Why Women Can Confidently Stand With Mitt

Imagine your house is on fire.  From the curb, you watch your life go up in flames.  To your relief, firefighters arrive and reassuringly tell you they can help.  They run into your home.  Long minutes pass and the black smoke thickens.  Firefighters finally emerge protecting something in their hands.  They run to you and say, “Don’t worry.  We got it.  Here is your birth control.”

This is how I feel about the president’s campaign to target women.  Our economy is still crumbling.  Families still can’t pay their bills.  My neighbors are still losing their homes and four years later, the president hasn’t fixed it.  Days before his re-election, he thinks I should be focused on birth control? 

Please.  I am insulted.

President Obama says women should fear Mitt Romney claiming that Romney will to “take women back to the 1950s.”

There are a few reasons why President Obama and his surrogates are wrong about their erroneous and misleading claims about Mitt Romney.

I lived in Massachusetts when Romney was elected governor.  His actions demonstrated that he cared about women’s issues.  First, he selected a remarkable female Lt. Governor and then filled his cabinet with more women than any time in state history—more than any other cabinet in the country.  And throughout his sterling business career he surrounded himself with countless female executives.

The criticism for Romney’s “binders full of women” comment is juvenile.  Have we forgotten that Monster.com didn’t exist?  He reviewed “binders full of resumes” of women and he ended up hiring dozens of them to be his key advisors.

Like the President, Governor Romney also inherited a “mess.”  Massachusetts was facing a recession.

But unlike President Obama, he not only kept every one of his 44 campaign promises, but he passed health care reform, cut taxes, lowered unemployment to 4.6%, balanced the budget, drove public schools to #1 in the nation, and turned a $3 billion budget shortfall into a $2 billion surplus—and achieved it all without raising taxes or borrowing a single dollar. 

More remarkable?  He accomplished it in one term with an 87% democratically controlled state legislature.  (Has the president’s record even come close?)

Under Romney's leadership, did women lose access to birth control?  Did women lose their voice or place in the workforce?  Did women go back to the 1950s?  Absolutely not—in fact, it was just the opposite.  It’s misleading to act under the misguided assumption that it would be any different under a Romney presidency.

Does Romney have plans to eliminate birth control?  No.  Does he promise to get America’s fiscal crisis in order?  Yes.  Will that require possibly cutting federally funded programs like Planned Parenthood, which could be self or state funded? Most likely.

But someone should tell the President that actions speak louder than words.  The 2011 White House annual report shows that White House female staffers earned 18 percent less than male staffers.

The truth?  President Obama is marching America towards a deficit level that mirrors Greece—a country on the brink of collapse.  Is birth control the top concern for those Greek women?  Probably not. 

Shame on the president and his campaign for thinking it should be here.

We must take the steps to protect America’s stability or we are like women asking a firefighter to run into a burning home just to save our birth control.  If birth control isn’t going anywhere, why should it be the determining factor for whom is most able to lead America back to the path of prosperity?

In the words of Governor Susannah Martinez, “Too many Americans are out of work. Our debt is out of control.  Obama promised to bring us together, to cut unemployment, to pass immigration reform, and to cut the deficit in half in his first term—(he) hasn’t come close to accomplishing any of it.”

I am a woman.  I live in Denver, Colorado and I stand with Mitt because his resume shows that he’ll know what to do and not just know what to say.  A recovery is supposed to feel like a recovery and my family can’t afford to find out what happens if President Obama gets it wrong…again.

Join me and stand with Mitt.  It's time to find out what a real recovery is supposed to feel like.

Does Benghazi Matter? 3 Reasons Why it Does

The most highly talked about moment in Tuesday's debate isn't the fact that Obama had a strong performance---it isn't that the president "won" the debate---and much to Obama's dismay, the focus isn't "binders full of women."

Like it or not, the focus continues to be the Benghazi attacks.

Image from ABC News

During the debate, Mitt Romney said, "It took the President 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror."

The president then interrupted and said, "Get the transcript." (Who was he talking to?)  Then out of nowhere, the debate moderator Candy Crowley, interjected and declared that the president did indeed call it an "act of terror."

Wait...When the president said, "Get the transcript," did he actually cue the moderator?  Had the president actually prepared her in advance with materials to help him at just the right moment?

Is that even allowed?  Isn't that a conflict of interest?

Well, I want to know if Mitt Romney was granted the same courtesy.  Because I am sure Romney would have appreciated Crowley's "fact checking skills" when the president flatly denied that his administration has cut the number of permits and licenses for oil drilling on federal lands and waters. Obama said Romney was lying.  Fact checkers and analysts have confirmed that Romney was right.

{It is worth noting, that following the debate, Crowley admitted that "Romney was largely right on Libya."}

Image from Wall Street Journal

But thanks to the debate, Obama finally offered some clarity:  He wants the American people to know that on September 12th, he officially, although somewhat ambiguously, called the embassy attack an "act of terror."

Well, I would argue that there are three reasons why Obama made a huge mistake in "clarifying an act of terror:"

***

#1 Did the President Prioritize Fundraising over National Security?

1) If the president firmly believed that the attacks were an "act of terror," how did he justify hours after the attack, to leave the confines of closed door meetings with his National Security Advisers and Intelligence Staff at the White House to parade himself around at fundraisers and campaign events? 

Obama in Las Vegas on September 12th (Image from Flickr)

Hadn't terrorists just committed a despicable act of war on America's interests abroad?  Wasn't an Ambassador dead?  For the first time in 30 years, an American ambassador had been murdered in an attack on our embassy and hours later, the president is off talking to supporters in Las Vegas about looking "Forward?"

That doesn't exactly look like leadership.  And it certainly doesn't show the terrorists that we have a president who is serious about terrorism.

#2 Who Fed the President False Information? Why Did he Believe Them?

If the president was convinced on September 12th that it was terrorism, then at what point did he change his conviction?  Who told him that it was a spontaneous attack in response to a YouTube video and why did he trust them enough to believe it?  Who had the president's ear?  And how did they convince him so quickly to change his description of the attacks to repeatedly say that it was simply a spontaneous protest in response to an obscure 20 minute video? 

Image from UPI.com

Whoever fed the president and Secretary Hillary Clinton this false information should be fired.  This information tarnished their reputation and their judgement.  My heavens, days after the attack, our president and the Secretary of State stood before the caskets of the four dead Americans and in front of their families, they simply condemned the video.  

Even worse?  Obama and Clinton spent millions of dollars on a commercial aired in Pakistan where they actually apologized for any offense that the video had caused---yet not one condemnation of terrorism.  

For two weeks, White House spokesmen, Obama and Clinton repeated claims about the video.  President Obama appeared on The View, David Letterman and he even spoke before the United Nations, but never once clarified that our embassy had been attacked by terrorists.  Rather, we simply heard that there was an investigation and that the video clip had sparked the violence.    

We now know that this not true. 

#3 Why Are Only Women Taking the Heat?   Did Obama throw Women Under the Bus?

Five days after the Benghazi attacks, the White House sent the current UN Ambassador, Susan Rice to appear on five different Sunday talk shows.  On each of these shows, Rice adamantly and consistently insisted, "Our current assessment is that what happened in Benghazi was, in fact, a spontaneous protest prompted by the YouTube video." 

The Washington Post reported that Rice says that "days before her TV appearances, she relied on updates from Security Officials and also on a set of talking points prepared by the administration."  She says that there was no attempt on her part to "pick and choose" possible explanations.  

Either she is lying or someone deliberately used her to downplay suspicions of terrorism.  Why?  Either way, Rice's reputation and her credibility is ruined and someone in this administration is letting it happen.

Secretary Hillary Clinton is also at the center of this controversy.  She now takes "full responsibility for what happened on September 11th."  Full responsibility for what?

Is Hillary confirming that she was the one who ignored Ambassador Steven's repeated requests to beef up security in Benghazi?  Was she responsible for the phony talking points provided for Susan Rice?  Was she the one who had the president's ear and convinced him to waver on his September 12th "act of terror" declaration? 

Was she the one who failed to inform the President and Joe Biden that this was truly terrorism and that there were security breeches?  Because according to the last two debates, apparently neither of them were "aware" of any security issues at this embassy.

If all of this is true, will the president be forced to fire Susan Rice and Hillary Clinton?  If it isn't true, then why is President Obama allowing these two women to take the blame?

Either way, his administration seems perfectly willing to throw these women under the bus.

***

The president and his administration have handled the Benghazi tragedy with sloppiness and careless ambiguity.   An ambassador is dead.  American interests have been attacked by terrorists.  American security has been breached.  And yet, all we see from this administration is that a strange cover-up is unraveling.

To defend the president on many things is fine with me, but to defend his handling of the Benghazi attack is indefensible.

The press may not want to hold him accountable for it, but in 19 days, we can.  We should.  We will.

Go Mitt.

Women for Mitt? A Simple Call for Action

Are you a woman who Stands with Mitt?

This is a personal invitation to take part in a small, yet powerful Facebook movement.

This Thursday, tomorrow, women across this country want to vocalize their support for Mitt Romney and show President Obama that although he may speak for some, he doesn’t speak for us. 

In three short sentences, update your Facebook status with, “I am a woman.  I live in (city, state).  And then one sentence about why you support Mitt Romney.  Sample:

“I am a woman.  I live in Denver, Colorado.  I stand with Mitt. (Or I stand with Mitt because...)

Then challenge your friends to do the same.  

Please forward this message to every woman you know who wants to reclaim her voice in this election.  Invite her to post the same Facebook status update tomorrow.  

Let’s reclaim our voice in this election.  Let's Stand with Mitt!

We can make a difference! 

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.

Women Who Stand With Mitt

Day 2 of the convention is over and by all accounts it was a remarkable night.  There was plenty of red meat -- it fired up the base and has stirred up the critics.

One thing which continues to stand out more than anything?  The Women.

Much to the dismay of the left, the Republican party is saturated with strong, articulate and respectable women.  Women who love their country and are fighting for the promise that the American Dream is still within reach for anyone.  Women who ardently believe that our leaders must begin to exercise fiscal discipline and for the sake of our country's stability, these women demand that our leaders be confined to moral spending limits.

These women are leaders.  They have found their voice.  Above all, these women refuse to be defined or confined by the social issues of our day.

Susana Martinez, Gov. New Mexico; Nicki Halley, Gov. South Carolina; Mia Love, Mayor, Saratoga Springs, Utah, Condoleeza Rice, former Secretary of State; Kelly Ayotte, Senator, New Hampshire.

Susana Martinez 
First female Hispanic governor in America
Last night America was introduced to a remarkable woman, Susana Martinez, Republican Governor from New Mexico.   She talked about her humble upbringing in a town on the border where her family lived paycheck to paycheck.  She told of her parents determination to improve their circumstances and the risks they took to build a business that grew from one employee to hundreds and eventually spread to three states.

She candidly shared the poignant moment not too long ago, when as a Democrat she realized, "All be damned, I am a Republican."

Image from Foxnews.com

Martinez challenged Americans that this election must be about real issues.  She said, "Too many Americans are out of work and our debt is out of control.  This election needs to be about those issues.  Obama promised to bring us together, to cut unemployment, to pass immigration reform in his first year and he even promised to cut the deficit in half in his first term.  Do you remember that?  He hasn't come close."

Martinez made an impression on me and I have no doubt that her impact will be far reaching.

***

Condoleezza Rice
First African American Female Secretary of State
Her poignant speech has those on the left scrambling today because she spoke with authority on foreign  policy and domestic issues and boldly asserted that America's standing in the world has been impacted under President Obama.  She declared that America's future is uncertain if we continue to try to "lead from behind."

Image from the Wall Street Journal

Rice said the world has seen areas in the Middle East declare their desire for freedom, and yet the US has remained a silent spectator.  She said "The promise of the Arab Spring is engulfed in uncertainty; internal strife and hostile neighbors are challenging the fragile democracy in Iraq; dictators in Iran and Syria butcher their own people; all wonder 'Where does America Stand?'"

She said, "Our friends and foes alike, do not know the answer to that question."

In regards to domestic issues, she reminded us that while our economy is crumbling here at home, our standing in the world has been compromised.  She said, "When the world looks at us today they see an American government that cannot live within its means.  They see a government that continues to borrow money, mortgaging the future of generations to come."

Perhaps one of the strongest arguments she made, "The world knows that when a nation loses control of its finances, it eventually loses control of its destiny."

She whole heartedly endorsed Mitt Romney and artfully undermined the president and his effort to segregate our country based on financial and class standing.  She said, "Ours has never been a narrative of grievance and entitlement.  We have not believed that I am doing poorly because you are doing well.  We have not been envious of one another and jealous of each other's success. Ours has been a belief in opportunity and a constant battle -- long and hard--- to extend the benefits of the American dream to all -- regardless to circumstance of birth."

Image from the Boston Globe

Rice awakened imagery of our country's greatness and the hope of a better future when she reminded us that "America has met and overcome difficult circumstances before."

She ended with the heart wrenching and emotional story from her childhood.  She said, "A little girl grows up in Jim Crow Birmingham -- the most segregated big city in America -- her parents can't take her to a movie theater or a restaurant -- but they make her believe that even though she can't have a hamburger at the Woolworth's lunch counter -- she can be President of the United States and she becomes the Secretary of State."

***

It was a powerful night.  These women and the others who shared that stage have awakened a yearning for America's greatness to be restored -- that the American Dream is still attainable for anyone -- and that leadership matters.

These strong women are all standing with Mitt.

These women have found their voice and refuse to be defined by the social issues of our day.  They boldly reminded the president the same message which I wish I could shout from my own roof, "Mr. President, you may speak for some, but you don't speak for me."