1998: "I'm going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations with that woman."
2012: "Conditions are improving and if you'll renew the President's contract you will feel it." (Note the eyes as well as the finger.)
.
.
.
.
Clint Eastwood’s comedy skit during the Republican National Convention has inspired the celebration of National Empty Chair Day today, September 3rd, 2012. The idea was originated by William A. Jacobson, of legalinsurrection.com.
Today, Americans celebrate their intention to unseat Barack Obama by displaying or posting an empty chair, or a photo of one, to symbolize Clint Eastwood’s suggestion that we fire President Obama:
We own this country . . . Politicians are employees of ours . . . And when somebody does not do the job, we’ve got to let them go.” –Clint Eastwood
In his empty-chair routine, Clint Eastwood expressed the thoughts of many Americans, and that includes mine.
.
Here is a photo I posted on my blog back in April, 2012, in which I am sitting in Barack’s empty chair:
Enough is Enough, I'm Takling Over!
Vote on November 6th to fill the empty chair!
Barack should not be in it.
And Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan have way more experience than me 🙂
God bless and help America!A power grab swept under the rug by the RNC, by FOX, by Rush Limbaugh…
Unable to win by the rules, the RNC estblishment bulldozed a last-minute rule switch at the Convention yesterday:
Ron Paul had accumulated petitions from enough states (6) to be nominated legitimately, which might also have opened the convention to candidates other than just Mitt Romney and Ron Paul. According to RNC rules, Ron Paul would have to be listed as a candidate, and a brokered convention, as previously described in Presumtive Nominee, would have followed.
The RNC establishment, wanting only Mitt Romney and wishing to avoid the brokered convention, drafted a new set of rules which would require petitions from 8 states to nominate a candidate, instead of the previously required 5. This attempt at alteration of the rules after the fact to eliminate an undesired candidate after he has already satisfied the rules of qualification was underhanded, to say the least. But then it got even more ugly.
When it came to the actual vote on the rule change, John Boehner railroaded the vote through dishonestly, announcing that in the opinion of the chair (his opinion) the “ayes have it,” when in fact the sound track of the above video will show clearly that the “ayes” did NOT have it, and Boehner was subsequently booed for the bad call.
The Republican Party “establishment” has for decades been drifting towards liberalism through compromise with Democrats. They have not had much objection from conservative voters, who in prosperous times had less objection to expanding government and expanding spending.
Now, in dire economic times, when unemployment is somewhere between 8 and 15% (depending on how and who defines it), when half of college graduates cannot get jobs, and 85% of college graduates move back in with their parents, when the average American has lost $4,019 due to the economy and the average American’s worth has dropped 39%, Americans have become more conservative. Americans see the need to conserve. Numerous movements, including the Tea Party, have placed pressure on Republicans to become more conservative.
The Republican “establishment,” the “old boys,” don’t want to change. Either they think that they know better than the grass roots “regular guy” (you and me, the voter), or they want to protect their privileged positions and benefits. There could even be a chance that the powerful liberal-social-engineering-spenders like Soros, Turner or Gates, might be a bit smarter than we give them credit for. They might have been covering their bets in both parties all along. There may be some puppets in the Republican Party who take orders from elsewhere. Democrats have just used fake “Republicans” in their campaign ads, who’s to say they don’t run fake “Republicans” for office?
So there’s a war going on, and the above video illustrates it.
That was the “floor fight” predicted yesterday.
Boehner’s dishonest handling of the vote on the rule change in the above video, as well as Fox’s Ben Swann’s questions Romney’s truthfulness and tactics, show that the liberal, “establishment” half of Republicans are using some pretty dirty tricks.
They are not the only ones not playing it fair. They now seem to have some of the conservative media in their pockets. FOX News, and even Rush Limbaugh, have stayed away from this story. They are almost a guilty as the liberal media has been, in failure to report important stories and placating those who are powerful.
It’s pretty clear that we’ve lost this battle of the nomination.
John Boehner falling off pedestal
The fat lady sings “Yes, it’s over.” The nomination has finally (however undemocratically and dishonestly) been made.
Some of our heroes have fallen; particularly John Boehner.
When the pride of our conservative leaders becomes so inflated that they forget for whom they work, and they try to defy the wishes of their electorate, they become very much like Obama.
“Establishment” Republicans are the product of the prosperous and liberal past, and are gradually being replaced with new more principled conservatives.
Paul Ryan is an example of that shift. So are some of the Governors who spoke at the Convention last night.
Tough new leaders who are willing to implement tough new reforms. Scott Walker got a standing ovation last night.
America’s growing grass-roots conservatism will eventually displace the old Republican “establishment” and the required changes will be made. The angry people in the video above are not going home defeated.
The next battle will be defined in three stages:
I would have preferred a cleaner and fairer fight at the RNC yesterday, with a better outcome. I wish we had an (undivided) Republican establishment which respects and enforces it’s own rules, and I wish we could have had a brokered convention to choose the next Reagan or Lincoln for America. But God’s wisdom, His choices and His intervention are not for us to fathom. We keep faith in God and watch further developments.
We work to defeat the Abortion President, Obama.
A nation which kills it’s own children cannot prosper.
Neither morally, nor economically.
I love how the left and this president talks about inclusion as they advocate the discarding and destruction of over 1 million children every year. Some inclusion. We stand for the truth. We stand for life. We stand for love, and we will win. – Rick Santorum
Apparently, Mitt Romney was sufficiently worried about the security of his status as Presumptive Nominee, that he managed to get the RNC Rules changed at the last minute, to eliminate democratic input from grass roots voters, and allow party bosses to determine who gets the nomination.
Ben Swann of FOX’s Reality Check claims that the Republican delegate process is becoming unraveled.
.
To say that the Republican convention is a mess would be a huge understatement.
The entire state of Maine was stripped of their credentials because they were going to vote for Congessman Ron Paul and not Governor Mitt Romney.
As a result, Maine’s Governor, Paul LePage, is boycotting the RNC.
Saturday Ben Swann interviewed Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.
He asked how the Governor could support the RNC stripping these Maine delegates of their credentials. He asked it even though we were told the campaign did not want to talk about delegates:
Ben Swann: Yesterday (Friday) the RNC chose to remove the entire Maine delegation from being able to be seated as a part of that. Do you believe that is the right step for the RNC to have taken considering the fact that these people were elected, they were Republicans who were elected by Republicans to go and represent the State of Maine?
Romney: You know, I haven’t seen the inner politics of what’s gone on and I’m not going to comment on the RNC’s decision. I really haven’t looked at this.
Ben Swann (on Reality Check): Really? So Governor Romney claims he wasn’t aware of his own campaign having an entire state of delegates stripped of their credentials? Hard to believe, when it was his campaign that led the challenge of these delegates.
But then again, Governor Romney also claims to not have realized that his chief legal counsel just pushed through what many top GOP leaders are calling the biggest GOP power grab in the party’s history.
So here’s what happened. Conservatives and even some moderates are accusing the Romney chief attorney Ben Ginsberg of pushing through a rules change for delegate selection that would give Mitt Romney enormous power over the primary process, should he win the White House and seek reelection in 2016.
According to the Washington Times, Ginsberg persuaded the RNC Rules Committee members to let Mr. Romney, if he becomes President, decide which delegates will be seated at the 2016 GOP presidential nominating convention. It also calls for letting future presidential hopefuls decide who gets to take the delegate slots that they win in each state. Tea Party supporter and the founder of FreedomWorks Dick Armey came out strongly against this RNC rule saying this:
The process has always been bottom-up, but Romney officials have rewritten the rules so that the nominee can stifle any dissent on the platform committee and even unseat delegates. Make no mistake, this will weaken the process by which Republicans choose their candidate for president and push the grassroots out of the party process.
So when Romney told me (Ben Swan) on Saturday that he isn’t worried about the delegates, he apparently meant it.
Romney: I’m sure the convention will work just fine. We’ll have a lot of delegates there, we’re gonna get the nomination, I’m not worried about that.
Ben Swann- So, what you need to know is that there is a saying in Maine:
“As Maine goes, so goes the rest of the nation.”
And that’s why this delegate battle with Maine is really so important. Let me break this down like this: in Maine, Republican delegates were elected by Republicans. The RNC didn’t like who they were going to vote for, even though under State rules, they had every right. So the RNC said, “We’re going to replace those delegates with ones who will vote the way we want.” Under this new rule change, in 2016, the same thing that happened this year in Maine will happen to every State in the country.
One campaign will have veto power over every single delegate. Which means party bosses run everything, and those at the grass roots level are cut off.
And that is Reality Check
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Llg-a8FamJg&feature=share&list=UU1h3bqESVdqkwm123Ce4ZmA
.Is the Republican Primary Over?
.
.
Yes, it might be over, and so might democracy be over.
And this time, it’s not Obama doing it, it’s Republican Party “establishment” or bosses, and Mitt Romney doing it.
Some were questioning Romney’s committment to truth back in March 2012.
Bosses win, voters lose.
This is why some of us don’t belong to political parties.
May God help us, and may we pray harder than ever before.
Wow, thank God (literally) we’ve been praying!
I was just at Adoration ( what’s that? – the subject of a future post), and I listed the Convention and the general election on the list of prayer intentions. I am sure I am just a tiny drop in the hurricane of prayers that are being launched at heaven today; for the Convention, and for the people in the way of the hurricane.
Apparently, the rules proposed by the RNC committee Friday (mentioned in the article above) must be approved at the Convention, and today at the Convention numerous delegates are opposing the new rules, and calling them for what they are: a movement to shut out grass roots (that’s us, the average guy). The rules committee is in session as we speak (2 PM Eastern time), and if the “establishment” or bosses, or Romney Team, or whatever you want to call them don’t give in, many delegates, not just Ron Paul delegates, but many, many others as well, are promising a floor fight.
It’s not easy to take freedom away from Americans.
People shouldn’t try.
Several recent developments are dovetailing in such a way as to ensure that the Republican Convention, Aug 27-30, will be a potential powder-keg, and at very least, a memorable event.
The conflict between conservatives and moderate Repbulican “establishment” has been described in Presumptive Nominee. Now, the Republican “establsihment,” together with Romney, is using every dirty trick in the book, including changing RNC Convention rules, four days before the convention, to eliminate the threat of a brokered convention to which Ron Paul holds the key:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQvszfnOSY8&feature=player_embedded
.
.
.
Just days before the Republican National Convention, a developing tropical storm and potential hurricane Isaac threatens to hammer the convention.
The ACLU, headed by Soros, has launched a legal campaign to suppress the police’s ability to keep order during anti-RNC protests in Tampa.
.
DHS Prepares for Civil Unrest as Obama Poised to Destroy 2nd Amendment – July 28, 2012.
.
Vice President Biden
Vice President’s Biden’s announcement today to cancel his plans to be in Tampa indicate that something is brewing that Biden does not want to be in the middle of. Biden claims that it’s the hurricane, and he does nto want to overtax emergency resources with his presence, but the left’s legal plans to suppress police powers makes this claim suspect.
.
Todd Akin
(Post Script added below on 8-24-12)
-Double Standard on criticizing conservatives but not liberals
-Double Standard on defining “choice” as only one choice
-Double Standard on defining women’s rights and women’s opinions
What a double standard exercised by the mainstream press!
Yet Rep. Todd Akin, not even a medical expert, is being attacked for believing that the violent nature of rape might prevent conception, a concept suggested by medical doctors online! Duh, maybe the stress of a rape might affect the outcome; after all, stress is one of the leading causes of infertility in 2012. People, including members of his own party, are demanding that Akin drop out of the Missouri Senate race as a result of stating this medical opinion.
Liberals are just looking for any dirty tactic to knock out contenders for Senate seats. Why don’t they clean up their own act first? And why are Republicans so quick to join in and go on the defensive?
True choice would let a woman be rewarded equally for choosing life. If the government doesn’t contribute towards raising children, why should it contribute towards destroying them?
The squeaky wheel minority who just doesn't get the point.
Liberals might also stop claiming women’s votes and fabricating the non-existant “War on Women.” It is unwarranted to imply that Democrats represent women’s interests better than Republicans do. Actually, conservatism outweighs liberalism in both genders – Gallup poll. More than half of all women are conservatives, yet the liberals lie, and claim to represent their interests. Liberals claim that conservatives, the group favored by both women and men, is declaring a war on women. How can anybody take them seriously?
Moreover, 2/3 of America (including women) opposes federal funding of abortion, yet liberals ignore that.
Republicans should focus on how liberals LIE, and how they are ANTIi-democracy and ANTI-choice, rather than rushing to cooperate with liberals in picking off conservatives one by one for errors that they make.
Most women love and want their babies, and don’t appreciate the suggestion that their baby is a burden which should be painfully dismembered and discarded. 64% of women who have abortions were coerced, pressured by others into abortion. Abortion is the unfair choice.
Liberals brag about providing free $7 birth control pills through ObamaCare mandates, but do nothing to strengthen the family, or to help women keep their babies, which is the BEST way to raise good future citizens. Providing pills thorugh ObamaCare is simply a cheap trick for buying votes, which insults women by presuming their ignorance.
Obama mandating what's good for women
The REAL War on Women is being waged by the Obama Administration and it is waged on a woman’s intelligence. Obama offers to buy women’s votes, an intellectual prostitution of sorts, and implies that women are so stupid that they will get on board : “You are so stupid that I can purchase your vote for $7 worth of birth control pills per month, and you will not notice that you still have to pay for your own aspirin, food, rent, and everything else. For $84 per year, I get your vote, and you foolishly believe that I have your bests interests at heart.”
Today (8-24-12) a CNS News article by Patrick J. Buchanan, A Grand Old Party in Panic, discusses “the great failing of American conservatives is they do not retrieve their wounded.” Apparently, the Family Research Council also came to the defense of Todd Akin.
In addition to the above CNS speculations on whether the GOP is dumping their wounded because they are nervous about the popularity of their social and moral positions, I will suggest that recent in-fighting in the Republican Party may also influence the willingness of some “moderate” Republicans to discard their more staunchly conservative colleagues. See The Presumptive Nominee, or The Secret Insurrection.
Yesterday (8-23-12) a FOX opinion, written by psychiatrist Dr. Keith Ablow, blasted Todd Akin, putting words in his mouth, or rather, attributing thoughts to him, and then proceeded to psychoanalyze him in a most unflattering and unjustified way. Dr. Ablow actually suggested that Todd Akin believes that “women consciously or unconsciously wanted to be fertilized by the men they are identifying as their rapists.”
Ablow’s analysis was based on projection and supposition, and not on what Todd Akin had actually said.
Dr. Ablow should lose his medical license over such unprofessional meddling in politics if he does not publish an apology and a retraction.
In actual fact, Todd Akins’ reasoning may have been quite simple: stress is well known to be one of the major causes of infertility. Rape clearly produces a phenomenal level of stress. An online doctor at Christian Life Resources claims that rape rarely produces pregnancy, and analyzes the scientific reasons why this might be true. Whether this analysis is correct or not, Todd Akin cannot be blamed for believing it, or some similar scientific analysis. Maybe the level of stress and terror in a rape could prevent conception; nobody has the data to indicate either way.
Finally, Todd Akin’s use of the word “legitimate” rape distinguishes the rape from a statutory rape, in which, for example, a 17-year-old woman could have willingly participated, yet is legally labeled a rape. Our culture cannot simultaneously allow Planned Parenthood to hand out condoms to 12-year-olds with instructions on their use, then lynch any man who slept with a 17-year-old. What about her 18-year-old boyfriend who has been sleeping with her for 5 years, but now he is 18 and she is 17, and suddenly it’s statutory rape? What about casual college “hook-ups,” in which the 17-year-old freshman (freshwoman) lies about her age?
The term “legitimate” rape also distinguishes rapes from false accusations, which are a possibility in the real world.
This is the United States of America, and no woman should have the power to destroy the career and life of any man of her choice by simply accusing him of rape.
If men are guilty until proven innocent, our democracy and our Constitution are a farce.
Women are not guilty until proven innocent, at least not yet.
0r
Mitt Romney, Presumptive Nominee
Presumptive: based on presumption or probability; affording reasonable ground for belief.
Presume: take for granted, assume, or suppose; assume as true in the absence of proof to the contrary; undertake with unwarrantable boldness; undertake without right or permission; take something for granted; act or proceed with unwarrantable or impertinent boldness; go too far in acting unwarrantably or in taking liberties.
The Point: Presumptive is a pretty loaded word.
Mitt Romney is the Republican party’s Presumptive Nominee for President of the United States.
The questions must be asked: is Romney the clear front-runner? Does Romney have a sufficient lead to gain the nomination at the Republican Convention at the end of August?
On the surface, Romney does appear to be a pretty clear front-runner. He does, after all, have 52% of the popular vote from State primaries at this point, according to Wikipedia’s count, which is based primarily on the Associated Press count. And the Republican Party “establishment” has recognized Romney as the Presumptive Nominee.
Finally, the mass media, with a few exceptions, certainly seems to be on board with calling Romney the presumptive nominee.
Doesn’t that make Romney a clear winner?
The fact that the conservative Wall Street Journal and Drudge Report did not jump to presume Romney to be the nominee gives us a clue that there may be some doubt about the security of Romney’s position.
Problems with Counting Chickens Before They Are HatchedThere are a number of reasons why Romney should not count his chickens before they are hatched, particularly in this 2012 election:
nominee was more likely to be successful in defeating the Democrats in the general election.Romney has struggled to inspire a passionate following among conservatives because of his liberal leanings, and much of his early success in primaries was attributed to his campaign’s prolific spending.
Romney’s early struggle in primaries
Prior to his eventual accumulation of 52% of the popular vote in the primaries, Romney struggled to compete with the conservative candidates opposing him. Lean economic times often cause more voters to be conservative. Most people have the common sense to realize that during a shortage one must conserve, not spend or waste. Conserving is the root of conservatism.
It has become pretty clear that now in 2012, the Republican “base” includes an increasing number of voters with conservative fiscal and social philosophies, who are not at all happy with Mitt Romney, author of RomneyCare, previous supporter of abortion, and present supporter of gay Boy Scout leaders and gay adoption. Some have even challenged Romney’s commitment to one set of values and have accused him of shifting his values in accordance with political advantage.
Although Romney was the front-runner during the primaries, he was also the only liberal candidate. Since the conservative vote was split among numerous conservative candidates, Romney appeared to be leading, but in actual fact, the total number of conservative voters was outnumbering Romney supporters. Many of these conservative supporters voted for Santorum in the primaries. 
When Santorum suspended his campaign due to his daughter Bella’s illness, these voters were left with nowhere to go other than Romney or Ron Paul. And Ron Paul’s extreme attitude towards foreign policy, defense budget, and legalization of drugs scared many voters off. Many voted for Romney because their favorite conservative candidates had suspended their campaigns. They voted for Romney despite their lack of enthusiasm for Romney. Romney was the not-Obama.
Ron Paul – Mitt Romney
Things were also complicated by the fact that Ron Paul has refused all along to withdraw from the campaign, and still remains in the race, so Romney cannot claim victory officially. According to Convention rules (and depending on who is counting or estimating the delegates), Ron Paul still has a plurality of delegates in five states, and his name can be presented for nomination at the Convention. Romney is still taking this threat very seriously; his supporters are still attempting now in August, to unseat Maine’s Ron Paul delegates – Maine Public Broadcasting Network. Romney supporters would not be wasting their time if no threat existed.
In fact, three candidates have enough delegates (a plurality of delegates in five states) for their names to be presented for nomination: Paul, Romney, and Santorum. This opens the door for at least several people to challenge Romney.
Paul Ryan joins the Romney ticket
Romney was lagging in some polls against Obama, making establishment Republicans nervous about his ability to carry the election against Obama. A rightful concern, with so many conservatives still unhappy with the “un-Republican” Romney, who has in the past virtually admitted himself that he was Republican in name only (RINO).: “My R doesn’t stand so much for Republican as it does for reform.”
Many conservatives, particularly in the wake of Obama’s recent abysmal failures to keep his word, are very nervous about the reliability of Romney’s new promises, particularly considering Romney’s previous flip-flop or Etch-a-Sketch reputation.
Republlican Party energized
So Paul Ryan was added to the ticket. The addition of such a bright, energetic conservative to the ticket has energized the Republican Party dramatically. The initial reaction has been one of enthusiasm, new focus, strength, and has led to success in changing the agenda; from one of defense against Obama’s fallacious attacks on Romney, to one of challenging Obama on his policies and on his shameless dishonesty. The addition of Paul Ryan has been very positive, very beneficial, and has been very fruitful in the fundraising department.
However, something will eventually dawn on people- that if Paul Ryan is so noble in character, intelligent in policy and charismatic in personality that he can transform Romney’s campaign overnight, why is Romney, and not Paul Ryan at the top of the ticket?
It would be tempting for conservatives to rearrange the ticket, putting Paul Ryan at the top, if that is at all possible at the convention. As Vice President, Paul Ryan’s position and power are not secure. Ryan could swiftly be demoted by Etch-A-Sketch master Romney into a powerless and peripheral position immediately after the general election. Already, Mitt Romney is distancing himself from Paul Ryan, claiming that he, Romney, has an economic plan that is “not Paul Ryan’s.”
Mitt Romney would be naïve not to realize that Paul Ryan is a threat to him; not by design, but by Ryan’s inherent likeability, charisma and character; characteristics Romney is lacking.
The fact of the matter is that numerous conservatives like me, who have never committed to one political party, yet who are devoted to unseating the anti-colonialist Barak Obama, are sitting out the Republican internal insurrection to see who wins. We will support any candidate produced by the GOP convention by virtue of his/her being not-Obama, including Mitt Romney. But we do have our favorites, and Romney is not one of them.
Many non-Republican conservatives (such as the Tea Party) are not sitting out the insurrection as I am. They are actively trying to unseat Romney as the presumptive nominee. (More on specific efforts below.)
Ryan has certainly energized Romney’s campaign, and will help Romney do better in polls against Obama, but Ryan may have little effect on internal Republican battles before the convention, because people realize the “demote-ability” of a Vice President.
If Romney survives convention attempts to unseat him, then Paul Ryan’s presence on the ticket will definitely help Romney against Obama in the general election. Let’s just hope Ryan does not get demoted to a position of little power and influence after the election, as some Vice-Presidents have been in previous administrations, including George Washington’s, who did not include John Adams in cabinet meetings. The current Vice President, Joe Biden, has virtually been assigned the role of court jester. In this case, however, his own behavior has contributed to his undignified position; presumably Paul Ryan would fare better than Joe Biden has.
The Republican Party has found its success during previous increasingly liberal decades by compromising repeatedly with liberals. They have thus slowly drifted away from staunch conservatism. The seasoned “establishment” Republicans want to continue this trend with the nomination of Mitt Romney, arguing that he will help to capture moderate votes, and perhaps even some liberal votes, helping Republicans to unseat Obama in the general election.
However, the tide of history can change, and has changed in the past. The Tea Party movement is one indication of a possible change of heart in the American people, driven by economic problems and by the need to face reality. Economic austerity often motivates philosophical corrections and a shift toward conservatism. The Republican establishment agenda of compromise and of seeking moderate votes will not attract votes when Americans are drifting towards conservatism. Instead, it will frustrate people who want true change. When the base gets alienated, they will not go to the polls, and the reduced voter participation will cancel out any gain that was made by compromising to get moderate votes.
The History of Republican primaries and conventions also indicates that the nomination of moderates or liberals (like Romney) often disappoints the Republican base, and leads to defeat in the general election. Republican Convention historian Dr. Barbara Haney, a RNC convention delegate from Alaska herself, discusses the surprising history of Republican conventions, a history which seems to indicate that the unseating of a lukewarm presumptive nominee by a more conservative alternative during a convention actually improves the chances of winning the general election against the incumbent Democrat.
The enthusiatic rally of support observed this week for Paul Ryan indicates that America might be ready for such a course correction towards conservatism. A moderate candidate like Romney gets half-hearted, lukewarm support, while a strong, principled conservative like Paul Ryan reenergizes the Republican party overnight.
The new energized conservatives, including evangelical Christians and the Tea Party, may play any hand available to them at this convention, to nominate a true conservative in place of Mitt Romney. This might actually be a good idea, based on Barabara Haney’s historical analysis, which showed an 88% chance of success in unseating an incumbent Democrat following the vetting process of a brokered convention, compared with a paltry 31% chance of success in unseating the Democrat incumbent following an uneventful first-ballot nomination of a presumptive nominee like Romney.
Lincoln and Reagan, products of the “brokered convention;” NOT “presumptive nominees.”
Ronald Reagan and Abraham Lincoln are examples of the 88% successes, which illustrate Barbara Haney’s historical analysis and theories, on the beneficial nature of brokered conventions.
So it boils down to: do you play chicken, compromise, court the moderate vote, and risk having only a 33% chance of defeating Obama, or do you boldly embrace the uncertainty of the brokered convention, nominate a candidate capable of energizing the general election (like Reagan or Lincoln), and go for the 88% chance of defeating Obama? And do you put your energizing candidate in the Vice President slot, or in the President slot?
“Establishment” Republicans are making a fallacious assumption in promoting Romney; they are assuming that a conservative candidate of strong character will not attract liberal votes. Abraham Lincoln disproved that fear, Ronald Reagan disproved that fear, and, incidentally, Paul Ryan has already disproved that fear in his home district of Janesville, Wisconsin, which is liberal, yet has elected conservative Paul Ryan for seven consecutive terms, because of his integrity, his character, and his reliably.
Jim Thorpe testimony on Paul Ryan’s character and popularity:
Incidentally, Paul Ryan is not the only Republican with the character and integrity capable of attracting liberal and moderate votes; add to that list Rick Santorum, Ron Paul, and Michelle Bachmann, among others.
The UK Guardian offers the following analysis:
The Romney campaign chose him (Paul Ryan) to deliver the Republican base vote amid fears that die-hard conservatives could cost him the White House by staying at home on election day rather than turning out for a candidate they are ambivalent about….
But that strategy was not working. The US is so polarised that there are, according to the polls, few undecided voters left. Compared with 2008, when about 25% of the electorate had still to make up their minds at this stage in the election, only about 5% are undecided. Both the Democratic and Republican strategists have concluded that the winner on 6 November will be the campaign that fires up its own supporters, that gets its base out, rather than the one that wins over the independent swing voters….
Larry Sabato, professor of politics at the University of Virginia, said: “It is base v base. There are hardly any independents.” At the cost of winning over a percentage of that small group in the centre, the campaigns risked alienating their core support, he said.
This analysis supports my arguments and the historical findings of Barbara Haney; that a conservative candidate may secure more votes than a moderate at certain times in history. 2012 is one of those times.
Apparently, it’s not too late to change our minds, and Republican historian Barbara Haney indicates that in the last 21 Republican conventions where the nominee, like Romney, was not an incumbent President, 43% of presumptive nominees were unseated at the convention. Romney, too, can be unseated. There is historically a 43% probability of that.
Here comes the next surprise: RNC convention rules contain some surprises.
Whether it is by the wisdom of our predecessors or by fluke, RNC convention rules appear to allow for delegates to change their minds about candidates between the primaries and the convention. Although there has been some dispute over this, the 2008 convention raised this issue for a delegate from Utah, and the RNC Legal Counsel Jennifer Sheehan upheld the freedom of delegates to change their minds, writing:
The RNC does not recognize a state’s binding of national delegates, but considers each delegate a free agent who can vote for whoever they choose.
and
The national convention allows delegates to vote for the individual of their choice, regardless of whether the person’s name is officially placed into nomination or not.
More details on this controversy on Rule 38 at Rule 38.
Why would the architects of democracy allow such uncertainty and reversibility in RNC primary and convention rules? Presumably they assumed that delegates will be honorable and will not to change their minds frivolously; that they will make a serious effort to vote (in the first ballot) for the candidate they were “bound” to by the primaries. But ultimately, they are allowed to consider events and developments prior to the Republican Convention, and are allowed to change their votes, or to abstain from voting, if they feel it is in the best interests of their constituents. It could be argued in 2012 that the majority of primary voters wanted a solid conservative to represent them, and Mitt Romney is not that solid conservative. We have the unusual case where delegates could honestly believe that they will be more faithful to the wishes of the people if they abandon Mitt Romney. It is such an eventuality that would motivate the architects to include some flexibility into the system. After all, our elected Representatives and Senators are not bound to vote the party line after their election either, and are allowed to use their best judgment in response to developing events.
Internal tension within the Republican Party is undermining the security of Romney’s projected victory.
Ben Swann, a Fox News anchor from Cincinnati, Ohio, produced a segment of Reality Check, explaining why he believes that internal tension within the Republican Party may be undermining the security of Romney’s projected victory. According to Ben Swann’s Reality Check, The Liberty Movement (conservatives who support Ron Paul) is taking over the GOP. Reality Check suggests that the Republican Party might be winning the Texas battle at the moment, but could actually be losing the primary war to conservatives. Some claim that Ron Paul may have recruited as many as 1,000 delegates going into the Tampa convention, reducing the support Romney thinks that he has:
Ron Paul’s not-so-secret plot for the GOP convention– ABC News
Fox Reality Check is not alone in their suspicions. Newt Gingrich also acknowledged that Ron Paul is the “biggest danger” for Romney in Tampa. As Ron Paul wins over delegates Romney thought he had, it becomes difficult to make any projections about the convention at all. For example, 1,144 delegates become only 144 delegates if somebody wins over 1,000 of them. Extreme example, but illustrates the point.
Very recently, a conservative movement has surfaced issuing an appeal to 20,000 RNC members and delegates at the Convention called DumpRomney. They propose that dumping Romney would be accomplished by “bound” delegates conscientiously abstaining from voting in the first ballot. When Romney does not get the required 1144 votes in the first ballot, then all delegates are released to vote their conscience in subsequent ballots, and new candidates can be added to the list of contenders. Not only can previous contenders like Santorum, Gingrich, Ron Paul and Michelle Bachmann be added, but new names can also be added. Sarah Palin? Scott Walker? Paul Ryan? Anybody’s guess. DumpRomney does not advocate any particular candidate; they simply advocate the dumping of Romney at the RNC convention.
Ron Paul’s campaign has claimed to have won over 500-1,000 delegates. The DumpRomney folks may or may not have success in persuading delegates to abstain in the first ballot. This split in the Republican Party makes Romney’s nomination in the first ballot very uncertain.
The present battle for delegates is (not surprisingly) not covered by the mainstream media, who would love to see liberal Romney as the Republican nominee.
The Republican Party is also not advertising the conflict. Public show of division is rarely wise.
But the battle rages on:
Battle of Gettysburg by Currier & Ives
But now, for those of us who are rooting for a brokered convention, for a replacement of Mitt Romney with a true conservative, for the election of the next Ronald Reagan or Abraham Lincoln, this, 1 week before the Republican Convention, when the plans have been laid and the agenda is set, is a good time to remind everyone to have an open mind and a positive attitude toward the possibility of a brokered convention.
There is no question that this Republican Convention is bound to be very exciting.
It also holds the potential to alter the course of history dramatically.
Let’s presume little: historically speaking, Mitt’s odds are 57:43.
Much is going on behind the scenes that the media is not telling us about.
However, if Mitt does get the nomination, our chances of beating Obama are reduced by a factor of about three.
Can Mitt Romney convince Republican conservatives that he is capable of the kind of leadership that the fiscal and moral challenges of 2012 demand?
Mitt Romney has already pledged to repeal ObamaCare (which 2/3 of America opposes) and to oppose abortion. He claims that he will balance the budget, something that is high on American list of priorities.
Romney could also pledge to uphold the values that close to 2/3 of Americans hold:
Mitt Romney could sign the Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life Pledge. He is one of the few Republican candidates who have refused to sign the pledge so far.
Mitt could promise to uphold religious freedom, a freedom that is under threat for the 25% of Americans who are Catholics.
There was a time when political promises carried more weight. But a new era of political dishonesty has been inaugurated with Obama’s demonstrated ability to about face, and to thumb his nose at his own previous promises.
The lies, reversals, security leaks, and imperial mandates characterizing the Obama administration have led many into shock and disbelief that so much could transpire in less than four years. Obama rules by issuing mandates each time Congress and the Senate fail to approve the legislation he wants. No FBI, police, or security force has materialized to challenge Barack Obama on his actions, to label him a traitor, or to drag him off in chains.
The head of the Department of Justice, Eric Holder, panders to Obama’s wishes, fails to protect and enforce the Constitution of the U.S. and it’s laws. He has been held in contempt of Congress, yet the Department of Justice refuses to prosecute him.
The Department of Homeland Security similarly neglects it’s duties, and seems to be headed by a “liberal sisterhood of plundering hacks” who are consumed in an Animal-House style sexual harassment scandal.
In the past, the news media would also have kept presidents and politicians accountable for their promises. In 2012, they don’t. The media clearly has a political agenda, an extremely liberal one not shared by the majority of Americans, an agenda which 2/3 of America opposes, and the media misuses their profession to misinform the public, attempting to steer them towards liberalism. Liberal Presidents and politicians get away with more and more lying. No behavior on the part of liberals shocks the media; neither lies (Obama) nor incompetence (Biden) shock anyone. Media now actively covers for the liberal politicians whom they favor. They excuse any behavior by candidates who continue to advocate lower and lower standards of morality and accountability in our society.
In this atmosphere, it will be difficult for Romney to acquire the credibility to energize the Republican base and to get them to the polls. His recent statements in support of gay adoption and gay Boy Scout leaders do little to improve his credibility as a conservative or as a Republican.
Previous to 2012, Romney might have had a better chance to redeem himself.
But today, an alternate, more principled nominee with a history of strong character is more likely to be believed, and would serve both the Republican Party and our nation much better in 2012.
May God bless, help, and direct America… starting with the Republican Convention on August 27- 30, 2012.
Numerous moral and ethical leaders have indicated that this election is the most important election of a lifetime, an election which will determine the future character of America; strong, responsible and autonomous nation, or bankrupt dissolute welfare state. The movie 2016 predicts disaster for America if Barack Obama is re-elected on November 6th.
Related Subsequent Articles:
AND
A new group led by former Special Forces and intelligence operatives (Special Operations OPSEC Education Fund) have produced a 22-minute film that criticizes Obama for taking too much credit for the bin Laden raid. The film features a Navy SEAL saying “Mr. President, you did not kill Usama bin Laden, America did.” – Fox News , Reuters.
The group also plans TV ads focusing on prominent security leaks in the administration.
The above ad refers to the Obama campaign ad linking Mitt Romney to a woman’s death from cancer.
CNN debunked the fallacious pro-Obama ad, callling it “despicable.”
The Obama ad contains false statements and tries to link Mitt Romney to a death which occurred years after Mitt Romney’s departure from Bain Capital. The ad tries to blame the death on lack of insurance following closing of a steel plant, when in actual fact the man in the ad (Joe Soptic) was offered a severance package which would allow him to get insurance, and his wife continued to have insurance from her employer.
In addition to President Obama’s refusal to condemn the “Romney killed my wife” ad put out by super PAC Priorities USA, the Obama campaign was caught in a lie over Joe Soptic, and a possible violation of the law.
Syte Reitz grew up in Queens, New York, in a family of Lithuanian immigrants who fled Nazi and Soviet domination during World War II. Her education includes a Ph.D. in Biochemistry, and post-doctoral work at Princeton University. Syte left her job as an Assistant Professor at Oakland University, Michigan, to devote herself to raising her children, and ultimately homeschooled them through the end of high school. She is a member of Madison's Cathedral Parish.
Copyright © 2022. Published by Syte Reitz Media, LLC. All rights reserved. Legal
Based on a design by SRS Solutions
