OUR NATIONAL DEBT

national debt
Showing posts with label 2012 Presidential Candidates. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2012 Presidential Candidates. Show all posts

Thursday, October 18, 2012

Obama's Chances Of Getting Re-elected Is Growing Slim

By Jared Allebest

Conservative Samizdat


There are several signs that Barack Obama's campaign is in serious trouble and that there is a strong likelihood that he will not be reelected on November 6th, 2012. With Obama not winning the last two debates and running a poor campaign with no new vision or plans, using lame attacks on Romney over Sesame Street's Big Bird or Romney's comments about getting a binder that contains a list of women he could hire, his campaign is starting fall apart.


One of the best indicators that Obama's campaign is in trouble is RealClearPolitic's electoral map which shows Mitt Romney having an electoral lead for the first time in the 2012 general election: 

T

The second piece of evidence that shows Obama is in real trouble for November 6th is polls show that Mitt Romney has opened up a 7 point lead in the crucial swing states. That is part of the reason why there has been a strong shift in the polls and electoral map that has swung in Mitt Romney's favor. Mitt Romney is gaining support amongfemale voters
Even Bob Beckel, a well known liberal on Fox News admits that the writing on the wall doesn't look good for Obama.

While Obama's chances of wining are slipping away from him, it doesn't help the President that Bill Clinton is admitting that Obama hasn't fixed the economy like he promised. One can speculate if this is pay back for Obama throwing Hilliary under the bus or not, but such speculation doesn't really matter. What matters is Bill Clinton's comments are going to matter with moderate Democrats and independents who need a perfectly good excuse to ditch Obama at the ballot box.

 Obama only has 19 days to keep his campaign from sinking. He has one more debate left with Mitt Romney. However, given that Mitt Romney has performed well in the last two debates, only a miracle would help Obama now.

See more of Jared Allebest / Conservative Samizdat here.......... 


Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Who Won The Second 2012 Presidential Debate?

By Jared Allebest

Conservative Samizdat


The first indication that Mitt Romney won the debate came immediately after the event had ended and CBS News released this tweet: 


After that, other results started to come in. CNN posted these results on television: 
MSNBC had a panel of undecided voters who gave their opinion that Mitt Romney won tonight's debate.


Fox News had a similar panel in which Frank Luntz found out that they were also swayed to support Mitt after the debate.

I think it is safe to say that the immediate reaction is that Mitt Romney won tonight's debates. Further polls that will come out in the next few days will most likely confirm this. 
This has been one of the most aggressive and fierce Presidential debates I've ever seen. I think everyone benefited from watching the debates tonight even if you are a hard core Romney or Obama supporter. I learned alot about Obama and Mitt from this debate. For the undecideds, it looked like this debate was influential in who they will ultimately vote for on November 6, 2012.
See more of Jared Allebest / Conservative Samizdat here........... 

Monday, October 15, 2012

6 Things Obama And Romney Could Learn From The UFC For The Next Debate



By Jared Allebest
Conservative Samizdat
Obama is currently cramming for the next Presidential debate on Tuesday in order to make up for his terrible performance in his first debate with Mitt Romney and Joe Biden's odd and rude debate with Paul Ryan. Meanwhile, Mitt Romney knows he won't face a pacified Obama in the second debate and is preparing for an Obama who promises to be more aggressive with Mitt. 
While Mitt Romney and Barack Obama are preparing for the debates, I'd like to offer some lessons on debating from an unlikely source: the UFC. Here's some lessons the candidates could learn from the UFC.
1. Take Your Training Seriously: As any UFC fighter or Coach will tell you, be serious about your training and train hard. Apparently, Obama didn't train hard or seriously in his first debate. As a result, his lack of preparation and not taking it seriously was obviously apparent. If UFC President Dana White could offer advice to Mitt Romney and Barack Obama, he would probably tell them, "If you want the f***ing belt, train like you f***ing want it."
2. Stick To The Game Plan: Many UFC coaches and training will tell you that sticking to the game plan as established in the training sessions will increase your likelihood of wining in the Octagon. Apparently, Obama didn't stick with his prearranged game plan that in the first debate:  
In an extraordinary insight into the events leading up to the 90 minute showdown which changed the face of the election, a Democrat close to the Obama campaign today reveals that the President also did not take his debate preparation seriously, ignored the advice of senior aides and ignored one-liners that had been prepared to wound Romney.
The Democrat said that Obama's inner circle was dismayed at the 'disaster' and that he believed the central problem was that the President was so disdainful of Romney that he didn't believe he needed to engage with him.

'President Obama made it clear he wanted to be doing anything else - anything - but debate prep,' the Democrat said. 'He kept breaking off whenever he got the opportunity and never really focused on the event.

'He went into the debate armed with a number of one-liners to throw at Romney, including at least two about Romney not caring about 47 per cent of the country. But he decided not to use them.'
The Democrat, who is aligned with the Obama campaign and has been an unofficial adviser on occasions, said that David Axelrod, Obama's chief strategist, was stunned that the President left the stage feeling that he had won the debate.

'To his credit, the President believes that debates are about substance rather than performance. He felt that his argument about the direction this country should take was much stronger than Romney's. Unfortunately, that's not the way modern debates work.'

During his debate preparation in Henderson, Nevada, Obama broke off to visit a campaign field office. There, he joked with a volunteer about how his advisers were 'keeping me indoors all the time' to practice. 'It's a drag. They're making me do my homework.'
By playing it safe and letting the judges score the fight rather than going for a decisive knock out, Obama may have thrown away his chances of winning the election. Will Obama stick to his advisor's game plan in the second debate? That remains to be seen. 
3. Its All About Cardio: You can be the strongest fighter in the world but lose many fights if you are not able to sustain your energy throughout the entire match. In watching the debate, Obama appeared to me to come out strong but gassed out shortly after the debate began. You can see it when Obama tells Jim Leher, the moderator, "Jim, I -- you may want to move onto another topic." To me, that was an admission from Obama that he was losing the energy to stay in the fight with Mitt. To make matters worse, Romney took advantage of that lack of preparation and sucked out whatever remaining energy Obama had left by keep throwing those laser guided punches.
Another piece of evidence that Obama had no stamina for the first debate was that he never maintained eye contact with Romney. He could not look Romney in the eye which revealed that he could not muster the confidence or energy to defend his own record. By contrast, Romney kept his gaze on Obama which made Obama appear weak, small, and not at all presidential
Given Obama's lackluster performance at his first debate, does Obama really have the stamina to go toe to toe with Mitt Romney for another 1 hour round with Mitt? Can Mitt Romney repeat his performance at the first debate a second time in his second match with Obama? If both candidates want to win, they must be able to look strong, sharp and have the energy to endure the brutal debate. Neither one can afford to gas out in this match.
4. Don't Let It Go To The Judges: Dana White, the President of the UFC, has consistently told fighters to not let the fight go to the judges because victory is left in the hands of someone other than you. In his first debate, Obama clearly was willing to let the debate be decided by the judges, in this case, the American people. The American people overwhelmingly thought Obama lost that debate. In contrast, Mitt Romney didn't play it safe but came out swinging. That's why he won the debate. 
I didn't see the debate live and so when I was reading and watching the post-debate news, the media made it appear as if Romney gave Obama a beatdown. When I finally saw the debate, Obama didn't perform as badly as the media portrayed him to be but that Romney gave a perfect debate in terms of technique and style and Obama simply wasn't ready for it at all. Romney picked Obama apart with precise and hard punches. When the debate ended, the judges, the American people, clearly gave Romney the victory in that debate.
5. Be Selective With Your Punches: This lesson comes from the Vice Presidential debates and I think both Obama and Romney should review the tapes of this debate in preparation for Tuesday's debate. Its a simple and basic lesson but the Obama campaign apparently hasn't learned this lesson yet. 
I am 100% positive Peggy Noonan doesn't watch the UFC but she makes a great point about confusing strength with aggression. In the UFC, one can be strong and not need to be aggressive to win a fight In contrast, you can be aggressive and still end up losing the fight. Joe Biden was wildly aggressive towards Paul Ryan but there was no strength behind his attacks. He was throwing haymakers but not landing any punches on Mitt's running mate: 
Joe Biden came out swinging at Paul Ryan, flailing wildly and landing a few punches on his own jaw as well as his opponent's. He showed the kind of spirit and populist anger that President Barack Obama was so conspicuously lacking and has cheered up many demoralised Democrats.
Obama campaign advisors are openly stating to the media that Obama will be like Joe Biden in the next debate. Obama should becareful in with that strategy since Biden attempted to have a bar fight with Paul Ryan but ended up losing because Paul Ryan's debating style is much like Mitt Romney's in terms of executing patient, precise and hard punches against his opponent. One commentator correctly named the Biden-Ryan debate The Bully v. The Wonk.
Mitt Romney could learn a thing or two from his young Vice Presidential running mate in reviewing the debate tape of the Vice Presidential debate. It will help him review the fundamentals of debating that he executes so well. It will also help Romney in terms of how to be on the defensive when Obama starts throwing his punches and how to return fire. Although both men are known to be well informed policy wonks who love to get deep into the details, I think Paul Ryan is much better than his older in finding that balance of educating the voters with facts and details while landing the hard punches on his opponent.
6. What Happens After The Debate Is Just As Important As What Happens During The Debate: Its clear that Obama didn't take the debate seriously when preparing for it. However, sometimes UFC fighters can make up for their loss by how they act after the fight. About 99% of the time, most UFC fighters are humble and pensive about their losses. Rarely do they get cocky about which can diminish the way the fans view the fighters. For Obama, he negatively influenced the way Americans look at him when it was revealed that the President thought he won the first debateimmediately after he left the stage. To make matters worse, Obamastill thinks he won the debate and claims that people will judge him as the winner if they read the debate transcript. In this day and age, I don't think anyone reads transcripts anymore. I don't think making that statement helps Obama at all. 
Obama also went after Mitt Romney after the debate had debate had ended by calling Mitt Romney a liar and running ads about Sesame Street. I think the American voter wasn't amused by Obama's post debate behavior and it will hurt him in the long run. 
In contrast, Mitt Romney simply went out on the campaign trail as if victory was natural to him. It also made him look very Presidential. This will help him tremendously in building the momentum for November 6th and sharpening the contrast between himself and Obama.
It may appear that the UFC and Presidential debates have nothing in common but by reviewing these basic lessons, a Presidential candidate can be well prepared for a debate. Obama needs to learn these lessons badly while Romney simply needs to review them in preparation for Tuesday's debates.
What other lessons from the UFC do you think Romney and Obama could learn in getting ready for the debate?

See more of Jared Allebest / Conservative Samizdat here...... 


Wednesday, August 29, 2012

Mitt Romney Officially The GOP Nominee At The GOP Convention




By Jared Allebest
Conservative Samizdat

 Today, Mitt Romney officially became the Republican nominee. They conducted a final delegate tally and he received 2,061 delegates which is well above the 1,144 delegate needed to become the nominee. 
Its been a long journey for Mitt Romney who ran for President in 2008 and like Reagan, decided to make another run for the White House. He fought hard in each of the primaries in the 2012 election and built a strong momentum that helped him win Super Tuesday. He endured tough debates and took on multiple Republican challengers. Mitt Romney had to endure attacks on his faith and his successful career by people within the GOP party. Finally, Mitt Romney was able to get enough delegates needed to win the GOP primaries.  Looking back on the 2012 primaries, Mitt Romney mastered the fundamentals of running for office and that's why he's the GOP nominee to go head to head with Obama.
I have heard and read comments from some people who are still unhappy with him as the GOP nominee. There were numerous attempt to stop Mitt Romney. Each primary was an opportunity to stop Mitt. Republican voters had alternatives to choose from if they didn't want to vote for Mitt. However, Mitt proved himself to be an effective, smart and \superior candidate who deserved to win the nomination. 
Looking forward to the election in November, Mitt Romney is a serious threat to Obama. Obama has been relentless in attacking Romney and has burned through alot of money to unsuccessfully take him down. Mitt Romney has been just as aggressive with Obama as he has with his GOP competitors in the GOP 2012 primary. Mitt Romney has also been an aggressive fundraiser for which Obama may not be able to compete with him since due to the amount of money Barack spent during the summer against Mitt. 
Based on Mitt's experience in the private and public sector, looking at how he campaigned in the 2012 primaries, how well he's done so far,  picking Paul Ryan to be his VP and going after Obama, Mitt Romney will be our next President in 2012. 
P.S. I want to thank fellow Mitt Romney supporters and bloggers and volunteers in helping him become the GOP nominee. I have admired you hard work and dedication. I also want tell you how awesome the people behind Mitt Romney Central are and that they have done a great job keeping people informed about Mitt Romney. Good job everybody!

See more of Jared Allebest / Conservative Samizdat here.................................................................

Saturday, August 11, 2012

Breaking: Paul Ryan is Mitt Romney's VP!!!

By Jared Allebest

Conservative Samizdat


Back in the early days of the 2012 election, there were talk of the possibility of Paul Ryan running for President and he denied any plans of throwing his hat in the ring. Yesterday, rumors starting swirling like a F5 tornado all day today about who Mitt Romney's pick would be. MSNBC and CBS declared late last night that the VP was Congressman Paul Ryan. However, Mitt Romney himself confirmed that Paul Ryan is the VP on the U.S.S. Minnesota.


Having Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney's VP is a logical and bold choice for Mitt Romney. Lets go through each of those reasons.
Paul Ryan is a logical choice for Mitt Romney since the economy is still the top concern for American voters. He just doesn't talk about fixing the economy and reforming the government, he has actually put forward concrete plans. Paul Ryan's “Roadmap” is a fabulous plan to reduce our national debt. It is a bold, innovative, controversial and smart plan to head off the entitlement time bomb that America faces. Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan share a vision of how to fix our economy. Paul Ryan liked Mitt's economic plan since a lot his ideas were similar to Paul Ryan's.
I think everyone, including libertarians, should be at least intrigued, if not excited, about a Romney/Ryan ticket because there is a legitimate complaint that American has been more focused on fixing problems abroad than at home. A Romney/Ryan ticket would be a strong indication that Mitt Romney plans to really focus on the problems here in America rather than abroad.  Moreover, by picking Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney is attempting to offer the American people the starkest and most interesting choice on domestic policy that Americans haven't seen in a very long time. If we were back in the 1980's, this would have been a Reagan/Kemp ticket.
Moreover, the ticket is a devastating blow to Obama when it comes to the issue of the economy. As we all know, Obama is weak on the economy because he's never taken the economy seriously. Moreover, Obama and the Democrats haven't passed a budget yet and will be the first President in history not to have passed a budget.
The Romney/Ryan team is an interesting and historic ticket given that it is a Mormon/Catholic ticket.  Its also a historic ticket because both religions have experienced discrimination in the US. There was a time that it was unheard of for a Catholic or a Mormon to be on a major ticket. This is a strong indication that we have come a long way since the 1960's when it comes to accepting a candidate based on his religion.
Picking Paul Ryan should appeal to religious conservatives since both men are pro-life. Moreover, Catholics have been turned off by the way Obama mislead the Catholic Church on the contraceptive issue. Its also a strong attempt to go after the Catholic vote. 
Romney's choice is should also be appealing to the TEA party conservatives. Paul Ryan has been a rising star for this emerging section of the Republican party. He's been called the intellectual leader of the Republican party. By picking Paul Ryan, Romney may be trying to find a balance between Establishment Republicans and the Tea Partiers. I think Romney succeeded in finding this balance. 
The Romney/Ryan ticket is an excellent challenge to the Obama/Biden ticket. Both the Presidential and Vice President will be a must see event. For a good preview of what a Ryan/Biden debate might look like, watch Paul Ryan take down Timothy Geithner. 
One vulnerability that Mitt Romney faces is that  Paul Ryan has been on record criticizing RomneyCare. But he has also been very vocal in his belief that his running mate will repeal ObamaCare.
Mitt Romney has made a very wise choice in selecting Romney. It is a bold and exciting ticket. Its a ticket that emphasizes Romney's focus on the economy. This is a smart move since it gives America a real clear choice about which direction we want to take on the economy. Its a perfect and serious challenge for the Obama Campaign. Way to go Mitt Romney for picking Paul Ryan!!!

See more of Jared Allebest  / Conservative Samizdat here ........................................................... 

Friday, August 10, 2012

Why The Priorities USA Ad Just Made The 2012 Election Even More Important


By Jared Allebest

Conservative Samizdat


Mitt Romney has put out a campaign ad hitting back hard on the controversial Priorities USA ad which is causing problems within the Democratic party. Watch below:

 



The Republican Party also went after the controversial Priorities USA ad with a devastating ad of their own: 



As Mitt Romney and the RNC ad points out, the Obama campaign shows that has a serious character problem, especially when it comes to honesty. We know that Obama has been dishonest in the past and there's strong Obama campaign may have been illegally communicating with this SuperPac and are lying about it. Thus, its fair to wonder about what other lies Obama might be telling us. Furthermore, if Obama is reelected, there's a good chance that Obama will continue to lie to the American people. 
As a result, its fair to say that a vote for Obama means all of the following: 
  1. The voter has no problem with Obama lying to the American people in the past (see Solyndra, Operation Fast and Furious, etc.)
  2. The voter has no problem with Obama lying to you now (See Priorities USA ad)
  3. The voter has no problems with the fact that the Obama campaign may be breaking the law with the Priorities USA ad.  
  4. The voter has no problems with Obama's hypocrisy in complaining outside campaign groups but is caught collaborating with them.
  5. The voter has no problems with Obama's surrogates lying to you (See Harry Reid's false claim that Romney hasn't paid taxes for 10 years)  
  6. The voter is fine with the Obama campaign promising to be the most transparent administration ever only to lie about it. 
  7. The voter is perfectly fine with another four years of Obama lying to him or her.
But we also have a deeper problem here with this Priorities USA ad. Its not just Obama's character problem that is a problem. There is strong evidence that the Obama's potentially illegal action. The significance of this fact is that it shows that he's willing to do whatever it takes to hang on to power. Mitt Romney's ad mentions alludes to this problem when he the ad asks, "what does it say about a president’s character that tries to use the tragedy of a woman’s death for political gain?”
It is becoming increasingly evident that Obama is willing to do whatever it takes to hold onto power. As we have seen with history and current events, things don't turn out well when a political leader bitterly clings to power. In fact, its a bad omen of things to come for a country unless the politician is removed from power early on. We have that chance in 2012.
Usually, a when a scandal like this hits a political campaign where they are caught lying to the American people and potentially breaking laws, its OVER for that candidate.However, there doesn't seem to be much of a outcry from the American people A country can survive if the citizens have zero tolerance for this kind of behavior from a politician. However, a country cannot survive for long if the citizens themselves tolerate this kind of immoral and potentially criminal behavior from its leader. 
The Obama team has tried to frame this election as a choice of electing a president who will make the government provide everything you want or a President who will provide only what the Constitution will allow. Mitt Romney is trying to frame the election as a choice between four more years of economic sluggishness or a new President who will revitalize America's economy. However, regardless of how these candidates want to frame the choices presented to the American people, the real issue before the American people is character. Whether Obama likes it or not, this scandal has just made this election about a choice between a man with questionable character and a man with a squeaky clean character. The choice should be obvious to the American people. When the American people are presented with these options, its OVER for the candidate with the questionable character.
Yet, if we elect Obama, we are admitting that we are fine with a President who lies and breaks laws. It also a reflection of us since it means that we as a society are OK with this behavior and that its OK for people to behave this way. If such behaviors are tolerated by its leaders and the public, then we deserve a society and a country where such behavior becomes the everyday norm.
This election has just become more important than ever.

See more of Jared Allebest / Conservative Samizdat here..... http://conservativesamizdat.blogspot.com/


Wednesday, August 1, 2012

Mitt Romney Launching Four Day Bus Tour Ahead Of GOP 2012 Convention



By Jared Allebest
Conservative Samizdat

With the Mitt Romney campaign launching a "Mitt's VP app" and encouraging supporters to donate money to the campaign with the possibility of meeting the new VP, announcing a bus tour two weeks prior to the GOP convention in Tampa, Florida is adding more fuel to the fire of speculating who he will pick as his VP: 
But beginning August 10th, Romney will ramp up his campaign operation with a splashy four-day bus tour targeting the largest media markets in several of the states that will decide the November election, CNN has learned.
And in a show of force and party unity, Romney will be joined at each stop by prominent Republican officials and campaign surrogates.
Some details are still murky, and Republicans cautioned that they are subject to change, but on August 11th, Romney will hit three of Virginia's biggest population hubs - the Washington, D.C. metro area, Richmond and Norfolk - before heading down to North Carolina the following day.
On Aug. 13, the Monday after the Olympic Summer Games finish in London, Romney will arrive in Florida for campaign stops in Jacksonville, Orlando and Miami.
Romney aides are also scouting multiple campaign venues in Ohio for later that week, knowledgeable Republican sources told CNN. Other states may also be added to the itinerary that week.
"Sounds like V.P. week," said one Republican familiar with the schedule, who did not want to be identified revealing the campaign’s plans. “Hitting the big markets in the big states. It just makes sense.”
found some tiny additional details of the bus tour: 
A campaign aide could not immediately confirm what states Romney is expected to visit on the trip. According to CNN, the bus tour will take Romney to the Washington area as well as Richmond and Norfolk, Va., on Aug. 11. The next day, Romney is expected to hit the swing state of North Carolina, with the final leg of the tour expected to bring him to Jacksonville, Orlando and Miami, Fla., on the last day of the London Olympics.
While all of the details of the bus tour hasn't been released, you can be sure that people will try to figure out who the VP is based on the path of the tour bus. That's why the Romney campaign is keeping things under wraps and the details vague. 
Some people are speculating that Tim Pawlenty or Bob McDonnell based on the scant details that we do have. While those names have been mentioned as potential running mates for Mitt Romney, I don't think it will be either men.

See more of Jared Allebest / Conservative Samizdat here........................


Tuesday, July 31, 2012

Obama's Potential Strategy To Attack Mitt's Faith Won't Work


By Jared Allebest

Conservative Samizdat


The last time there were rumors that President Obama was going to go after Mitt Romney's religion, he got slammed hard by Jon Stewart





Once again, there is new speculation that Obama's surrogates plan to go after Mitt Romney's faith since none of Obama's attacks on Mitt are working:
Anyway, attacking Romney on Bain hasn't proved to be effective in any polls, but there is no reason for Obama to stop.  Again, what else does he have? Newsweek is doing its part this week by calling Romney a wimp, a la 1987. That petty insult didn't work against George H.W. Bush, but again, it shows the left is mentally exhausted. It reveals how trapped and empty it has become.
Obama will figure out a few more promises he can make to lure voters to the dole, but that has become old hat. I really believe there are meetings at the Obama campaign and at the White House (what's the difference?) where the question on the table is, "What can we give away to whom that will get us votes?" As the Obama campaign exhausts itself, having misspent money and failed with its messages too early in the election cycle, it is near the bottom of the barrel. The final 100 days are here and all Obama can do is attack — but he needs some new material.
I look for the "September surprise" to be Mormonism on trial. At first the attacks will come from marginal surrogates, then the reliable half-cocked usual suspects among Democrats in Congress.  (Somebody cue Debbie Wasserman Schultz.)  Next, a member of the left's apologencia from the MSM will write a cerebral, somber piece saying the tenets of Mormonism are fair game, and then we will be off to Slimytown. Romney will be confronted with this or that Mormon practice or theological position, the late-night comics will weigh in and Obama will have a distraction that could linger while he hopes for a break or something external to change the trajectory of the race.
However, going after Mitt Romney's faith is not a winning strategy for Obama: 
new Pew survey released Thursday found that eight in 10 voters either are either completely “comfortable” with Romney being a Mormon or simply don’t care. White evangelicals are slightly more skeptical, but the poll found that it made no difference in how ardently they support Romney.
Further evidence indicates that attacking Mitt's faith would be a losing strategy for Obama: 
Not only do voters have huge information gaps when it comes to candidates’ religions, but they are not interested in learning more. Another Pew survey released July 24 found that only 16 percent of voters want to know more about Romney’s faith. There are a couple of explanations for that fact; voters may think they already know what candidates believe, or they might not find it particularly relevant to who they plan on voting for.
The latter is certainly the case for a large number of religious voters. Most voters surveyed say the economy is their primary issue, and other evidence suggests that Christians, Jews, and Mormons alike are more likely to vote for a candidate’s policies instead of basing their decision on his or her religion. (The same is true for other groups: immigrants, for example, consistently rate the economy as more important than immigration.) Sectarian political identification may have been alive and well in the JFK era, but it seems to have evaporated since then.
Regardless if the speculation that Obama or his surrogates will go after Mitt is true or not, its not winning strategy for Obama. Obama has unleashed all of his arsenal on Mitt and none of it has stuck. Obama might be desperate enough to try this attack on Mitt's religion just to win another term but the American people will see right through it.

See more of Jared Allebest here...................

Friday, July 13, 2012

Romney May Announce VP Pick Very Soon


By Jared Allebest
Conservative Samizdat

After many months of speculation about who Mitt Romney's running mate will be, we are about to find out very soon:


Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney acknowledged on Tuesday he is considering naming his choice to serve as vice presidential running mate earlier than usual to better compete with President Barack Obama.


As they work from a short list of leading Republicans, Romney and his advisers say they are weighing whether he should announce his choice some weeks earlier than the traditional time of around the Republican National Convention, which is to be held in Tampa in late August.


The reasoning, advisers say, is that two candidates would be able to raise more money and engage Obama and Vice President Joe Biden in battle with polls showing Americans closely divided on whether to pick the Republican challenger or Democratic incumbent in the November 6 election.


Picking the choice early could also serve to guarantee some positive news coverage at a time when Romney is under fire from Obama over whether he should release more financial information about his wealth.


The subject of when to announce the pick was brought up by a voter at a lively town hall meeting Romney held in a high school gymnasium in Grand Junction, the largest city in western Colorado. The man asked whether Romney would announce his vice presidential choice before the convention.


"I can't give you the timeline for that. That's a decision we'll make down the road. Nor can I give you the individual," said Romney.


We do have a time line for when Mitt will announce his VP. In a campaign fundraising e-mail blast sent out today by Mitt Romney's campaign, the announcement will come sometime between now and the GOP Convention in Tampa, Florida:


I am very excited to find out who Mitt's VP will be. I can't wait!


See more of Jared Allebest / Conservative Samizdat here............
http://conservativesamizdat.blogspot.com/

Sunday, June 24, 2012

Is There A Rift Between Ron Paul & His Supporters?


By Jared Allebest 
Conservative Samizdat

With the GOP convention in Tampa, Florida coming up soon, there has been a lot of discussion about what Ron Paul supporters will do at the convention. Its very possible that things will go off without a hitch or we could see some political skirmishes take place at the convention.

       

As a result, I am worried about the convention and I do not trust the Ron Paul supporters who say that there will be no disruption at the GOP convention. I don't trust Ron Paul when he has told CNN’sNewsroom that he doesn't support or like the idea of disrupting the GOP convention. 
However, what does want is to have the ability to he  insert his political agenda and beliefs into the GOP platform. Ron Paul was never in the 2012 Presidential race to win. He has admitted on Fox News that he doesn't want the power of being the President but simply wants to influence the Republican Party's platform. He was only in it for the sole purpose of amassing enough delegates so that he can use his delegates as a way of getting the Republican party to adopt his libertarian views on foreign policy, economics and other issues.
That is why people like Rick Santorum sent a loud and clear message to Ron Paul and his supporters that they should not mess with the GOP platform. There are rumors that Mitt Romney might add Ron Paul's "Audit the Fed" campaign to the GOP platform. I'm open to adding that to the GOP platform but any other request from Ron Paul supporters to add more items on the platform is asking too much. 
There's also speculation that Paul's supporters might try to nominate him to be the Mitt Romney's Vice President and override whoever Romney picks to be his VP. While it is a possibility, it would do major damage to the GOP party as well as Mitt Romney and would hinder their efforts to make Obama a one term president. On the flip side of the coin, pulling a stunt like this would result in a major backlash against Ron Paul and his son Rand Paul and make a major dent in their political future. So as much as Ron Paul people may dream about this possibility, it is not a realistic given the consequences of what would happen if the Ron Paul supporters were successful in nominating Dr. Paul to be the V.P.
Ron Paul knows this. While Ron Paul supporters are itching for a fight at the convention and are making things difficult for the GOP party as evidenced by the lawsuit against the Republican Party by some supporters, he's being more cooperative with the GOP party than his supporters are: 
While the congressman from Texas didn't win any nominating contests this year, he amassed some 200 delegates to send to the convention, his campaign says. His backers have done that by winning extra delegates at state conventions that occur after primary voting, an often-overlooked process.
That strategy caused some in the GOP establishment to fear that Mr. Paul would try to hijack the convention through parliamentary stalling tactics and anti-Romney protests. Yet when his supporters announced a three-day Paul festival, including a 77th-birthday party for the candidate, at the state fairgrounds in Tampa the weekend before the convention, his campaign announced that he wouldn't attend. His focus instead is on the nascent official event organized with the GOP convention—which, meanwhile, hasn't decided yet whether to approve the festival that Paul backers are organizing on their own.
Mr. Paul's decision to play nice with Mr. Romney has already gotten him at least a few kind words. "Gov. Romney has a lot of respect for Dr. Paul and the energy his supporters bring to the process," Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul said. That's a notable contrast from 2008, when Mr. Paul opted to hold his own convention in Minneapolis as counterprogramming to the official convention in neighboring St. Paul. This year, both the GOP establishment and Mr.Mr. Paul seem to have found a way to satisfy their interests and present a more united front.
Given that I am not a fan of Ron Paul, I can't help but be skeptical about the different path Ron Paul is taking with his supporters. I honestly don't know what to make of it. Part of me hopes that this is a real and genuine split and tension between Ron Paul and his supporters about what to do and how to behave at the convention. The skeptic in me thinks otherwise. 
The only thing to do is wait and see how the convention unfolds.


See more of Jared Allebest here...http://conservativesamizdat.blogspot.com/

Conservative Samizdat Samizdat (Cамиздат-Cам-"self, by oneself"; издат-"publishing house"): Translates to mean self published. Providing conservative news and opinion since 2009.

Thursday, June 21, 2012

Mitt Romney Making History In The Fundraising Battle Against Obama

By Jared Allebest
Conservative Samizdat

Mitt Romney had a great day yesterday in raising a campaign record of money raised in a single day. He also continues to do well in raising funds for his campaign:
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, since becoming his party’s presumptive nominee, is now taking in cash from donors who had backed his onetime rivals, campaign finance reports show.


The $23.4 million Romney raised last month included $634,495 from 225 contributors who earlier gave the maximum $2,500 to the presidential campaigns of former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum, or Texas Governor Rick Perry, according to a computer-assisted analysis of Federal Election Commission data. Romney faces President Barack Obama in November.


In addition, casino executive Sheldon Adelson and his family, who had contributed $21.5 million to a political action committee supporting Gingrich, gave $10 million in June to a pro-Romney super-PAC, Restore Our Future. Texas businessman Robert Brockman, who earlier had given $50,000 to a pro-Perry super-PAC through one of his companies, gave $1 million through three other companies to the super-PAC supporting Romney, a former Massachusetts governor.


Mitt Romney is making history as he runs for President. He's the first LDS candidate to successfully become the official candidate of a major party. He's also making history of financing his campaign entirely on funds raised by private donors:


Several donors gave $5,000 to Romney, who became the first Republican since Richard Nixon in 1972 to raise private money for the general election. Following the Watergate break-in scandal that led to Nixon’s resignation in 1974, Congress offered public financing to candidates who agreed to forgo raising private money, and every major-party nominee except Obama in 2008 took the federal funds. This year both campaigns will be funded entirely with private money.


Romney entered June with $17 million in the bank, one-sixth of the $109.7 million amassed by Obama. That gap was narrowed as the Republican National Committee reported $60.8 million cash on hand, more than double the Democratic National Committee’s $29.7 million.


In May, the first full month since Romney was assured of winning the nomination, he received $7.1 million and the RNC $25.9 million from a joint fundraising committee. Obama brought in $8.7 million and the DNC $13.3 million from a similar fundraising apparatus, which allows donors give larger contributions at one time.


Mitt Romney is also making history as being the first candidate to have the ability to raise more money and outspend the incumbent President:


A senior Obama campaign strategist, briefing reporters on condition of anonymity, said earlier in the day that Romney would best his earlier total — and predicted that the Republican's hauls, plus unrestricted super-PAC cash, would mean "we're going to be the first incumbent outspent."The super-PAC phenomenon has been a recurring source of handwringing at Obama HQ in Chicago. Aides say they worry that those deep-pockets will unleash an unprecedented blitz of negative ads—and that comparable entities on the Democratic side lack the cash to counter effectively.


"I think [Romney's] going to have a $100 million month this month between he and the RNC," the strategist said. "I think you are going to see another huge month from him."


"Given Sen. Kerry outraised Bush two to one in the first couple of months after he won the nomination, I think Romney is going to continue to have big months. Combined with that with the super PAC stuff, we're going to be the first incumbent outspent," the strategist said.


Its clear that Romney is doing well when it comes to the battle of campaign financing between these two men. But the real winner is this game is the supporters of Mitt Romney, conservativism and the Republican party who are the ones helping Mitt make history as we open our wallets and donate to him. We must continue our efforts of making phone calls for him, donating for him and doing other things like blogging for Mitt, writing letters to your local newspaper and putting signs in your yard. All of your efforts, in whatever way you have contributed so far is helping. Keep up the good work everyone!

See more of Jared Allebest / Conservative Samizdat here......  http://conservativesamizdat.blogspot.com/

Mitt Romney Campaign Hauls In Record Campaign Donations In One Day

By Jared Allebest
Conservative Samizdat

Mitt Romney had his most successful campaign fundraiser in his 2012 campaign in which the team set a record for cash raised in one day:
Mitt Romney enjoyed what campaign officials described as his single best day of fundraising yet, which hauled in between $6 million and $8 million for the candidate as he made a finance swing through Michigan on Wednesday.
"Michigan has been great," John Rakolta, a national finance co-chair of Romney's presidential campaign, told attendees during a fundraiser Romney headlined at a local Marriott here. "Today, we will exceed every single event that has been held for Gov. Romney from the beginning of the campaign. So we have set a new record tonight in terms of fundraising."
Taking the stage, Romney praised the supporters who had written checks to his 2012 bid. According to the campaign, more than 500 people contributed at least $2,500 a piece to attend tonight's reception just outside Detroit. Individuals who contributed $10,000 got to meet and pose for a photo with the Republican nominee, while $50,000 scored folks an invite to a private dinner with Romney.
"It's hard to write a check to a politician. It's harder to get a friend to do it," Romney said, praising the "herculean work" of his national finance team.
He suggested donors weren't just giving to support his campaign, but rather to get America back on track.
"I realize that this is not about me. You are not giving a check to me. You're not giving a check to the Republican Party. You are concerned about America. This is about our country. And like me, you are of the view that if we stay on the path we are on, that America will be something far less than what it could be," Romney told supporters, as they munched on appetizers. "You're trying to make an investment in America's future that will put us on the road to greatness again. And so I salute you in this mutual quest we have."
Mitt Romney is correct. A donation to his campaign is an investment in our country by supporting a candidate who will help restore our economy, put people back to work and reducing the national debt. Keep those donations coming in for Mitt Romney! 
See more of Jared Allebest here.... http://conservativesamizdat.blogspot.com/ 

Sunday, June 17, 2012

How Do Mormons Feel About The U.S. Constitution?


By Jared Allebest
Conservative Samizdat
The United States Constitution is the single most important document in America. It has historical, philosophical, legal and political significance. Moreover, there is no document like this in the world. As a result, it has evoked many different responses from people all over the world ranging from the positive to the negative. Some people look to the Constitution with nothing but respect and admiration while others look on it with scorn and disgust. 
Many people wonder what the LDS perspective is towards the U.S. Constitution since Mormons were not always treated well in American history and were denied the protections it promised in the document. Although the LDS faith was not in existence when the Constitution was drafted, Mormons are well known for their patriotic dedication to the Constitution and the founding fathers: 
Latter-day Saints have long been regarded by people outside their faith as among the most patriotic citizens of the nations in which they reside. Nowhere does this perception exist more strongly than in the United States of America. Yale University humanities professor Harold Bloom is typical of non-Mormon intellectuals and academics in his description of Latter-day Saints as the "most American" of all religions (The American Religion, Simon & Schuster, 1992). During the 20th and 21st Centuries Latter-day Saints have typically been over-represented among U.S. Senators, Representatives and Governors.
And yet, there were no Latter-day Saints among America's "Founding Fathers." The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was founded on 6 April 1830, a full 54 years after the signing of the Declaration of Independence, and 43 years after the Constitutional Convention of 1787. There were Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Quakers, Dutch Reformed, Lutherans, Huguenots, Methodists and even a Unitarian and a few Catholics among the nation's Founding Fathers... but there were no Mormons.
Nor did the Founding Fathers have the opportunity to join the Church when it was finally organized in 1830. All but one of the Founding Fathers had died by then. Charles Carroll of Maryland was the last surviving signer of the Declaration of Independence to pass away: on 14 November 1832. He was a 93-year-old Catholic living in Baltimore, Maryland at the time the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was organized, and he died before Latter-day Saint missionaries went to his city.
Suffice it say, Latter-day Saints did not have an opportunity to participate in the founding events of the new nation, and the Founding Fathers never had the opportunity to become Latter-day Saints. (How the Founding Fathers would have viewed the Saints is another question altogether. Over 90% of the Founding Fathers remained faithfully within the denominations of their birth throughout their lifetime and never converted religiously.)
Despite the fact that the religion was not in existence when the Constitution was created, members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints think highly of the founding fathers and the Constitution.
Latter-day Saints today regard the Founding Fathers as among the most important, most ethical individuals in history. They believe that the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution are divinely intended documents which were "inspired" (although not the revealed Word of God in the same sense as the New Testament and other scriptures). 
Why do Mormons revere the Constitution? It can be traced back to Joseph Smith. If he were alive today, he would be considered a strong conservative and most likely be labeled a T.E.A. patriot due to his love for the U.S. Constitution. As a result for his love and devotion to the U.S. Constitution, the Prophet outlined the Church's belief regarding governments and laws in general and it become part of LDS scriptures in D&C 134.
However, Joseph Smith and subsequent LDS Church leaders have taught that the U.S. Constitution is a divinely inspired document which is a concept that is rarely taught at any educational level including law schools:
The idea of an inspired Constitution is rare in contemporary public discourse and wholly absent from contemporary constitutional and historical scholarship. Seeking to discern the hand of divinity in America's beginnings, however, was once common not only in popular rhetoric but also among eminent nineteenth-century historians such as George Bancroft. Perhaps even more important is the repeated acknowledgment of divine aid by America's founding fathers. Notably, George Washington frequently expressed gratitude to God for felicitous circumstances surrounding the rise of the United States and chose the occasion of his first inaugural address to recognize the providential character of the framing of the Constitution:
No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand which conducts the affairs of men, more than the People of the United States. Every step by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency. And in the important revolution just accomplished in the system of their united government, the tranquil deliberations and voluntary consent of so many distinct communities, from which the event has resulted, cannot be compared with the means by which most governments have been established, without some return of pious gratitude, along with an humble anticipation of the future blessings which the past [blessings] seem to presage [W. Allen, ed., George Washington: A Collection, p. 461. Indianapolis, Ind., 1988].
LDS teaching and revelation are in harmony with this self-understanding of the founding generation. Latter-day Saints believe that the Lord established the Constitution, not by communicating specific measures through oracles, but by raising up and inspiring wise men to this purpose (see D&C 101:80). This emphasis on the extraordinary character of the American founders—and perhaps, more generally, on the founding generation as a whole—accords with assessments by contemporaries, as well as by later students of the period. Thomas Jefferson, then U.S. ambassador to France, described the Constitutional Convention of 1787 as "an assembly of demigods." More than forty years later, Alexis de Tocqueville, the noted French observer of American society, included the American people as a whole in his praise of the founding:
That which is new in the history of societies is to see a great people, warned by its lawgivers that the wheels of government are stopping, turn its attention on itself without haste or fear, sound the depth of the ill, and then wait for two years to find the remedy at leisure, and then finally, when the remedy has been indicated, submit to it voluntarily without its costing humanity a single tear or drop of blood [Vol. 1, p. 113].
This understanding of the divine inspiration of the Constitution as mediated through the human wisdom of the founders and the founding generation invites the inference that new needs and circumstances might require the continued exercise of inspired human wisdom by statesmen and citizens alike. LDS leaders have taught that the Constitution is not to be considered perfect and complete in every detail (as evidenced most clearly by its accommodation with slavery, contrary to modern scripture; e.g., D&C 101:79) but as subject to development and adaptation. It was part of the wisdom of the founders to forbear from attempting to decide too much; they therefore provided constitutional means for constitutional amendment. President Brigham Young explained that the Constitution "is a progressive—a gradual work"; the founders "laid the foundation, and it was for after generations to rear the superstructure upon it" (JD 7:13-15).
While Mormons believe it to be a divinely inspired document, they do not believe that it is a perfect document. Joseph Smith himself stated that the Constitution was imperfect. Not only do Mormons believe the Constitution to be imperfect, but it is not be given the same kind of respect and reverence scriptures get. Dallin H. Oaks, a well known LDS lawyer and one of the leaders of the LDS Church explained that the U.S Constitution is not to be considered the same as scripture
Reverence for the United States Constitution is so great that sometimes individuals speak as if its every word and phrase had the same standing as scripture. Personally, I have never considered it necessary to defend every line of the Constitution as scriptural. For example, I find nothing scriptural in the compromise on slavery or the minimum age or years of citizenship for congressmen, senators, or the president.
Rex E. Lee, another well known LDS Lawyer and prominent Constitutional scholar explained that while the U.S. Constitution is a divinely inspired document, it is not a divine document like scriptures are:
That is, from the general label "divinely inspired ," some assume that the Constitution is tantamount to scripture, and therefore perfect in every respect, reflecting in every provision and every sentence the will of our Heavenly Father, just as is true of the Book of Mormon or the Doctrine and Covenants. That view cannot withstand analysis. Our Constitution has some provisions that are not only not divine, they are positively repulsive. The classic example is contained in Article V, which guaranteed as a matter of constitutional right that the slave trade would continue through at least the year 1808. There are other provisions that are not as offensive as the slavery guarantee, but they were quite clearly bad policy, and certainly were not divinely inspired in the same sense as are the scriptures. Moreover, regarding the Constitution as tantamount to scripture is difficult to square with the fact that our republic has functioned very well, probably even better, after at least one of its original provisions (requiring United States senators to be elected by their respective state legislatures rather than by the people at large) was amended out of existence by the Seventeenth Amendment.  
As an attorney and as someone who enjoys politics, I am aware of the different perspectives that people have towards the Constitution. Some people view it as a perfect and infallible document while others believe it to be a very flawed, unfair, and incomplete document. I believe that Mormons have a unique, pragmatic, patriotic yet realistic view of the U.S. Constitution and that this document is significant in LDS theology. What is even more interesting is that despite how Mormons were treated in early American history, we have always kept a positive view of the Constitution. 
I hope this short little blog will be helpful as voters continue to learn about Mitt Romney. I believe what I have outlined here reflects Mitt Romney's beliefs about the Constitution since it reflects the majority of the LDS perspective towards that document. Moreover, Mitt Romney has a legal background since he obtained his law degree and business degree from Harvard. 

See more of Jared Allebest / Conservative Samizdat here ......................