Month: July 2012

Did Mitt Romney get his facts wrong on Reagan?

As I wrote in my previous blog posting about Mitt Romney; there is this little story about Romney getting his facts wrong about Ronald Reagan.

It comes via the Weekly Standard:

The Wall Street Journal reported Monday that Mitt Romney is recounting a Jim Baker anecdote in which President Reagan ordered Baker, as White House chief of staff, to hold no national security meetings over a hundred day period early in his first term so that President Reagan and his team could focus on the economy. If the Journal‘s reporting is accurate—and I don’t believe the Romney camp has challenged it—Romney should stop telling this false and foolish tale.

[….]

“Given the challenges a Romney administration will face – from a spiraling Syria to key decisions on the way forward in Afghanistan to dealing with Iran’s nuclear program and the threats from al Qaeda in Yemen and East Africa – it is unlikely Romney will have the luxury of ignoring foreign policy for his first 100 days….But the fact that Romney thinks it would be desirable to ignore the world for his first 100 days is troubling. Yes, the American people are focused on the economy – and understandably so. But Romney isn’t running for treasury secretary – he is running for Commander in Chief. And those responsibilities begin on Day 1 of his presidency.”

What’s more, I can’t believe the story is true. Or if Reagan did once say what Baker says he said, it was an expression of exasperation after one (presumably unsatisfactory) meeting that neither Reagan nor Baker followed through on. In fact, I’ll buy Jim Baker a very good dinner next time he’s in Washington if he or anyone else can find a 100-day stretch (or a ten-day stretch) of the Reagan presidency in which President Reagan was involved in no national security meetings. I encourage interested readers to research this eminently researchable topic, and e-mail us what you find at webeditor@weeklystandard.com. I was able to spend just a few minutes scrolling thought the Reagan Foundation’s helpful account of President Reagan’s daily schedule, and I see no week, let alone three months, in which President Reagan doesn’t seem to have held some sort of national security and foreign policy meetings. To say nothing of the fact that he ran for the presidency highlighting national security issues, and was a historic president in large part because of his national security accomplishments.

So, reminder to Mitt Romney: With respect to the presidency, national security isn’t a bug; it’s a feature.

To be quite honest, I do not believe this to be overly damaging to his campaign; like the previous story I reported, this just seems to be a matter of getting his message tightened up a bit. It might be that Romney was fed some inaccurate information. Although, I have to wonder if this piece by Bill Kristol is not some sort of underhanded Neoconservative attempt to kneecap Romney. It would make sense, Romney has not been exactly thundering hawk, when it comes to Iran. Maybe this is supposed to be a gentle reminder as to who controls the strings in the GOP. Of course, I have to watch it, or the Wilsonian Republican Blogosphere will start a crusade against me again. 😉

 

The U.K. Telegraph prints a bogus story on Mitt Romney

It seems that either The U.K. Telegraph is either getting some bad information or someone over there has an axe to grind with Romney.

The story via The Telegraph:

As the Republican presidential challenger accused Barack Obama of appeasing America’s enemies in his first foreign policy speech of the US general election campaign, advisers told The Daily Telegraph that he would abandon Mr Obama’s “Left-wing” coolness towards London.

In remarks that may prompt accusations of racial insensitivity, one suggested that Mr Romney was better placed to understand the depth of ties between the two countries than Mr Obama, whose father was from Africa.

“We are part of an Anglo-Saxon heritage, and he feels that the special relationship is special,” the adviser said of Mr Romney, adding: “The White House didn’t fully appreciate the shared history we have”.

Mr Romney on Wednesday embarks on an overseas tour of Britain, Israel and Poland designed to quash claims by Mr Obama’s team that he is a “novice” in foreign affairs. It comes four years after Mr Obama’s own landmark foreign tour, which attracted thousands of supporters.

He lands in London early on Wednesday morning, in advance of meetings with David Cameron and other senior ministers on Thursday. He will also meet Ed Miliband and Tony Blair before attending two lucrative fundraisers and the opening ceremony of the Olympics.

[….]

“Obama is a Left-winger,” said another. “He doesn’t value the Nato alliance as much, he’s very comfortable with American decline and the traditional alliances don’t mean as much to him. He wouldn’t like singing ‘Land of Hope and Glory’.”

The two advisers said Mr Romney would seek to reinstate the Churchill bust displayed in the Oval Office by George W. Bush but returned to British diplomats by Mr Obama when he took office in 2009. One said Mr Romney viewed the move as “symbolically important” while the other said it was “just for starters”, adding: “He is naturally more Atlanticist”.

Mr Obama has appeared less interested in relations with London than Mr Bush. He repeatedly rebuffed Gordon Brown when the then-prime minister sought a meeting at the UN in 2009 and was criticised for responding to an elaborate gift with a set of DVDs that did not work in Britain.

The whole quote, if true, has all the trappings of dog-whistle racism. The problem is, according to Jeff over at “The Lid”, not a word of it is even remotely true:

There is one problem with the quote, it is a fraud!

Andrea Saul, Romney’s press secretary, disputed the comments and emphasized that they did not reflect the beliefs of the former Massachusetts governor.

It’s not true. If anyone said that, they weren’t reflecting the views of Governor Romney or anyone inside the campaign,” she told CBSNews.com in an email  I emailed my contact within the campaign who backed up Ms Saul’s response.

The fact that Romney denied that anyone in his campaign made that comment doesn’t matter to the US press, neither does the fact that Mr Swaine hasn’t backed up his charge with proof.

Good work on the part of Jeff to put out the truth on this story. I really do not believe this one to be a effort to knock Romney on the part of the Telegraph; however, I do believe it to be a result of some bad sourcing or planting of a false story, by someone who might have an axe to grind with Mitt Romney. This happens quite a bit in Politics.

However, Mitt Romney does have a bit of another problem, which I am covering in my next blog posting.

Sorry for the blog silence yesterday

A bit of housekeeping: My apologies to those who actually do read here.  I was busy with business related matters yesterday. Plus, life called and I had to tend to personal matters.

I had a huge posting in mind, about what is happening on twitter and with some of my enemies or stalkers, as I like to call them. However, I just cannot justify wasting the bandwidth on them.

So, yes, I am back and I am now going to do a posting on something I think is more important.

 

Boycott ABC?

This is what this blogger here is asking people to do.

Sounds good to me. I mostly watch Fox News channel anymore. Only honest network left anymore.

Hopefully, this takes off in a big way.

Video: Bristol Palin’s son demonstrates Palin family’s blatant hypocrisy

This comes from somewhere that I normally would not link to in a million years.

This video does not sadden me, it angers me greatly. All during the 2008 election, the left contended that this family were nothing more than two-bit fakes, when it came to social Conservatism. It was first suspected when Bristol came out as pregnant. It was also was confirmed, when Bristol and her younger sister and some friends, made some rather nasty comments on a posting in the comments section of her Facebook page. Now, there is this above.

When will Fox News, and the rest of the conservative community finally say that enough is enough and finally wake up to the fact that entire Palin family; are nothing more than a bunch of two-bit charlatans, who are using the Conservative Christian banner as nothing more than an means to make money? I have been a born again Christian for 30 years. (I have not always acted like it and even spent time far away from the Lord. But I digress. ) I have spent more than my fair share of time, in Church and around Christians. The Christians that I know, do not talk like that, and they do not allow their children to talk like that either! Because if their talked like that; they would either get their mouths washed out with soap or, they would get their little behinds spanked. I can also say that this was the case with yours truly too.

Am I being judgmental? No, I am simply saying that there is a Godly way of raising a child and it is quite obvious to me, that Bristol Palin is not doing that; and because she is such a public figure, she most certainly should be held to a higher standard, than most parents. What I also find to be absolutely laughable, is that somehow or another; Bristol Palin is being held up as some sort of Christian role model for young Christian girls. Further more, that child did not just make up that little word up; take two guesses where he learned it from and your first one does not count. In other words, the child is repeating what he heard his mommy say!

I leave you with this:

Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it. (Proverbs 22:6 KJV)

and…

Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him. (Proverbs 22:15 KJV)

Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell. (Proverbs 23:13-14 KJV)

The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame. When the wicked are multiplied, transgression increaseth: but the righteous shall see their fall. Correct thy son, and he shall give thee rest; yea, he shall give delight unto thy soul. Where there is no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy is he. (Proverbs 29:15-18 KJV)

This, according to Word of God, is where Bristol Palin is a massive failure. Modernist Christians will disagree with this, of course; because they reject the Word of God as the final authority. But we Baptist’s know this to be very true. Another thought too; it is quite obvious that Bristol Palin, much like her mother, is a feminist, which is a liberal progressive idea — and it very much shows in her child rearing.

UPDATE: Bristol says he did not make a “gay” slur as Huffpo reported, but rather used the word, which Van Halen called “For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge.” Just the same, the kid should get its mouth washed out with soap. Bristol writes this for a silly excuse:

Lifetime filmed over 12 months (on and off) and they caught a moment on film that would cause any parent to be red in the face. Tripp is always surrounded by adults – around the campfires with cousins and their friends, at the shop with my dad and his snowmachine buddies. He’s apparently picked up some language that I’d prefer he not use. On national television or at home.

I got twenty bucks that says she uses the language too. Also too, some Christian family. I was under the impression that all of Palin family were Christians. Either way, it’s a flimsy excuse. Just more perfect example of a fatherless child and a lousy mother.

Quote me on this: Russell Pearce is a FREAKING DOLT!

…and a big freaking dolt at that!

What am I talking about? This: (via progressive blog think progress)

Stupidest Facebook posting ever…. click to see it full size!

Good Lord almighty! Did this moron even read the news at all? From my editorial piece, where I tore Roger Ebert a new one for saying the same thing:

Via USA TODAY:

James Eagan Holmes, 24, legally bought the four weapons he allegedly used. Police said he opened fire in a suburban Denver theater with four sold-out showings of the premiere of the Batman movie Dark Knight Rises. He was dressed head-to-toe in black bullet-proof gear, including helmet, vest, leggings and a groin and throat protector. He wore a gas mask, goggles, and black gloves.

You see, Roger Ebert omitted the fact that this man was wearing armor to protect himself from being shot at in the theater. Therefore, it would not have mattered at all, if someone would have shot back at him or not — that is unless someone was shooting armor piercing ammunition, which is generally not available to the public, unless someone happens to have an old stash of it. This is because of our over reactionary Government decided to outlaw those types of bullets after the North Hollywood Bank shootout that happened in 1997. This resulted in the outlawing of automatic assault rifles and armor piercing bullets. The ban on the assault rifles expired, but the ban on armor piercing bullets never did. This would leave someone unable to defend himself or herself against an attacker wearing body armor.

So, you see why I call Russell Pearce a dolt? There could have been 60 men in that theater with pistols. It would not have mattered one lousy iota. Because the man was wearing a vest and a good deal of other stuff to protect himself from being shot. Again, I don’t agree with Think Progress’s politics at all; but I am calling this one, like I see it. The man is a woefully uninformed dolt!

I mean, I can understand the left making idiotic comments like this; but our side?!?!?! Yeeesh... 🙄

Others: Tucson Citizen, tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com, Feathered Bastard

 

Colorado shooting suspect appears in court

The Video:

The live blog of the suspect, who opened fire in a theater in Colorado  court appearance, is at CNN‘s “Just in” blog.

I watched the video of above, it does look like he might have just woken up; also too, he does not seem totally with it. Could be off his medication, if he is taking any..

I will say this; as a Constitutional Conservative, I fear that this guy will not get a fair trial, at all. You see, as that video states in my right side bar, at the top; I happen to know that America is NOT a Democracy, but rather a Constitutional Republic. I fear that this man has been accused, tried and convicted by the media already. I fear that jurors in this man’s trial will be brought in with their minds already made up and that my friends is never a good thing in a Republic like ours.

Please, do not misunderstand me; I am fully aware of carnage that this man has unleashed, there is no doubt that he is either evil or just a very sick man.  However, I do believe that is a Constitutional right of all American citizens to receive a fair and impartial trial. Thus, I fear that this man will not receive such a trial.