GBTV - Where the Truth Lives

Election Season 2014

And it has brought us to this trainwreck called ObamaCare and we have bankrupted our kids and grandkids!

We are now headed into the 2014 Election Season and common sense and conservatism are on the rise. Please stand-up and be counted!

Reading Collusion: How the Media Stole the 2012 Election is a great place to start!

The Founding Father's Real Reason for the Second Amendment

And remember the words of Thomas Jefferson "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." See Video of Suzanna Gratia-Hupp’s Congressional Testimony: What the Second Amendment is REALLY For, below (u-tube HERE).

The Leaders Are Here... Palin, Cruz, Lee, Paul, Chaffetz....

T'S A WONDERFUL LIFE

Can You Really Still Believe That None of These People Would Have Done a Better Job???

Bloggers' Rights at EFF

SIGN THE PETITION TODAY...

Showing posts with label Rick Perry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rick Perry. Show all posts

Monday, November 19, 2012

Republican governors decide against setting up ObamaCare insurance markets

Fox News  -  True Health Is True Wealth:

Video: Rick Perry on Neil Cavuto… Not Setting up ObamaCare Insurance Markets

Several Republican governors, in what could be their last symbolic stand against ObamaCare, announced Rick PerryFriday that they will not set up a state-based marketplace for selling health insurance.

A total of 20 states have now decided not to implement their own exchanges -- which could also mean increased costs for the federal government.

The governors of Wisconsin and Ohio joined Texas Gov. Rick Perry and others in confirming that they will not establish so-called "health insurance exchanges," which are set to launch in January 2014. Under the federal health care overhaul, these exchanges will act as virtual markets where people and small businesses can shop for private coverage in a regulated environment. Many will also be eligible for government subsidies.

The governors' move does not stop those exchanges from being implemented. Rather, it kicks the project back to the federal government to run with regard to those states. While a number of states, largely those run by Democrats, will establish their own exchanges, Republicans who declined argued that it wasn't worth the cost and resources to set up a marketplace that would be under the thumb of the federal government anyway.

"As long as the federal government has the ability to force unknown mandates and costs upon our citizens, while retaining the sole power in approving what an exchange looks like, the notion of a state exchange is merely an illusion," Perry wrote in a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. "It would not be fiscally responsible to put hard-working Texans on the financial hook for an unknown amount of money to operate a system under rules that have not even been written."

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker said the same, writing in a letter to Sebelius Friday that "no matter which option is chosen, Wisconsin taxpayers will not have meaningful control over the health care policies and services sold to Wisconsin residents." With that in mind, he wrote, the state has decided not to build its own system. Ohio Gov. John Kasich echoed that point of view.

Republican governors have been largely opposed to the health care law anyway. But for months, they were effectively waiting to see if the Supreme Court would overturn it or whether Obama would lose re-election and potentially leave an opening to repeal it. Neither of those things happened.

Walker was among those who stopped implementation last year on the hopes the law would be overturned either by the U.S. Supreme Court or Republicans following the November election.

Thursday evening, the Obama administration responded to a request for more time from Republican governors on the exchange question by granting states a month's extension, until Dec. 14.

A few states have signaled they want to partner with the federal government, as opposed to running it themselves or handing the reins to Washington. Those states would handle consumer issues and oversight of health plans in the exchanges, while the feds do the heavy lifting by enrolling individuals for coverage and determining who's eligible for government assistance. Among these states are Arkansas and North Carolina.

The number of partnership states could grow significantly, since the Obama administration has given states until next February to decide on that option.

Obama's election victory virtually guaranteed the survival of his health care law, which is eventually expected to provide coverage to more than 30 million people through the exchanges and expanded Medicaid programs. It was the final hurdle, after the Supreme Court upheld a legal challenge from 26 states. In the aftermath of the election, some Republican state leaders say it's time to accept the law.

"I don't like it; I would not vote for it; I think it needs to be repealed. But it is the law," said Mississippi Insurance Commissioner Mike Chaney, after announcing that his state wants to set up its own exchange. "If you default to the federal government, you forever give the keys to the state's health insurance market to the federal government."

Traditionally, states have regulated the private health insurance market.

But other Republican-led states say they don't have enough information to make a decision at this point and are clamoring for the Obama administration to release major regulations that have been bottled up for months.

"States are struggling with many unanswered questions and are not able to make comprehensive far-reaching decisions prudently," Govs. Bob McDonnell of Virginia and Bobby Jindal of Louisiana wrote Obama earlier this week. They asked for a meeting with the president, as well as a postponement of the original Nov. 16 deadline.

Some of their main concerns are hidden costs of operating the exchanges and the sheer bureaucratic complexity of the new system. The Obama administration has steadfastly maintained it will not postpone the Jan. 1, 2014, launch date for the law's coverage expansion. Open enrollment for exchange plans will begin even sooner, Oct. 1, 2013.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Related: 

Rick Perry: 'Another federal power grab'

Perry may not have last say on health care

Medical giant Stryker cuts 1,170 jobs, citing ObamaCare

Monday, February 13, 2012

A Path to a Brokered GOP Convention Emerges…. Bush verses Palin?

Photo:  Real Clear Politics

For many conservative Republicans, the dream outcome of the 2012 primary season is a brokered convention. Disappointed in the four remaining choices, they hope to change horses in August, at the end of the primary stream. drafting their preferred candidate, be it Jeb Bush, Mitch Daniels, Chris Christie, Paul Ryan, or ???

But as sure as Jeb Bush will be proposed, so will Sarah Palin. She is now and always has been the singular Reaganesque super-star voice in the original Tea Party phenomenon; the only one who can bring it to the mainstream. Her absence from the primary race has left a vacuum and no substitute has been found. Every other possible or potential leadership hopeful has risen and receded in this already seemingly long Republican primary season. 

All reports from the CPAC conference, the former Alaska governor received far and away the most spirited and enthusiastic reception at the convention of about 10,000 conservative activists. She drew the audience to its feet more than a dozen times during her keynote address on Saturday. “The cheers for Palin were so loud that they drowned out her remarks again and again,” he writes. “Conference organizers had to set up three overflow rooms to accommodate the throngs of supporters eager to hear her words.”

Sarah Palin bated clean-up at CPAC and hit a home run!  Her appearance reminded CPAC’s attendees how much they missed her. Palin was/is the conservative super-star.  She brought the red meat to CPAC and crowd loved it… as they loved her!  Palin repeatedly said the door was open for a conservative victory, but the door that seemed to be open the widest was the one to her political future as the leader of the conservative movement and as heiress to the Reagan legacy.  Sarah once again proved her conservative relevancy… It was her party on Saturday, and it could be for the foreseeable future. The only questions remains, could that include a place for here on the party ticket in a brokered primary?

Remember… Palin has already been there once for a dress rehearsal.

Senator John McCain and his running mate Governor Sarah Palin address the crowd during the balloon-filled closing ceremony of the convention on Thursday night

Photo: McCain Election Album 2008

Many have been adamant that the outcome of a brokered convention is extremely unlikely. For it to occur, there has to be an almost perfect storm of events; the GOP elites can’t just declare shenanigans on the primary season and select a new nominee. Instead, something has to prevent any of the current candidates from clinching a majority of the delegates; if one of them amasses that majority, he will be the nominee on the first ballot at the convention in Tampa. But has anyone else noticed how often they ask Mitt Romney about this possibility?

It is looking more and more like the the GOP fight could eventually degenerate into an ideological battle between the very conservative and somewhat conservative/moderate wings of the party, with Romney on one side and a single alternative on the other. Unless there was a late entrant or Ron Paul caught fire in the caucus states, someone was virtually assured of claiming the requisite number of delegates in that scenario. (However, there are signs that the Romney and Paul camps may have already brokered a deal.)

Something else to remember, the GOP does have super-delegates of a sort, in the form of the 63 RNC members. They aren’t as numerous as they are in the Democratic Party, but they are still there. While many of them have already declared allegiance to one candidate or another, those commitments can evaporate quickly, as Hillary Clinton learned all to well to her sorrow in 2008.

Additionally and perhaps even more importantly, demographic and geographic splits are beginning to surface in the GOP that resemble the splits in the Democratic Party in 2008. That year, Hillary Clinton laid claim to working-class whites and Latino voters, while Barack Obama laid claim to college-educated whites and African-Americans. This divide continued throughout the primary, right up to the last day of voting.

The GOP split is still speculative at this point. But to see the possibility, examine the map of U.S. counties and how they have voted so far. Blue counties backed Romney, red backed Gingrich, green are for Santorum, while white have gone for some other candidate (or not yet voted).

Map:  Real Clear Politics

Romney has done well in New Hampshire and south Florida; the latter is basically the North transplanted to the South. This suggests continued strength in the Northeast. He’s also done well in the Mountain West: Nevada was in his camp, as was a large portion of the Western Slope of Colorado. Note also the handful of counties in southern Colorado that went for Romney; they are heavily Mexican-American, and Romney has run well with Latino voters in the GOP contests thus far.

Next, Gingrich. There is continued resistance to Mitt Romney in the GOP among evangelicals. These voters are concentrated largely, but not exclusively, in the South. And as we see, the former House speaker ran well in South Carolina as well as in northern Florida, and is expected to do well in Georgia. This caused many to conclude that Gingrich was on the verge of emerging as the definitive not-Romney.

But now we have to consider that Santorum has won Iowa and Minnesota in the Midwest, and won Colorado largely on the strength of his showing in eastern Colorado (which is basically the Great Plains). He also won Missouri -- which is culturally more southern than Midwestern -- but Gingrich wasn’t on the ballot there. For now at least, he is the "anti-Romney" in the Midwest. Santorum is getting a bit of boost from the Catholic birth control mandate issue, but some aren’t so sure about his fiscal conservatism.

If this split continues -- Romney in the West and Northeast, Gingrich in the South, and Santorum in the Midwest -- we could easily find ourselves in a scenario where no candidate crosses the 1,144-delegate threshold by the time voting ends. Consider this: Right now, Romney barely has a majority of the delegates. If Gingrich successfully contests the winner-takes-all allocation in the Florida primary (based on the RNC’s rule against such a format before April), no one would have a majority of the delegates as of today.

We will find out how viable this path is in the next few weeks. In the lead-up to Super Tuesday, we’ll probably see Romney win Arizona, Michigan and Maine. Arizona and Maine are in his demographic wheelhouse, while he is a native Michigander and his father was governor of the state (Although in a recent survey 67% of the people living in Michigan were not born or did not live in Michigan when George Romney was Governor). Washington is a coastal state, where Romney’s strength hasn’t been tested, so it is up in the air.

Super Tuesday will likely be tougher for him. Four of the five largest states -- Virginia, Tennessee, Oklahoma and Georgia -- are Southern (or in Oklahoma's case, culturally Southern). Romney will likely win Virginia by default, but he will probably fare poorly in the remaining three. If Gingrich can stay in the race and maintain his strength in the South, he will likely win them.

On the other hand, Romney will probably do well in Massachusetts, Idaho and Vermont. Santorum seems well-positioned to win North Dakota. But let us remember, Santorum is fourth in delegates, behind Ron Paul.

So the viability of a three-way split probably comes down to Ohio, which has a fair number of evangelicals, though not to the degree that Tennessee, Oklahoma and Georgia do. Santorum has some strengths he can draw on in the Buckeye State, as his blue-collar message could play well even among Republicans there. If he wins, it means that we probably do have a deeply divided GOP, with Gingrich taking the anti-Romney vote in the South, and Santorum taking the anti-Romney vote in the Midwest.

The key is that neither Gingrich nor Santorum can begin to do so well that the other drops out. Both must remain effectively regional candidates. If Gingrich’s support collapses in the South, it might leave an opening there for Santorum. We’ve seen some potential evidence of this, as Gingrich’s support in Gallup’s tracking poll is down about seven points since the Florida primary (although it isn’t down in the wake of Santorum’s wins Tuesday night). If that were to occur, we would be back to a two-person race. There is also now word that Gingrich’s financial supporter, Adelson, has pulled out.  Most feel he will stay in the race, but that his star has faded.

Alternatively, Santorum’s support could turn out to be confined to caucus states and/or states where Romney failed to spend money. Remember, Colorado and Minnesota are small state caucuses, virtually ignored by the candidates. Santorum’s win in Minnesota was large enough, however, that it could indicate broader support among the general electorate (as was his showing in eastern Colorado). This might allow Gingrich to step in, or Romney to wrap up the nomination. But Santorum says he has a plan to beat Mitt in Michigan.

But in the event this scenario does unfold through Super Tuesday, we would then begin a long slog. But unlike 2008, where Obama’s states were frontloaded and allowed him to gain an air of inevitability early on, here the states are spread out. The remainder of March contains Northern caucuses in Wyoming and Kansas. There are Southern states: Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana. At the same time, areas with heavily Latino population such as Puerto Rico, and states with relatively liberal Republican parties (Illinois) will cast their ballots. The fact that these contests award their delegates proportionately will prevent any candidate from breaking out.

In April, Gingrich would have a great chance in Texas, Maryland and Delaware (increasingly de facto Southern states in the GOP primary electorate), while Romney would receive large delegate hauls in Rhode Island, Connecticut and New York. Santorum would have primaries in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

In the end, we could end up in California in early June with no clear nominee. While that state is nominally winner-take-all for a whopping 172 delegates, in fact it allocates the overwhelming majority of those delegates by Congressional District. Who is voting in a Republican primary in Nancy Pelosi’s or Maxine Waters’ district? I honestly have no idea, but if they’re different from the voters in the Latino central valley districts, and if they’re different than the voters in Orange County, and if they’re different from the voters in the Sierra districts, we really could have a situation where the state doesn’t produce a winner for the GOP.

If this occurs, and Ron Paul wins around 100 delegates along the way, we have a situation where no candidate has more than 900 delegates, and three have more than 400. In that situation, no one would be able to lay claim to the mantle of presumptive nominee. The convention would eventually deadlock, and an outside candidate could emerge.

The Bush family secret agenda has been a subliminal theme for months with New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie as the favored proxy and pitchman. But at CPAC it broke through to the surface: Al Cardenas, head of the American Conservative Union, says that Republican turmoil might lead to a brokered convention in which Jeb Bush would emerge as a “possible alternative” party nominee.  (Cardenas is already walking back his comments and his speech is disappearing from the Internet… but the cat is out of the bag.) It made Drudge this past weekend.

This would not be without its difficulties. We’ve seen the problem with sudden, late entrants before. The nominee would have to be able to put together a platform, a fundraising organization, prepare for debates, select a running mate, and hit the campaign trail, all in a manner of weeks.

And the candidate would not be fully vetted. There might be some skeleton in his closet, or his family’s. One wing of the party might not be satisfied. Chris Christie’s name is frequently mentioned, but he believes in climate change and favors civil unions. How will the religious right react when that is in the spotlight? Mitch Daniels may bore Tea Partiers looking for a fighter, and his past as Bush’s budget director is a black mark waiting to be exploited by his opponent. Jeb Bush is a Bush. And so forth. And then there are the the new, independent, states-oriented, freedom-seeking constitutional conservatives… a ticket of the Western states, a Palin/Perry ticket ticket from Alaska and Texas. Now wouldn’t that be interested?

Conservatism is at the shore of a new awakening but is afraid to cross the river. It goes back to Gov. Rick Perry’s Texas primary race. From Quigley’s Pundits Blog of Jan. 21, 2010: “The Austin Statesman reported that former President George H.W. Bush will endorse U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison in the Republican primary for governor in her race against Rick Perry. Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Margaret Spellings and Karen Hughes [W.’s agent] also support Hutchison … But Sarah Palin supports Rick Perry and will appear with him at a rally on Super Bowl Sunday. Does one Sarah Palin equal a Bush, a Rove, a Spellings and a Hughes? In Texas, I believe it does.”  …Bernie Quigley

Perry won in a landslide. But why would the Bush establishment pull out all the stops to support Hutchison, who was sure to lose? Because they saw a new conservative movement building with Perry and Palin and were determined early on to stamp it out. They still are.
Bush/Christie or Christie/Bush as “establishment” representation is bound to bring muffled chuckles (“Hey Abbott!!!”) and Obama would win in a landslide. But Bush/Christie vs. Sarah Palin/Rick Perry positions coming head to head at the Republican Convention would pit the storied worlds of Dexter and Paulie Walnuts; the most notoriously corrupt, burned-out, busted-up, used-up, dangerous, underwater and broke Eastern states, against the new, independent, states-oriented, freedom-seeking constitutional conservatives like Palin of the Western states, Texas and Alaska. Now that would be interesting.

The path to this outcome is still a very narrow, precarious one. But for the first time, I can see it.  A Jeb Bush/Christy fight against Palin/Perry with maybe even a Romney/Santorum or Romney/Rand Paul option still sitting out there… or a Palin/Santorum option?  Can you see it? I am beginning to!

h/t to Real Clear Politics and The Hill’s Pundit’s Blog

Related Reading:

The Lost Majority: Why the Future of Government Is Up for Grabs - and Who Will Take It

The Road to the White House 2012

Saturday, January 14, 2012

“Huckabee Forum 2: South Carolina Undecided” GOP Presidential Forum (FULL VIDEO - January 14th)

Overall all the candidates did well and the toned down rhetoric was good for people to get their questions asked.  No major surprises and probably no major gains for any of the candidates, although Rick Perry probably had his best night.

Video: Huck Forum 2 – Part 1 – Mitt Romney

Video: Huck Forum 2 – Part 2 – Jon Huntsman

Video: Huck Forum 2 – Part 3 – Newt Gingrich

Here is video of Newt Gingrich getting booed by the crowed in South Carolina who attended Mike Huckabee’s Candidate Forum when he tried attacking Mitt Romney by name. One of the rules of the forum was that candidates were not to mention any other candidate by name.

Gingrich was responding to a question from a voter who asked how he could justify his attacks “vilifying” the work of Mitt Romney in a private equity firm like Bain Capital.

Video: Huck Forum 2 – Part 4 – Rick Santorum

Video: Huck Forum 2 – Part 5 – Rick Perry

Video: Huck Forum 2 – Part 6 – Wrap-Up

Ron Paul chose not to attend the forum in South Carolina.  He was campaigning in Nevada, but will participate in the FOX/WSJ debate on Monday, January 16th at 9p.m.ET. 

Earlier this week, Mike Huckabee along with a long list of GOP leaders asked the candidates to stop the onslaught of attacks against each other and against the party’s principles.

The South Carolina primary is one week away, 01.21.12.

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Michael Savage offers Gingrich $1M to drop out!

Why?? 'His continued candidacy spells nothing but ruin for conservatives'

Newt Gingrich

Talk-radio host Michael Savage says America can't survive another four years of Barack Obama, and he's putting his money where his mouth is, offering Republican presidential contender Newt Gingrich $1 million to drop out of the race within 72 hours.

Savage says that while rival Mitt Romney is not entirely satisfying to conservatives, the former Massachusetts governor can beat Obama. Gingrich, on the other hand, according to Savage, is "unelectable."

"If Newt Gingrich really loves this country as much as he says he does, if he really wants what is best for America, he will set his ego aside, call me and accept my offer," Savage wrote on his website today.

"His continued candidacy spells nothing but ruin for conservatives, Republicans and all true American patriots," he continued. "One million dollars in exchange for preserving the nation, Newt. I say take the money … and don't run."

Savage noted that the Republican presidential field has come down to two candidates who have a real chance of getting the nomination, Gingrich and Romney.

"While it's true that Romney is not as strong a conservative as many would like him to be, the most pressing issue before America today is defeating Barack Obama," he said. "And that is something Newt Gingrich cannot do."

Savage outlined the reasons he believes Gingrich can't win the general election:

  • When he was speaker of the House, he failed to deliver on his so-called Contract with America;
  • He made ads with Nancy Pelosi promoting the false theory of global warming;
  • He's in favor of amnesty for illegal aliens;
  • He's taken hundreds of thousands of dollars from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two of the most corrupt financial institutions in history;
  • He's cheated on two wives, which will destroy his chances among female voters;
  • He called the Republican plan to reform Medicare "right-wing social engineering";
  • In a presidential debate against Obama, regardless of how well he does, on television he will come off badly compared to Obama and look like nothing more than what he is: A fat, old white man.

Last week on his nationally syndicated show, Savage warned that if Obama wins re-election, America will become like Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's dictatorship.

Savage's show airs live Monday through Friday from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. Eastern. It can be heard online through stations such as WTNT in the nation's capital.

As WND reported, Savage's show is ranked No. 2 in listenership among all talk-radio shows streamed on the Internet, according to Talk Stream Live.

Source:  WND

Related:

The DNC’s Christmas Gift to Newt Gingrich

The road to the White House in 2012

The Newt World Order

Newt Gingrich and “the vision thing”

Gingrich Unveils 21st Century Contract With America

 "Liberalism is a Mental Disorder" by Michael Savage

Sunday, December 11, 2011

The DNC’s Christmas Gift to Newt Gingrich

DNC Web Video: "Original Tea Partier"

By Marion Algier

Without a doubt Obama and the Democrats would rather run against Newt Gingrich than Mitt Romney.  In poll after poll Mitt wins as the most electable, having the best chance to beat Obama in the general election over anyone else in the GOP field.

So was the ad a mistake… a DNC Oops?  Or are they sly as foxes?  Was this an attempt at gift giving to themselves?

The conservative right faction of the GOP, although almost everyone says that in the end they will vote for whomever to beat Obama, is looking for the ‘real’ most conservative GOP hopeful… to support, which Newt isn’t. So is this an attempt by the DNC to help Gingrich?

Newt might be considered more right of center than moderate Mitt in some areas, but certainly not on personal behavior or ethics.  Romney has been married to the same women, Ann Davies Romney with whom he has raised 5-children, without a hint of scandal and has always been very involved in his church, while keeping both his morals and religion out of the spotlight.  Mitt has political experience as Governor of Massachusetts but is not a career politician nor a beltway insider.  He also has extensive business experience and saved the economically distressed Winter Olympics in Utah with his business know now (a definite positive for where we are as a country).  Gingrich on the other hand is on his third marriage with questionable affairs in-between including with present wife Callista Bisek Gingrich, and has scandal and dissent in his political background as well for the Democrats to dig out later.  Newt is a career politician as well as a Washington insider.

If the GOP were really interested in a tea party candidate or the most conservative candidate for their nominee they would be leaning toward Rick Santorum, Michele Bachmann or Ron Paul with his added Libertarian leanings. (Santorum picked up the endorsement of the Secretary of State  of Iowa this week; Michele Bachmann had her best debate performance this past weekend in Iowa in months; and Ron Paul has an incredibly loyal organization on the ground for the Caucuses.)   All three have a chance to surprise the pollsters in Iowa.  And even Rick Perry is further right of center and has some tea party support. But Perry’s campaign continues to flounder even though he did redeem himself somewhat in Saturday’s debate.

Side note:  Perry attacked Mitt Romney for the 7th time, during the Iowa Caucus Debate this past weekend moderated by ABC, on the issue of Romney’s position on the individual mandate in the nation’s new health insurance law, ObamaCare. Perry keeps asserting what Mitt wrote in his book, No Apology (the hardback version), was changed to accommodate a flip-flop for the paperback version release. (Mitt has explained that the book was written two years ago so in light of his candidacy he updated parts of it for the new paperback release since information and issues change.)  Rick Perry has continuously misquoted what Mitt wrote in the hardback version (verified by this writer and several mainstream media news outlets) 7-times now.  Mitt finally had enough and last night said so, asking Perry if he wants to bet $10K.  Perry of courses backed off saying he was not there to bet but to run for office, but did back down.

The leftist controlled mainstream media as well as left-blogosphere seized on the comment and have had a field day with Mitt’s' ‘bet’  comment as soon as the words left his mouth in an attempt to make Mitt look like an out of touch rich guy.  The Romney camp when contacted today said Mitt had finally had enough and obviously knew that Perry was wrong so wouldn’t take the bet. Mitt just wanted to put an end to this on-going erroneous charge.  Come on people… let us stop being manipulated.  Mitt was right to back Perry down.  And if you pay attention, it is Newt who has been caught at Tiffany’s more than once buying very expensive gifts… not Mitt.  Another great media manipulation by Team Obama and their media alliances.

Overall, Newt experienced his first round of being attacked as the latest front-runner. Mitt came out for the first time in the loser category, not because he did badly, but because he wasn’t  as good on his feet and message discipline as he has been in the past, and because of his $10K remark blown out of proportion by the media. And Bachmann came out strong except for one too many positive references about former candidate Herman Cain; people still aren’t ready for that.  All six candidates did fairly well in the Iowa debate and no one missed Huntsman.  Even with Mitt’s bet remark he has a strong organization in Iowa from the 2008 run that shouldn’t be diminished. (Don’t miss the next GOP Debate moderated by Fox on Thursday, December 15, 2011 at 9p.m. ET)

The road to the White House in 2012 is going to be a long, hard and probably ‘dirty’ road.  Obama has the biggest war chest in history and goes into his second term campaign still virtually un-vetted while the GOP candidates with help from the media are tearing each other apart and doing all the vetting for Team Obama.

Who ultimately gets the GOP nomination is still up for grabs… Even Iowa is still up for grabs. But at least for now Newt should be sending the DNC a Merry Christmas card with a big thank you for their support with this ad!

Wednesday, December 7, 2011

On the Road to the White House 2012… Time for the GOP to Step Up

Huck's Forum 2011

I watched Governor Mike Huckabee’s forum on Fox News this past  weekend, as I have watched all the GOP debates so far. If you did not see it, here are a couple of good recaps by Jazz Shaw at Hot Air and Doug Mataconis at Outside The Beltway  

Huck’s Forum was a positive event and perhaps the first time we have had to really see and hear, in some depth, what a few of the remaining candidates had to say… and say on an equal playing field.  Each candidate took questions from 3-GOP State Attorneys General (Pam Bondi, Ken Cuccinelli and Scott Pruitt who are all part of the ObamaCare suit)  with Governor Huckabee as the moderator.  Each candidate received exactly the same amount of time and they were also each interviewed one at a time so the viewer saw each from the same perspective.

My focus here is primarily on the current state of the Republican primary race to examine the political strengths and weaknesses of the GOP field and what has to happen for the GOP to have the greatest chance to defeat President Obama.  And Obama’s defeat  is and must be the number one goal of all conservatives, independents and patriotic non-progressive Americans. (I also touch on the effects of the Presidential race on down-ticket campaigning that will be important for the GOP to solidify their control of the House and possibly gain control of the Senate.) I am not focusing on issues or the individual political beliefs of the candidates… on my preference(s).

This is now a two-man/person race and barring a miracle will remain a 2-man race.  Wish all you want but  Huntsman, Perry and Santorum are not going to win.  Bachmann has a slight chance to catch on and Ron Paul, although second or third in many polls and even a possible winner in the Iowa Caucuses probably has also reached his saturation point because of some of his Libertarian views in certain areas,  especially foreign policy and how it affects his approach to situations like Iran.

Posted: December 02, 2011 on WND

by Joseph Farah "Between the Lines"

Pray for a Michele Miracle

I like a lot of what Rick Santorum and Ron Paul have to say. I also have some problems with both of them. But if either of them got the nomination, I would support them enthusiastically. But neither one is going to get the nomination.

That leaves one other candidate – Michele Bachmann.

She's the real deal, folks. She's 100 percent. She's gaffe-proof. She's smarter than Newt, but doesn't brag about it (He’s already choosing his cabinet) half as much. She's honest. She's sincere. And she really believes in what she says.

What we need to pray for prior to the Iowa primary is a Michele Miracle.

Pray fervently for the future of this country – that it should be worthy of the blessings God has bestowed upon it for 235 years.

And ask God for a little miracle this year.

Ask Him to give us Michele.

To be honest… Bachmann and Santorum are the true consistent Conservative candidates and if evangelicals, constitutionalists and tea party members thought that was the highest priority, both their poll numbers would be a lot higher!  So it will take prayer and a miracle to move Michele (or Rick) up in the polls.

But for our purposes here since the race is now between Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich, the focus needs to be on their strengths and weaknesses and what should be done by each of their campaigns immediately.

What I saw in the Huck Forum was both enlightening and a bit frightening at the same time. The panel  asked some excellent even probing questions. And they pressed the candidates when appropriate for clarifications, as with Governor Perry when they tried to lead him away from his stand on repealing ObamaCare using Executive Order(s), that just wouldn’t be possible. (Something that Michelle Bachmann is very aware of and vocal about and has been ignored every time she has brought it up during the debate series.) The format overall turned out to be a winner giving viewers a good chance to learn more about each candidate.

However, given the reasonable ease for each campaign  to anticipate the general areas of the questions that would be focused on, including the obvious questions that would probably be asked, it was disappointing to watch Romney fumble his way through a couple of his answers. And while Gingrich handled himself better he too could have been more on message and less bloated in his answers.  I’ve heard some say that Newt’s performance outdistanced Mitt’s by a fair amount and others say they were pretty even, just a matter of style.

My thoughts then turned to the current state of each campaign’s organization and fund-raising performance. Here is where Romney has it all over Gingrich, and when it comes down to pure politicking Romney is still the odds on favorite to get the nomination.

I heard an interesting comment by liberal (and past campaign organizer) Bob Beckel say on Monday on the Five (Fox Cable News’ successful replacement for the former Glenn Beck slot where Beckel is a co-host) that what should happen is that Romney should convince Bachmann to pull out of the race, pay off her campaign debt (much like they did with Pawlenty)  and have Bachmann endorse Romney so she can focus on her re-election to Congress campaign.  (It would be a terrible shame for Bachmann and conservatives to not only lose for president but then to also lose her seat in the House! With Ron Paul not running for his House seat alongside his presidential run, Conservatives could lose two strong conservative voices in the House (who won’t be President).

Romney already has the organization in place to see his candidacy through the primaries and into the general, plus his campaign is well placed to down-ticket campaign to the betterment of his Presidential run and Congressional GOP candidates.  He also is well-funded. The task at hand is that Mitt has to step up and elevate his game right now.  He must get better prepped for debates, forums and interviews, and he must stop playing it safe. All candidates have bad weeks over the course of any campaign but the Romney organization has to step it up and insure their candidate does not suffer another debate like this last one, where people have a question who… he or Gingrich, did a better job at debating… but rather know that the only difference is just a matter of style.

The Gingrich campaign organization is weak and disjointed, and is playing catch up right now.  They are also are not as well funded. The challenge is to establish a true national-level structure quickly and effectively, for without it Newt will ultimately come up short and lose any chance of getting the nomination, especially because of his old baggage.   There are plenty of excellent political operatives out there, some of which may need to be lured from current jobs with lower level candidates. The Gingrich organization has to go on a talent search blitz immediately now that funds are coming in more readily. There’s barely a month until the Iowa caucus with the New Hampshire primary is a week later. Newt must elevate his organizational game considerably by early January 2012.

Considering the reality and gravity of what is at stake in this election, it is time for both Speaker Gingrich and Governor Romney to step up their game.  And it is perhaps time for the other candidates, including Michele Bachmann to consider making their exists and especially if they lose in Iowa.  What is an absolute is that the GOP candidates and those focused on replacing Obama  must stop tearing each other apart and start focusing on the job at hand… beating Obama!

In several recent polls, although the numbers vary a little, there are some consistent votes no matter who is doing them:

Who will bring the most change:  Newt Gingrich

Who is most likeable between Mitt and Newt:  Mitt Romney

Best Debater : Newt Gingrich

Who is the most intelligent GOP candidate: Newt Gingrich

Who is most acceptable to moderates and independents (who end up deciding elections): Mitt Romney

** Who is most electable in the General Election: Mitt Romney  **

Another factor is that the Democrats could not be making it more obvious that they consider Mitt Romney the greater threat and that they would much rather run against Newt Gingrich, even though Newt would probably make mince meat of Obama in the debates. 

Both Mitt and Newt have done their share of flip-flopping but Newt Gingrich has a lot more baggage (affairs, 3-marriages and lots of turmoil as former Speaker of the House (which Pelosi has already threatened to expose… (of course that was yesterday) plus a more recent question involving money paid to Newt’s firm for his consulting on Fannie and Freddie)  for the Democrats to attack.  Mitt has led a pretty scandal free life and is much more the businessman verses the career politician.  (The Mormon issue still surfaces now and again (Romney and Huntsman) in discussions about evangelical votes, but many of them are just as wary of Catholics.

Former Clinton advisor and strategist Dick Morris, now turned conservative and Fox News contributor, says that really Mitt’s only flip-flop that needs more explaining other than “facts have changed and I’ve adjusted and re-thought my position based on those new facts” is Mitt’s change on abortion or a woman’s right to choose… because those facts don’t change.  But MItt has already said that he has always been pro-life personally and then when he was in office and it came to signing legislation that was pro-choice that he just couldn’t do it and changed his position as did Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.  Morris thought that explanation is sufficient and believes that RomneyCare was a state rights issue and ObamaCare is not and that Romney will over-turn ObamaCare.

Both men could win the nomination and both would be formidable candidates against Obama. So Gentlemen… “Start Your Engines and Step on the Gas Full Throttle!  No More Playing it Safe!!”

The Road to the White House 2012

By Marion Algier

Related:

The interview: Glenn v. Newt

More accurately, it was Newt vs. Newt as Glenn played a series of past Newt quotes on the issues and the current frontrunner had to answer for them. He's known as an intellectual who enjoys a good debate -- did he acquit himself from himself? Take a listen and decide for yourself if Newt is a big government progressive or the right man for the job. WATCH (Transcript)

A Case Against Ron Paul’s Foreign Policy and a Rebuttal

Democrats Ramp Up Anti-Romney Ad Attack

Santorum Says Iowa Is Still Wide Open With One Month to Go

Perry TV Ad:  I Can Defend Faith From Obama’s “War on Religion”

Donald Trump’s GOP Debate: Mitt Romney Becomes Third Candidate Who Won’t Participate

Trump-Huntsman Feud Heats-Up

Perry to Launch Massive Iowa Push

Sarah’s Shoes  -  Could There Be a Palin Reconsideration

Ron Paul, Gary Johnson, Donald Trump, Sarah Palin and Chuck Baldwin have all been mentioned as possible 3rd Party Candidates. Beck even stated lately that he thinks  a 3rd Party Candidate Could Win in 2012… Beck is someone I agree with most of the time in most areas, but not on this one… and neither does anyone else that is credible, that I’ve heard.  A 3rd party run will split the Republican Party (like with Ross Perot in 1992) and guarantee an Obama re-election and pretty much bring the end  of America as we know it.  And not voting or writing in candidates will help do the same.

Obama and the Progressives will run a dirty campaign and you can bet that there will be a lot of fraud from their operatives, including the unions. Every single non-Obama vote and every patriot volunteer monitoring what is going is needed.

Ask Marion~

Friday, November 11, 2011

The Other Rick Perry Gaffe

By: Cliff Kincaid  -  Accuracy in Media

One of the best questions in the GOP debate was offered by Jim Cramer, the hyper CNBC host, near the end of the event. Interestingly, it came from a viewer. Unfortunately, the Republicans with a chance to answer it had no answer.

“I’m going to be quoting Joanne Kornbly (ph),” Cramer said. “She e-mails us. She says, ‘Our stock market has turned into a casino with high- frequency computerized trading comprising 70 percent of all transactions and hedge fund speculation resulting in market swings. Before privatizing Social Security, how would you make the stock market safer for individual investors?’”

This is a question that is on the minds of millions of Americans who want to see the American system of capitalism succeed and have investments in stocks. Last year, in the famous flash crash of May 6, the stock Accenture dropped from $44 dollars to one cent per share within 15 minutes, and recovered back to $41. Apple computer dropped 60 points in 15 minutes. It went from $258 down to $199 and then recovered to $248 within a 15-minute period.

Cramer introduced the question by saying that he was directing it to Herman Cain and that “This does not lend itself to 9-9-9 or any other number.” He asked the question and then said, “…how do we restore faith in the markets for the little guy?”

After Cain responded with another statement about improving the economy, Cramer followed up: “When the economy was going great, sir, there was no trust. When the economy was going great, people were getting ripped off and there was insider trading. When the economy was going great, people were getting hurt in the stock market. Forget the economy. Talk about the way the market is regulated.”

After Cain failed to respond, Maria Bartiromo followed up with Texas Governor Perry: “How do you restore faith in the public markets?” Perry replied, “Well, we have the regulations in place, and we had the regulations in place well before the meltdowns occurred.”

This may not be as funny as his gaffe in forgetting one of the federal departments he wants to abolish as president, but it is just as serious. Beginning under President George W. Bush, the Securities and Exchange Commission began dismantling the safeguard regulations, such as the uptick rule, circuit breakers and trading curbs, which prevent short selling and computerized high-speed trading.

Cramer, a director and co-founder of TheStreet.com, has been an advocate of reinstating the uptick rule, which would slow trading. He has also been extremely critical of Obama’s economic agenda, saying that he was “taking cues from Lenin.” Predictably, the Soros-funded Media Matters group has attacked him for these and other anti-Obama comments. It understands that its financial patron, who backs Obama, is the ultimate inside trader, having been convicted for that offense in France.

Cramer is not a liberal in the media and knows the money business. A former hedge fund manager and founder/owner and senior partner of Cramer Berkowitz, his bio notes that his compounded rate of return was 24% after all fees for 15 years at the firm.

“Not all regulation is bad,” he said, in reviewing the GOP debate performance. He makes the simple point that capitalism requires rules and regulations that protect invested capital. This was the point implied in the question he put to the Republicans.

In this debate, at least in the case of Jim Cramer, we saw a panelist and questioner who knew his business and tried to get real answers. Cramer did the Republicans a favor by feeding them a softball question from a viewer. Their failure to handle it effectively was a lot more significant and newsworthy than Rick Perry’s much-publicized gaffe.

The role of the hedge funds in market manipulation, which was alluded to in the question and was a subject of Cramer’s on his Tuesday show, one day before the debate, is something that won’t go away. Let’s hope that CNBC hosts another debate and Cramer is given another opportunity to grill the Republicans.

Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism, and can be contacted at cliff.kincaid@aim.org.

h/t to the Noisy Room

Related:


Two National Polls Show Gingrich  on the Rise, Now in Second Place

It’s Getting Ugly… Did Liberal Radio Host Bill Press Really Compare Herman Cain to Penn State Molester?

Perry Not Worried About Debating Obama

GOP Contenders Debate:  Fix US Economy or Go the Way of Europe

Thursday, November 10, 2011

GOP Contenders Debate: Fix the U.S. Economy or Go the Way of Europe

We’re getting there! It was the sixth debate of the fall season Wednesday night series.  CNBC’s debate was tag-lined “Your money. Your vote.” And yet by the time most of us had sat down and found a comfortable position for our legs, they were talking about Cain’s sexual harassment allegations. But while Cain isn’t off the hook for the accusations, he did very well for himself and it was the beginning of what could be a strong comeback. And in last night’s debate whenever the liberal media started to ask Cain about the on-going sexual harassment allegations the people in the audience booed.  When the media went back to questions on the economy, they cheered.  Hurray for everyone in that audience!

Cain said that the American people “deserve better than someone being tried in the court of public opinion based on unfounded accusations.”

He also said that since the allegations surfaced more than a week ago, “voters have voted with their dollars,” and supported his campaign.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney was asked about the allegations against Cain. Romney said Cain has responded to the questions and “people can make their own assessment.”

The questions about the Cain allegations generated boos from the audience at Oakland University.

The Media has been focused on “all “Herman Cain scandal, all the time. No Solyndra Solar scandal, no Fast and Furious Guns scandal... just Cain without end.  How convenient… another created diversion

ROCHESTER, Mich. (The Blaze/AP) — United in agreement for once, Republican presidential rivals warned forcefully Wednesday night the United States could be doomed to the same sort of financial crisis that is afflicting Europe unless federal deficits are drastically cut and the economy somehow revived.

Though sexual harassment allegations facing Herman Cain have dominated the GOP campaign for more than a week, the debate in economically ailing Michigan focused almost entirely on financial worries and proposed solutions in the U.S.

The candidates generally stuck to practiced speech lines – with a late exception…

Let’s not count Perry out quite yet, even though it looked like he clocked out two weeks ago. He had another one of those awkward moments… In the middle of one answer, Texas Gov. Rick Perry found himself unable to recall the names of the 3rd Cabinet-level government agency he plans to get rid of if elected, even leaning over to Rep. Ron Paul for help at one point.  That couldn’t have been more uncomfortable had Herman Cain passed Perry a reminder of the third agency’s name engraved on a rock.

rp

“The third agency of government I would do away with – the Education, the Commerce. And let’s see. I can’t. The third one I can’t. Oops,” he said, forgetting for a moment that he wants to abolish the Department of Energy.

On one specific issue that Congress must address soon, the candidates generally backed an extension of the Social Security payroll tax cut scheduled to expire at the end of the year. That was a rare moment of accord with President Barack Obama and many congressional Democrats, who have been warning that consumers could be hurt if the reduction is not renewed.

“I‘m not prepared to raise taxes on working Americans in the middle of a recession that’s this bad,” said former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, a sentiment quickly seconded by former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

Perry disagreed, and Rep. Michelle Bachmann of Minnesota said she opposed the one-year reduction when it was approved late last year. She said it had so far “blown a hole of $100 billion in the Social Security trust fund.”

Asked about Europe’s financial troubles, the candidates seemed to speak with one voice in saying Italy and other European countries should rise or fall on their own without any American bailout. And several of the White House hopefuls warned that unless U.S. deficits are cut and the economy invigorated, America is headed for the same type of downward spiral.

“Europe is able to take care of their own problems. We don’t want to step in and bail out their banks and their economies,” former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney said as he and GOP rivals met for the first time in three weeks in campaign debate.

Video: GOP Debate: Let Europe Solve Its Own Problems

Even so, he said the United States should continue contributing to organizations like the International Monetary Fund that are working to prevent a meltdown in troubled economies overseas.

Paul was more emphatic about the debt. “You have to let it liquidate. We took 40 years to build up this worldwide debt,” he added.

Cain said there wasn’t much the United States could do to directly to help Italy at present because the economy there is in such difficult shape. “We need to focus on the economy or we will fail,” he said, referring to the U.S. and calling for spending cuts, a strong dollar and measures to stimulate growth.

The Cain accusations did come up, though briefly.

“The American people deserve better than someone being tried in the court of public opinion due to unfounded accusations,” he said when the question came up early in the debate. “I value my character and my integrity more than anything else. And for every one person that comes forward with an unfair accusation there are probably, there are thousands who come forward and say none of that ever happened with Herman Cain.”

Romney, a former venture capitalist, was asked if he would keep Cain on the job as a CEO given the accusations. He responded, “Herman Cain is the person to respond to these questions. He just did.”

On another point, Cain felt it necessary to make a post-debate apology to House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, whom he had called “Princess Nancy” for sidetracking Republican legislation when she was speaker.

The announced topic for the evening was the economy, a subject that produced few if any early sparks among rivals who often spar energetically.

Perry, Gingrich, Bachmann and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum joined Romney, Cain, Paul and Huntsman on stage at Oakland University in Michigan, a state where unemployment is 11.1 percent and well above the national 9 percent jobless rate.

The debate took place less than two months before Iowa’s kickoff caucuses, as the pace of campaign activity accelerates and public opinion polls suggest the race remains quite fluid. Romney and Cain currently share co-front-runner status in most surveys, with Perry and Gingrich roughly tied for third, within striking distance.

Not surprisingly, none of the contenders found much to like in Obama’s economic stewardship.

Perry said the next president should systematically judge all of the government regulations enacted since Obama took office on a standard of whether they created jobs. Any that failed should be repealed, he said.

Bachmann sharply criticized Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. She said the latter had recently given multimillion-dollar bonuses to executives even though it was seeking a new federal bailout.

Gingrich, who last held public office more than a decade ago, bristled when asked what advice his company had given Freddie Mac for a $300,000 fee. “Advice on precisely what they didn’t do,” he shot back – stop backing mortgages to applicants who aren’t credit-worthy.

The government rescued mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in September 2008 to cover their losses on soured mortgage loans. Since then, a federal regulator has controlled their financial decisions.

The cost to taxpayers so far has been about $169 billion, the most expensive bailout of the financial crisis.

There was only scant mention of the Michigan auto industry, which benefited in 2008 and 2009 from a federal bailout that both President George W. Bush and Obama backed.

All eight Republicans on the debate stage say they wouldn’t have offered government assistance.

Not so Obama, who stood outside a factory not far from the debate site recently and said government bailouts of General Motors and Chrysler were a success that saved thousands of American jobs.

 

Side notes:

And then there was Mitt Romney‘s hair. It was actually a little messy. Granted, “messy” by Romney’s standard is like being “feminine” by Janet Napolitano‘s standards stated one of the event bloggers. But those five hairs haven’t seen this much freedom since birth and actually made him look ‘more real’ commented more than one viewer. Winking smile

The things they can do with technology. It‘s a miracle there wasn’t a mic blowout for Jim Cramer, one of the moderator’s, who yelled every question like he was day trading on NASDAQ. Not even a little audio feedback when he said his “P”s or “B”s.

Video: Herman Cain and Jim Cramer

Related:

AP: Some Candidates ‘ Drifted from Reality’ During Last Night’s GOP Debate

Perry Not Worried About Debating Obama

CNN Spins Tuesday’s Elections as Republican Setback

(h/t the Blaze/AP)

To be updated later…

Thursday, October 20, 2011

'My headache's about to explode': U.S. girls just dropping dead

Unearthed documents reveal new deaths from 'mandated' shot

Posted: October 19, 2011  -  8:07 pm Eastern  -  By Joe Kovacs
© 2011 WND

Gardasil, the controversial drug that took the early Republican presidential debates by storm, is back in the news as newly unearthed documents reveal 26 additional deaths associated with the shot designed to help prevent young women from getting a sexually transmitted disease that can lead to cervical cancer.

The public-interest group Judicial Watch has obtained the documents through the Freedom of Information Act from the Food and Drug Administration detailing reports of harmful reactions to the vaccination for human papillomavirus, also known as HPV.

"The adverse-reaction reports detail 26 new deaths reported between Sept. 1, 2010, and Sept. 15, 2011, as well as incidents of seizures, paralysis, blindness, pancreatitis, speech problems, short-term memory loss and Guillain-Barré Syndrome," Judicial Watch said.

What's really going on with all these shots? Read 'SCARY MEDICINE: Exposing the dark side of vaccines'

According to the documents, adverse Gardasil events reported to the FDA include:

  • The information was received from the patient's mother ... concerning her healthy 14-year-old daughter who in August 2007, January 2008, and June 2008, was vaccinated with a first, second and third dose of Gardasil ... It was reported that the patient experienced several symptoms including numbness and tingling in her fingers and toes, fatigue, a really hard time falling asleep, urinary tract infections, ovarian cyst, moody, trouble getting out of bed and seizures. The patient had had upwards of 150 seizures following her third shot in June 2008. During her seizures she stopped breathing for periods of 30 to 40 seconds. The patient was diagnosed with Neurocardiogenic syndrome and seizures. It was reported that the patient died due to ovarian cyst. The reporter felt that the patient's symptoms were related to vaccination with Gardasil.
  • Additional information was received from a newspaper article concerning a 18-year-old female ...who on 10-MAY-2007 was vaccinated with Gardasil ... in the right arm ... The patient who was a college freshman traveled on 05-OCT-2007 to visit her family for the weekend. The patient reportedly felt "slightly ill" upon her arrival and subsequently took an aspirin and went to bed awakening at 1:30 PM the following afternoon "appearing refreshed." The patient became feverish again that night and woke at 1:00 a.m. the morning of 07-OCT-2007 with chills and a severe headache complaining that "my headache is about to explode." The patient was taken to a local hospital, where a brain computed axial tomography (CAT) scan was performed and the brain revealed meningococcal disease in her brain and brain stem. The patient was immediately transferred to another hospital and died the evening of 07-OCT-2007 due to complications of meningitis.
  • Information has been received from a physician regarding a 15-year-old female who on 26-SEP-2007 was vaccinated with her second dose of Gardasil for prevention of HPV ... Thirty minutes after the vaccination, the patient experienced a headache and that night went home and slept until the next morning. The patient woke up the next day and went to school. The school nurse called the patient's mother and informed her that the patient felt tingling in both hands. Later that day, the patient was again sent to the nurse's office due to a shaking sensation all over. Later that evening, things became worse and the patient started crying from the pain and burning in her back. The patient was taken to the emergency room by her parents. In the emergency room, the patient collapsed and was not able to walk; she was paralyzed from the waist down. It was reported that the patient was hospitalized for two months.

In response to the concern about death reports among those who received Gardasil, the Centers for Disease Control insists "there was no unusual pattern or clustering to the deaths that would suggest that they were caused by the vaccine."

"These reports raise additional concerns about Gardasil's questionable safety and provide ample reason to end the push to give it young girls and boys. And the CDC's continued caginess on reported deaths is disturbing," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. "Federal, state and local officials need to stop promoting this vaccine for children."

The Gardasil controversy received national attention during the presidential debates, as candidates hammered Texas Gov. Rick Perry over his 2007 executive order to vaccinate schoolgirls in the Lone Star State against HPV.

"To have innocent little 12-year-old girls to be forced to have government injections through an executive order is just flat-out wrong," Michele Bachmann said during the Sept. 12 tea-party debate in Tampa, Fla.

Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum also took aim at Perry's inoculation push.

"This is big government run amok," Santorum said, receiving applause from those in attendance. "It is bad policy and it should not have been done."

Perry said he regretted his decision to push for the vaccine using an executive order, but said he was standing up against cancer.

"At the end of the day I am always going to err on the side of life," Perry said. "At the end of the day this was about trying to solve cancer."

The mandated shots never actually took place after the Texas Legislature halted the plan.

As WND previously reported, one expert on Gardasil claims the drug is not only dangerous, but actually useless in fighting cervical cancer.

Dr. Christian Fiala, who successfully fought the use of the drug in Austria, told WND "there is no proof of a causal relationship of HPV and cervical cancer (correlation is not necessarily causation) and there is no evidence that HPV vaccine reduces the overall number of cervical cancer (cases)."

Judicial Watch launched a comprehensive investigation of Gardasil's safety record in 2008 after the drug's manufacturer, Merck & Co.,begana major effort to lobby in state legislatures to impose requirements that girls be given their product.

It was in 2008 when Judicial Watch obtained documents from the FDA documenting "anaphylactic shock," "foaming at mouth," "grand mal convulsion," "coma" and "now paralyzed" descriptions of the complications from Gardasil. The company wanted it to be mandatory for all schoolgirls.

Previous federal reports documented some three dozen deaths in the United States, although an activist organization claimed there had been almost 70 deaths, nearly 800 "serious" reactions and thousands of minor reactions.

According to a Reuters report today, as of this past June, about 35 million doses of Gardasil had been dispensed in the U.S., and about 18,700 "adverse events" – which may or may not be caused by the vaccine – had been reported.
Of those, 92 percent were considered mild – meaning they were not life threatening and caused no persistent damage. The rest were serious, and included blood clots and 56 deaths. If the 26 new deaths are added to the official figure, it would put the official fatality count at 82.

Reuters says the CDC estimates that in 2010, 48 percent of girls between 13 and 17 received at least one dose of the HPV vaccine, which is given in three doses over six months. That rate is higher than in the two previous years, but still too low, according to the agency.

Merck spokeswoman Jennifer Allen Woodruff told WND that the drug addresses a medical need, that of reducing the rates of HPV.

She said it has been approved widely around the world, with 120 countries having examined and approved its use.

"Nothing is more important to Merck than the safety of our vaccines and those who use them," she said. "The facts about Gardasil are clear and its efficacy and safety … were established."

She declined to say that Merck had not lobbied state lawmakers for laws that would force the vaccine on children and families, instead offering that the company focused on lobbying efforts regarding the "potential school requirements" in some states.

She said the company's goal was simply to provide information to those who made such decisions.

However, the vaccine has had a few bumps. Agence France-Presse reported in 2009 that Spanish authorities withdrew tens of thousands of doses of the vaccine when two teen girls were hospitalized.

In the United Kingdom, an investigation was launched after two young girls died following their injections of the drug.

And the Daily News and Analysis from India said the Indian Council of Medical Research suspended a cervical cancer control vaccination program for girls after four deaths and complications for 120 more.

The Truth about Gardasil has launched a video called One More Girl that publicizes "questions" about Gardasil's safety.

Read more:'My headache's about to explode': U.S. girls just dropping deadhttp://www.wnd.com/?pageId=357853#ixzz1bLXj5kj9


Source:  WND  - Cross-Posted at True Health Is True Wealth

Related:

Rick Perry’s Vaccine Shocker

Rick Perry - Lies About Dying Woman and His HPV Decisions

Gardasil – If A Picture is Worth A Thousand Words, Then A Video Report, Or Two, Or Three, or SEVEN…

Merck Vaccine Scientist Dr. Maurice Hilleman Admitted Presence of SV40, AIDS and Cancer Viruses in Vaccines

Rick Perry

Texas Governor Orders STD Vaccine for all Girls (By Executive Order)

Stealth Vaccine Laws Allow Children to Consent to Vaccines

Merck Vaccine Dangers

Dr. Mercola:  Don’t Let Your Child Be the Next Victim of This Deadly Vaccine

Gardasil: Oversold, Over-Hyped, and Risky?

32 Girls Have Died

Research Firm Blows Hole In Big Pharma Vaccination Lie

Vaccines:  Cooking Up a Witches Brew of Death and Deceit

Vaccinations, Obama, and the Illusionatis Depopulation

Sterilization of Our Children Has Begun With the H1N1 Vaccine…  -Lots of informative links

Vaccination Nanotechnology

Review:  The New World of ObamaCare

Bilderberg Behind Rick Perry 2012 Run  Given Their Nod in 2007

Thursday, October 13, 2011

The Mormon Minutia … Real? Created? And is it Fair or Even Relevant?

When I heard the latest media circus created in response to key Perry supporter Pastor Robert Jeffries’ comments at the America Family Values Summit in Washington, D.C., that Mitt Romney belonged to a “cult” because he is Mormon, I thought both really and here we go again?!?  The attack was made against Mitt Romney but fellow GOP candidate Jon Huntsman is also Mormon and so is Glenn Beck, who was one of the other speakers at the event, who along with historian and Founder of Wallbuilders, David Barton, has been instrumental in resurrecting the Black Robe Regiment, made up of religious leaders of all faiths.

I am a Christian who throughout my life has had many Mormon friends and business associates but I don’t have a personal dog in this hunt. But it bothered me.  Mitt Romney is also not my first choice for our party’s standard bearer, but he is not my last either and I will vote for whomever the GOP nominates because any of them will be better than the present occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Just as I started doing a little research for my article I received the following titled: the Mormon Thing…

Article VI, U.S. Constitution: “…No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

First things first—I know very little about the Mormon faith system and, frankly, I don’t care. I may or may not have friends who are Mormon, but since I don’t ask and don’t select my friends on the basis of their religion, I don’t know if they are or not.

The simple fact is that virtually any religion you can name has aspects that seem odd to those not born into it, cause others to drop out of it, and provide rich material for those who mock all religion. I personally feel more secure around people who have a religion—any religion—than around those who have none, but that’s just me.

So when the media, as usual, seized upon some obscure Texas pastor’s comments about the Mormon Church as a “cult” after he introduced the hapless Gov. Rick Perry at some event, the whole Mormon thing raised its ugly head again as various members of the chatteratti and various ink-stained wretches tried to raise the issue of Mitt Romney’s religion. It is also Jon Huntsman’s religion.

The question, generally stated, is whether Romney could be a good President as a Mormon? It is an idiotic question, the kind that was raised back in the 1960s when John F. Kennedy, a Catholic, ran for office. For my part, I would take Romney any day over the present occupant of the Oval Office who claims to have been a parishioner and close friend of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, a racist and America-basher of the first order.

For deep dish conservatives concerned about Mormons serving in the White House, Stephen M. Studdert, a former Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan, recalled that he “truly admired the Latter-day Saints. His administration included more members of the Church than any other American president ever.”

Among those close to Reagan during his eight years as the greatest president of the modern era was Richard Wirthlin, his chief strategist. Terrel Bell served as Reagan’s Secretary of Education, Angela Buchanan was Secretary of the Treasury, and Rex Lee was Solicitor General.

Reagan’s White House included Jon Huntsman, Jr., currently a former governor of Utah and a candidate for the GOP nomination. The national security advisor to Presidents Ford and George H.W. Bush, Brent Scowcroft, is now an elder statesman. Suffice to say there were many others. No one recalls that any those Mormons served with anything other than dedication and patriotism.

Still scared of Mormons? Sen. Bob Bennett of Utah was first elected to the Senate in 1992. John Doolittle formerly represented California’s 4th Congressional District. Jeff Flake represents Arizona’s 6th District. Mike Crapo is a Senator from Idaho. A former Senator from Utah, Jake Garn, has previously been an astronaut. Anyone caring enough to check will find many other Mormons who have honorably served in Congress.

One of the most respected members of the Senate is Orrin Hatch of Utah, a Republican. Indeed, all the Congress critters named to this point have been Republicans, but the Senate Majority Leader, Sen. Harry Reid, a Democrat, is also a Mormon.

You can even go back to Eisenhower’s administration and find that Ezra Taft Bensen served as Ike’s Secretary of Agriculture for both terms.

History buffs will tell you that Leroy Eldridge Cleaver who, after a past that included thirteen years as a guest of the California penitentiary system for narcotics possession and assault, became the face in the 1960s of the Black Power movement. After renouncing the movement, Cleaver joined the Church of the Latter-day saints in the 1970s. And, yes, God does work in marvelous ways.

All of this is to say that, despite the misgivings of some Texas pastor and others, Mormons have an admirable record of serving their nation and doubtless, if elected, former Gov. Mitt Romney will do so as well.

By Alan Caruba  © Alan Caruba, 2011 – Posted at the Tea Party Nation

One of the most amazing things is that in 1968 when George Romney, Mitt’s dad, ran for President and people knew much less about the Mormon religion and probably feared it more, the Mormon issue never came up. I heard Karl Rove mention that as well in an interview. His take on it was that again it is the biased secular liberal media who is against anyone on the right, religion in general and the Conservative take on the Constitution, that is raising and over-reporting this issue.

I, unlike Alan Caruba, do know which of my friends were and are Mormons but like Alan I still don’t know much more about the inter-workings or beliefs of the Mormon or LDS Church that are different from other Christian sects and don’t particularly care, at least not for this purpose.

What I do know is that every last one of the Mormon people I know are great hard working patriotic people who love America, family, God and their church.  They are terrific helpful friends and are devoted to their families.  And as a group they raise the best kids on the planet in these modern times, Kids who are almost always polite, well-mannered,  ambitious and who are also involved with their families, church and school and are proud of and willing to server America.   So what is wrong with that?

We have a guy in the White House now who attended a church for 20-years founded in Liberation Theology rooted in Islam whose pastor hates America. And Obama’s religious background and allegiance before that is pretty questionable or vague like everything else about his past. He also has surrounded himself with people who are self-avowed Marxists, Communists and Progressives that want to fundamentally change everything about America.

So looking at this and all the problems we have as a country I have to ask, “Really?  We are worried about a Mormon in the White House?”.

By Marion Algier

Related:

Perry Practicing, Polishing For Debates  -  Perry’s strategy for winning the GOP primary is focused on highlighting the Texas economy, vilifying Romney as a wealthy Mormon elitist (which is pretty amazing when start looking into Perry’s friends, associates and supporters) and painting himself as the honest  straightforward “everyman.”   I personally think looking at this whole situation of the past week unfold, it is Perry that comes out looking like the small un-relatable bad guy!

GOP Candidate and Mormon Jon Huntsman Calls Perry-Backing Pastor Who Criticized Mormonism a ‘Moron’ and Bizarrely Joe Scarborough Twists That To Attack Beck’s Viewers

Note from a friend of mine who emailed me after reading my article and said, “I just watched Dancing with the Stars where Dereck and Julianne Hough (a Mormon brother and sister who are part of their expert dance team) danced in an expose as Donny Osmond, of Donny and Marie (both former DWTS winners or finalists) and the Osmonds was sitting out in the audience.  I then flashed on them (wholesome, cute, energetic and ambitious) after looking at some of the liberals sitting in the audience and performing and reflecting on a lot of the people in Washington and thought… “Yup we could do a lot worse than a Mormon in the White House if that is the deciding issue”.

Tuesday, October 11, 2011

The American Values Voter Summit

(Photo: Sofia Resnick/The American Independent)

‘Values voters’ pick Ron Paul

Bachmann, Cain, Rubio, Santorum given running-mate nods

By Sofia Resnick | 10.09.11 | 10:14 am

Ron Paul was declared the winner of the 2011 Values Voter Summit straw poll, taking 37 percent of the vote.

(Photo: Sofia Resnick/The American Independent)

Beck believes college is for those who can afford it

Beck is  as self-made man with only a high school education who believes that not everyone needs to go to college and many are piling on more debt than what they will gain from a college education that will take half their working life to pay back.

By Sofia Resnick | 10.09.11 | 9:57 am

Glenn Beck, ardent supporter of the tea party movement, spent the majority of his speech at the Values Voter Summit attacking the Occupy movement.

(Photo: William Dahlsten/Linn County GOP)

Former Findley, Roberts staffers sign on with Santorum

By Andrew Duffelmeyer | 10.09.11 | 8:18 am

The campaign manager for former attorney general candidate Brenna Findley has signed on with Rick Santorum’s Iowa presidential team, as has the field director for former gubernatorial candidate Rod Roberts.

(Photo: Dave Davidson, www.TEApublican.com)

Iowa’s 3rd, 4th CD races among “10 FEC reports to watch”

By Andrew Duffelmeyer | 10.08.11 | 3:01 pm

The race to raise funds in Iowa’s 3rd and 4th Congressional Districts are among “10 FEC reports to watch,” according to Politico.

"We need a president who will treat homosexuality ... as a threat to public health," said Bryan Fischer. (Photo: Sofia Resnick/The American Independent)

AFA’s Bryan Fischer condemns gays, Muslims; Mitt Romney condemns Fischer

By Sofia Resnick | 10.08.11 | 11:38 am

The American Family Association’s president, Bryan Fischer, delivered a Values Voter Summit speech rife with rhetoric some have called “unmitigated bigotry” and what presidential hopeful Mitt Romney indirectly called out as “poisonous.”

Related:

PASTOR DEFENDS COMMENTS CALLING MORMONISM A ‘CULT’, GOP CANDIDATES

mitt_romney_fair_500

Radio host to Jeffress: ‘You did Rick Perry no good’

By Sofia Resnick | 10.08.11 | 11:25 am

Radio host Bill Bennett had strong words for Dallas pastor Robert Jeffress during his comments at Saturday’s Values Voter Summit in Washington, D.C., saying that statements Jeffress made against Mitt Romney’s religion were inappropriate and ultimately took away from the pastor’s endorsement of Rick Perry.

(Photo: Patrick Michels/The Texas Independent)

Controversial Texas pastor endorses Perry

Pastor said evangelicals will not support Romney due to Mormonism

By Sofia Resnick | 10.08.11 | 11:04 am

A controversial pastor who introduced Rick Perry at the Values Voter Summit also handed the Texas governor an endorsement, saying that Perry deserve the presidency because he has a “strong commitment to biblical values.”

steve_king_vvs_500

King brings Iowa marriage stump speech to Values Voter Summit

Tells attendees, like Iowans, that fabric of society at risk from gay marriage

By Lynda Waddington | 10.08.11 | 10:27 am

If Iowans were hoping to hear something new from U.S. Rep. Steve King during his address at the ongoing Values Voter Summit in Washington, D.C., they were sorely disappointed.

Source:  The Iowa Independent