Posts Tagged ‘Mitt Romney’

Pump, pump, pump it up!
Pump that bullshit economy up!
Keep, Keep, Keep it afloat!
Keep that false economy afloat!
Ben Bern-yank-me, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, reminds me of a cheerleader chanting this cheer as he relentlessly pushes the print button on the printing press. Please don’t confuse the wild look in his beady eyes with anything resembling a spark of monetary responsibility. This guy is nothing but a puppet on a string for the Obama administration.
The latest announcement from The Fed is nothing more than a propping mechanism intended to temporarily keep the economy from collapsing and aid Barack Obama with his re-election efforts. From the beginning, this administration has been thick as thieves with the banksters. The fascist back scratching favors that Obama did for them are being returned with repeated rounds of “quantitative easing” from the central bank. This disgraceful disregard for the economic future of our great nation is, in my opinion, bordering on treason.
Here is a little analogy that I came up with to describe the state of the economy and what QE can do for it:
The stew (economy) is on the stove. The pot is there (able workers with a desire to work), the stove top is there (factories and manufacturing facilities), the flame is lit and burning.
Unfortunately, the stew has been scorched because of poor kitchen management (systemic issues with Congress and the office of the President). The meat (jobs) and potatoes (profits) are shriveled and burned beyond recognition. But don’t worry the sous chef (Bernanke) has a gallon of milk (QE) he is going to pour in and create “liquidity”. All of this milk should magically cure the charred meat and shriveled potatoes!
No matter how much milk he pours into that pot, there will not be an edible stew. The basis of that stew is ruined. The pot needs to be scraped clean and new meat and potatoes need to be added. The recipe for stew does not need to be changed, stew has been delicious and essentially the same for a few thousand years. What needs to change are the kitchen help (Congress) who keep walking by and taking a spoon full of the broth out for tasting, never intending on putting more broth in which results in the stew scorching. The chef (the President) thinks he is being clever and can fool the customers. After the stew was scorched, the chef walked into the restaurant and announced to the patrons, “we are proud to introduce our new improved stew” and talked of its deliciousness as the patrons scrunched their noses and spit the stew back into the bowl. The chef ordered his kitchen help to distribute free bread (health insurance, low interest loans, welfare) to the customers and convince them that the stew was actually appetizing now with the bread. The stew is a poor product and the bread will only pacify the paying customers for so long. The chef knows that his stalling tactic will not solve the problems that his kitchen has, but it has bought him a little more time.
It is easy to imagine that a restaurant with this type of kitchen management would go out of business very quickly. So why is it so difficult for people to understand this same logic applies to government?
With every round of QE we take one more step toward an irreversible fiscal disaster brought on by unchecked expenditures by the Federal Government, crushing debt, and inflation caused by reckless monetary policy. The measures being taken by Obama and his administration are temporary measures and are not intended to help a recovery or foster growth, these measures are intended to slow the collapse to a “manageable” speed. Mark my words, if Romney is elected this thing will unravel at record speed as he assumes office….just as it did to Obama when he took office. Obama’s stall tactics have succeeded in keeping the economy from falling apart for 4 years, he will pull the plug on it as he exits. On the flip side, if Obama is re-elected we will begin to hear him call for austerity. It will go over with the entitlement crowd here in the US just as well as it went over with the entitlement crowd in Greece. Obama, who is prone to placating to the welfare warriors, will attempt to jack taxes on the 50% of Americans who still pay them and alienate the small businesses of America even further with heavy taxation, fees, etc.
In my opinion, by 2016 America will be much, much different than it is today, and that will hold true regardless of which one of the two evils gets elected.

LIKE US ON FACEBOOK!

The Nevada Caucus

As I predicted last week, Newt is on his way down. (Hooray!)

The Nevada caucus results are being reported as follows

1. Mitt Romney (50% ish)
2. Newt Gingrich (21% ish)
3. Ron Paul (19% ish)
4. Rick Santorum (10%ish)

 

Mitt Romney- No real surprise here, the guy has been campaigning in Nevada since 2008. He has huge Mormon and LDS support in this state and was the heavy favorite. Give him credit though, he tried his best this past week to alienate and piss off large groups of people. Fortunately for him most of the country doesn’t pay attention or care about the election process, and the poor people that he was busy throwing under the bus are too busy trying to feed themselves to give two shits what Mitt For Brains has to say about them.

New Campaign Slogan:

Mitt Romney 2012: “Because Rush Limbaugh Says The Most Important Thing For Uhmurica Is To Get Obama Out Of Office”

Newt Gingrich- Every time this guy talks his campaign should play “With arms wide open” by Creed. I know you are a swinger and all but quit trying to hug the entire world Newt. (He constantly opens his arms up like he wants a big hug when he speaks, in case you are lost) The Ging is going down, and I don’t mean on a plate of cheeseburgers. He did ok in Nevada but not a strong 2nd, he barely put any distance between himself and 3rd place. For the self proclaimed clear alternative to Mitt “he sure isn’t shaping up” (pun intended) to be much more than a flavor of the moment (part 2). I heard an interesting quote this week, “the difference between the past and history is that the past is what happened. History is the story of what happened.” Newt is a self proclaimed historian (notice a theme of self proclamation). This means he tells stories about events in the past, the stories don’t have to be accurate or true, just repeated often enough and loudly. Apparently adding in some “air hugs” doesn’t hurt credibility either.

New campaign slogan

Newt Gingrich 2012: “We will go to the moon, everyone will be hugged, and the sanctity of open marriage will be protected.”

Ron Paul- Ron came in 2nd in 2008 with 14% of the vote, this go around he got 19%. Not exactly a barn burner performance for Paul, but something to hang his hat on. As The Ging continues his demise Ron will begin to gain favor with some of his defectors, after Ging has spent so much effort trashing Romney it seems unlikely his lost support will go to Mitt. Some will travel to Santorum by way of Glenn Beck’s relentless promotion of him. Ron is poised to gain the most as the campaign moves on, hopefully he’s ready to take advantage. Maine and Minnesota are key places to watch for Paul.

 

New Campaign Slogan

Ron Paul 2012: “You probably haven’t seen me on the news or in the newspapers, but I’m the only guy in this race that is different than Obama.”

Rick Santorum- Bad performance in Nevada for Rick. He is betting on Colorado as his next stand against the Romney machine. If he does not succeed, he is out. Nothing less than 2nd place is acceptable in Colorado for Rick, he is losing his traction from the early states. Despite trying to start arguments over what he feels are great points in the debates, he has continued to show his Big Government, Big Spending tendencies and his feelings of inequality toward homosexuals and opposing religions. Not to mention, he is a warmonger, a Santorum Presidency would undoubtedly lead to war with Iran and likely 1 or 2 other places of his choosing.

New campaign slogan

Rick Santorum 2012: ” Ok, so Jim Bob Duggar didn’t convince you I was the best choice? Hmm, I will declare 5 wars on day one, all without congress! How about that?”

Projection for the coming weeks:

February is considered a slow month for the campaign. I think it is critical, we will potentially see one more candidate drop out in February. I think it will be Santorum. He may hang on until Super Tuesday but I think Colorado will boot him from the race sooner than that. Newt is going to decline, much slower than his first decline, but he’s still on the way down. If Santorum drops out I think it benefits Gingrich the most, his supporters will not go to Ron Paul or Mitt Romney so they take Gingrich de facto. That could offer Gingrich a temporary boost. If Santorum hangs around until Super Tuesday it benefits Ron Paul the most. Santorum takes votes from Gingrich and he is one more voice and pile of money going after Romney. However, if Santorum wins Colorado, he will stay in the race at least to Super Tuesday if not all the way to Tampa. February could be make or break for him. But, there are always surprises. It will be interesting to see what dirt comes out about a candidate next, and whether it sticks.

Florida didn’t shape up quite how I predicted previously in my South Carolina Predictions post, but close.

Mitt Romney- Winner

Newt Gingrich- Second

Rick Santorum- 3rd

Ron Paul- 4th

Brief analysis.

Florida was all about Gingrich and Romney, mostly because somehow Gingrich duped South Carolina into giving him the win, and he had the momentum heading into Florida.

Newt-

I do not expect Gingrich to hold up to the continuing scrutiny that he will receive beyond Florida. He will fall hard, again. The only thing that will prop him up is the fact that he has a few huge donors that are funding a media blitz for him. Undoubtedly Newt has promised these donors some favors if he is the one that gets into office.

Romney

Mitt will continue to show strength but I predict he will begin to lose favorability as the race moves on and some of the Western states begin to effect the race a little more. He will still have a strong showing in just about every state, after all, the guy has a huge pile of cash.

Santorum

I was a little surprised that he didn’t skip South Carolina and campaign harder in Florida. He is working with much smaller funds and it seemed to me that more time and money in Florida would have been better for him. Rick is on the ropes, he keeps saying he is on for the long haul, but in my opinion he is the next to drop out. He did a lot better last month with donation totals and is becoming a more accepted candidate by the electorate. He could hang around until the convention if he does well in a couple of upcoming states, I just don’t think that will happen.

Ron Paul

Ol’ Ronny Boy, he skipped Florida. Not that it seemed any different, he doesn’t get national coverage when he does campaign in a state.  His base continues to build, his game plan for focusing on caucus states is not traditional and has not yielded a Presidential nominee in the past. But keep in mind, Ron Paul is not a traditional candidate, his supporters are not traditional supporters, nothing about his campaign fits the norm. I still feel strongly that he will pull it off against all odds. To my knowledge, there has not been a race for the nomination quite like this before, so a new and different strategy might just work. Keep an eye on Maine who has a week long caucus where Ron will likely pick up several delegates. He has also been campaigning hard in Nevada where large crowds have been highly receptive and his support seems to be swelling.

In summary, I’m starting to believe that if Gingrich survives the next 2-3 states he will stay in until the convention.  That will give us 3 candidates for the nominee at the convention. Paul, Romney, and Gingrich. If Santorum drops in the next month or month and a half, the national media will begin calling for Ron Paul to get out and let Gingrich and Romney fight it out. He will not oblige.

An analysis of the Fox News debate from Monday night. If you have any question on these quotes or paraphrasing please watch the debate, its all on video.

Mitt Romney

1.(Paraphrase) “People Convicted of Violent Crimes Should NEVER Get to Vote Again.”

But they will still have to pay taxes right? Will they be eligible for the military draft? Does a bar fight when you’re 19 justify a lifetime voting ban?

2. “I do not believe that marriage should be between two people of the same gender” (exact quote)

Will you put your personal beliefs aside and govern based on the equal rights of all Americans? Or much like Obama, will you govern from your personal beliefs and use the government to unfairly benefit people that you prefer?

3. (Paraphrase) “I would have supported the NDAA”, “You do not have the right to support groups that do not agree with the Federal Government”

Wow. So now disagreeing with the Federal Government should lead to indefinite detention under the NDAA. At least he promised not to do that, we all know that we can trust promises from politicians.

Rick Perry

1. Confused the Taliban with Al Qaeda.

Called out by Ron Paul for not knowing the difference.

2. “I don’t think its the governments responsibility” in reference to Government intervention in the housing market

Kudos Rick, you sound a little like you’re getting it!

3. “We will have Predator drones on the border patrolling” (paraphrase)

Do we really want unmanned weapons flying around our skies? How long before police use these against “criminals”? This issue could be a slippery slope toward the police state.

Newt Gingrich

1. “All unemployment compensation should be tied to a job training requirement” (exact quote)

Who runs this training program? The federal government? Who funds this Federal job training program? The taxpayer that’s who. Or is this mandated on private industry and/or the individual….like Obamacare.

2. “Andrew Jackson had a pretty clear opinion on America’s enemies, kill them” (exact quote) in reference to Ron Paul saying that we should apply the “Golden Rule” to foreign policy and that we should respect the sovereign territory of other nations.

What if Canada was at war with China? Let’s say that there were Chinese militants hiding in the Rocky Mountains of Colorado? Would we be ok with secret missions flown into US airspace by Canadian forces without permission of America to bomb suspected hiding places of these Chinese militants? Perhaps the suburbs of Denver? Perhaps inside a national park? Doubtful. So why would it be ok for the USA to fly into Pakistan and bomb neighborhoods in pursuit of insurgents without the cooperation and permission of the Pakistani government?

3. “As a historian”

Don’t even need to complete the sentence, Newt we get it, you know a little bit about history and distort it to fit your answers. This is something like the 16th debate, we have all heard that you are a “historian”.

Rick Santorum

1. “Neutrality ends in poverty”, “this is unconsionable”, in regard to the Federal government taking a neutral stance on promoting marriage.

Obviously the Government should be determining what individuals should be doing with their lives. What about parents, communities, churches, and organizations being the mentors who suggest and encourage proper or preferred individual behaviors? Is parenting and mentoring now the job of the government? What about individual responsibility and accountability for your behavior and for raising your children?

2.”sometimes you have to pass laws to keep worse laws from passing” (paraphrase)

Sometimes you have to cut off your nose to spite your face, right Rick? Or is this more along the lines of digging your way out of a hole in the ground? Big Government politicians see the only solutions to the nations problems as being more government oversight and more legislation. Rick needs to learn that often times government oversight is a large part of the problem.

Ron Paul (here are some of his best hits tonight)

1.”I want to cut money, overseas money, I want to cut military money, not defense money”, “I want to bring the troops home”, “there is a difference between military money and defense spending”

2. “Our taxes should be the lowest they’ve ever been since 1913, 0%”

3. “If we have no respect for the sovereignty of another nation it will negatively effect our nation” (paraphrase)

So who won or lost this debate?

Winner, big government neocons who got favorable questions and more air time.

Losers, the American people who got lied to, mislead, and had establishment candidates shoved onto them.

Comment below if you have any argument for any of these points.