DNC Campaign Strategy: Ignore Obama’s Record

You’re the Democratic National Committee. Your task: somehow getting the American public to re-elect President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm).

How in the world do you pull off something like that?

The local CBS affiliate in Washington checked out the DNC’s website to see how they plan on achieving the impossible:

If the Democratic National Committee’s strategy for victory is to muffle its own party’s achievements and focus more on slamming Republicans, it seems to be doing a good job on its website.

The DNC’s homepage has numerous attack ads against presumptive Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, far more than news touting President Obama’s accomplishments in office.

A review of the DNC’s homepage shows a majority of ads mocking Romney from “Romney’s Guide To International Diplomacy” following his comments that London might not be ready for the Olympics with the Twitter hashtag “RomneyShambles,” to attack ads highlighting “Mitt Romney’s $ecret $tash” of money in Swiss bank accounts and his tenure at Bain Capital.

But a visitor will have to dig through the site to find Obama’s signature accomplishments.

July 11 is the last post on the homepage to mention the president’s signature health care law, but in that instance, it’s a blog post about why Republicans shouldn’t have voted to repeal “Obamacare” for the 33rd time. Before that, users have to go back to last month to find the DNC page proclaiming a health care victory following the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the law as constitutional.

Obama made history by becoming the first sitting president to endorse same-sex marriage, but to find it on the DNC homepage, one has to go through over 100 posts back to May when he first made the statement.

Instead of having Obama’s accomplishments readily available on the homepage, visitors need to scroll over to the “People” and “Issue” tabs to find his successes in office. CBSDC reached out to the DNC for comment.

Mathews Pierson, director of politics at CBS Local Media, said negative attack ads work better than presenting someone’s success.

“Everyone complains about negative campaigning, but we keep doing it for one really simple reason: it works,” Pierson told CBSDC. “The same voter who tells you he doesn’t want to see anymore of it will then tell you something bad about Mitt Romney that he certainly didn’t learn doing his own research. “

Pierson explained that constantly using attack ads on the DNC’s front page will help to “rev up activists.”

“Driving Romney’s negatives is working to engage activists and generate press coverage to keep pressing until it doesn’t,” Pierson said. “Also, while most of the public is tuned-out and hitting the beach, if every time they tune in they hear the negative Romney narrative it can solidify their opinion of him before they truly start paying attention to the race this fall.”

A recent Rasmussen Reports poll shows that Romney holds a 49 to 44 percent lead over Obama.

Accentuate the other guy’s negative campaign in order to overcome your own candidate’s ineptitude?

Errr…ummm…brilliant? No…that’s not the word. Liberal?  Yeah…that’s it. That’s how they approach everything (with thanks to John):

If a conservative doesn’t like guns, he doesn`t buy one.
If a liberal doesn’t like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.

If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn`t eat meat.
If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.

If a conservative sees a foreign threat, he thinks about how to defeat his enemy.
A liberal wonders how to surrender gracefully and still look good.

If a conservative is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a liberal is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.

If a black man or Hispanic are conservative, they see themselves as independently successful.
Their liberal counterparts see themselves as victims in need of government protection.

If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.

If a conservative doesn’t like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Liberals demand that those they don’t like be shut down.

If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn’t go to church.
A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced.

If a conservative reads this, he’ll forward it so his friends can have a good laugh.
If a liberal reads this he will delete it and try to ban the use of email for everyone for life.

Finally, to add to this wonderful list:

If a Conservative, or in Romney’s case, a Moderate, runs for President, he tells you why you should vote for him.

If a Liberal (Obama) runs (again) for President, he tell you why the other candidate is horrible, completely ignoring his own horrible record.

I mean, which are you going to believe? Him…or your wallet?

The Northeast Republican National Convention

Have you ever been excluded from a club, meeting, or party? Remember how rejected and mad that made you?

Wellll…grab the duct tape Reagan Conservatives, living in the Heartland.

The New York Post reports:

The word is going out quietly to Republican activists across New Jersey: If you’re going to the GOP convention in Tampa next month, be sure to be there by Tuesday night, Aug. 28, because Gov. Chris Christie is going to be giving the keynote speech that night.

“We’ve been told that’s the night to be there, that’s when the governor is going to speak. They’re saying he’s the keynoter,” one top party activist told The Post yesterday.

On May 26, 2012, Andrew McCarthy wrote the following article for nationalreview.com, answering a post by National Review’s Noah Glyn, claiming that Chis Christie was one of us (Conservative)

As it happens, I am a citizen of New Jersey, so my reasons for examining his record closely go beyond my day job. It is based on that examination that I see Christie as wildly overrated. Sure, his YouTube smackdowns of overmatched lefty hacks are catnip for the Right. The routine gets old fast, though. The tantrums have become as mundane as “Pass the salt.” Christie now erupts not only at teachers’ union drones but at NYPD commissioner Ray Kelly, New York congressman Pete King, former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, anti-sharia “crazies” who resist Islamic supremacism, all those “completely intellectually dishonest” conservatives who think Romneycare may not have been a fabulous idea, and, one infers, just about anyone who happens by when Governor Grumpy is having a bad day . . . which seems to be often. Plus, there’s not much rain in them big winds: Christie’s bully-boy études do not drown out his nonstop symphony to “bipartisanship,” nor obscure that it is “compromise” with the Left that sends him into (not infrequent) frissons of self-adulation.

To be sure, Christie is a very talented politician and a deft extemporaneous speaker. He has done some good things in a heavily Democratic state dominated by municipal unions. He is certainly, as blue-state governors go, better than average. That does not make him a conservative, much less the “consistent conservative” of Glyn’s portrayal.

…In the post Glyn targets, my point was that Christie would be a poor choice as Mitt Romney’s running mate — a conclusion with which Glyn actually agrees. If the objective in making the pick is to improve Romney’s chances by balancing the ticket with someone more conservative than Romney, that purpose would not be served by selecting a near-clone of Romney. Another moderate northeastern GOP governor with a soft spot for socialized medicine is not going to energize tea partiers and other Romney-indifferent conservatives. Furthermore, my principal contention in the post, not mentioned by Glyn, was that Christie has been adamant about not being ready to be president. Given that readiness to assume the office is generally taken to be the salient qualification for the No. 2 slot, Christie would seem to be unsuitable on his own account. In any event, my main purpose was not to trash Governor Christie — as a governor for New Jersey, he may be the best we can do at the moment. My post addressed the claim, still making the rounds, that he’d make a good veep choice.

…Borrowing more millions to pay current operating expenses — heaping more exorbitant debt, with interest, onto the backs of New Jersey’s children — is exactly the practice Christie lambasted his statist predecessor over. He promised to bring it to an end. But now the dilemma: Christie wants to keep his conservative cheerleaders cheering by cutting income taxes while preserving his “reach across the aisle” cred by not only maintaining but expanding the welfare state. As always, the “have it all” fantasy relies on the mirage of epic growth. When that growth inevitably fails to materialize, a governor can either get real or start playing budget voodoo with borrowed money. The “consistent conservative” has made his choice.

I’m far from the first to observe that there is much less to Chris Christie than meets the conservative ear. A blue state could — and usually does — do a lot worse than Christie for its governor. But if “Christie is one of us,” then a lot of “us” aren’t.

As we get closer to the kick-off of what is sizing up to be a distinctly Northeastern Moderate (and I’m being kind) Republican Convention (no Reagan Conservative Republicans allowed), I am reminded of this analysis of the words of the greatest United States President in our generation, who just happened to be a Republican:

Matt Barber wrote in the Washington Times that

Ronald Reagan often spoke of a “three-legged stool” that undergirds true conservatism. The legs are represented by a strong defense, strong free-market economic policies and strong social values. For the stool to remain upright, it must be supported by all three legs. If you snap off even one leg, the stool collapses under its own weight.

A Republican, for instance, who is conservative on social and national defense issues but liberal on fiscal issues is not a Reagan conservative. He is a quasi-conservative socialist.

A Republican who is conservative on fiscal and social issues but liberal on national defense issues is not a Reagan conservative. He is a quasi-conservative dove.

By the same token, a Republican who is conservative on fiscal and national defense issues but liberal on social issues – such as abortion, so-called gay rights or the Second Amendment – is not a Reagan conservative. He is a socio-liberal libertarian.

Put another way: A Republican who is one part William F. Buckley Jr., one part Oliver North and one part Rachel Maddow is no true conservative. He is – well, I’m not exactly sure what he is, but it ain’t pretty.

I, like most other Conservatives out here in the Heartland, am going to hold my nose and vote for Mitt Romney.

But, this whole situation sure ain’t pretty.

Romney, Palin, and the State of the Republican Party

Yesterday, I was observing and commenting on a discussion thread on my favorite Conservative website, whose subject was an article in the barely-read magazine Newsweek in which Former Governor of Alaska Sarah Palin stated that she had not been invited by the Romney Campaign to speak at the Republican Convention.

Intrigued, I went to the source article. Here are some excerpts:

Romney never seemed quite comfortable with politicking in the Tea Party era. Even in the heat of the primary race, Romney seemed put off by the idea of courting the activists, complaining in February that he wasn’t about to “light my hair on fire to try to get support”—a remark that only underscored doubts about him within the base.

…[Herman] Cain believes that the grassroots will eventually rally around the Republican nominee. “Romney is not Ronald Reagan,” Cain says. “But Romney is not Barack Obama. The Tea Party people, the citizens-movement people, they get that.” (Cain plans to continue his role as emissary between the Romney camp and the Tea Party, and plans a unity rally in Tampa on the eve of the convention.)

…Palin shares much of these same reservations about Romney. “Romney has said before that he doesn’t want to have to light his hair on fire,” Palin said on Fox last week. “Well, there are a lot of his base supporters, independents, who are saying, ‘Well, light our hair on fire, then!’” Palin’s objections to Romney are not so much about the man himself—she speaks of him respectfully, as he does about her—but about who, and what, he represents. Romney was the choice of the party’s elites, whom Palin has regarded with open disdain ever since her rough treatment during the 2008 campaign. They are some of the same people who anonymously disparaged Palin as a clueless bumpkin, and some of them are now helping to run Romney’s campaign. When unnamed Romney aides tell reporters that Romney will likely go with a “safe” choice for vice president because of the 2008 “disaster,” Palin notices.

She noticed, too, that when the Romney camp reined in Fehrnstrom after his “not a tax” goof, the man assigned to take on a more public role as Romney spokesman was Kevin Madden, best known in Palin’s sphere for his appearance on a CNN news panel just days before the 2008 election. The subject was the latest piece of leaked Palin gossip—her $150,000 “shopping spree” (for which Palin later reimbursed the Republican National Committee)—and the damage Palin was perceived to have done to the McCain campaign. “That’s an indication just how unseasoned Sarah Palin is as a national candidate,” Madden opined, before laughing about Palin’s lack of knowledge about issues and declaring that “people who have done this before” know enough to choose running mates “that are nationally vetted.”

Palin says that she doesn’t know Madden and will not comment about him personally. However, she adds: “I assume he didn’t do his homework and his disparaging remarks were due to him actually believing the BS reporting on my record and reputation that began the day I was tapped to run for VP. I’ll assume and hope he’s evolved since then, perhaps understanding now the leftist media’s agenda against candidates they oppose.”

The Romney camp will not comment on Palin, or on plans for the convention, but one adviser associated with the campaign suggested that Palin would be prohibited from speaking at the Republican convention by her contract with Fox News. “It’s true I’m prohibited from doing some things,” Palin says, “but this is the first I’ve heard anyone suggest that as an excuse, er, reason to stay away from engaging in the presidential race. I’m quite confident Fox’s top brass would never strip anyone of their First Amendment rights in this regard.” (Fox says her contract would not prohibit speaking at the convention if she sought permission.)

Palin is keeping the dates open in late August, just in case. In any event, she says, she plans to be politically active between now and November, starting with a Michigan Tea Party appearance, sponsored by Americans for Prosperity. “No matter the Romney campaign strategy,” she says, “I intend to do all I can to join others in motivating the grassroots made up of independents and constitutional conservatives who can replace Barack Obama at the ballot box.”

Palin’s admirers—and they are many, judging by Facebook and Twitter metrics, where her numbers are far greater than Romney’s—still hope for a rapprochement. “Palin is the female Ronald Reagan of our time,” says Kremer of the Tea Party Express. “There’s no one that excites the base, and energizes the base, the way that Sarah Palin does. There’s just not.”

As I write this post, that thread on the before-mentioned Conservative website sits at 1,807 comments and growing. The next closest thread on the site is at 592 comments.

How come?

Well, as I sit here at my computer in the Northwest Corner of the Magnolia State, I’ve had some rather pointed questions running through my mind:

If you want to become President of these United States, as Mitt Romney says that he does, why would you intentionally marginalize 40% of the country’s population in Conservatives, especially when you are in a virtual tie in head-to-head polls with the worst president in America’s collective memory?

Governor Romney, are you scared that Gov. Palin will upstage you at the Convention? Are you scared that Conservatives are actually going to expect you to stand for something? Have you ever lived anywhere in your adult life besides the Northeast Corridor?

Governor, you can continue to ignore Conservatives if you wish.  Just don’t compare yourself to Ronald Reagan.  Ronaldus Magnus united the party.

I, along with most Conservatives who love this country, plan on holding our noses and voting for you on November 6th, in spite of it all., so we can rid our nation of the Manchurian President.

So, would you please start attacking Obama as viciously as you attacked your fellow Republicans in the Primary?

Thanks.

The Bain of Obama’s Latest Attack: Johnathan Lavine

My, how the worm turns…

The Obama campaign’s latest attack tells the story of workers at an Indiana office supply company who lost their jobs after a Bain-owned company named American Pad & Paper (Ampad) took over their company and drove it out of business.

Here’s what the Obama Web video doesn’t mention: A top Obama donor and fundraiser had a much more direct tie to the controversy and actually served on the board of directors at Richardson, Texas-based Ampad, which makes office paper products.

Jonathan Lavine is a long-time Bain Capital executive and co-owner of the Boston Celtics. He is also one of President Obama’s most prolific fundraisers. He has already raised more than $200,000 for the Obama campaign this election, according to Federal Election Commission records.

Lavine started working for Bain in 1993. He was one of three Bain executives who served on the board of directors of Ampad for several years, a post he held until 1999. Here’s a news release announcing his departure from the company in April 1999.

Lavine’s placement on the board of Ampad suggests he had a more direct role than Romney in the series of events surrounding the layoffs, labor disputes and eventual bankruptcy of the Marion, Ind., factory featured in the Obama campaign video.

Asked about Mr. Lavine’s role, Obama campaign spokesman Ben Labolt put the focus back on Romney.

“No one aside from Mitt Romney is running for president highlighting their tenure as a corporate buyout specialist as one of job creation,” Labolt said. “The president has support from business leaders across industries who have seen him pull the economy back from the brink of another depression”.

And, Labolt argued, Romney, as the CEO of Bain, would have been the one ultimately responsible for what happened with Ampad.

“He made profit at any cost for himself and his partners by outsourcing jobs and bankrupting companies,” Labolt said. “From buyout to bankruptcy, Mitt Romney was CEO and sole owner of Bain. The managing director working on Ampad reported directly to him and has said Romney could have ordered him to settle with the union but didn’t.”

UPDATE: Alex Stanton, a spokesperson for Bain Capitol, does not dispute that Lavine was on the board of Ampad, but insists that he had nothing to do with the workers being laid off in Marion, Indiana.

“Jonathan Lavine was not at Bain Capital when Ampad was acquired by the firm, and was not involved on the investment during the challenging situation at the Marion plant. The assertion he had any involvement with those events is totally false,” said Stanton in a statement.

Mr. Lavine and President Obama have a couple of things in common. Guess what University he is a Trustee of? Furthermore, look at where he got his M.B.A.?

Blessed Be the Ties That Bind…

From Columbia.edu

Jonathan Lavine

Columbia, B.A., 1988

Harvard University, M.B.A., 1992

Jonathan Lavine is a Managing Director at Bain Capital, a leading global private investment firm based in Boston.

Mr. Lavine serves as the managing partner and Chief Investment Officer of Sankaty Advisors, Bain Capital’s fixed income and credit affiliate, which he founded in 1997. Today, Sankaty is one of the leading credit and distressed debt managers, with over 160 employees in offices in Boston, London, Chicago and New York and approximately $18 billion in committed assets under anagement.

Before the formation of Sankaty, Mr. Lavine worked in Bain Capital’s private equity business which he joined in 1993. Prior to joining Bain Capital, Mr. Lavine was a consultant at McKinsey & Company. He began his career at Drexel Burnham Lambert in the Mergers & Acquisitions Department.

An active participant in charitable organizations, Mr. Lavine is Chair of the Columbia College Board of Visitors, a member of the Boards of the Dana Hall School, Children’s Hospital Trust, City Year, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and Stand for Children. Mr. Lavine also is a member of the ownership group and a Director of the Boston Celtics.

Mr. Lavine received an M.B.A., with Distinction, from Harvard Business School, and a B.A., Magna Cum Laude and Phi Beta Kappa, from Columbia College. He was a 2008 recipient of Columbia’s John Jay Award for distinguished professional achievement. While at Columbia, he received the David Truman Award for outstanding contribution to the academic affairs of the college. In 2004, Mr. Lavine was named as one of the 40 outstanding Bostonians under the age of 40 by Boston Business Journal.

According to Bain Capital’s bio of Mr. Lavine:

Managing Director & Chief Investment Officer

Experience:

Mr. Lavine joined Bain Capital in 1993. He is a Managing Director, and since inception, managing partner and the Chief Investment Officer of Sankaty Advisors and its related funds. He is chair of the firm’s Credit Committee and Risk & Oversight Committee with overall responsibility for strategy, portfolio management and risk. Previously, Mr. Lavine worked as a consultant at McKinsey & Company. Mr. Lavine began his career in the Mergers & Acquisitions Department of Drexel Burnham Lambert where he focused on acquisitions, financings and restructurings in a variety of industries.

The hard cold facts are: 

Romney was Running against Teddy Kennedy when SCM Office Supplies in Marion, Indiana went out of business in 1994. Obama bundler Jonathan Levine, who has raised $100,000 for the president, was still very active with Bain at the time. 

But, since when has the truth mattered to the Manchurian President and his minions?

Obama Calls Romney a Crook: Glass Houses, Preezy

Things are beginning to get down and dirty in the Race for the White House.

Politico.com has the story:

President Barack Obama said Mitt Romney should answer questions about his ties to Bain Capital — and soon — in an interview taped Friday with WJLA.

The interview came as a series of Romney interviews were set to air Friday evening, following days of attention to questions about when the Republican candidate exited the venture capital firm and stopped leading day-to-day operations.

“My understanding is that Mr. Romney attested to the SEC, multiple times, that he was the chairman, CEO and president of Bain Capital and I think most Americans figure if you are the chairman, CEO and president of a company that you are responsible for what that company does,” Obama said.

Obama told Scott Thuman of WJLA, the ABC affiliate in the Washington, D.C., area, that Romney “absolutely” must answer questions about his tenure at Bain and whether it continued past 1999 — when Romney has said in the past he left — to 2002, as Securities and Exchange Commission documents suggest.

“If he aspires to being president, one of the things you learn is, you are ultimately responsible for the conduct of your operations, that’s probably a question that he’s going to have to answer, and I think that’s a legitimate part of the campaign,” Obama said in the interview, which was conducted earlier Friday in Virginia Beach, Va.

The coverage area of WJLA — which shares a corporate parent, Albritton Communications, with POLITICO — includes Northern Virginia, a key region of the state that pushed Obama to victory in 2008. The election in Virginia is again expected to be close and hard-fought this year.

The president suggested Romney had ultimate responsibility over the company.

“As president of the United States, it’s pretty clear to me that I’m responsible for folks who are working in the federal government and you know, Harry Truman said the buck stops with you,” he said.

On 7/2/2010, I posted a Blog titled: The Great Disconnect, Part 3: The Chicago Ascent

Let’s hop in the Wayback Machine, Sherman, and check into Obama’s run for the Illinois State Senate, shall we?

In 1995 “Bomber” Bill Ayers and his wife Bernadette Dohrn hosted a fund-raiser for Obama prior to Obama’s run for Alice Palmer’s seat in the state Senate and Ayers donated $200 to Obama’s upcoming state Senate campaign.

In 1996 at age 34, he ran for the state Senate in dubious campaign that is barely known of, outside of Chicago. Alice Palmer, the incumbent, had decided to run for Congress and supported Obama as her successor. But after Palmer’s congressional campaign ran into trouble, she changed her mind and decided to run for re-election to the Illinois Senate after all. Obama refused to step aside and the melee ensued. One of Scooter’s volunteers challenged whether Palmer’s nominating petitions were even legal. Obama’s campaign pulled the same chicanery concerning the petitions of other candidates. Palmer dropped out, and the other candidates were disqualified. So, Obama won unopposed in the Democratic primary—guaranteeing his victory in the general election. This was truly an example of Chicago-style politics at it’s finest…or dirtiest.

Around this same time, at a Bill Clinton White House event, philanthropist Walter Annenberg announced that he was making a $500 million grant to cities across the nation to put towards the reform of public schools. Bill Ayers was the head of the Chicago group that, with$49.2 million in hand, formed the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. The launch party in 1995 was attended by the governor of Illinois and the mayor of Chicago, as well as anybody was influential among the Chicago Political Elite. Guess who the first chairman of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge was? You guessed. Obama held the post until 1999. At that time, he stepped down and remained on the board. Bill Ayers worked closely with the Challenge as a leader of the newly formed Chicago School Reform Collaborative.

They also both served on the board of the charitable Woods Fund of Chicago from 1999 to 2002. Just a “guy from the neighborhood”. Huh, Scooter?

Additionally, Scooter served on the board of the Joyce Foundation from 1994 to 2002. This foundation started as the financial back-up plan of a widow whose family had made millions in the lumber industry.

After her death, it was run by philanthropic people who increasingly dedicated their giving to Liberal causes, including gun control, environmentalism and school changes. It has grown over the years until it is now bigger than the TIDES Foundation and actually funds it.

The Joyce Foundation in 2000 and 2001 provided the capital outlay to start the Chicago Climate Exchange. It started trading in 2003, and what it trades is, believe it or not, air.

What a coincidence, that, as president, pushing cap-and-trade is one of his highest priorities, huh?

Back to the Future (Hey, that’s catchy. It would make a great movie title.  Oh, wait. Never mind.)…

Romney is finally manning up and fighting back, according to abcnews.go.com:

Mitt Romney wants President Obama to apologize for his campaign’s suggestion that the Republican candidate could have broken the law by making inaccurate statements to the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Romney told ABC News’ Jonathan Karl late this afternoon that Obama should clean up his campaign staff after officials coordinated an effort to imply that Romney committed a felony by saying he left Bain Capital in 1999, though The Boston Globe reported this week that Romney was listed as the company’s CEO until 2002 on official files.

“The president needs to take control of these people,” Romney said. “He ought to disavow it and rein in these people who are running out of control.”

Romney added, “He sure as heck ought to say that he’s sorry for the kinds of attacks that are coming from his team.”

Romney insisted that he abandoned the private-equity firm he founded to run the Olympics and that, after 1999, he had “no role whatsoever in the management” of Bain even though SEC documents listed him as president, chairman of the board and sole stockholder.

“I left any responsibility whatsoever, any effort, any involvement whatsoever in the management of Bain Capital after February of 1999,” Romney said.

Obama is proving that he’s not just a “guy in over his head”, he ‘s a vindictive, petulant president with a re-election team weened on Chicago Politics.

Romney is going to have to treat Obama like he did his fellow Republicans, in he wants to win on November 6th.

Obama and Romney Vie for Illegals’ Votes

I knew a fellow named Jose several years ago.  Jose’s family had immigrated from Puerto Rico to Milwaukee when he was 6 years old.  When we met, he lived in Northeastern Mississippi with his wife and 3 children.  Jose had a good job at Fed Ex.  Then, he got laid off.

After he lost his job, Jose became a handy man to make ends meet.  He mowed yards and painted houses.  He wound up with a solid business.

One time, when he was painting a room for me, I asked Jose about illegal immigration.  A grimace came over his usually smiling face.  He said that he resented these people sneaking into this country, while he and so many others, came in the right way.

Then there’s George.  George is a 3rd generation Hispanic American.  George served in Vietnam, and now lives outside of Detroit, after retiring from GM.  George can’t speak a word of Spanish.  A few summers ago, George was riding his Harley all the way to Arizona to visit a buddy whom he served with.  My bride and I were dating at the time.  Since George is married to her cousin, he spent the night at my place.

We talked all afternoon.  While we were talking, I asked George what he thought about the “newcomers”.  He said they needed to become citizens, period.

He was right.

However, I don’t think that he meant the way President Barack Hussein Obama wants to git-r-done.

The Obama Administration announced Friday it will stop deporting illegal immigrants who come to the country at a young age.

The politically charged decision comes as Obama faces a tough reelection fight against Republican Mitt Romney, and Hispanic voters in swing states will play a crucial role in the contest.

The change in policy could allow as many as 800,000 immigrants who came to the United States illegally not only to remain in the country without fear of being deported, but to work legally, according to a senior administration official speaking to reporters Friday.

In a Rose Garden statement, President Obama said the measure would “lift the shadow of deportation” from immigrants, some of who have made “extraordinary contributions” by “serving in our military and protecting our freedom.”

“That we would treat them as expendable makes no sense,” Obama said.

“They study in our schools, play in our neighborhoods … they pledge allegiance to our flag, they are Americans in their hearts and minds … and in every single way but one: on paper.”

Obama was briefly interrupted by a reporter during his statement, a rare breach of protocol that caused the president to lose his temper.

“Excuse me sir, it’s not time for questions, sir, not while I’m speaking,” Obama said.

Later in his statement, Obama, pointing his finger at the reporter in front of the live TV cameras, said: “And the answer to your question, sir — and the next time I prefer you to let me finish by statements before you ask a question — is this is the right thing to do for the American people. I didn’t ask for an argument, I’m answering your question.”

The new policy will not grant citizenship to children who came to the United States as illegal immigrants, but will remove the threat of deportation and grant them the right to work in the United States.

According to the Department of Homeland Security, the policy change will apply to those who came to the United States before they were 16 and who are younger than 30 if they have lived here for five years, have no criminal history, graduated from a U.S. high school or served in the military.

A memo from DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano ordering the “prosecutorial discretion with respect to individuals who came to the United States as children” argued that those covered by the order “only know this country as home.” It said these people “lacked the intent to violate the law.”

The new policy will apply to individuals who are already in deportation proceedings, the memo said.

The policy change will accomplish portions of the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act, legislation that has stalled in Congress amid Republican opposition.

Never fear, Americans.  Mitt Romney will save us from this unconstitutional abuse of power!

Err…ahhh…never mind:

Republican presidential challenger Mitt Romney suggested Friday that he was open to helping young illegal immigrants but said the new policy announced Friday by the Obama administration to suspend their deportations complicates efforts to find a permanent solution.

“I believe the status of young people who come here through no fault of their own is an important matter to be considered and should be solved on a long-term basis so they know what their future would be in this country,” Romney told reporters after a rally in New Hampshire. “I think the action that the president took today makes it more difficult to reach that long-term solution,” noting the new policy “could be reversed by subsequent presidents. I’d like to see legislation that deals with this issue.

His comments represented a sharp change in rhetoric from the Republican primaries, when Romney repeatedly sought to outflank his rivals with a hard line on illegal immigration.

I have a question for Scooter and Mittens…

What part of the word “illegal” do you not understand? What makes the current influx of illegal immigrants exempt from the rules and regulations that every other generation of immigrants to this country had to abide by in order to become legal citizens of the greatest nation in the world? By being here illegally, they are not entitled to the same rights as natural born or naturalized American citizens. In fact, their entry into this sacred land is no better than that of someone who breaks into someone’s home, does their dishes, cuts their yard, cleans their house, and then helps themselves to their food and drives their car without asking. This is in no way a human rights issue. Freedom is God-given. And with freedom comes responsibility. With citizenship comes responsibility, like paying taxes and making your own way. Illegal immigration reminds me of the amorous boyfriend who wants everything a young woman will give him, but will leave her at the first mention of marriage.  This is not a civil rights issue. Illegals do not have the same rights as American citizens. With our rights, come the responsibilities of being an American citizen.

I understand that people want a better life for themselves and their children.  We are all immigrants in this land, expect for American Indians, and they got here by crossing the Bering Straight.  But there is a huge difference between immigrating here legally and sneaking in illegally, between assimilating into an existing culture, and insisting on replacing a country’s existing culture with that of the country you left.

I’m all for assisting anyone in becoming a legal citizen of the United States, if that is their wish.  But, it must be done the right way, and they must accept responsibility for their illegal entry, show a willingness to learn our language, and embrace our American way of life, including respecting the American Flag.

But, hey…I guess that’s just me.

Liberals: A Study in Intolerance

I’ve spent the last two days engaging in a “discussion” with an anonymous Moderate/Liberal/Moby, who took offense to my suggestion that the idiot Coney Island Principal who forbade 5 year olds from singing God Bless the USA, should go ahead and leave our country, if she hates it that much.

The anonymous woman (I presume) in question said, that I did not have the right to express my opinion in that way because it was rude.

Oh yeah?  Well, what do you call this, precious?

Noel Sheppard, posted the following at newsbusters.org:

Joy Behar, Al Gore’s new employee at Current TV, said Tuesday in response to Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s comments on the need for more police, teachers, and firefighters, “I’d like to see his house burn, one of his millions of houses burning down.”

During an interview with the liberal website Mediaite, Behar added, “It would be kind of cool – the Mormon fire patrol”

MEDIAITE: What would you ask Romney if you could?

JOY BEHAR: I would ask him plenty of questions about, is he planning to endorse the Ryan budget? And I think that would be a terrible mistake. I don’t want to see people on the streets begging for food, thank you. And why does he hate Planned Parenthood? You know, he didn’t used to hate Planned Parenthood. I want to ask him about all the flip-flopping he’s been doing. That’s why he doesn’t want to come on, because he’s afraid of the questions.

MEDIAITE: I saw that you used to be a school teacher. What did you think about what he said about “teachers, firemen, and police?”

BEHAR: What did he say? Tell me what he said.

MEDIAITE: He was making fun of the President for wanting to hire more policemen and firemen and teachers saying, you know, “Didn’t he get the message of Wisconsin that we want less government?”

BEHAR: Oh, less government? That is an idiotic statement. Can I just say that?

MEDIAITE: Yes.

BEHAR: I mean, I’d like to see his house burn, one of his millions of houses burning down. It would be kind of cool – the Mormon fire patrol.

MEDIAITE: Is that a thing?

BEHAR: You know what I mean? Come on. What am I supposed to do if my apartment gets caught on fire? Am I gonna call Mitt Romney to come and put it out? See what I mean?

No, you belligerent Beltway Heifer, I don’t.  

You’ve made a living being an obnoxious loudmouth.  I can’t believe somebody would actually pay a no-talent whiney Lib like you, to express opinions which 80% of the country think are nothing but vacuous vulgarities.

But, that’s the double standard so prevalent in America today.  Liberals can say whatever they want to, about anybody they want to, no matter how vulgar and hurtful it is.

Sometimes, like David Letterman’s failed joke concerning Bristol Palin and a New York Yankee, they wind up having to apologize.  Most of the time, as in the case of all the unfunny oral diarrhea flowing from the walking, talking orifice known as Bill Maher, they don’t have to.

It’s viewed as witty and urbane by those Libs and Moderates on the East and West Coasts.

Those of us here in the Heartland, know the reason why his eyes are brown.

But, I digress…

It’s not just Liberal celebrities who are acting like idiots.

I’ve already written about the idiot principal up in Coney Island. Here’s another very educational example:

Gerald Molen won a best picture Oscar for co-producing Schindler’s List with Steven Spielberg and has produced such Hollywood blockbusters as the first two Jurassic Park films and Twister. He’s a former U.S. Marine and is a sought-after motivational speaker.

So he’s not accustomed to being shunned.

Such was the case, though, when he was invited to speak to the graduating class at a Montana high school. But upon arriving, was told by the principal he would not be allowed to deliver the speech he had prepared.

The reason, he believes, is politics.

Molen is one of those rare conservatives in Hollywood (he’s even making a documentary called 2016, based on the Dinesh D’Souza book The Roots of Obama’s Rage) and because of that, he says, Ronan High School principal Tom Stack decided to disinvite him — and he didn’t tell him so until after Molen made the 90-minute drive from his home in Bigfork, Mont.

Well, I’ve got some good news and some bad news for you: The good news is that the school district apologized to Molen. The bad news is that it was too late for him to speak at the graduation:

The incident as described by Molen “did, in fact, occur,” superintendent of schools for the Ronan district Andy Holmlund told The Hollywood Reporter on Friday.

“It is my understanding that the high-school principal made the decision based on his point of view. It is not the view of the district. That’s not the expectations that the district maintains. That principal will not be serving in this school district for the upcoming school year.”

Holmlund said Stack has accepted a position with a school in Clinton, Mont., though he refused to say when or why that decision had been made. Residents say it was likely unrelated to Stack’s decision to disinvite Molen.

Asked why Stack had not responded to several phone calls, Holmlund said: “I can’t speak to the fact that Mr. Stack isn’t talking.”

Asked about the public’s response to the sudden, nationwide pubicity to the controversy, Holmlund said: “Oh, it’s on fire, sir. Justifiably so. We don’t expect people to be treated poorly.”

Uh huh.  But, just like those 5 year olds up in Coney Island, Mr. Molen was.

Isn’t it funny, how those among us who claim to be the most tolerant, are actually the least tolerant of all?

American Leadership in a Dangerous World

Mitt Romney has issued a warning, concerning keeping our country safe in a dangerous world.

Reuters.com reports:

Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney chose Veterans Day to proclaim to the American people his conviction that the world is a dangerous place, and the United States must remain its most formidable military power.

“The world is not safe,” Romney told veterans on Memorial Day. He was joined by Senator John McCain, in a speech to honor the veterans of America’s wars.

The United States now has two paths forward, Romney said. He called one “the pathway to Europe,” suggesting Europe had acquiesced to geopolitical threats. “To shrink our military smaller and smaller to pay for our social needs.”

The other path, Romney said, is “to commit to preserve America as the strongest military in the world, second to none, with no comparable power anywhere in the world.”

Romney, expected to face off against President Barack Obama in November, joined the 2008 Republican presidential nominee in thanking the nation’s veterans.

Romney, who has focused his campaign on the struggling U.S. economy, changed his focus on Monday in his warning about the dangers of the world outside America’s borders, indirectly criticizing Obama’s foreign policies.

“I wish I could tell you that the world is a safe place. It’s not,” Romney said.

Romney ticked off Iran, Pakistan, China and Russia, among other countries, as threats as he transformed his message from economic warnings of the United States becoming like Europe to a military warning that America was becoming weaker.

McCain introduced Romney to the 5,000 people gathered as a “man who I believe is fully qualified to be commander-in-chief.”

“He believes in American exceptionalism,” McCain said. “He believes the 21st Century will also be an American century.”

Quite different from what the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania says about our country, don’t you think?

Well, not according to “The Lightbringer”.

Back on April 12th, foxnews.com reported:

President Obama defended his record on “American exceptionalism” on Monday, saying that his entire career has been a testimony to that core belief.

“It’s worth noting that I first arrived on the national stage with a speech at the Democratic convention that was entirely about American exceptionalism and that my entire career has been a testimony to American exceptionalism,” Obama said at a press conference alongside Mexican president Felipe Calderon and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

Obama’s comments come days after GOP frontrunner Mitt Romney said Obama “doesn’t have the same feelings about American exceptionalism that we do.”

Romney’s absolutely correct.

Thoughout his reign as the Leader of the Far Left, masquerading as a Moderate President of the United States, Obama has shown himself to be out of touch with average American thought.

Let’s review a few examples:

He started out his presidency by giving a speech at the University of Cairo, on June 4th, 2009,  an attempt to reach out to the Muslim World, the same people who danced in the streets when 3,000 Americans were massacred on September 1st, 2001.  He said:

…There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground. As the Holy Koran tells us, “Be conscious of God and speak always the truth.” (Applause.) That is what I will try to do today — to speak the truth as best I can, humbled by the task before us, and firm in my belief that the interests we share as human beings are far more powerful than the forces that drive us apart

Now part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I’m a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and at the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith.

As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam. It was Islam — at places like Al-Azhar — that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe’s Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities — (applause) — it was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality. (Applause.)

I also know that Islam has always been a part of America’s story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President, John Adams, wrote, “The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims.” And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, they have served in our government, they have stood for civil rights, they have started businesses, they have taught at our universities, they’ve excelled in our sports arenas, they’ve won Nobel Prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch. And when the first Muslim American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding Fathers — Thomas Jefferson — kept in his personal library. (Applause.)

This was only the beginning of a worldwide apology tour, where he made a very public show of apologizing for our country’s transgressions to every two-bit, tinhorn despot around the globe.

Beginning with the passage of Obamacare, by him and his Congressional minions, holding clandestine meetings, both on Christmas, and in the dark of night, Obama has shown the propensity to do whatever he wants to, in order to further his personal agenda, regardless of the wishes of the people whom he is supposed to be serving.

An example of American Exceptionalis?  Hardly.

More like “The Peter Principal”.

 

 

The European Socialist Slide

Americans have watched as Europe has teetered on the brink of economic chaos, reminiscent of a Buddhist monk preparing to set himself on fire.

It appears that the match has been lit.

French socialist Francois Hollande has won a clear victory in the country’s presidential election.

Mr Hollande – who got an estimated 52% of votes in Sunday’s run-off – said the French had chosen “change”.

Admitting defeat, centre-right incumbent Nicolas Sarkozy wished “good luck” to Mr Hollande.

Analysts say the vote has wide implications for the whole eurozone. Mr Hollande has vowed to rework a deal on government debt in member countries.

Shortly after polls closed at 20:00 (18:00 GMT), French media published projections based on partial results giving Mr Hollande a lead of almost four points. Turnout was about 80%.

Jubilant Hollande supporters gathered on Place de la Bastille in Paris – a traditional rallying point of the Left – to celebrate.

People drank champagne and chanted: “Sarko, it’s over!”

Mr Hollande – the first socialist to win the French presidency since Francois Mitterrand in the 1980s – gave his victory speech in his stronghold of Tulle in central France.

He said was “proud to have been capable of giving people hope again”.

He said he would push ahead with his pledge to refocus EU fiscal efforts from austerity to “growth”.

“Europe is watching us, austerity can no longer be the only option,” he said.

Mr Hollande has called for a renegotiation of a hard-won European treaty on budget discipline championed by German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Mr Sarkozy.

Meanwhile, in Greece…

Greece’s former finance minister and Socialist party leader called for a broad coalition government of pro-European parties, ruling out a two-party government with his conservative rivals after his party received a drubbing in Sunday’s parliamentary elections.

Official projected results showed Evangelos Venizelos’ PASOK party plunging to third place with 13.6 percent and 42 seats in the 300-member parliament. The conservative New Democracy was projected in the lead with 19.18 percent and 109 seats, far below the 151 needed to form a government. The margin of error was 0.5 percentage point.

“A coalition government of the old two-party system would not have sufficient legitimacy or sufficient domestic and international credibility if it would gather a slim majority,” Venizelos said. “A government of national unity with the participation by all the parties that favor a European course, regardless of their positions toward the loan agreements, would have meaning.”

If borne out by final results, the outcome is devastating for PASOK, which won a landslide victory in 2009 with more than 43 percent of the vote.

Voters outraged by Greece’s protracted financial crisis and the austerity measures imposed in return for international bailouts punished both main parties, turning to smaller anti-bailout groups instead. The leftist Syriza, which was projected in second place with 16.3 percent and 50 seats, has been strongly opposed to Greece’s bailout agreements.

“For us in PASOK, today is particularly painful,” Venizelos said. “We knew the price would be heavy and we had undertaken for a long time to bear it.”

Things aren’t  so peachy-keen in Germany, either:

German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s centre-right coalition lost power in the state of Schleswig-Holstein, first estimates showed Sunday, after a vote that could presage national elections next year.

Merkel’s Christian Democrats (CDU) scored 30.6 percent, according to ARD public television, with her junior partners at the national level, the Free Democrats (FDP), winning 8.3 percent – not enough to retain power in the northern state.

However, the opposition – combining the centre-left Social Democrats and ecologist Greens – also failed to gain sufficient support to form a government, with 29.9 percent and 13.6 percent respectively.

This left as a strong possibility a so-called “grand coalition” between the CDU and SPD, which many believe could be the final result of the national elections due in September or October 2013.

The big winners on the night were the Pirates, an upstart party that has shaken up the staid world of German politics with a campaign based on more transparency in the political process and internet freedom.

For the third consecutive regional election, they breached the five-percent mark needed to enter the state parliament, winning 8.2 percent of the vote.

But for the FDP, although they lost more than six percent compared to the last election in 2009, it was a better-than-expected result, given that they are polling nationally at around three percent.

Turnout was low, with around 60 percent of the 2.2 million registered voters casting their ballot, compared to more than two-thirds in 2009.

The socialist Left party failed to clear the five-percent hurdle, scoring around 2.4 percent. A party representing the state’s small Danish minority also fell below the threshold, with 4.5 percent.

The parties will now engage in days of horse-trading before the final make-up of the state parliament is determined.

However, the election will have little impact on the make-up of the Bundesrat, the upper house of parliament where Germany’s 16 states are represented, and Merkel’s personal popularity remains high.

Back on April 24th, Robin Wells reported on the effect of what was happening in European Politics on the markets, for guardian.co.uk:

When markets contemplate that it’s likely that another austerity-skeptic, François Hollande, will win the presidency in France, then the pattern becomes impossible to ignore: the “core” eurozone countries are fragmenting. While it would be foolish to make predictions, what is probable is that Germany’s political isolation within the eurozone will deepen, leaving German taxpayers unwilling to continue backstopping the whole system.

Unthinkable as it seems, the logical conclusion is that the eurozone cannot continue to exist, at least in its present form. Markets, which hate unquantifiable uncertainty, are sensing this. We are likely to be in for an extended period of gut-wrenching turbulence.

What are the implications for the US, economically and politically? Direct links between the US and eurozone economies are fairly minor: we don’t export that much to them, they don’t import that much from us, and US banks have had an extended time to cut their exposure to eurozone risk. Yet the collateral damage could still prove significant.

When the stock markets fall, consumer and business confidence falls, leading to cutbacks in spending – bad news for an American economy that is still mired in recession. In addition, crisis in Europe makes for a stronger US dollar, as investors flee to safer abodes. Again, bad for the economy as a stronger dollars hurts US exports.

The reality of the eurozone’s troubles should lend support to President Barack Obama’s campaign against GOP presidential nominee presumptive Mitt Romney and congressional Republicans. It provides a demonstration that austerity is self-defeating, that fiscal stimulus is needed in a deeply depressed economy, that recovery from a financial crisis is a slow and halting process, and that by grasping the nettle immediately, the Obama administration has succeeded in stabilizing its financial sector – while the Europeans have made a hash of it.

Ms. Wells’ thoughts about our economic plight are way off…unless she calls the Obama Administration embracing of European Socialist-style Big Government, spending like there’s no tomorrow, and keeping unemployment at over 8% “stabilizing the financial sector”.

It is imperative that America not follow Europe’s example, this November 6th.

More Chens Than a Chinese Phonebook

Domestic policy can only defeat us; foreign policy can kill us.

John F. Kennedy

Obama’s “Smart Power!” Foreign Policy is looking like anything but, in his handling of the case of a blind gentleman from China who wants to defect to America.

Thehill.com has the story.

The Chinese dissident at the center of a political firestorm called a hearing Thursday and told lawmakers he wants to meet with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Chinese human rights activist Chen Guangcheng called a hearing set up to explore his efforts to leave China and escape persecution—apparently from a Chinese hospital room.

“I want to meet with Secretary Clinton,” he said on the phone. “I hope I can get more help from her. I also want to thank her face to face.”

Chen added that he is most concerned with his family, and said, “I really want to know what’s going on with them.”

“I want to thank all of you for your care and your love,” he added, through a translation by Pastor Bob Fu, Founder and President, ChinaAid Association. Fu was a witness at Thursday’s hearing of the Congressional-Executive Commission on China.

Chen is at the center of a diplomatic row between the U.S. and China that has become a political liability for President Obama.

Chen was under house arrest for several months for protesting China’s one-child policy, but escaped to the U.S. Embassy, where he stayed for several days.

The U.S. and China appeared to reach a deal Wednesday that allowed Chen to remain in China, where he said he wished to stay.

But after Chen was released to a Chinese hospital to have his injuries treated, the dissident said he did not want to stay in China and requested political asylum in the U.S.

Administration officials insisted they did not pressure Chen to stay in China and that he decided on his own initially that he wanted to remain in his country.

But the about-face has led to criticism from Republicans that U.S. officials never should have allowed him to leave the U.S. embassy.

Speaking of the Republicans, the unofficial/official Republican Nominee for President was not shy about voicing his opinion concerning this fiasco:

Mitt Romney condemned the Obama administration’s handling of blind Chinese dissident Chen Guangcheng, calling the episode “a dark day for freedom” and “a day of shame” for President Obama if, he couched, reports are true that American officials communicated threats to Chen’s family.

At the same time Romney was speaking about the Chen story, about which there are conflicting reports, CNN was reporting that Chen told the network that he blamed a “misunderstanding” with the U.S. government for impressions that the Americans abandoned him and expressed “deep gratitude” to American officials.

Several times on Thursday, Romney couched his comments with disclaimers like “if the reports are true,” but the takeaway was clearly intended that the incident is a black eye for President Barack Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.

“Just in the last day or two we’ve heard some disturbing things from across the world that suggest that, potentially, if the reports are true, some very troubling developments there,” Romney said. “Where an individual, Mr. Chen, has sought freedom in a bastion of freedom, an embassy of the United States of America. Aren’t we proud of the fact that people seeking freedom come to our embassy to find it?”

Romney continued: “The reports are, if they’re accurate, our administration willingly or unwittingly communicated to Chen an implicit threat to his family. And also probably sped up, or may have sped up, the process of his decision to leave the embassy because they wanted to move on to a series of discussions that Mr. Geithner and our secretary of state are planning on having with China.”

The likely GOP presidential nominee added: “It’s also apparent, according to these reports, if they’re accurate, that our embassy failed to put in place the kind of verifiable measures that would assure the safety of Mr. Chen and his family. If the reports are true, this is a dark day for freedom and it’s a day of shame for the Obama administration. We are a place of freedom, here and around the world and we should stand up and defend freedom wherever it is under attack.”

But, according to the Twitter feed of CNN executive producer Ram Ramgopal, Chen offered praise to the Americans who helped him.

“Chen Guangcheng speaks to CNN; says he believes U.S. will help him, expresses “deep gratitude” to American officials in Beijing,” Ramgopal wrote. “Chen also blames a ‘misunderstanding’ for the impression that the U.S. govt. abandoned him in the hospital.”

Romney, who has made a get-tough attitude toward China a central part of his foreign policy, on Sunday released a statement professing concern for Chen’s treatment, but had not previously spoken about the case from the stump.

Good for Mitt.  Well done.

On the subject of freedom, the greatest president in my lifetime, Ronald Wilson Reagan,  said:

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.

In 1974, in a speech titled, “The Shining City Upon a Hill”, Reagan said:

Standing on the tiny deck of the Arabella in 1630 off the Massachusetts coast, John Winthrop said, “We will be as a cityupon a hill.The eyes of all people are upon us, so that if we deal falsely with our God in this work we have undertaken and so cause Him to withdraw His present help from us, we shall be made a story and a byword throughout the world.”

Everyone’s watching, Mr. President.  It’s your move.