Do Words Speak Louder than Actions or Actions Louder than Words?

The world of politics is exploding over a secretly taped video of Mitt Romney back in May at a fundraising event when he made some questionable remarks about the 47% of Americans who don't pay income tax and why those individuals would never vote for Mitt Romney.

The world of journalism is doing their part to ensure that this explosion will be the implosion of one man's presidential hopes.

Image from Foxnews.com

The press is outraged.  The press is disgusted, but make no mistake about it, the press is really just celebrating.  They seem perfectly ready to end the election and declare that Mitt Romney is not fit to hold the office.  They want us to believe that Romney has revealed that he doesn't care about the poor and obviously wants to separate the "haves from the have nots."

Are they right?  Is the election over?  Is this the final blow?

Absolutely not.  Although for the moment, this election appears to be about this video, like it or not, the election is still about the economic security of our people and to be blunt, despite all the president has tried, the economic security in America still stinks.

***

The press can shout about this tape, but the fact remains that this election will be about our broken economy and our president's failed attempts to make things better.

I have no problem with the press holding a leader accountable for their words, but it seems a little disingenuous when they are not equally as determined to hold the president accountable for his actions.

Image from nytimes.com

Last night, our president appeared on David Letterman.  There was of course, talk of this Mitt Romney recording.  President Obama in his calming and reassuring way said,

"What I've learned as president is that you represent the entire country. If you want to be president, you've got to work for everyone and not just some.  You've got to be president to all the people."

Hmm.  That sounds really nice.  I think I even got a chill up my leg.

Problem?  Obama's actions as president have not reflected that sentiment.  In fact, this country feels more divided than ever and our president has been at the center of it.

Actions speak louder than words:

Religion
I for one, am a person of faith.  I strongly believe and defend our first amendment right which respects religious freedom and prohibits our government from making laws impeding the free exercise of it.

When the president made changes to the Affordable Care Act requiring non-profit organizations, including Catholic institutions to pay for birth control, contraceptives, morning after pills and abortions, even though such a requirement goes against their moral convictions, Obama brazenly pushed it through and instead made "amendments" which changed the wording but not the requirement.

Mr. President, your actions with this ruling did not represent me or millions of other people of faith.


Debt
I am also an American who firmly believes in moral spending limits.  Like many conservatives, I believe it is immoral to spend more money than we have.

Mr. President, I have watched you add $5 trillion dollars to our deficit in 3 1/2 years---more debt than any administration combined. A $16 trillion debt is reckless, irresponsible and as you once said, "unpatriotic."

With regards to spending and debt, your actions have not represented me or millions of conservatives who share my convictions.  


Free Enterprise
I am an American who believes that free enterprise works.  I believe that American businesses are at the heart of a thriving economy.  I believe that high taxes, government restrictions and impositions are hindering business growth and potential.  I am an American who is freaked out that 2011 saw the slowest start up rate for new businesses in 11 years.

Mr. President, when you say things like "You didn't build that," it didn't feel like you were representing me or the millions of Americans who disagree with your idea that success should not be rewarded.


Health Care Reform
I am an American who still does not want Obamacare.  I am one of the millions of Americans who opposed such an expensive, intrusive and unproven overhaul of our health care system.  I am one of the 65% of Americans who did not support this reform. (Remember, only 35% of Americans supported this legislation at the time it passed).

Mr. President, when you resorted to bribes and back room deals to get the votes needed to pass your signature piece of legislation, it did not feel like you represented me or the millions who disagreed with Obamacare.  When this bill passed without one Republican vote, it should have concerned you that its content did not represent half of the country.

***

Although there is widespread panic over Mitt Romney's remarks, it feels disingenuous.  It feels orchestrated.  It feels insincere.

Sadly, the press is more eager to hold Mitt Romney accountable for his words than they are willing to hold our president accountable for his actions.  We should not stand for it.

President Obama has been in office for nearly 4 years.  He vowed to improve everything--including the ocean tides and even the planet.  He promised to fix the economy.  He assured us that he would and he spent trillions to show that he could.  Well, 50 days before his re-election, it is hard to argue that any of his attempts have worked.

- 23 million people are still out of work.

- 1 in 6 Americans are now living in poverty.

- Nearly 50 million Americans are on food stamps.

- Millions of our neighbors are still losing their homes.

- Our country is still facing a fiscal cliff.

The president may say that he is the president for the all the people and say that he wants to help us all, but his actions speak louder than words.  He has never attempted to represent all of us and his efforts certainly have not helped enough of us.

Image from politico.com

Do Mitt Romney's words speak for his future actions?  Why shouldn't the president's actions speak louder than his words?

I am not buying it.  We are hurting.  We need help.  The president has miserably failed to help us.

We need to hold him accountable for it.

Go Mitt.

Deficits, Unemployment & An Economy in Decline--Achievements & Milestones?

This week the president will take the stage and make his case for a second term.  Without making it seem like he is begging for a second chance, he is going to have to highlight some of his successes.

(Wait, what were those again?)

Image from NBCnews.com

In all fairness, there were a few significant milestones which were reached under his leadership, but I'll bet that we won't hear mention of even one.  Why?  Because these milestones are nothing to brag about.

Like it or not, these "milestones" all happened under his watch:

1) Thresholds Crossed in Deficit
In the next few days, the U.S. deficits will reach the $16 trillion mark.  The debt obligation for each tax payer has now reached $140,000.  (Translated, each tax payer would have to pay $140,000 to the government in order to pay off these debts.  Last time I checked, most Americans are having a hard enough time paying their own bills let alone the excessive and immoral spending habits of our politicians).

More money has been spent and borrowed in one term than the total of every previous administration combined.  Hmm.  There was a time in 2008 when Candidate Obama rebuked President Bush for the $4 trillion he added to the deficit in his 8 years in office.  He even branded such deficits as "unpatriotic."

If that was the standard, Mr. President what does $5 trillion in 3 1/2 years say about you?

2) Unprecedented Stimulus Bill was Passed
An unprecedented $800 billion was spent in an effort to artificially stimulate our economy--it didn't work.  Our president promised that this money would bring unemployment below 8%.  It hasn't been below 8% in 42 months.

23 Million Americans are still out of work.

3) Milestones in Poverty Rates
1 in 6 Americans are now living at or below the poverty level.  As the New York Times reported, this is the highest number in 52 years.

4) Record Levels of Americans on Food Stamps
1 in 7 Americans are now dependent on food stamps.  This is the highest number in our country's history.

5) First Ever Downgrade in U.S. Credit Rating
One year ago, Standard & Poor downgraded the country's AAA credit rating.  This is the first time in history.

6) Health Care Reform
President Obama was the first president to achieve health care reform in America.  Will he boast about such an achievement?

Don't count on it.  He doesn't want to remind us that only 35% of Americans supported it at the time it passed.

Image from Zimbio.com

He doesn't want to remind Americans that this bill passed with rumors of back room deals and bribes in order to get the votes needed from members of his own party. And that it passed without one Republican vote--a party which represents the ideology of nearly 50% of Americans.

Health Care Reform--the president isn't talking about this achievement because he knows that we didn't want it then and we still don't want it now.

He doesn't want to remind anyone for two critical years he focused on health care reform while millions of Americans were losing their jobs, their homes and their livelihood.

***

Deficits, unemployment, and an economy in decline -- achievements and milestones?

The president may have promised "Hope and Change," but like it or not, these achievements are what his policies produced.

The president has 64 days to make the case that it was all worth it.  Mitt Romney has 64 days to make the case that it wasn't.

Image from politico.com

This week, the Democrats will make their case.  Without mention of milestones, what are we going to hear about at the Democratic National Convention?  Most likely incessant blaming of a predecessor -- that women deserve free birth control -- and that the wealthy need to pay their "fair share."

Are those really the solutions to these uncertain times?

Can we really afford to find out if the president will get it right the second time around?  Because right now, the president is essentially asking us to put his job security ahead of our financial stability.

President Obama may want a second term, but has he earned it?

I would argue, absolutely not.

For this reason, I will continue to support the one candidate in this race whose resume actually reflects someone who turned deficits into surpluses, bankruptcy into profitability, saw decreases in unemployment rates, and a leader who accomplished it all with bipartisan support, without raising taxes, and without borrowing a single dollar.

Image from Wall Street Journal

Milestones--we just need the right leader to help us achieve the milestones that matter.

Go Mitt.

Does this kind of "Change" deserve 4 more years?

With 82 days left until the election, the presidential campaign is entering a crucial phase.  History has shown that now is when voters start really paying attention, scrutinizing the candidates and selecting a leader whose vision for the country reflects their own.

It goes without saying that the urgency is real and the candidates know it.

Last night, I heard an Obama supporter pose a powerful question.  In essence, she said, "If things are really so bad, then why isn't Obama losing by 15 points in the polls?"

This to me is the heart of this election.  Her question, "If things are so bad" only tells me that she is unaware of how bad things really are.

Image from patdollard.com

President Obama's team may be currently winning the narrative that Mitt Romney is apparently "not likable," but I am convinced that he will never be able to win the narrative that his "Changes" have actually been good for this country.   They haven't.

In an effort to illustrate how, I have assembled a list of "Changes" that have taken place under Obama's watch:

Weakest & Slowest Recovery on Record

• Since mid-2009, the economy has grown an average of 2.4% per quarter.  "This is slower growth than all recoveries since WWII." (Wall Street Journal 4/27/2012)
• "In contrast, during the first 11 quarters of the Reagan expansion in the 1980's, the economy grew an average of 6.1% per quarter." (Wall Street Journal 4/17/2012)

Poverty Rates

• In this "recovery," an additional 2.6 million Americans have dropped out of the middle class and are now living below the poverty line--$22,315 a year for a family of four. (CNN poverty rate index 9/13/2011)
• 1-in-6 Americans--42.6 million people--are now living in poverty. (Washington Post 9/13/2011)
• This is the highest number of people in 52 years. (New York Times 9/13/2011)

Food Stamps

• 1-in-7 Americans--nearly 50 Million people---are currently dependent on Food Stamps.
• This is the highest number in our country's history.
• Inauguration Day 2009: 31.5 Million on Food Stamps (Reuters 12/31/2008)
• Today: 46 Million on Food Stamps (ABC News 12/2/2011)

National Debt

• "The National Debt has increased since Obama took office by more than $5 trillion---more than any previous administration in history." (Fact checker politifact.com 6/12/2012)
• Inauguration Day 2009: $10.615 Trillion
• Today: $15.9 Trillion

Unemployment

• America is experiencing 42 months straight of the unemployment rate above 8%--a pattern not seen since the Great Depression. (U.S. Labor Statistics)
• December 2008: Unemployment Rate 7.2%
• Today: Unemployment Rate 8.3%

Cost of College Education

• Average tuition at a four-year public university has jumped 15% and as high as 40% in Georgia, Arizona and California. (Associated Press 6/12/2012)
• U.S. Department of Education Secretary Arne Duncan said, "If the costs keep rising, college will become increasingly unaffordable for the middle class." (Associated Press 6/12/2012)

Impact of Recovery on College Graduates Getting Jobs

• Only half of those who graduated from college since 2006 are now employed full-time. (Rutgers University Study 5/10/2012)
• College graduates are now earning 10% less in starting salaries than graduates in 2006. 
• 1-in-4 college graduates are now living with their parents. (Rutgers University Study 5/10/2012)

Unsustainable Path--A Tipping Point?

• The U.S. government's debt obligations exceed the net worth of its citizens.  In 2011, the U.S. had $61 trillion in total debt obligations and yet, the nation's total household worth is $58 trillion. This equals a net accumulated deficit of $14.8 trillion and $46.3 trillion in Social Insurance obligations. (Denver Business Journal 7/13/2012)
• The president's 2nd term agenda does not address this fiscal crisis.

Taxes

• Obama is trying to make the case that raising taxes on the "wealthy" and getting them to pay their "fair share" will be the difference maker for our crumbling economy.  It is important to note that raising taxes on those making above $250,000 would not even close this year's budget deficit.
• Furthermore, President Obama has already tried to pass his "Fair Share Tax Legislation."  It did not pass.

Taxing Small Businesses

• Thanks to our current tax codes, S Corporations, sole Proprietorships and LLCs are recognized by the IRS as individuals.  This means that under Obama, small businesses would be taxed as "wealthy."
• President Obama's proposed tax hikes do not provided an exemption for small businesses.

Obama's Recovery Effort's Impact on Small Business

• Small Businesses are responsible for 65% of new hires in this country.
• According to a survey from Challenger, Gray and Christmas, "2011 had the lowest startup rate in 11 years." (Fox Business Center 2/15/2012)
• In 2011, half as many jobless managers and executives started their own business as the year before.
• The study showed that even after the dot.com crash in 2001, an average of 8% of job seekers still pursued entrepreneurship.  Today that number is only 3.9%  (Fox Business Center 2/15/2012)

***

This list could go on and on.  One question we must ask ourselves, yes, Obama inherited a mess, but has he fixed the mess we hired him to do?  Furthermore, do these changes merit a second chance?

I would argue, absolutely not.  

It would be hard to see how our country is better off today when in just 3 1/2 years, millions more Americans are living in poverty, our deficits have skyrocketed and unemployment rates mirror trends of the Great Depression.

After nearly 4 years, this is the best he had to offer.  I think America deserves more.

So in answer to the Obama supporter's question, "If things are really so bad, then why isn't Obama losing by 15 points in the polls?" I am convinced that the more informed voters become, the more obvious it will be that Obama's efforts have failed.

Help me spread the word.  This is not the "Change" we wanted.

Go Mitt.

A Scott Walker Win and Why it Matters

Last night, Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin prevailed in the historic recall election.  Polls closed at 9:00 PM ET and within minutes, the media started feeding a frenzy reporting that exit polls indicated that the race was "too close to call." Within an hour, however, the polling numbers indicated that Walker had indeed won and by a much larger margin of victory than was assumed.  He won by 7% points.

AP Photo/Morry Gash

Those in the media have been quick to point out however, that although Walker won the election, the exit polls did reflect some "good news" for President Obama.  Those who participated in the exit polls were asked to choose between Obama and Romney.  The exit polling data showed if the election were held today, Obama would carry Wisconsin by a 52-43% margin.

Phew.

I am glad to hear that the White House can exhale.  They should really take comfort in those numbers. Because as last night's final election results indicated, those exit polls are very reliable.

***

Today, the spin of this election is in full swing.  Despite big name endorsements from Bill Clinton and DNC chairwoman, Debbie Wassermann Schulz and also, despite a massive grassroots effort by Unions and Democrats to oust Walker, the tone of the left is much different today.  The left is now arguing that this recall election was just a little "local" election that won't really impact the November race.

Haraz N. Ghanbari/AP

I guess that is why it is now easy for them to justify the blatant absence of Obama's participation in the race.   Oh wait, I stand corrected, he did tweet his "support" late Monday night.

Although the left would like us to believe that this election was inconsequential to national politics, make no mistake about it, the White House cared about this outcome.  Despite the brave face today, there has to be a growing concern.

***

In 2010, candidate Scott Walker ran on a message of fiscal reform and accountability.   Once in office, Walker kept his campaign promise and immediately began to address a $3.6 billion budget shortfall.  He proposed a bill limiting the ability of public sector unions to bargain collectively over pensions and health care.  Furthermore, Walker wanted to limit the pay raises of public employees to the rate of inflation.

Ironically, Walker's message was that of "fairness."  He wanted public sector union employees to pay the same fair rates comparable to those outside the unions.

Walker wanted state employees to make a greater contribution to their pensions and said that without fiscal changes to the budget, thousands of state workers risked being laid off.  He argued that the changes would save the state of Wisconsin $180 million a year.

Democrats and big union bosses cried foul.  They protested, marched and even some legislators purposely left the state in order to block a vote on the bill.

Image from nymag.com

Their efforts came up short.  Walker and the voice of his supporters rang louder than the chants and protests of Big Unions.  

In just over a year, Walker's reforms helped private businesses create thousands of jobs.  His fiscal restraints turned a $3.6 billion budget deficit turn into a surplus.  He did all of it without increasing the role of government and he accomplished it without raising taxes.  Furthermore, he prevailed over big unions.

Scott Walker pushed for a smaller, less involved government.  He pushed for fiscal discipline and responsibility.  He wanted to diminish the power that unions have in dictating how his state's budget is allocated.  His efforts were beyond successful.

Yesterday's vote shows the value in fiscal reform and accountability.  Yesterday's vote also shows that big unions voices are not as powerful and influential as once thought.

***

Why does the White House care?  Two reasons.

1) President Obama is pro-government.  He thinks the role of the government should be bigger not smaller.  His limitless spending spree of the past 3 1/2 years reflects a politician who believes that government spending is the answer to our economic fragility.  He hasn't insisted that his party members limit their spending to the confines of a budget and that simply reflects someone with little regard for our astronomical debt.

Obama with Bob King, President of United Auto Workers (Getty Image/Chip Somodevilla) 

2) It is also no secret that this president is pro-union.  His policies have always been loyal to the union vote.  For example, his efforts to bailout the auto industry primarily benefited the United Auto Workers Union.  Since taking office, Obama has had countless meetings with union leaders to discuss the country's economic recovery and how it will impact the standing of various unions in their respective communities.

Hector Sealey, Safety Director, Construction Corporation, and AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka (Carolyn Kaster/AP)

As a result, the unions have been fiercely loyal to Obama.  Their support and financial backing helped  him win the White House in 2008.  One can't help but ask if their admiration and loyalty will be as strong this time around.  The president's absence in this Wisconsin fight shows that his fear of a loss was greater than his desire to help his friends win a desperate fight for their cause.

Did Obama's silence sour his relations with unions?

As I have said before, it is becoming increasingly clear that this president is more concerned about saving his own job than he is in saving ours.

This recall election mattered.

I am not about to say that Wisconsin is now a red-leaning state---the last time Wisconsin voted for a Republican President was in 1984.  I hardly see that changing this time around, but why this election mattered is that the fight for a smaller, more accountable and fiscally responsible government prevailed.

Image from Washingtonpost.com

This is the heart of Mitt Romney's message.  It goes without saying that the White House is hoping that support of that message won't trickle beyond the borders of the badger state.

I think they are fooling themselves to ignore that it already has.

Go Mitt.

Expecting More from Our Leaders

Despite resistance from many Democrats, the president is continuing to annihilate Mitt Romney's resume and portray Bain Capital investments as everything that his wrong with capitalism in America.

The other day, in front of a group of reporters, the president defended his attacks on Romney's business experience.  He said, "The main goal of a financial firm like Romney's is not to create jobs.   Their main goal is to create wealth for themselves and their investors."  He went on to say,"Sometimes jobs are created...sometimes it goes the other way. Workers get laid off. Benefits disappear.  Pensions are cut.  There may be value for that kind of experience, but it's not in the White House."

Image from wired.com

The president wants to discredit Romney's record and portray him as a hollow man driven by profit and that Americans should fear someone who tramples on those who get in the way of his wealth accumulation.

Is the president accurate?  Should we fear Mitt Romney?

The answer is emphatically, no.

It is ridiculous to insinuate that we should fear an individual who time and again went into financially broken companies and made them stronger.  It is ridiculous to insinuate that Americans should fear an individual who has a 25+ year track record of being accountable with other people's money.  It is ridiculous to suggest that Bain Capital is full of "vampires" and "vultures" when Bain's reports indicate that its investments have been successful 80% of the time and that only 5% of the firm's investments ended in bankruptcies.

But has Mitt Romney had a perfect career?  Has he been successful at everything he did?  Absolutely not. And Mitt Romney has never tried to act under that assumption.  He talks about the successes of his career, but what makes Mitt Romney so unique is that he is also willing to recognize his failures.

Mitt Romney will be the first to admit that not every investment went as he had hoped or planned.  He has frequently admitted frustration and deep disappointment for failed investments that resulted in job losses and heartache for laid off employees.

But when his company is successful 80% of the time and experienced real failure only 5%, is there a chance that the Obama campaign is choosing to focus on bad?  Is he choosing to distort the real picture of this American company?

Former New Hampshire Governor John Sununu argues that it is absolutely fair game to use Bain in the campaign, but only if you talk about Bain as a whole.  He said, "If you want to talk about Bain on cherry-picking basis that's a distortion."

Darren Hauck/Reuters

Mitt Romney has repeatedly said that his investors were always cautious with the companies they invested in and in the event that they were unable to help resuscitate a broken company, they carefully learned from their mistakes.

Can the same be said of this administration?

When was the last time that we heard contrition or an apology from a DC politician?  When was the last time we heard an apology from this president for the $5 trillion spent in just 3 1/2 years?  Money that has failed to stimulate our economy.

Instead, we have watched an administration in just three+ years, throw money at programs hoping each time that it would be the trick to revive our staggering economy.  As I said here, it has been like watching individuals throw darts at a dart board.  Each time crossing their fingers to hit the mark.

But the president has promised that attacks on Bain will continue and he will continue to brand Romney  as a "reckless" and "immoral" individual.  However, as they scrutinize and vilify, there is one blaring truth that they will never be able to say:  Mitt Romney nor anyone on his team has ever grossly overspent the money they were allotted.  In his entire 25+ years, Mitt Romney never borrowed an unthinkable $5 trillion without ever devising a plan to repay the debt.

Can the same be said of this president?

Pablo Martinez Monsivais, AP

Can we imagine for a moment if Mitt Romney had been this type of investor?  Would the media ever have stood by and allowed him to get away with it?  Would the media have tolerated an individual whose organization recklessly spent/ borrowed $1.6 trillion annually and never hinted at a plan to repay it?

The answer is of course not, nor should they.

But this president is given a pass on his 3 1/2 year record and the media seems perfectly willing to blame the immoral reckless spending on an "inept" Congress.

***

The Romney campaign released this campaign ad highlighting some unknown details of Obama's first-term investments where billions and billions of dollars were made for clean energy solutions.

Most of these clean energy investments were to companies owned by some of Obama's biggest Democrat donors.  In just a few short years, most of these investments have failed causing these companies to shut down--jobs lost---money wasted--peoples' lives affected.  Billions and billions of tax dollars have been lost.

Who is accountable for this loss?

It seems almost ironic that this president wants to hold Mitt Romney accountable for the jobs lost at a steel plant or one paper company, yet the trillions he lost on failed programs are brushed off as "politics as usual."

AP Photo/Jae C. Hong

This is not okay.  Apparently Obama agrees.  As I mentioned above, he said, "Sometimes jobs are created...sometimes it goes the other way.  Workers get laid off.  Benefits disappear.  Pensions are cut.  There may be value for that kind of experience, but it's not in the White House."

We should expect more from our leaders.

Fortunately with Mitt Romney, we can.

Go Mitt.

Obama's Debt Outrage--Is it for the Right Reason?

Our president is finally showing outrage over the debt that has accumulated under his watch.  Last night, standing in front of a group of supporters in Iowa, he finally voiced his outrage---but his outrage was not exactly what you would think.

He wasn't outraged or apologetic for the $5 trillion spent in just 3 1/2 years.  He wasn't outraged over the insatiable spending habits of Washington DC politicians.  And he still isn't outraged that members of his own party in the Senate have yet to pass a budget to fiscally control themselves.  No, none of this seems to bother him.

President Obama's outrage is simply that Mitt Romney is holding him accountable for it.  He is taking offense that Romney says that debt is sweeping the nation like a "prairie fire."

(Apparently, the president doesn't like it when people hold him accountable for his own record).

He would much rather blame his predecessor, pivot away from his own record and then distract voters with hot button issues.

Blame. Pivot. Distract.

***

Last night, Obama told his supporters, "He left out some facts.  His speech was more like a cow pie of distortion.  I don't know whose record he twisted the most: mine or his."

I am not exactly sure what the president meant.  Hasn't anyone in his administration ever provided him a copy of the US deficit / financial records for his first term?

Is he possibly unaware how much debt has been accumulated under his watch?  Didn't someone explain to him that he assumed responsibility for every dollar borrowed and spent from the moment he was sworn into office?

Because let's be honest, the president can't exactly cry ignorance.  He undoubtedly knows the gravity of America's financial stability, well, I stand corrected, at least candidate Obama in 2008 certainly did.  Candidate Obama knew those deficit numbers like the back of his hand.  He had scrutinized and analyzed every frivolous Bush expense.  He boldly criticized President Bush for the exorbitant $4 trillion that was accumulated in 8 years.

(FYI, that's $4 trillion in 8 years compared to $5 trillion in 3 1/2 years).

As I mentioned here, Candidate Obama frequently attacked Bush for his 8 year reckless spending spree and even went as far as branding him "irresponsible" and "unpatriotic."

Jim R. Bounds  /  AP

Back in 2008, candidate Obama was a bold and refreshing voice of reason and advocate for fiscal responsibility.

Is he that same person?  Why not?  What has changed?

Could it be that the role he assumed as President of the Free World is a much harder job than he could ever have imagined?  Or worse yet, was all of his "fiscal responsibility" talk just a bunch of campaign rhetoric meant to seduce voters?

Either way, President Obama needs to have the courage to own it.  It happened under his watch.  Like it or not, this $5 trillion mess is tied to his presidency.

***

This morning the Romney camp responded to the president's attacks.  Romney spokesman Ryan Williams said, "A president who broke his promise to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term has no standing when it comes to fiscal responsibility."

But the Obama Administration appears unfazed.  In fact, they are now synchronizing their message and are blaming Mitt Romney and the media for distorting Obama's fiscal record.

Jay Carney, White House Press Secretary warned reporters earlier this week not to "buy into the BS that you hear about spending and fiscal constraint with regard to this Administration.  I think doing so is a sign of sloth and laziness."

Carolyn Kaster/AP

Could Carney be feeling a little bounce in his step after reading a report published by Market Watch?  This article written by Rex Nutting makes the assertion, "The Obama spending binge never happened."

Although the Fact Checker for the Washington Post cited numerous falsities in Nutting's data, the White House is now clinging to the notion that somehow they have been fiscally disciplined.

Please.  This is ridiculous.   And no matter how hard Carney and President Obama try, numbers---$5 trillion of them---don't lie.

***

For now, I am sure we are going to hear congratulatory speeches about Obama's "fiscal sobriety" and see plenty of pats on the back, and see plenty of phony "outrage" over Romney's attacks, but fortunately for Mitt Romney, this time around, people are very engaged in the election.  Voters are paying attention.

Credit: AP Photo/Mary Altaffer

I would be willing to be that the only "BS" people will see is the incessant pattern of:  Blame. Pivot. Distract.  Voters will continue to question why the president's fiscal "outrage" only surfaces when Mitt Romney holds him accountable for his $5 trillion fiscal train wreck.

By November, I am confident that the real "outrage" will simply be that this president allowed that $5 trillion wreck to happen and we have nothing to show for it.

America deserves more.

Go Mitt.

Debt, Collateral & Accountability

Anyone who has gone through a home purchase knows that the process to apply for and secure a home loan is surprisingly tedious and ridiculously complicated.

hardmoneyloansnortherncalifornia.com

The amount of paperwork, verification and signatures needed to secure a home loan is outrageous.

It can be quite intimidating.

By the last signature, a buyer certainly feels the weight of their purchase and the responsibility in assuming a debt that will take 30 years to repay.

Banks certainly take a risk, but aside from the interest they earn, the single biggest incentive for the bank is that the house is the collateral.  They know that people feel an obligation to pay their mortgages or they will lose their homes.

The collateral keeps the borrower accountable for the debt.

***

Just think for a second how different borrowing is for our political leaders in this country?

Politicians draft up legislation with unthinkable price tags---literally trillions and trillions of dollars for expensive, inefficient, unproven and mostly, broken programs.

Getty Images

How are they paying for it?  After tax payer revenue has dried up, borrowed money from China covers the rest.

This lovely borrowing system has been going on for decades.  Today, America's debt  / deficit stands at a staggering $15.7 trillion and counting. (www.treasurydirect.gov).

According to the usdebtclock.org, the total debt per US citizen is $183, 378.  That puts the debt per US family to $692,810.

I don't know about the average person, but the fact that our government leaders have passed this debt onto each of us seems totally unfair, completely uncalled for and quite frankly, immoral.

Who is holding these leaders accountable?

Furthermore, what is the collateral on their debt?

***

This cycle continues year after year.  Decade after decade. Trillions upon trillions.  No politician has been able to adequately address the amount of overspending by our government or effectively come up with a significant plan to eliminate it.

Where is the outrage?

When Candidate Obama ran in 2008, he hinted that he was different.  He portrayed himself as being unlike his predecessors.  He boasted that he could be trusted to be fiscally responsible.

He heavily criticized President George W. Bush.  Obama said, "The problem is the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion for the first 24 presidents. #43 added 4 trillion by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back---$30,000 for every man, woman and child.  That's irresponsible.  It's unpatriotic." (Fargo, ND 7/3/08)

As the Romney campaign has highlighted, Candidate Obama once promised to go through the budget, "line by line, eliminating programs that no longer work and making new ones we do need work better and cost less." (Denver, CO 8/28/08)

Has he done any of it?

Absolutely not.  Instead, his record reflects that his claims of fiscal responsibility were nothing but empty rhetoric used in a stump speech to pander to voters.

In just 3 1/2 years, this president has spent way more than he was allotted.  He has increased our debt by $5 trillion.  He once called President Bush "unpatriotic" for the debt he created.  What does he have to say about his $5 trillion contribution?

***

Will Mitt Romney be any different?

There is one blaring reason why Mitt Romney will be different: He has been trained to be accountable.

Mitt Romney has made a career out of being accountable with other people's money.  For years, he managed millions and millions of investors' money.  These years gave him hands-on training to never spend more than he takes in.

Romney has been trained to use discretion.  Unlike President Obama, Romney never had access to an unlimited amount of borrowed money.  Instead, he had to learn how to budget and account for every dollar and every expense.  His career reflects an individual who knows how a budget works.  He has always had to spend within limits.

Why?

For 25+ years, Mitt Romney knew that if he wasn't accountable and fiscally responsible, he would get fired.  This is how he has been trained.  This is how he made a living and he was exceptionally good at what he did.  This training led to tremendous growth under his watch.

This is what makes him different.

America deserves more.   It is time for a leader who not only knows what to say, but more importantly knows how to act.

We must remember that something is terribly wrong in this country when it is harder for a homeowner to secure a $200,000 loan on a home than it is for a politician to rack up trillions in debt.

It is time for some accountability---because the only collateral that voters have for this reckless debt is to remove the reckless politicians.

It is time to collect.

America needs Mitt.

Mediocre Economy...Should We Settle?

The Commerce Department released the first quarterly report on the gross domestic product (GDP)--the total output / value of good and services produced in the United States.  Unfortunately, the news is not great.  For the first quarter of 2012, the GDP fell to 2.2 percent.  It was 3 percent in the last quarter of 2011.

The quarterly GDP report is one of the most closely watched reports for economy and for good reason.  It most accurately reflects the economic mood of the country.

What does this mean?  How do these numbers affect my household?

The reality is, this is far from encouraging news.  It shows that the economic recovery in the U.S. is still fragile and very unstable and most would argue, still unpredictable.  Although the report shows a slight rise in consumer spending, most would say that it is hard to paint a pretty picture from this report.

Make no mistake about it, the White House is paying close attention by scrutinizing and analyzing every detail of this report.

I have no doubt that they are undoubtedly frustrated by these numbers, especially with the November election looming on the horizon. They are now trying to put on an optimistic face.

When asked about the report, Josh Earnest, the White House press secretary said,  "We don't put too much weight on any individual report but rather what we examine are the longer-term trends and today's report indicates for the 111th consecutive month, we've enjoyed economic growth."

What?

They don't put "too much weight on any individual report?" Um...this is the Commerce Department with a report showing that the economy is now growing at a slower pace than it was 3 months ago.  This is not good news.

No matter what they do or say, or how much they try to focus on the "encouraging data," in the report reflecting slight improvements in personal consumption, home construction and auto markets, the truth remains, this stinks.

It will be hard to spin their way out of mediocre economic performance.

So what do these numbers really mean and how do these numbers really affect my household?

It reminds us that our president's policies have not worked.  Our president has tried his best to make it right and this is all we get?  This report just reminds us that this president just might be in over his head.

This report demonstrates once again that the American Dream is becoming less and less possible for any of us.  It reminds us that millions of Americans are still wondering how they are going to keep their heads above water, stay on their feet, pay their bills and keep their homes.

This report reminds us that the unemployment rate in this country remains at 8.2 percent.  Even worse, it reminds us that the unemployment rate for workers under the age of 25 remains at an unthinkable 16.4 percent.

It reminds us that the cost of attending college has risen 25 percent in the last four years and it reminds us that college graduates--at even the best universities--are having difficulty finding a job after graduation.

This report reminds us that businesses are still in a very fragile place.  Scott Hoyt, senior director of consumer economics at Moody's Analytics said, "Businesses are flush right now, but they are very scared.  They are hoarding their cash rather than distributing it in hiring, investment or giving it to shareholders."

This report reminds us that maybe the stimulus/ TARP money was nothing more than an artificial boost to the economy.  The stimulus money has all been spent.  The spike appears to have only been temporary.

Are these results worth the $4 trillion price tag? Did the stimulus stimulate?

Regardless of how hard the White House spins this, this report is discouraging.

***

I wish more than anything that politicians would see that these numbers affect more than the outcome of an election.  This is personal.  This is urgent.  We are desperate.  America is still broken.

This is one of the many reasons why I believe that Mitt Romney's specific economic leadership skills are exactly what we need for these very specific and fragile economic times.

Gerald Herbert / AP 

Time and again he has proven that he knows what to do in these kinds of situations.  And more importantly, time and again, Mitt Romney has demonstrated that his fine-tuned skills have been the lifeline for countless companies, organizations and even a nearly bankrupt state government.

Mitt knows how to get our economy moving again so that it will return to a healthy, thriving country where people find jobs, where opportunities are real, where an education is seen as a benefit and not simply a personal debt to overcome, where people can afford to buy homes and more importantly, afford to keep making the payments.

America's future is promising, but we need a leader to help us remember that America can be better and stronger than it is now.

We should not settle for mediocrity.  We should not celebrate poor performance.  We should not reward politicians who create failed policies.  We should not settle.  We deserve more.  Americans should demand better.

The time is now.  America needs Mitt.

A Thank You Note to Mr. Santorum

Dear Mr. Santorum,

As a Mitt Romney supporter, I feel some obligation to thank you for your recent campaign tactics.  Over the past few days, your spontaneity and campaign blunders have undoubtedly shortened Romney's path to the nomination.

Here are a few reasons why my heart is full of gratitude:

First of all, thank you for rarely thinking before your speak.  It has given your rivals choice opportunities to use your own words against you.  When you said that Republicans would be "better off voting for Obama over Mitt Romney" and when you declared that you "didn't care about unemployment rates" or most recently when you told supporters that Mitt Romney is the "worst Republican to go up against Barack Obama."  In each of these instances, you have rallied rank and file Republicans around Mitt Romney.  It has been a pleasure to watch you attempt to clarify your own words...again.

Secondly, thank you for your gaffes--especially during times of visible frustration.  Your recent outburst with the New York Times reporter was perfectly timed.  I realize that today Sarah Palin also congratulated you for sticking it to the "Gotcha' Media," but my congrats is different.  By trying to claim that this reporter had somehow "distorted" your words and your use of that choice expletive, perfectly demonstrated that you are becoming unhinged.  Let's be honest, your chances of securing the nomination are diminishing and your frustration is visible.  It is taking its toll.   It isn't professional.  It isn't presidential.  Furthermore, it only seems to highlight the fact that Mitt Romney has never had one of "those" moments.

AP Photo/Jae C. Hong

Thank you for effectively letting the Etch A Sketch gaffe made by a Romney spokesman blow up in your face.  When you tried to say that the country would be "better off with Obama than an Etch A Sketch president," it was a terrible mistake.   Ironically, this gaffe has now lost its effectiveness and is now more associated with you than with Romney.

Also, congratulations on your Louisiana win.  It only seemed to highlight that your coalition of supporters struggles to reach beyond evangelical Christians.

Lastly, Mr. Santorum, I hope that you see the writing on the wall, especially before another possible loss in your home state of Pennsylvania.  I can't imagine that would help your political aspirations in the future.

All that said, thank you.  Your efforts, tactics, blunders and gaffes have made a difference.  Mitt Romney looks more more prepared, more organized, more mature and quite frankly, more presidential than ever. 

Romney supporters are anxiously awaiting your endorsement.  It goes without saying, the fat lady has entered the stage.


Best regards,

Alecia Williams
-A conservative who is more convinced than ever that Mitt Romney is the right candidate with the right experience who has emerged at the right time.

Sorry Santorum--No Such Thing As A Do-Over

I think Rick Santorum woke up this morning wishing he could have a do-over, but in politics, there is no such thing.  And worse yet, soundbites and media frenzy will continue to extend the life of last night's nightmare debate performance.

Photo from The New Yorker

For Santorum, last night was a disaster.  By all accounts, he was the clear loser.  He came into the debate with a huge advantage--namely surging poll numbers and the coveted media buzz highlighting the excitement surrounding his candidacy.  Advantages that for two weeks, Santorum effectively drained away from his rivals.

But in politics, everything can change in a day...

***

Today, Rick Santorum's popular message of being the "only true conservative" is no longer effective.  This message got muddied up last night and oddly enough, Santorum did it to himself.

Santorum walked on stage with the advantage and yet, he wasn't able to profit from any of it.   His rivals were able to effectively portray him as a product of Washington DC--an overspending politician who over and over puts party before principle.  Santorum spent most of the night rambling on about why voted for bills he opposed.  It wasn't good.  He left the stage a bruised and weakened candidate.

Photo from Politico.com

When questioned about some of his votes, Santorum said, "I have to admit, I voted for that (No Child Left Behind).  It was against the principles I believed in, but you know, when you're part of a team, sometimes you take one for the team, for the leader, and I made a mistake."

Hmm.  This didn't exactly help his war cry of being an individual that is "consistently" and "courageously" conservative.

His weakest moment came when he tried to defend his position on earmarks.  He once again defended the practice of earmarks and said that "Congress has a role of allocating resources." He defended his $1 billion earmark record, but not very well.

He became so tangled in his explanation that he actually ended up helping Mitt Romney.  He tried to point out that Romney had secured earmarks for security measures for the Salt Lake Olympics.  His tangled attack however, made Romney's Olympic earmarks seem valiant and a justified federal expense.  The nail in the coffin came when Romney pointed out that Santorum had actually supported Mitt Romney's earmark effort when he voted to approve federal funds for the Olympics.

Oops.  Santorum must have forgotten that conservatives view earmarks as corrupt practices which allow wasteful government spending.  By defending it, he portrayed himself as anything but a true fiscal conservative.

To make matters worse, CNN reported today that during the debate, Google searches for the word "earmark" spiked 2300%.  (click to read CNN article).  Yeah, I am pretty sure that Santorum is not thrilled that an increase of 2300% means more people are better educated on the controversial spending habits of our politicians.

Some of the strongest zingers of the night came from Representative Ron Paul.  The moderator John King asked Paul about his new campaign ad depicting Senator Santorum as a "fake fiscal conservative." When asked why he depicts Santorum as a "fake," Ron Paul responded, "Because he's a fake." He portrayed Santorum as a typical candidate--one who overspends as a politician, but as a candidate, claims to be fiscally conservative, one who suddenly advocates to repeal all the expensive bills he had voted to approve.

Ron Paul made Santorum look like a hypocrite.  Unfortunately Santorum's record compared with his campaign message shows that he is.

***

We are now five days from the pivotal Michigan and Arizona primaries.  Mitt Romney, the clear winner of last night's debate is campaigning today with a swing in his step.  On the other hand, Rick Santorum is campaigning, but will undoubtedly be stuck in his now muddied message.  Will it resonate?  Has his turn at the top expired?

Santorum is desperate for some big name endorsers to spin attention away from his damaging remarks, but as I mentioned here, Rick Santorum doesn't have any big endorsements.  No colleagues, no senators, no representatives, no governors have endorsed him.  No one, but Santorum can rally to his defense.  Is it going to be enough?  

(On a day like today, it is clear that endorsements matter).

This process has been a volatile roller coaster ride, but one thing has remained constant and that constant is Mitt Romney.  Despite the resistance to his candidacy, attacks from all sides, and rejection from the ultra conservative base, Mitt Romney continues to survive.  He continues to rise to the top.

Getty Images

***

The purists continue to reject him and even if Romney wins on Tuesday, the purists will still resist and continue seeking the anti-Mitt candidate.  However, I would be willing to bet that Mitt Romney will survive...again.

Why?  Mitt Romney survives not because he is clever or because he has a better organization, he survives because Mitt Romney is a remarkable candidate.  A remarkable leader whose experience makes him unique.  A candidate whose successes make him different, whose skills make him valuable.  Mitt Romney will be a weapon for our party.  He will be an invaluable asset to our country.

I think it is time to rally.  Time to rally behind the candidate with the best chances of beating Barack Obama.  Time to rally behind the candidate whose conservative principles won't alienate independents, whose statements won't fuel a social ideological war. It is time to rally behind the candidate who has been prepared for the fight to save America and has the skills to actually be successful.

Photo from planetromney.com

Purists, it is time.  It is time to rally behind Mitt Romney.

Extreme is Not Good For Democracy

Extreme--a word that is now a part of the every conservative's vocabulary.

Why?  Extreme is they way most conservatives describe our current president.  Extreme policies.  Extreme changes.  Extremely polarizing.  Extremely divisive. Extremely expensive. Extreme.

Under President Obama (and I would also partially include President George W. Bush), our country has been introduced to some of the most extreme policy changes in our country's history.  Most would argue that this extremeness has literally changed the culture of our government.

Has extreme been good for America?  Are we a better people?  Are we stronger? Is America still an indivisible nation?   Can we say with conviction, "We, the people?"

The answer is unequivocally, no.

Extremism is not democracy at work.  Extremism polarizes.  Extremism is not representative of a diverse culture.  Extremism is not in the constitution of the United States.  Extreme leadership has divided us.

Image from newsjunkiepost.com

The presidential election is 259 days away.  Our country will have the opportunity to bring an end to extremism in our national government.  Will we be successful?

Everything seems to be in the conservatives' odds to end Obama's extremism.  Namely, a struggling economy, high unemployment, staggering deficit levels, a drop in the US's credit rating (first time in history), an inept legislature, an angry electorate and an unpopular president.

One would think that this is the perfect recipe for a Republican victory, but obviously it is not.  Things do not look optimistic for our cause.  We are losing and President Obama continues to widen his chances of victory.

Yet, there was a time in the past few months when the Republican party held a solid lead over President Obama.  A time when it appeared that President Obama's chance for reelection was extremely vulnerable.  The only time this has happened was when Mitt Romney was leading in the polls.

Image from Zimbio.com

Why?   Mitt Romney's years of experience in fixing broken systems, repairing bankrupt companies, balancing budgets, record of bipartisanship, and his gift of analysis and careful decision making abilities made Mitt Romney different.  His skills made him unique.  His leadership made him remarkable.

Many Independents and even some moderate Democrats recognized it.

For several months, our country was given pause to consider what it would be like to have a true Washington outsider leading our country.  What it would be like to have someone actually have the skills to know how to repair our broken government.  What it would be like to have someone getting bipartisan bills passed without back room deals and bribes. What it would be like to have someone with a track record of being accountable with other people's money.

It appeared that most people liked what they saw in Mitt Romney.  Why?  Because Mitt Romney is NOT extreme.

***

But this primary season changed everything.  Extremism has once again been given a voice.

Extreme conservatives rejected Mitt Romney's experience and only focused on a few of Romney's past moderate political stances--stances he has long rejected.  These extreme conservatives rejected him and then did whatever they could to discredit his record--to vilify his financial successes--to dishonor his accomplishments as governor--to disfavor his character and personality.  It worked.

Instead they became hellbent on finding the "purist" conservative candidate.  Well, it looks like they have found him--Rick Santorum--an extreme social conservative politician who spent 16 years in government, raised the debt limit 5 times, and who personally racked up $1 billion (yes, Billion) of federal debt for just his home state of Pennsylvania.  This individual is now leading in the polls.

Biggest problem?  Rick Santorum is very extreme.  His statements over the years and even some things have said over the past few days in relation to women's health issues, birth control, derogatory statements about homosexuality, comparing Obama to Hitler and his intertwining of religion and political ideology have demonstrated that Santorum--although conservative--will lead with extremeness.  Rick Santorum will continue to widen the vast canyon that exists between the two political ideologies in our country.

Under Rick Santorum, America will remain like the Grand Canyon--a deeply divided people--a vast chasm of ideology.

Photo from bugamerica.com

Aren't we tired of this kind of leadership?  Extreme is not democracy at its finest.  Extreme is not good for America.  Extreme leaders will never make us an indivisible nation.

America deserves more.  America needs Mitt.