Romney the Education Messiah: Central Education Planning Mitt Romney Style: Department of Education Lives

The last time a Republican dabbled in centralized planning of your child's education, we got No Child Left Behind. Conservatives everywhere note this was Bush's power grab for the federal government to take more unconstitutional control of your child's education and have unaffectionately dubbed it "No Child Gets an Education" as education quality continues to fall in the United States. I personally know teachers who left the profession because of the politics of mainstreaming, an element of No Child Left Behind.

I know those who watched the Republican National Convention heard Republicans last night selling Mitt Romney as the great messiah of education in Massachusetts. You can't deny Massachusetts has better schools year in and year out based on national averages. However, as the chief executive of this union of states Mitt hopes to lead one day, there is NO CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY for Mitt Romney to come in and save American schools.

I gathered last night from the Republicans push of Romney the Education Messiah, Romney plans on riding in on a white horse to save the American public school system--which really means he is going to save the Department of Education since you must have a vehicle to have such influence over the public school systems. I remind you the Constitution gives the federal government no authority in regulating the public schools.

"I am running for president to help create a better future. A future where everyone who wants a job can find one. Where no senior fears for the security of their retirement. An America where every parent knows that their child will get an education that leads them to a good job and a bright horizon," Romney stated last night.

Romney didn't go into specifics, but ending the Department of Education wasn't in the speech. Just the build up by friends and fellow Republicans that promoted Romney as a central planner for your child's education.

Clint Eastwood: GO AHEAD, MAKE MY DAY

Clint Eastwood, "Go ahead an make my day." And then he suddenly looks down into an empty hand and realizes Mitt Romney wasn't so Second Amendment friendly. See Massachusetts gun control laws signed into law by one Willard Mitt Romney, where Romney banned semi-automatic weapons and supported other tough gun laws.

Clint Eastwood is left to run for his life. Luckily the old man is in pretty good shape.

Mitt Romney Biographical Video at the Republican National Convention

The Republican National Convention showed a heart warming video about Mitt Romney, his family, and the good things about Mitt Romney.

I have to admit I was impress. Even thought for a minute maybe I should give this guy a second chance. Then I realized this would be like those Obama voters in 2008 voting for hope while ignoring the Romney record. There are many things the Republicans didn't want to share with Americans about Mitt Romney at the Republican National Convention, things that should make most Republicans cringe.

* Romney led a socialized healthcare plan in Massachusetts called Romneycare that soon would inspire Obamacare.

* Romneycare made abortions easier while forcing Catholic Hospitals of Massachusetts to administer the Morning After Pill.

* Romney took Bill Clinton's assault weapons ban and made it tougher banning semi-automatic weapons.

* Romney had his own stimulus plan that looked to green energy companies to create jobs. Those green energy companies failed just like Obama's green energy investments.

* Romney raised fees on gun owners while governor.

* Romney grew government and raised taxes (fees) in order to balance the budget while growing government.

* Romney supports cap and trade, heavy regulations that tax the air of corporations.

* Romney believes in man-made global warming.

* As the Newt Gingrich tried to compare Romney to Ronald Reagan, in 1994, Romney ran against the Reagan record.

* Romney is on record against due process laws in the United States, supporting indefinite detainment of Americans.

* Romney's approval rating as governor was so bad he didn't run for a second term and began mapping out his road to the White House instead. It was 36% when he left office.

* Unemployment went up in Massachusetts under Romney despite a $700 million stimulus plan designed to create jobs.

* Under Romneycare in Massachusetts, insurance premiums went up and the average time to see your doctor increased.

* Mitt Romney pushed a radical gay agenda in Massachusetts and supports gay Boy Scout leaders.

* Mitt Romney supports the Brady Bill, federal legislation that restricts gun ownership against the Second Amendment.

I wonder how come the Republican Party didn't mention these things in the Romney Biographical film aired at the Republican National Convention.

I think we know why.

We Must Hold Mitt Romney's Feet to the Fire

I hear a number of conservatives who know Mitt Romney is a liberal. They understand his history of passing some of the toughest gun control laws in the country.

I hear a number of conservatives who know Mitt Romney is a socialist. They are fully aware of how Romneycare evolved into Obamacare.

I hear a number of conservatives who know Mitt Romney is tyrannical. Against church doctrine, Mitt Romney forced Catholic Hospitals of Massachusetts to administer abortion pills.

I hear a number of conservatives who know Mitt Romney is big government, noting he raised taxes and fees, grew the size of government, invested in green energy initiatives that failed with tax dollars among a whole list of other things.

There is one phrase they always say as they try to convince you that we must get behind and support Romney.

We Must Hold Mitt Romney's Feet to the Fire!

I wonder how they plan to do that? First, Mitt Romney has already been purchased by the bankers like Goldman Sachs. They are his master. This is how politics work. Political donations are purchases for political influence, and we know how the bankers in this country helped ruin an almighty economy by promoting financial irresponsibility and then got their bailout.

How much holding the feet to the fire has the Tea Party been as Republicans in the House under the leader of John Boehner continue to produce trillion dollar deficits each year? Where is this holding the feet to the fire of these Republicans? I saw a lot of blaming Barack Obama for the continued deficits, but the Constitution clearly states Congress is in charge of the spending. Few are holding the Republicans feet to the fire in Congress as they have racked up another $2.6 trillion in deficit spending since Boehner took the reigns.

An English professor once told me not to use cliches. They are meaningless. Guess what?

Holding one's feet to the fire is a cliche. It means nothing. It gives one a false justification, a false sense of hope if you will, about their decision that comes with a sick feeling in one's gut.

We all know Mitt Romney is a liberal, a statist, and a socialist. We all know his Romneycare healthcare bill subsidized abortions and gave Planned Parenthood greater power in Massachusetts. Yet, if we tell ourselves we are going to hold Mitt Romney's feet to the fire, we can suddenly feel better about our vote despite the fact Romney doesn't share our values.

Oh, I know what you are thinking right now. That convention speech was brilliant. No, it was clever marketing where Mitt Romney got on stage and told Americans what he thought Americans wanted to hear. This is a political truth.

My point here is, if Americans really held their politicians feet to the fire, why are we in such a mess? Come November 8, we will take a breath from this political process and most Americans will return to "Dancing with the Stars" or "American Idol" and won't think much about the fire for another four years when they are forced to out of guilty--if you don't vote it's unAmerican. All the while lobbyists and special interests are buying fireproof boots.

Think back to the beginning of the John Boehner era in Congress where they promised an instant spending cut of $100 billion. That never happened and a number of months later the Republicans were pushing the largest debt ceiling vote in history. Did you hold their feet to the fire? Probably not.

Please don't amuse me with these meaningless words anymore.

Mitt Romney and Family Values

The theme tonight at the RNC is to Mitt Romney is a family values man. What are these family values?



That doesn't sound like my family values. It sounds like Ted Kennedy's family values.

Mitt Romney's record is one of forcing religious institutions to administer abortion pills against their religious doctrine. His Romneycare forced Catholic Hospitals of Massachusetts to administer abortion pills.

Once again, are these your family values?

Staples CEO Tom Stemberg "Obama Just Don't Get It": And Mitt Does on Green Energy?

Former Staples CEO Tom Stemberg just exited the Republican National Convention. The theme of his speech was "Obama just doesn't get it" which the Republican minions repeated after him like school children.

Stemberg pointed out how he benefited from Bain Capital and that's all good. He is another example of how the RNC hides Romney's real record.

Stemberg said as Romney was making investments to create jobs, Obama was using tax dollars to invest in Solyndra. I am not going to argue this point.

What I am going to remind you is that Mitt Romney hit hard times as governor of Massachusetts and looked for ways to create jobs. Romney, like Obama, decided it was the role of government to create jobs, so Romney created an Obamaesque stimulus plan where Romney used tax payer dollar in the form of stimulus to create jobs.

The plan failed and unemployment went up. We have seen this model in the United States under Obama as well. In that plan was Romney's effort to invest in green energy companies with stimulus dollars.

Guess what, those companies failed. AlterNet reports:

In 2003, Romney launched the Massachusetts Green Energy Fund, a $15 million project aimed at providing "an opportunity to capitalize on two emerging trends: the growing level of investment interest in clean energy and the importance of Massachusetts' academic and corporate R&D in forming clean energy technology companies," according to its website.
At the time, Romney called the fund a "springboard for the commonwealth by focusing on job creation in the renewable energy sector."

And it is in the nature of venture funds that some of their projects fail. That's why the private sector funds can get such high returns, and why some energy projects seen as having a huge public upside -- from nuclear to solar -- have convinced government officials to back them.

And so while Romney has criticized Solyndra on the campaign trail as a major failure of the Obama administration, his Green Energy Fund invested in several companies that have since failed or not lived up to expectations.

Of the six companies listed in the fund's portfolio, three are either struggling or have shut down completely.

Sounds like Romney just don't get it either.

Gary Johnson Ron Paul Ticket: Ron Paul Could Have the Last Laugh After the Deceitful Republicans Fixed the Nomination Process

As Romney takes the stage tonight, it's important to note Romney and the Republicans are acting a lot like Democrats. Earlier this week we discovered the Romney campaign had gone to court to have Gary Johnson removed from the ballot in certain critical states for Romney. This comes as Romney and the Republican establishment played with convention rules to minimize the impact of Ron Paul's delegates. Of course all this comes after a controversial caucus process where the Republican establishment played hardball against Ron Paul supporters, often failing to follow rules and creating political theater to have the movement discredited like we saw in St. Charles, Missouri.

Yes, the Republicans don't play fair. They cheat the electoral process just like they blame the Democrats of.



We also learned something else this week. There appears to be a battle brewing to keep the Libertarian Party candidate out of the presidential debates. Gary Johnson is much like Congressman Paul, a defender of liberty with a tough record as being a common sense Constitutional conservative as governor of New Mexico. He is someone I can vote for with good conscience, unlike Mitt Romney who pushed socialized healthcare, gun control, and abortion.

For Johnson to get in the debates, he had to be polling at 5%. Now that number seems attainable for Governor Johnson, they are trying to keep him out of the presidential debate by raising the bar. The new number is 15%.

Why is Romney so scared of Gary Johnson? Simple.

Gary Johnson has a record conservatives can get behind. He isn't a big government liberal like Romney.


Johnson entered politics for the first time in 1994, with the intention of running for governor and was advised by "Republican Elders"[16] to run for the State Legislature instead.[16] Despite their advice, Johnson spent $500,000 of his own money and entered the race with the intent of bringing a "common sense business approach" to the office.[23] Johnson's campaign slogan was "People before Politics".[24] His platform emphasized tax cuts, job creation, state government spending growth restraint, and law and order.[3] He won the Republican nomination, defeating state legislator Richard P. Cheney by 34% to 33%, with John Dendahl and former governor David F. Cargo in third and fourth. Johnson subsequently won the general election, defeating the incumbent Democratic Governor Bruce King by 50% to 40%. Johnson was elected in a nationally Republican year, although party registration in the state of New Mexico at the time was 2-to-1 Democratic. As governor, Johnson followed a strict small government approach. According to former New Mexico Republican National Committee member Mickey D. Barnett, "Any time someone approached him about legislation for some purpose, his first response always was to ask if government should be involved in that to begin with."[25] He vetoed 200 of 424 bills in his first six months in office – a national record of 47% of all legislation – and used the line-item veto on most remaining bills.[2] In office, Johnson fulfilled his campaign promise to reduce the 10% annual growth of the state budget.[citation needed] In his first budget, Johnson proposed a wide range of tax cuts, including a repeal of the prescription drug tax, a $47 million income tax cut, and a 6 cents per gallon gasoline tax cut. However, of these, only the gasoline tax cut was passed.[26] During the November 1995 federal government shutdown, he joined 20 other Republican governors who called on the Republican leadership in Congress to stand firm in negotiations against the Clinton administration in budget negotiations; in the article reporting on the letter and concomitant news conference he was quoted as calling for eliminating the budget deficit through proportional cuts across the budget.

On the other hand, Romney governed Massachusetts a lot like Obama governs the country. I have given you a few examples already and as you can see, parallels with Obama are easily drawn when you consider Romney forced Catholic Hospitals of Massachusetts to administer abortion pills, had his own job producing stimulus plan with green energy initiatives. No jobs came from $700 million in state government spending and the green energy initiatives failed. I could go on, but I am not going to. That's not the purpose here.

There is a way to get Gary Johnson to the debates. All he needs to do is ask Ron Paul to join him on the Libertarian ticket and run for Vice President. Could you imagine the impact of that?

The Republican party would be running scared as they deserve after all their shenanigans in pushing Romney to the nomination. It would boost Johnson in the polls and make him a viable candidate since Paul won six states in the Republican primary.

Ron Paul for Vice President. Mr. Johnson, if you want to join these debates, you know what to do. 

Honoring Ronald Reagan at the GOP Convention and Mitt Romney

As I type this, the Republican Party honors Ronald Reagan at the Republican National Convention. It appears to be Newt Gingrich's job, someone who has said some bad things about Reagan, to connect the Reagan revolution to Mitt Romney. Let's not forget Newt Gingrich has said some nasty things about Romney as well.

So as the Republicans try to connect Mitt Romney the liberal to Ronald Reagan the great conservative, let's recall how Mitt Romney tried to distance himself from Reagan.



See how fake all of this is? After honoring Reagan, they dishonored him by connecting him to Mitt Romney. Romney has supported ideas Reagan would never think of.

Remember there was Romney's socialized healthcare plan called Romneycare. I believe Reagan had a thing or to to say about keeping the government out of healthcare.



Ronald Reagan said "government is not the solution to the problem, government is the problem". When the going gets tough Mitt Romney has looked to government to bail him out. There was a the bailout of Mitt Romney's Bain Capital and Romney begged Congress for federal dollars to save the Salt Lake City Olympic games.

There was Mitt Romney pushing gun control. Reagan, the victim of a gun shot, never once considered putting limits on gun rights. Mitt Romney put a total ban on semi-automatic weapons in Massachusetts.

I think you can see now that Romney didn't just distance himself from Reagan, he did a lot of things Reagan would never have done--quite liberal things really.

This is just more marketing of Romney trying to make him something he's not. It kind of reminds me of that Loyd Benson/ Dan Quayle moment where Benson recalls knowing John F. Kennedy and reminding Quayle he is no Jack Kennedy.

Well, I grew up with Ronald Reagan, and Mitt Romney is no Ronald Reagan.

Romney/Ryan Promise to Spend a Boatload of Federal Money

The Republicans cheered. Void of logic, it made for a good soundbite but few in the crowd decided to do the calculations as Paul Ryan delivered another promise.

"In a clean break from the Obama years, and frankly from the years before this president, we will keep federal spending at 20 percent of GDP, or less. That is enough. The choice is whether to put hard limits on economic growth, or hard limits on the size of government, and we choose to limit government," Ryan told the Republican delegates.

Let's do the math. If the gross domestic product is roughly $15 trillion and Romney and Ryan are promising to spend no more than 20%, what they are saying is they will spend $3 trillion a year. That's a boatload of federal dollars. It's money we don't have.

This means the Romney/Ryan ticket are pretty much going to maintain the status quo big government.

Here's the deception in the Paul Ryan speech. According to a revised 2012 fiscal estimate, the federal government will spend about $3.8 trillion. All Romney and Ryan are promising is an $800 billion decrease in spending.

Now remember, Ryan said in his speech last night that we cannot continue to spend money we don't have. This statement shows the Romney Ryan budget will spend money we don't have. At $3.8 trillion, the US racked up another $1.2 trillion in debt and we aren't even to the end of fiscal year 2012 yet. As you can see, the Romney Ryan promise doesn't go far enough with cuts.

Paul Ryan:"We Don't Have Much Time"

They have no answer to this simple reality: We need to stop spending money we don't have.

My dad used to say to me: "Son. You have a choice: You can be part of the problem, or you can be part of the solution." The present administration has made its choices. And Mitt Romney and I have made ours: Before the math and the momentum overwhelm us all, we are going to solve this nation's economic problems.

And I'm going to level with you: We don't have that much time. But if we are serious, and smart, and we lead, we can do this. -- Paul Ryan 2012 Republican National Convention

While I know we need to take Paul Ryan seriously, it's hard to take Paul Ryan seriously. He's right, we don't have much time to get it right. We do need to stop spending money we don't have.

Unfortunately, looking at Paul Ryan's voting record in Congress, Ryan has voted to spend trillions of dollars we don't have. Is Paul Ryan serious or is this meaningless political rhetoric. I think the evidence is in his budget.

In terms of budgets, Paul Ryan's budget may be the lease conservative of budgets that have been introduced by Republicans. Rand Paul introduced a budget that was far more aggressive in cutting spending and balancing the budget. Republicans tossed it.

Ron Paul's budget cut spending by over a trillion in the first year and balanced the budget in five. The Republicans wrote him off as crazy.

Former Republican Gary Johnson who is running for president as a Libertarian has a plan that balances the budget in three years.

Where does Paul Ryan's plan stack up in this mix? The Conservative Club for Growth analyzed the Ryan Budget. It doesn't balance the budget until the year 2040 if it was passed this year.


The Hill writes of the Ryan budget:

The conservative Club for Growth on Wednesday came out against the new House Republican budget proposal authored by Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (Wis.).

The Club faulted the Ryan plan for not balancing the budget quickly enough and for turning off the automatic spending cuts triggered by the failure of last year’s supercommittee.

Ryan and House GOP leaders are facing continued unrest among Tea Party-backed conservatives in the House over the details of the Ryan plan, which does not balance the budget until 2040. The Club for Growth statement could embolden a floor rebellion against the 2013 budget.

“Despite containing several important reforms and pro-growth policies, the Ryan budget falls short in two critical respects,” said Club for Growth President Chris Chocola. “First, it does not balance for decades. Secondly, it violates the Budget Control Act by waiving the sequester.”

Apparently, Paul Ryan tells us time is critical, but his budget says something totally different. In fact, the Ryan Budget barely takes a chunk out of that past four years of spending with Obama in the executive. Two of those years include Republican controlling the House, who, according to the Constitution, has the power of the purse. The Ryan budget adds another $7 trillion in debt in the next nine years.

Paul Ryan Attacks Central Economic Planning and Then Promotes Central Economic Planning

Paul Ryan's speech has been that lone moment where the Republican National Convention was bursting at the seams with energy. For a party that should easily take the White House in November, they don't seem very sure of themselves as they nominate the socialist liberal Mitt Romney--the man who inspired Obama's socialized medicine plan.

Paul Ryan's speech started off slow. It could have been helped with the soundtrack to the move Never Ending Story. After he got through the first half he began sounding better. He began attacking the central economic planning from Washington which has turned the Capital city into the modern form of Mordor.

"It's the exact opposite of everything I learned growing up in Wisconsin, or at college in Ohio. When I was waiting tables, washing dishes, or mowing lawns for money, I never thought of myself as stuck in some station in life. I was on my own path, my own journey, an American journey where I could think for myself, decide for myself, define happiness for myself. That's what we do in this country. That's the American Dream. That's freedom, and I'll take it any day over the supervision and sanctimony of the central planners."

I would love to believe that Paul Ryan is truly sick of central economic planning. I would love to believe that, but Ryan's claim to fame is he is a central economic planner whose own budget doesn't begin balancing the federal budget until 28 years later because Ryan doesn't have the courage to cut the mechanisms that created  Mordor on the Potomac.

We get later in to Congressman Ryan's speech where once again the truth comes out. Central economic planning is only bad when the Democrats are the central economic planners. I remind you, and I think Paul Ryan knows this from the statement above, the power in this Republican wasn't supposed to be centrally concentrated in Washington. Rather it was supposed to be divided within the states which formed the union, thus allowing the freedom Ryan speaks of earlier in his speech.


We can get this country working again. We can get this economy growing again. We can make the safety net safe again. We can do this.

Whatever your political party, let's come together for the sake of our country. Join Mitt Romney and me. Let's give this effort everything we have. Let's see this through all the way. Let's get this done.

Of course Mitt Romney makes no bones about it. It his business experience--his management skills--that he touts as he campaigns to become the supreme executive. Ryan's words contradict when you look at how the Romney Ryan ticket will continue the central economic planning as Romney has adopted the Ryan budget to save the economy as his own.

Republican National Convention Attacks Obamacare Then Pretends Romneycare Doesn't Exist

The Republican National Convention has been a tap dance around Mitt Romney's socialist record as governor of Massachusetts. The lack of energy at the Republican National Convention is evident. It's a stale convention where the Republicans are trying to sell themselves at small government shoving the crap down our throats as they pretend they are good little conservatives. The problem is the Republican nominee Mitt Romney's own craft--a mixture of liberalism and socialism neutralizes much of the argument that can be made against Obama.

Last night the Republicans put a blonde woman and another man on stage. They read through a list of questions attacking Obamacare with each question as the clueless minions in the crowd answered "no".


Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi and Georgia Attorney General Sam Olens asked questions like:


“Tonight, we ask you: Do you want skyrocketing health insurance premiums?” Bondi asked. “Do you want a job-destroying insurance mandate that strangles our businesses? … Do you want the government to steal billions of dollars from Medicare to hide the true cost of Obamacare?”

Of course not. I don't want these things.

Of course the problem is Mitt Romney whose Romneycare pushed insurance premiums upwards to some of the highest in the country, something Glenn Beck touched on many times during the primary. Of course Romneycare had the freedom robbing mandate that forced the people of Massachusetts to engage in commerce by putting regulations over Massachusetts businesses.

The New York Post reported:

In fact, we have already seen the start of this process in Massachusetts, where Mitt Romney’s health care reforms were nearly identical to President Obama’s. Romney’s reforms increased the demand for health care but did nothing to expand the supply of physicians. In fact, by cracking down on insurance premiums, Massachusetts pushed insurers to reduce their payments to providers, making it less worthwhile for doctors to expand their practices. As a result, the average wait to get an appointment with a doctor grew from 33 days to over 55 days. 

Yet Republicans think they have some right, a holier than thou attitude, as their own presidential candidate did exactly what Obama did. As well, Republicans don't want to take any responsibility at all in the equation as Obamacare goes back to 1994 when the Heritage Foundation and the Republicans introduced it as an alternative to Hillarycare.

Oh, but it's good theater for the lazy American sheeple who don't want to know the truth about Mitt Romney's brand of socialism.

Since I don't like Democrat socialism, Republican socialism is just as offensive, which is why I invite you to look at Gary Johnson for president.

Todd Akin Takes Lead Over Claire McCaskill in Latest Poll

Todd Akin's political career was supposed to be over. There was no way he could beat Claire McCaskill after what he said. Right?

With his own party launching a war against Akin's very existence, it appears Akin may be the comeback kid of the year. The latest poll shows Akin isn't doing that bad.


A new poll commissioned by conservative advocacy group Family Research Council offers embattled Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.) quantitative support for him to stay in the race, as it shows him slightly ahead of incumbent Sen. Claire McCaskill.

The new numbers are a stark shift from two polls released last week, both of which showed him far behind McCaskill, in one case by double digits. But the new poll gives him a three-percentage-point lead over McCaskill, with 45 percent support to her 42 percent. 

John McCain: Republicans Need to Launch More War

John McCain's 76 year old bag of bones addressed the Republican National Convention last night. Republicans love putting their losers on stage and McCain was the ultimate in babbling losers. What was McCain's message? Send your sons and daughter off to more war in spite of the fact we can't even win the current wars we are in. More war, more debt, more body bags. I wish his old scraggly body would pick up a piece and go over and fight.

As the United States has militarized the Middle East military bases everywhere, we learn last night from McCain the world is less safe from the words of war hawk McCain. $16 trillion in debt reminded for those attending the RNC by a debt clock in the background they continue to blame all on Obama, and McCain and the war hawks want more war which is more debt.

McCain said, "We are now being tested by an array of threats that are more complex, more numerous, and just as deeply and deadly as I can recall in my lifetime."

See the problem here? With more US military presence in the Middle East--more bases on every corner of Iran in neighboring states--McCain says it's worse. Isn't this what Ron Paul tried to say as they called him crazy?

Details About the Federal Bailout That Saved Mitt Romney's Bain Capital

As the Republican National Convention rolls on, the theme We Built This signifies independence from the federal government to achieve success in America. It appears the Republican Presidential nominee has looked to government for a bailout on more than one occasion. Yesterday, I pointed out once again Mitt Romney turned to the federal government for boatloads of federal money to save the Salt Lake City Olympics.

As speaker after speaker praised Mitt Romney for saving the Olympics, you never heard anything said about where Mitt got his money to save the games.

A couple weeks ago I speculated the reason Romney doesn't want to release his tax returns is because he took a federal bailout to save Bain Capital. Mitt Romney put millions in his pocket without ever paying the taxpayers back. As you can see, this can get embarrassing for the Republican Party as they go around claiming "We Built This" and nominating Willard Mitt Romney as their presidential nominee.

Tim Dickinson has the details about Mitt Romney's unpaid federal bailout that saved Bain Capital. This is not part of the script you are going to hear as we continue to hear speaker after speaker calling Mitt an self-made man.


Mitt Romney likes to say he won't "apologize" for his success in business. But what he never says is "thank you" – to the American people – for the federal bailout of Bain & Company that made so much of his outsize wealth possible.

According to the candidate's mythology, Romney took leave of his duties at the private equity firm Bain Capital in 1990 and rode in on a white horse to lead a swift restructuring of Bain & Company, preventing the collapse of the consulting firm where his career began. When The Boston Globe reported on the rescue at the time of his Senate run against Ted Kennedy, campaign aides spun Romney as the wizard behind a "long-shot miracle," bragging that he had "saved bank depositors all over the country $30 million when he saved Bain & Company."

In fact, government documents on the bailout obtained by Rolling Stone show that the legend crafted by Romney is basically a lie. The federal records, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, reveal that Romney's initial rescue attempt at Bain & Company was actually a disaster – leaving the firm so financially strapped that it had "no value as a going concern." Even worse, the federal bailout ultimately engineered by Romney screwed the FDIC – the bank insurance system backed by taxpayers – out of at least $10 million. And in an added insult, Romney rewarded top executives at Bain with hefty bonuses at the very moment that he was demanding his handout from the feds.

With his selection of Paul Ryan as his running mate, Romney has made fiscal stewardship the centerpiece of his campaign. A banner at MittRomney.com declared, "We have a moral responsibility not to spend more than we take in." Romney also opposed the federal bailout for Detroit automakers, famously arguing that the industry should be forced into bankruptcy. Government bailouts, he insists, are "the wrong way to go."
But the FDIC documents on the Bain deal – which were heavily redacted by the firm prior to release – show that as a wealthy businessman, Romney was willing to go to extremes to secure a federal bailout to serve his own interests. He had a lot at stake, both financially and politically. Had Bain & Company collapsed, insiders say, it would have dealt a grave setback to Bain Capital, where Romney went on to build a personal fortune valued at as much as $250 million. It would also have short-circuited his political career before it began, tagging Romney as a failed businessman unable to rescue his own firm.

"None of us wanted to see Bain be the laughingstock of the business world," recalls a longtime Romney lieutenant who asked not to be identified. "But Mitt's reputation was on the line."

Mitt Romney's Federal Bailout: The Documents**
The trouble began in 1984, when Bain & Company spun off Bain Capital to engage in leveraged buyouts and put Romney in charge of the new operation. To free up money to invest in the new business, founder Bill Bain and his partners cashed out much of their stock in the consulting firm – leaving it saddled with about $200 million in debt. (Romney, though not a founder, reportedly profited from the deal.) "People will tell you that Bill raped the place clean, was greedy, didn't know when to stop," a former Bain consultant later conceded. "Did they take too much out of the firm? You bet."

The FDIC documents make clear what happened next: "Soon after the founders sold their equity," analysts reported, "business began to drop off." First came scandal: In the late 1980s, a Bain consultant became a key figure in an illegal stock manipulation scheme in London. The firm's reputation took a hit, and it fired 10 percent of its consulting force. By the time the 1989 recession began, Bain & Company found itself going broke fast. Cash flows weren't enough to service the debt imposed by the founders, and the firm could barely make payroll. In a panic, Bill Bain tapped Romney, his longtime protege, to take the reins.

In Romney's own retelling, he casts himself as a selfless and loyal company man. "There was no upside," he told his cheerleading biographer Hugh Hewitt in 2007. "There was no particular reason to do it other than a sense of obligation and duty to an organization that had done great things for me."

In fact, Romney had a direct stake in the survival of Bain & Company: He had been working to build the Bain brand his entire career, and felt he had to save the firm at all costs. After all, Bain sold top-dollar strategic advice to big businesses about how to protect themselves from going bust. If Bain & Company went bankrupt, recalls the Romney deputy, "anyone associated with them would have looked clownish." Indeed, when a banker from Goldman Sachs urged Bain to consider bankruptcy as the obvious solution to the firm's woes, Romney's desperation began to show. He flatly refused to discuss it – and in the ensuing argument, one witness says, Romney almost ended up in a brawl when the Goldman banker advised him to "go fuck yourself." For the sake of Romney's career and fortune, bankruptcy was simply not an option – no matter who got screwed in the process.

According to the government records obtained by Rolling Stone, Bain & Company "defaulted on its debt obligations" at nearly the same time that "W. Mitt Romney . . . stepped in as managing director (and later chief executive) in 1990 and led the financial restructuring intended to get the firm back on track."
Romney moved decisively, and his early efforts appeared promising. He persuaded the founders to return $25 million of the cash they had raided from Bain & Company and forgive $75 million in debt, in return for protection from most future liabilities. Romney then consolidated Bain's massive debts into a single, binding loan agreement with four banks, which received liens on Bain's assets and agreed to delay repayments on the firm's debts for two years. The federal government also signed off on the deal, since the FDIC had recently taken control of a bank that was owed $30.6 million by Bain. Romney assured creditors that the restructuring would enable Bain to "operate normally, compensate its professionals competitively" and, ultimately, pay off its debts.

Almost as soon as the FDIC agreed to the loan restructuring, however, Romney's rescue plan began to fall apart. "The company realized early on that it would be unable to hit its revenue targets or manage the debt structure," the documents reveal. By the spring of 1992, Bain's decline was perilous: "If Bain goes into default," one analyst warned the FDIC, "the bank group will need to decide whether to force Bain into bankruptcy."

With his rescue plan a bust, Romney was forced to slink back to the banks to negotiate a new round of debt relief. There was only one catch: Even though Bain & Company was deep in debt and sinking fast, the firm was actually flush with cash – most of it from the looted money that Bill Bain and other partners had given back. "Liquidity is strong based on the significant cash balance which Bain is carrying," one federal document reads.

Under normal circumstances, such ample reserves would have made liquidating Bain an attractive option: Creditors could simply divvy up the stockpiled cash and be done with the troubled firm. But Bain had inserted a poison pill in its loan agreement with the banks: Instead of being required to use its cash to pay back the firm's creditors, the money could be pocketed by Bain executives in the form of fat bonuses – starting with VPs making $200,000 and up. "The company can deplete its cash balances by making officer-bonus payments," the FDIC lamented, "and still be in compliance with the loan documents."
What's more, the bonus loophole gave Romney a perverse form of leverage: If the banks and the FDIC didn't give in to his demands and forgive much of Bain's debts, Romney would raid the firm's coffers, pushing it into the very bankruptcy that the loan agreement had been intended to avert. The losers in this game would not only be Bain's creditors – including the federal government – but the firm's nearly 1,000 employees worldwide.

In March 1992, according to the FDIC documents, Romney approached the banks and played the bonus card. Allow Bain to pay off its debt at a deep discount, he demanded – just 35 cents on the dollar. Otherwise, the "majority" of the firm's "excess cash" would "be available for the bonus pool to its officers at a vice president level and above."

The next month, when the banks balked at the deal, Romney decided to prove he wasn't bluffing. "As the bank group did not accept the proposal from Bain," the records show, "Bain's senior management has decided to go forth with the distribution of bonuses." (Bain's lawyers redacted the amount of the executive payouts, and the Romney campaign refused to comment on whether Romney himself received a bonus.)
Romney's decision to place executive compensation over fiscal responsibility immediately put Bain on the ropes. By that July, FDIC analysts reported, Bain had so little money left that "the company will actually run out of cash and default on the existing debt structure" as early as 1995. If that happened, Bain employees and American consumers would take the hit – an alternative that analysts considered "catastrophic."
But Romney didn't dole out all of Bain's cash as bonuses right away. According to a record from May 1992, he set aside some of the money to put one last squeeze on the firm's creditors. Romney now demanded that the banks and the government agree to a deal that was even less favorable than the last – to retire Bain's debts "at a price up to but not exceeding 30 cents on the dollar."

The FDIC considered finding a buyer to take over its loans to Bain, but analysts concluded that "Bain has no value as a going concern." And the government wasn't likely to get much out of Bain if it allowed the firm to go bankrupt: The loan agreement engineered by Romney had left the FDIC "virtually unsecured" on the $30.6 million it was owed by Bain. "Once bonuses are paid," the analysts warned, "all members of the bank group believe this company will dissolve during 1993."

About the only assets left would be Bain's office equipment. The records show FDIC analysts pathetically attempting to assess the value of such items, including an HP LaserJet printer, before concluding that most of the gear was so old that the government's "portion of any liquidation proceeds would be negligible."
How had Romney scored such a favorable deal at the FDIC's expense? It didn't hurt that he had close ties to the agency – the kind of "crony capitalism" he now decries. A month before he closed the 1991 loan agreement, Romney promoted a former FDIC bank examiner to become a senior executive at Bain. He also had pull at the top: FDIC chairman Bill Seidman, who had served as finance chair for Romney's father when he ran for president in 1968.

The federal documents also reveal that, contrary to Romney's claim that he returned full time to Bain Capital in 1992, he remained involved in bailout negotiations to the very end. In a letter dated March 23rd, 1993, Romney reassured creditors that his latest scheme would return Bain & Company to "long-term financial stability." That same month, Romney once again threatened to "pay out maximum bonus distributions" to top executives unless much of Bain's debt was erased.

In the end, the government surrendered. At the time, The Boston Globe cited bankers dismissing the bailout as "relatively routine" – but the federal documents reveal it was anything but. The FDIC agreed to accept nearly $5 million in cash to retire $15 million in Bain's debt – an immediate government bailout of $10 million. All told, the FDIC estimated it would recoup just $14 million of the $30 million that Romney's firm owed the government.

It was a raw deal – but Romney's threat to loot his own firm had left the government with no other choice. If the FDIC had pushed Bain into bankruptcy, the records reveal, the agency would have recouped just $3.56 million from the firm.

The Romney campaign refused to respond to questions for this article; a spokeswoman said only that "Mitt Romney turned around Bain & Company by getting all parties to come to the table and make difficult decisions." But while taxpayers did not finance the bailout, the debt forgiven by the government was booked as a loss to the FDIC – and then recouped through higher insurance premiums from banks. And banks, of course, are notorious for finding ways to pass their costs along to customers, usually in the form of higher fees. Thanks to the nature of the market, in other words, the bailout negotiated by Romney ultimately wound up being paid by the American people.

Even as consumers took a loss, however, a small group of investors wound up getting a good deal in the bailout. Bain Capital – the very firm that had triggered the crisis in the first place – walked away with $4 million. That was the fee it charged Bain & Company for loaning the consulting firm the services of its chief executive – one Willard Mitt Romney.

The moral of this story is when things get bad for Mitt, Mitt looks to the government for solutions.

Alan Keyes Sums Up 2012 Presidential Race: Socialist Democrat Vs. Socialist Republican

From Alan Keyes' Web site comes this gem describing the 2012 presidential election as socialist vs. socialist. Keyes doesn't hide the Romney record including forcing Catholic Hospitals of Massachusetts to administer abortion pills:

Should I be silent about Romney’s true record?

AUGUST 28, 2012

Just moments ago I read the following email from someone reacting to the article I posted earlier today:

Dr. Keyes,

I admire and promote you.   These messages at this time are not prudent. Although I agree with your thoughts, I fear another non-vote (by ten million Republicans) for the Republican nominee as the very same as when RINO John McCain ran.   This is one of the factors that left us with Mr. Obama.   Please consider this and stifle your admirable passion until AFTER the election, unless your very intent is to do Romney in.

Here is my reply, which I thought might be of interest to my readers:

Thank you for your words and counsel.  I disagree on only one point.  The issue is not what gave us Obama, but what gave us the choice between Obama and people like McCain and Romney, who are like him in all too many ways.
Nothing done in the voting booth in 2008 “left us with Mr. Obama.”  Obama’s election was assured when John McCain sided with those who crossed the Rubicon to socialism by adopting the TARP bank bailout plan.  The overwhelming majority of Americans thought it a bad idea to pawn the good faith and credit of the American people in order to assure the profits of those who brought on the financial disaster in the first place. Had McCain taken their side he would have beaten Obama in spite of himself.  That was not the plan.  The plan was exactly what happened- McCain took a dive in order to let Obama take the White House.
The same forces that put Obama in place have now engineered a choice in the 2012 election intended to force voters to side either with a socialist Democratwho wants to impose socialism on the nation or a socialist Republican who has already imposed socialism on his home state of Massachusetts.  To say that voters who refuse to support either are somehow responsible for electing one or the other is like saying that people who refuse to submit to the demands of terrorists are somehow responsible for killing the people the terrorists subsequently murder.  The guarantee of successful terrorism that results from that perverse logic places everyone’s life in greater danger.
I am responsible to God first and above all.  If I stand silent now, I let the torrent of lies being used to promote Romney as some kind of “conservative” stand. He will receive support from well intentioned people gulled by those lies.  The credibility he gains from their support will give him the power to reshape the meaning of “conservative” in ways that betray their good intentions.  Because of my silence, that result will be, in part, my doing.  When he uses that credibility to promote the murder of innocent children conceived during forcible rape, their murders will be, in part, my doing.  When he forces Catholic and other religious hospitals to provide abortifacient drugs or close their doors (as he did in Massachusetts) their sacrifice of conscience or good works will be, in part, my doing.  When he uses the White House as a bully pulpit to pressure the Boy Scouts into accepting openly homosexual scouts and leaders, the abuses that are likely to result will be, in part, my doing.  It may be prudent, in every worldly sense, for me to keep silent.  But when I stand before almighty God to answer for my share of responsibility for the (supposedly lesser) moral evils attributable to Romney’s successful bid for power, how prudent will it seem that I avoided the world’s scorn by deserving the condemnation of God, who made and governs the universe this world is part of?
The responsibility for Obama’s victory or loss burdens the people who support him.  The responsibility for Romney’s victory or loss burdens the people who support him. Forces larger than both of us have engineered the situation in which those who oppose Obama supposedly “have no choice” but to support his all too similar opponent.  But where there is no choice, there is no election, only a powerful fabrication intended to force good people to betray all that they profess to believe.  I guess I would fall prey to those larger forces, and their powerful fabrication, if I did not believe that the greatest force of all is the self-evident truth of God’s superintending power.  “Quid est veritas” (What is truth?) Pilate asked, before the election Jesus lost.  “I am the way, and the truth and the life” was Jesus answer, to the disciple who questioned His way.  Judged by the world’s prudence, Jesus was lacking, for he was crucified.  Judge by God’s wisdom, Jesus was prudent, for his way is the way of the elect in the only election that matters.
I think this was the faith of many of the founders of this country, who imprudently pledged their lives, and fortunes in order to establish the God acknowledging republic we are in process of destroying.  Could it be that we are doing so precisely because of the excessive prudence that stands silent while evil triumphs, more or less?  Could it be that the way to end that process of destruction is to elect, here and now to act for the right as God gives us to see the right, not wait until AFTER an election that has already gone the wrong way (else there would be a choice for good)?
“There is a way which seems right to man, but it is ultimately the way of death.” (Proverbs 14:12)  When faced with a crossroads of evil, human judgment makes out only one way or the other.  But by the grace of God, we may choose the way of the Cross, which stands above either.  Therein lies the imprudent, certain, only way to truth and life and victory.

Godspeed,
Alan Keyes

The Ron Paul RNC Video Tribute

The best way to keep Ron Paul from speaking is to produce a video. It's how they kept the Bush family away from the convention while still acknowledging they exist.

Here's the video from tonight's Republican National Convention.

Mitt Romney Comes Out in Favor of Abortion During Presidential Campaign

Mitt Romney has flip flopped yet again. In an interview with CBS News, Romney had some eye opening things to say about abortion.


In an interview with CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley, Mitt Romney said his views on abortion rights are more lenient than those put forward in the Republican party platform.

"My position has been clear throughout this campaign," Romney said. "I'm in favor of abortion being legal in the case of rape and incest, and the health and life of the mother."

There is a lot of wiggle room in this because health of the mother can be interpreted in many different ways. Notice he does not just say when the mother's life is in danger. Think about that. Most people who hold this view always say when the mother's life is in danger, but Romney opens a whole new can of worms here.

Health leaves open a wide array of possibilities. Good health means different things to all different people. We could be talking mental health, physical health, or emotional health. What is Romney trying to say or not say in this case?

Do you see the word play here? It leaves Mitt lots of wiggle room in a year where Todd Akin's comments are said to have alienated women voters from the Republican ticket. Is Romney pandering using his core beliefs demonstrated in many elections prior to this election?



Remember, earlier this year, Romney was the only Republican presidential candidate who would not sign the Susan B. Anthony pro-life pledge.

The pledge asked candidates to promise to nominate conservative federal judges and appoint only pro-life persons to “relevant Cabinet and Executive Branch” positions. SBA List also called upon the candidates to promise to advance government-wide Hyde amendment legislation and a federal Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, and to “defund Planned Parenthood and all other contractors and recipients of federal funds with affiliates that perform or fund abortions.”

The Truth About Mia Love: Clever Marketing Puts Mayor Front Center of RNC

Mia Love, the product of clever marketing

Grow up people! All day I have heard people bickering about the so called "rising star" in the Republican party. Mayor Mia Love delivered an inspired speech until she started claiming Mitt Romney was going to restore freedoms. While I don't want to go over the obvious with Romney, this is a man who has pushed for gun control, healthcare mandates in socialized medicine programs, and a whole list of not so small government issues. Trust me, Mia Love was told what to say. It's all part of the marketing of American politics.

I hear the bickering, and it's time both sides were honest. We need some truth about why a mayor of Saratoga Springs, Utah, with Congressional aspirations is suddenly called a "rising star in the Republican Party" even before she gives her speech. Had you ever heard of her before last night? I haven't. Yet she's a "rising star", a catch phrase created by a marketing department to get you to buy into something.

Saratoga Springs has the population of just over 18,000 people. Running for Congress doesn't make you a star. However, demographics and a marketing department does.

Can we just accept the fact that political parties are nothing more than some of the highest paid and most powerful marketing departments around? They are well studied in the art of rhetoric, they study what the American people will buy, and they sit in meetings wondering how to win your votes. It's no different than the marketing company that came up with the silly rabbit for Trix. The sad thing is they don't care about the Constitution or the limits of government. Their jobs is to sell you on politicians so the politician gets power.

Let's be honest. This small mayor of Saratoga Springs, UT, was off most of our radar screens last night. That is until a marketing department known as the Republican Party went looking for someone to appeal to a certain demographic. Their mission was probably how do we attract more black women to the GOP?

And I bet if you were to look at Republican Party expenditures of the party and politicians, a great deal of money is spent trying to come up with an answer.

More than likely this has been a marketing goal for many years. Then suddenly, this woman runs for Congress and she is given a label as a "rising star" just by simply showing up on the ballot and meeting demographics of the marketing department.

I mean not to insult Mia Love here. It's time we, the voters, grow up and realize what goes on behind the curtains at in these political parties. A political convention is nothing more than a four day infomercial, and like any infomercial, it's set up to appeal to as many of your senses as possible. The Democrats do the same thing and are probably more guilty of it.

If you think that a mayor of a small Utah town seriously earned the spotlight last night for any other reason than clever marketing, you are sadly mistaken. Look, these parties pay lots of money to create an image that Americans can get behind. They have ten seconds on average to get your attention. Do you think they are going to get your attention simply by talking about economic policy? No.

They have to create a story that gets your attention, so that you buy into it and give it your attention. It's all about generating political pathos, and Mia Love meets a demographic the Republican party has long tried to convince to vote Republican.

I listened to Rush Limbaugh distract listeners from this obvious truth. You know what goes on in the Limbaugh show daily? They have meetings about which stories are going to keep your interest the longest so you continue to listen. You continue to listen and advertisers will come. It's no different in politics. Even the President has marketing people to make it easier for him to convince more voters he is right.

This isn't to insult Love's accomplishments whatever they may be. It's just time that Americans look behind the curtains of the marketing departments known as the Republicans and Democrats and realize what they are selling on TV and what they are delivering are two different things and this is the result of some of the highest paid marketing specialists in the country. It is the illusion creating by the marketing department that is causing further divide in our Republic and driving us father from the Constitution. The next time they run a welfare story, look at the images designed to break your heart so you support the welfare bill.

Mia Love was invited because she was a black woman. This was decided by people behind the curtain who want to sell you a story in hopes you will cast your vote for Republicans. This is how it works. You may not like what I have to say, but you are probably going to have a hard time arguing with it as the marketing department's evidence is in front of you on TV everyday until November 7. You don't think amateurs put those commercials together do you?

You better believe Mia Love was coached how to act, talk, look, and deliver that speech last night. It's all part of the game, and Americans eat it up as they are being duped.

Republican Platform Promises Return to Constitutional Government

So after days of playing games to make sure the most Constitutional of all Republicans impact is kept to a minimum, the Republican party releases their platform just released promises "A Restoration of Constitutional Government." I have my doubts this is the establishment's intentions after the games I have watched this week transpire against the one man who fought his entire Congressional career to get the Republican party to follow the Constitution. That of course being Ron Paul.

The Republican party of course is the party that gave us the Patriot Act that gives the federal government power over the Fourth Amendment. They fought for the National Defense Authorization Act with its indefinite detainment language that gives Obama the power to indefinitely detain any American without due process. They even suggested in 1994 the federal government can force you to engage in commerce with a federal healthcare mandate. You know this now as Obamacare.

So after attacking liberty loving people who fought for a Constitutional Republican Party, here in Christian County Missouri, the Republican Central Committee decided to run an ad days before the last election accusing libertarians of trying to hijack the party as they were forced to fight for their committee seats, why should I believe the GOP seriously wants to return to the days of a limited Constitutional federal government?

I absolutely don't. This is pandering to the Tea Party, and they hope the Tea Party will buy it up just in time to vote for perhaps one of the greatest threats to the Constitution ever--Mitt Romney. Remember, Mitt Romney pushed harsh gun control laws in the state of Massachusetts, far harsher than Bill Clinton's assault weapons ban. It was Mitt Romney who also believed in the mandate that forces people to purchase healthcare.

These are just words and I predict as usual, the Republicans won't deliver on the actions. Remember, two years ago they promised us they would look to the Constitution before passing a bill and label the bill with which part of the Constitution gives them the authority to pass it and enforce it. They passed the Patriot Act without any real debate on whether it was Constitutional.

Obama's Vote Against Infant Born Alive Protect Act Will Resonate in Missouri With Melissa Ohden Commercial

In Illinois, Barack Obama was the only legislator to vote against the Infant Born Alive Protection Act. This bill protected the just born from being put in a janitors closet and left to die if the baby survived a botched abortion.

In neighboring Missouri, voters will soon learn the story of Melissa Ohden. She is a survivor--a woman who survived an abortion and has lived to tell about it.



This ad will start playing in Missouri soon, and it's funded by the Susan B. Anthony list who is spending at least $150,000 to educate Missourians about Barack Obama's sadistic vote.


“Many children, more than you might think, actually survive failed abortions and are born alive. I know because I’m one of them,” Ohden says in the SBA List ad. “When he was in the Illinois state Senate, Barack Obama voted to deny basic constitutional protections for babies born alive from an abortion – not once, but four times."

She concludes: “I know it’s by the grace of God I’m alive today, if only to ask America this question: is this the kind of leadership that will move us forward, that will discard the weakest among us? How will you answer?”

Those of us who are Pro Life have a tough issue to make because neither Obama or Mitt Romney are pro-life champions. Mitt Romney was a huge advocate for Planned Parenthood and abortion as a Massachusetts politician. Even after Romney claims he converted to a pro-life stance, there is plenty of evidence to suggest he worked behind the scenes to maintain Roe V. Wade.

It should be known the same people producing this commercial asked Mitt Romney to sign their pro-life pledge last year. Mitt Romney refused.


Mitt Romney has refused to sign a pro-life pledge by the Susan B. Anthony (SBA) List, inviting a rash of criticism from more overtly pro-life candidates.

The pledge asked candidates to promise to nominate conservative federal judges and appoint only pro-life persons to “relevant Cabinet and Executive Branch” positions. SBA List also called upon the candidates to promise to advance government-wide Hyde amendment legislation and a federal Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, and to “defund Planned Parenthood and all other contractors and recipients of federal funds with affiliates that perform or fund abortions.”


While I agree this commercial needs to air, I ask, do pro-choice voters really have a choice in 2012?

Deaf 3 Year Old Forced to Change How He Signs His Name Because It Looks Like a Gun

A deaf three year old is being told by adults he needs to change the way he signs his name. What's wrong with it?

When he signs out the letters, it makes the shape of a gun. The adults at his preschool says it violates the preschool's weapon policy. I am not kidding.

The school says when the child signs his name with his hands, the signs resemble a gun. But, the child and his parents have even changed the signs to where he crosses his fingers to make it more unique to him and to change it from looking like anything else.

He's three years old and handicapped. Good grief, can these adults deal with the real problem here?

Unity at the Republican National Convention Mr. Sununu?: BS!

Last night John Sununu appeared to be the spokesman selling the idea the Republican National Convention was a symbol of unity for the Republican party. This of course was after Mitt Romney showed he will be the dictator in chief giving us a little hint at his leadership style as he, like Obama, changes the rules in the middle of the game for his own political gains while ignoring the rights of the states.

If you have been following Romney's tyranny at the Republican National Convention, you know it's the Maine delegation that took the biggest hit from dictator Romney.

This unity Sununu spoke of as I watched PBS last night for my coverage of the RNC is total BS. You see, those Maine delegates aren't unified after the games Romney and the Republican establishment played on the day the Republican National Convention was supposed to be closed because of Hurricane Issac.

The Washington Post writes:


Delegates were finding their seats on the floor of the Republican National Convention on Tuesday when a commotion broke out in the back corner, near the Maine contingent.

Delegates and audience members erupted into chants of “Let him speak!” and “Seat them now!” Some waved signs proclaiming, “I am the Ron Paul Revolution,” and burst forth with a soccer ditty: “Olé, olé, olé, olé. Ron Paul, Ron Paul!”


Onto the floor, surrounded by cameras, microphones, stage lights and a crush of escorts and fans, strode Paul himself, in a purple lei bestowed upon him by Hawaii delegates. One delegate asked whether the libertarian gadfly came to stir up trouble for Mitt Romney.

Paul smiled. His message, he said, was unchanged: “Liberty, prosperity and peace.”

But peace was not on the agenda in the Tampa Bay Times Forum for this afternoon.

The Romney campaign had taken pains to stifle the Paul rebellion, by denying him a speaking role, expediting the roll call, changing party rules and even unseating Paul delegates from Maine. But as Romney and the Republicans have learned repeatedly this week, politics does not always go according to plan.

As the new rules disenfranchising the Paul delegates came to a vote, shouts of “no!” and a cascade of boos poured from Paul supporters across the hall. Maine delegates at one end of the arena and Texas delegates at the other began chanting, “Point of order!” Demonstrators shouted down the next speaker, a Republican National Committee member from Puerto Rico, and party chairman Reince Priebus hammered his gavel, pleading for quiet. A Nevada delegate raised his middle finger at Priebus and called him an “[expletive] tyrant.”

Convention officials evicted some of the loudest demonstrators, who filled the hallways with shouts of “fraud!” and “farce!” and “sheep!” Paul supporters inside the hall resumed their booing and cries of “no!” — this time directed at House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), who had taken the gavel.

Does this sound like unity to you? Oh the establishment is going to suggest and script the message of "unity" but we know it's BS.

The Republican National Convention can't have a repeat of 1964, where one George Romey led a walkout against the conservative Barry Goldwater because he was a conservative. You may remember Ann Romney speaking of her father-in-law last night. It's obvious Mitt Romney's iron fist is fighting Karma.

Yes, the Republicans "Built This"

The theme of last night's Republican National Convention was "We Built This". Several speakers like Mia Love were telling us how voting for Mitt Romney and the Republicans were going to save the country and return us to a limited Constitutional government. I got a headache listening to the crap.

For all my life, I was a Republican, convinced they were the party of small government. Then 9/11 happened and I realized how little the Republican party cares about the Constitution. They are big government progressives much like their Democratic counterparts.

When I heard "We Built This" I couldn't help but think about the TARP--the bank bailouts, or the Department of Homeland Security which has violated grandmas with its gropes and allows the federal government to spy on Americans without warrants against the Fourth Amendment.

John Boehner's House approved another $2.4 trillion in deficit spending late last year, so yes they helped build the national debt too.

Richard Nixon, a Republican signed into law the small business and driving jobs out of America Environmental Protection Agency, so Republicans helped build that too.

Republicans built these endless wars that continue to send Americans sons and daughters home in body bags--nearly a trillion dollars a year in total military spending and we can't win wars anymore.

Republicans built "No Child Left Behind" which should be called "No Child Gets an Education". It expanded the federal government's unconstitutional control over your child's education

Republicans built Obamacare. It's true. Back in 1994, the Republicans felt they needed an alternative to Hillarycare so the idea of of the federal mandate soon came out of the halls of the Heritage Foundation working with Republicans.

The Republicans have built a lot of stuff--a lot of big government. I am not impressed any more.

Ann Romney Lies About Unemployment: Mitt Failed

I really had problems stomaching the Republican National Convention last night. I guess having studied Mitt Romney for many months, the Republicans proved they had no integrity even putting Ann Romney on stage to push the lies. In her speech, Ann Romney says Mitt Romney doesn't fail. She then went on to say how Mitt lowered unemployment in Massachusetts.

While the average American is going to sit there and think this Mitt guy sounds great, the truth to this is Mitt Romney had his own big government spending stimulus plan just like Barack Obama. It didn't produce jobs like Ann Romney claims. In fact, like Obama's stimulus, unemployment went up. Like Obama, Mitt Romney believed government could create jobs.

From Salon:

As governor, Romney proposed more than $700 million in economic stimulus in a pair of packages over three years to right a sickly state economy that shed thousands of jobs before he took office, including offering to hand employers $30,000 for each worker they hired, even though he now bashes his Republican and Democratic foes over wasteful government spending.

As he stumps in Michigan, experts say this is yet another example of how Romney’s moderate governing style clashes with his conservative campaign attacks against Republican and Democratic rivals, amplifying Romney’s image as a candidate without a core.

“This has been his greatest vulnerability,” said Julian Zelizer, a Princeton University political scientist. “He looks like a guy who’ll say anything to win, and it’s a problem.”

Romney, like Obama, inherited a disaster. By the time he took office in January 2003, the Massachusetts unemployment rate rose to 5.8 percent from 5.3 percent a year earlier, and 66,000 fewer people had jobs, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. And his Republican predecessor left him a $3 billion budget deficit.

That year, Romney balanced the budget with Democrats by cutting spending and raising fees without hiking taxes (although some critics argued the fees amounted to tax hikes).

Romney’s first stimulus proposal in 2003 was a relatively narrow $125 million one. Eventually, Romney and the Democrats agreed on a $100 million version with tax credits and grants to promote the high technology industry. But the governor vetoed workforce training grants used to upgrade workers’ skills.

Two years later, Romney was eyeing a presidential bid, and job creation stubbornly lagged (Massachusetts would place 47thin the nation in job creation under Romney according to Northeastern University’s Center for Labor Market Studies). This time, the governor went big. In February 2005, Romney unveiled a sweeping $600 million stimulus package to kick-start the economy and create 20,000 jobs over five years.

Oh and it gets better. Remember how Obama's stimulus had funding for transportation projects like highways and high-speed rail...

The biggest big-ticket item was $300 million in bonds diverted for transportation projects, some of the money going straight to private companies’ infrastructure improvements. He’d also put about $250 million back into employers’ pockets but let them skip tax payments to the state’s jobless benefits fund for a year – this was controversial, since the fund was just beginning to build itself back up after the recession.

Most controversial: Romney wanted to spend $37 million to create new jobs by offering employers $30,000 for each new person they hired.

As a side note, Mitt Romney's Massachusetts stimulus also had green energy initiatives like the Obama stimulus. Like Obama's stimulus, those green energy companies failed.

"We Built This", Mitt Romney, and the Salt Lake City Olympics

Speaker after speaker on a night themed "We Built This" went on stage and praised Mitt Romney for saving the Salt Lake City Olympic Games. It was Mitt's right of passage letting America knows Mitt Romney is ready to save America.

Not so fast. How did Mitt Romney go about saving the Olympics? Did you look to private industry to save them and "build" them?

No.

He went to Congress and essentially asked for an Olympic sized bailout with federal dollars. He of course got those federal dollars.

"We Built This"?

Nope, Mitt's solution was what Mitt's solution has been all of his political career. Look to big government for solutions.

This was one of the big things I felt was dishonest put together by the Republican party last night.

There of course was the idea that Mitt Romney was going to restore freedoms when Romney says he supports indefinite detainment powers without due process as well.

Take off your part mask and discover the truth. This Republican National Convention is scripted to look like a unified Republican Party battling big government. Rick Santorum actually got on stage and tried to sell us on the idea the Republicans are ready to dismantle the Department of Education. It was Republicans like Santorum himself who thought "No Child Left Behind" was a good idea.

For nearly everything that was said at the RNC, the truth is something totally different.

No Kids Allowed on the Democratic National Convention Floor

This will be a story women need to read. The Democratic National Convention has created a firestorm because they have banned children from the convention floor next week in Charlotte.


The Democratic National Committee is taking flak from women’s groups for the lack of child care that is being provided at the convention.

The Charlotte Observer reports that children will not be allowed access on the floor of the Democratic National Convention and that daycare will not be provided for delegates who bring their kids.

Women’s rights activist Gloria Steinem and several National Organization of Women chapters have called out the DNC for the “discrimination against mothers with young children.”


“Women are the key to a Democratic victory, and sometimes, children are the key to women,” Steinem told The Daily Caller. “It’s both right and smart for the Democratic Convention to behave as if children exist.”

Well, you know, when Democrats have to use their own money rather than subsidize daycare by using your tax dollars, this is what you get. Should we really be surprised?

Sarah Palin Was a Greater Asset to the Ticket Than Paul Ryan

Well, you know, that little lady from Wasilla has proven to be a far better asset to the presidential ticket than that other fella Paul Ryan.

Here's the facts. Upon being chosen as John McCain's running mate, McCain received a huge bump in the polls. Paul Ryan hasn't given Mitt Romney the same excitement or bump.

Everyone knows vice presidential candidates don’t matter. Except that on August 11, the day Paul Ryan was announced, Mitt Romney trailed by almost 5 percentage points in the RealClearPolitics average of polls. Two weeks later Romney had pulled to within 1 point​—​his strongest rally of the general election season.

In 2008, the Palin pick gave John McCain a 5.8 point bounce and put McCain in the lead for two short weeks over Barack Obama.

Think about that and begin realizing coronating Mitt Romney to the top spot by cheating in the caucus and primary process is going to give Obama another four years. Liberal Republicans don't excite the conservative base.