better future. The comeback for our nation and for our party starts with you. You can count me as an ally in the work ahead. Thank you.

Share on Facebook

Share This

Share on Facebook

Share This

Politico reports in this article that the public outcry over internationally acclaimed rocket scientist Nancy Pelosi’s dufus insistence that the state’s need to economize should cause Congress to include contraceptive funding in the “stimulus” bill has caused Obama to place a phone call to Henry Waxman, asking him to drop the provision from the bill.

It’s not that Obama is having second thoughts about paying back Planned Parenthood for helping get him elected, it’s just that putting the money into this bill is kind of, well, embarrassing.

Speaking of embarrassment, Nancy Pelosi’s tin eared call for the government to help reduce the number of poor people, not by growing the economy, but by preventing poor people from having babies, helped provide the public opinion momentum to get this funding removed from the bill.

Chalk one up for the loyal opposition and one down for an increasingly inept and amateurish administration.

~~John Cronin~~

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/18024.html

It was the love affair that could never be, President Barack Obama and congressional Republicans.

The two sides came together en masse Tuesday for the first time since Obama took the oath of office. Despite the niceties, both sides walked away spurned.

In many ways, Obama told the assembled Republicans everything they would want to hear, according to people in the meetings.

He promised to make tough spending choices in his first budget blueprint — “everyone will have to take a haircut,” he said. He told them he wouldn’t increase the size of government just to increase the size of government. He even teased House Minority Leader John A. Boehner about his golf swing.

Likewise, Republicans left the meeting with kind words for the president — but still resolved to oppose him on the floor Wednesday when Democrats bring his massive economic stimulus plan up for a vote.

Beneath the polite give and take between the new president and the newly disempowered Republican caucus, there was a sense that Obama’s honeymoon had already begun to ebb. For the first time, it seems, congressional Republicans, shut out of power and seemingly cowed by the harsh verdict of voters and wild popularity of the new president, are finding their voice, rallying in large numbers against the centerpiece of Obama’s agenda.

Share on Facebook

Share This

WWW.COMMITTEDTOROMNEY.COM

Back by popular demand, our nationally acclaimed Committed To Romney live chat on Inauguration Night will be held at 9 PM Eastern, Jan. 20. Stop by the site that night to trade your opinions, insights, observations, one liners and clever repartee about Democrats from the safety of your own home.

Watch Democrats spend money and brave the long lines for hours in order to get a 30 second glimpse of the Obamas. Meanwhile, we Republicans, temporarily shut out of the corridors of power, will save our money and our energy as we watch the Democrats party like its 2012!

~~John Cronin~~

Share on Facebook

Share This

WWW.COMMITTEDTOROMNEY.COM

Back by popular demand, our nationally acclaimed Committed To Romney live chat on Inauguration Night will be held at 9 PM Eastern, Jan. 20. Stop by the site that night to trade your opinions, insights, observations, one liners and clever repartee about Democrats from the safety of your own home.

Watch Democrats spend money and brave the long lines for hours in order to get a 30 second glimpse of the Obamas. Meanwhile, we Republicans, temporarily shut out of the corridors of power, will save our money and our energy as we watch the Democrats party like its 2012!

~~John Cronin~~

Share on Facebook

Share This