Orrin Hatch May be Next to Quit – Romney to Take his Seat

from Breitbart:

Staff for Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) are not outright denying a new report from The Atlantic magazine that Hatch, another ally of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, plans to retire at the end of his current term—another death blow for the failing Senate Majority Leader.

The headline of the latest piece in The Atlantic from McKay Coppins is: “Orrin Hatch Tells Friends He Plans to Retire.”

In the opening sentences, Coppins writes that “has privately told allies in Utah that he is planning to retire at the end of his term next year.”

Hatch’s spokesman did not outright deny the report, he just said that the McConnell ally is not willing to make his plans public yet. read more

Podcast – The Republican Convention – Rule 40 and Mitt Romney – The Pope Lectures us on Mass Migration

Rule 40Today I discuss the upcoming Republican Convention, the now infamous convention Rule 40(b) and how the establishment has purposely corrupted the process and rigged the system to get the guy they want, regardless of the will of the people.

In segment two the discussion turns to the mass Syrian migration into Europe. The Pope, Pope Francis, Pope migrationgives us his thoughts on the matter of what he calls the “Arab Invasion” and somehow he considers this is a good thing.
read more

Sir Mitt – The Bold

by: the Common Constitutionalist

I have a friend in Texas who owns a business. He tells me that every night illegal aliens sneak into his offices to sleep. On cool nights, they turn up the heat and on warm nights they crank the air conditioner, which costs him a lot of additional money.

He said he went to the authorities and they said that not only would they not do anything to stop them or arrest them, but that he could not beef up the locks on his buildings. The authorities said he could hire security but that they could only observe and not intervene.

Okay – that didn’t happen, although I do have a friend in Texas who does own a business, but he would just shoot anyone trying to break in.

I am however demonstrating that anyone, conservative or liberal would never stand for people breaking into their businesses let alone accept it if authorities told them what they couldn’t do to keep the illegals out.

Yet somehow it’s just fine to allow the same thing happened to our country. It defies logic, yet Mitt Romney, who is rapidly reestablishing himself as the titular head of the establishment Republicans, is officially “on board” the Obama amnesty express – not that he was ever off. read more

Romney Is NOT the Guy

by: the Common Constitutionalist

A gentleman called in to Rush Limbaugh’s show last Friday. He said his name was Kevin from Fort Myers Florida. He told Rush that he wished for Mitt Romney to run again in 2016 and thought he had a winning formula for Mitt.

Rush was curious and allowed the man to continue. Kevin explained that Romney should hit on “19 things that are affecting the country in the negative”. He said that Romney should insist that “these are the 19 things I’m going to talk about. I’m not going to talk about abortion. I’m not going to talk about this or that.”

He should stick to the mysterious 19 things. I say mysterious, because Kevin never said, or was never given a chance to explain what the 19 things were.

Rush explained to Kevin that the mainstream left-wing media would never allow Romney to drive the bus regarding what topics they may or may not broach. Knowing that the media will do what ever they must to assist in the defeat of Romney or any other Republican, whatever questions Romney insists he will not answer, will be the only ones they ask and write about. read more

A Better Way Than the VA

by: the Common Constitutionalist

The VA hospitals and their subpar medical care isn’t a new debate. The only revelation is that now we have documented cases of veterans actually dying from lack of care.

The VA system has always been a mess. It can’t help but be. It’s after all, run by the government and we all know that the government can’t run anything properly or efficiently. And I do mean anything – including the military.

And couple the natural failures of the bureaucracy with a military loathing administration, full of 60s radicals and this is what we end up with. Garbage in – Garbage out. It’s not hard to forecast.

The funny (not ha ha) thing is that not too long ago the VA system was touted as being “great”.

In 2005 an article was published by Philip Longman entitled, “The Best Care Anywhere”. It was a defense of the VA medical system.

Many socialized medicine advocates pointed to this article as proof that a government run health system was superior to a private system, where patients are free to shop around. read more

An Argument Against The Minimum Wage Hike

By: the Common Constitutionalist

The fervor for a hike in the national minimum wage is picking up steam as RINO republicans like Mitt Romney are jumping on board.

Is it just me? I thought Romney was a brilliant businessman with a keen economic mind.

Could he possibly be signaling than another run at the White House is being considered? Why else would he pile on the populous political bandwagon?

With all the fuss over this issue, one would think it affects a large portion of the workforce.

Well, here are some statistics. Approximately 1.6 million people will be “positively” affected by the minimum wage, to start. There are about 318 million people in America today. Let’s just say half of them are of working age.

So without even doing the math, you can plainly see that we’re not even talking about a sliver of the overall working age population.

Now of these 1.6 million, a third, or about half a million are kids between the ages of 16 and 19. You know those kids. I sure do. Those with after school and weekend jobs (maybe, if their lucky), living at home with no expenses and virtually everything provided for them. read more

Where Did All the Voters Go?

When I am wrong, I’ll be the first to admit it. Well, I was wrong. Not that Romney wasn’t and isn’t a good man, but that I thought it was the one thing we needed; the thing the country craved. I believed more people would come to learn what I know of president Obama; that he’s not a good man.

I convinced myself that it was okay that Mitt wasn’t a true conservative, that being a good, honest man was enough. He is both those things. Probably a better man than I will ever be.

I bought in and am the worse for it.

Well, it wasn’t enough and I, for one, will try to never again make that mistake. I will try to never compromise again. I will resist allowing my gut instinct to be swayed.

I have preached to others for years that compromise is the easy path. Once you’ve compromised the first time, it just blurs the line you didn’t wish to cross. The line keeps advancing, leading you further away from your core and what you knew was right and just.

I am a conservative and I will only support conservative candidates and will only promote those with similar views.

As I discover and uncover more of why we lost this election, I am becoming convinced, going forward, to trust my original instincts and block out the noise. If I go down in flames, so be it.

Many republican wizards of smart have tried to explain that Romney and the republicans were just not sensitive enough to groups like Hispanics, women and homosexuals.

The problem we have is not a changing demographic, it is and has always been the countryclub, moderate wing of the republican party; insiders that choose our candidates for us. Those who believe the more moderate “electable” candidate is the only way to win were wrong and will continue to be wrong.

Our job as conservatives is to educate and try to rest control of the GOP from the moderates. Let’s please get away from the “Next man up” syndrome.

What Major Demographic Shift?

By: Tara Servatius

Conservatives need to take a collective breath and look closer at the numbers before they buy into the idea that GOP nominee Mitt Romney’s defeat was due to some kind of national demographic shift that now makes Democrat presidential candidates’ armor impenetrable.  Before you give in to the hysteria, here are a few things to keep in mind.

First, Barack Obama’s re-election showing was actually pretty unimpressive for a guy whose philosophies voters have supposedly adopted.  As of this writing on Wednesday, Obama’s vote total stood at an unimpressive 60,119,958.  That’s about what John Kerry got in 2004 (59,028,444).  President George W. Bush actually did far better than Obama in his 2004 reelection quest, posting a vote total that was about 2 million higher (62,040,610) than what Obama got on Tuesday.  That’s hardly a remarkable finish in a country with a population that has increased.  In fact, it’s a decline of 9 million votes from Obama’s 2008 total.

Had Romney (57,425,441) done as well as McCain did in 2008 (59,934,814), he and Obama would have run neck and neck, virtually matching each other’s vote totals.  That’s hardly the stuff of demographic ruin.

The question Republicans and conservatives need to ask is not why voters showed up for Obama, whose turnout wasn’t exactly extraordinary, but why millions of their own voters, people who had pulled the lever for Bush and McCain, didn’t do the same for Romney or simply stayed home.

Why did Romney get a full 2 million fewer votes than McCain did?  Why did those voters pull the lever for McCain, but not for Romney?  Who were they, and where did they go?  That is what Republican and conservative strategists need to find out.

Is it possible that Republicans and conservative-leaning independents just weren’t that wild about the guy?

Romney, you’ll remember, was not exactly popular with the GOP base through two primaries — the first of which he lost outright, and the second of which he won because, quite frankly, all the other candidates were largely unpresentable on the national stage.  Remember, Romney won just 52 percent of the votes cast in the primary — hardly a resounding send-off from his own party. Worse yet, Romney carried just 3 out of 43 states with 70-plus percent of the vote, compared to an average of more than 15 states by previous presumptive GOP nominees.

Evangelicals have always been suspicious of Romney’s Mormonism.  In fact, just days before the election, Paul Ryan had a phone teleconference with Evangelical leaders to rally them.  And the exasperation with Romney’s flip-flopping habit originated on the right, not on the left, and was well-known.  What’s more, the GOP’s anti-abortion wing has never been entirely comfortable with him the way they were with George W. Bush.  And some of the party’s base has wandered into the Tea Party and Ron Paul camps, where Romney was never fully welcomed, if embraced at all.

To understand Romney’s loss, we need to look not just at what Obama’s voters are doing, but what ours are up to as well.

Saved by Sandy?

by: the Common Constitutionalist

The following article in no way makes light of the tragic situation people find themselves in due to hurricane Sandy. The loss of life and property is horrible. For the loved ones I have in the effected areas, I wish you all the best.

Our beloved president may have been spared the humiliation of being thrown overboard by the liberal progressive commie establishment.

Hurricane Sandy, created of course, by the republican’s secret weather machine, may have inadvertently saved Barack Hussein Obama.

See, liberal ideas or policies can never be to blame for any election loss. I’m certain the liberal powers-that-be were all set to toss King Barack off his throne and under the proverbial bus. It was his fault, not liberal ideas. He just didn’t or couldn’t get the great collective message out. Heck, he only had four years.

No man (or god) will be allowed to shake the foundation of liberalism, not even the “Anointed One”.

But now hurricane Sandy has possibly bailed out Barack.

Alex Guillen of Politico floated the trial balloon this past Monday, of the possibility of postponing the election, despite it never being done before.

Not for any previous natural disaster. Not even for any war including the Civil War, in which, in 1864, President Abraham Lincoln acknowledged that the scheduled elections, “added not a little to the strain” of the ongoing struggle, but postponement was not an option. “We cannot have free government without elections; and if the rebellion could force us to forego or postpone a national election, it might fairly claim to have already conquered and ruined us.” Lincoln further noted that keeping to schedule “demonstrated that a people’s government can sustain a national election, in the midst of a great civil war. Until now it has not been known to the world that this was a possibility.”

That same day (Oct. 29), the White House cheer squad (press corps) asked Obama spokes boy, Jay Carney, “Jay, some of the utilities are saying that the power is going to be out in some areas for up to ten days. That would obviously include Election Day. Is there any contingency planning to alter the Election Day schedule because of this?”

The mainstream will, of course, do whatever it can to secure victory for their man.

On it’s face, this strategy makes no sense. It is completely illogical, but when it comes to the thinking of the left, logic has no place.

What possible gain could be had by postponing an election where only a few states, 2 in particular, were drastically effected? Those two states being New Jersey and New York, which Obama will win anyway.

But this is not the strategy at all. The democrat operatives in Washington no full well that the election will not postponed or changed in any way.

I’m betting, through internal polling and other sources, the liberal elites know Obama will most likely lose this election and may lose big.

Rather than accept the failure of policy, they must somehow create a situation on which to blame the loss.

Much as the liberals did 2000, they must also form a narrative of the election being stolen.

I’m quite sure they don’t favor throwing Obama under the bus, but if it must be done to save liberal ideology, so be it.

It will be much easier to now blame, at least partially, the election loss on the storm.

But the storm only severely effected a few states. How can that be to blame?

Several national polls have just been released showing Obama now winning key battleground states, such as Ohio. Never mind the polls are crap, but they still show Obama ahead.

Obama has suspended his campaign for a few days to actually play president. First time for everything, I know. He’s not really doing anything, but it has that appearance, none the less.

Those on the left, including all the mainstream press, will cry foul, that he, the president had to attend to the business of running the country, while that scum, Mitt Romney doesn’t have to concern himself with such things and can just campaign to his heart’s content, giving Romney the decided advantage. This, among other things, caused Obama to lose.

There will also be the predictable cry of cheating republicans, voters disenfranchised and discrimination due to new voter I.D. laws. The international observers will raise objection to something and lawsuits will follow.

One way or another, Romney will be said to be illegitimate; selected not elected. Sound familiar?

The only way to prevent most of this from occurring is a Romney landslide victory. We will never eradicate all the malfeasance of the left, but a clear and concise victory will quell most of the whining.

And as uncharitable as it may sound (and it is), it would please me greatly to see Obama get tossed in the trash heap of history by those same sycophants who have been fawning over him for years.

In Favor of Mitt

I was speaking to my son recently. He’s a High School student and has been complaining to me regarding the ignorance of his classmates. Most of them are Obama supporters but have no idea, other than repeating clichéd sound bites, why they believe what they claim to believe.

He suggested I request of the school, to call an assembly, where I stand up on stage and allow the students to ask me questions, so that I may dispel many of their liberal myths.

I suggested that we not go that route, for now, and that I may do some short, write-ups regarding these liberal talking-points.

Mitt Romney wants to shut down Planned Parenthood

Let’s look at Planned Parenthood. About one-third of Planned Parenthood’s funding comes from Taxpayer dollars. Even those taxpayers who don’t happen to want to pay for other people’s abortions are forced to contribute.

Mitt wants to stop providing taxpayer money to Planned Parenthood. They are a private company, kind of. He can’t and wouldn’t shut them down. If they can survive without government funds, like every other company, let them .

Well, what about women’s health issues? Mitt Romney doesn’t care about women. What about the cancer screenings and mammograms Planned Parenthood does? He will shut them down.

Well, Planned Parenthood does NOT do mammograms. They never did. They don’t have the equipment, training or licensing.

Well, what about cancer screenings? Romney wants to defund those.

What cancer screenings? The cancer screenings they speak of are for breast cancer only and they are only licensed and allowed to perform Level 1 screenings, which is the exact method used by women when they self-examine at home.

Planned Parenthood is an abortion clinic, pure and simple.

The creator and founder of Planned Parenthood was a woman named Margaret Sanger. What a wonderful woman she was, unless you were black.

She was a flaming racist and a Eugenist who wanted to start Planned Parenthood to kill off the black babies. She even spoke at Ku Klux Klan rallies. What a wonderful person and a great organization.

Mitt wants to Shut Down Public Television & Kill Big Bird 

PBS, the Public Broadcasting System, receives about 17% of its funds from the government. Actually the government doesn’t actually give them anything; you and I do, whether we want to or not.

Since Big Bird seems to be the headliner of this topic, let’s talk about Sesame Street.

Sesame Street cost about $17 million to produce a year.

Now let’s look at how much they make.  Make money? I thought they were PBS, a non-profit organization? Think again.

Marketing rights, you know, toys, games, etc., bring in about $1.3 billion a year for just Sesame Street and Barney alone and another $47 million in other licensing for Sesame Street.

So Sesame Street makes a boat-load of cash.

Those on the left are always saying they are for fairness, correct? Like Obama says, they just want to level the playing field.

Well, let’s think about this. How fair is it for one TV network to receive government money and the others not? Shouldn’t we then give an equal amount to Fox News? Would that not be fair?

Here’s another idea. It’s called “Revenue Sharing”. It works great in the NFL. Instead of taking our (taxpayer) money, why doesn’t Sesame Street level the playing field and give the extra money to the less fortunate programs that are struggling.

Mitt is going take money from the Middle Class to pay for his “Tax Cuts for the Rich”

First off, Mitt doesn’t wish to give the rich an additional income tax cut. He merely wishes to leave all the tax rates the same as they’ve been for more than a decade.

He does, however, wish to cut or eliminate some taxes. The estate tax for instance, or more aptly named, the death tax. You work your whole life, save your money, so that when you die you may pass that on to your loved ones, but the government swoops in and takes half. What did they do for that money? You already paid a ton of taxes on that money. How much do they think they deserve?

He wants to lower taxes on investments and capital gains.

Let me see a show of hands of everyone who works for, or who has been hired by a poor person. I thought not.

Here’s how it works. Companies and individuals make money. They don’t just hide the money in a mattress. They invest it and grow their businesses. As the business grows they must hire more people. If that money is being taken away by taxation, they can’t grow and thus they can’t hire.

Well, Mitt still can’t pay for all his tax cuts, right?

This is an assumption of a “Zero Sum Game”, as it were. “Zero Sum” just means for anything I receive, I must take it from you. The pot never gets larger.

Socialism is “Zero Sum”; capitalism is not.

Government gets it’s money by collecting taxes. If you lower tax rates and eliminate some taxes, the government will actually end up with more money. HUH?

Okay, the government lowers tax rates and get’s rid of some others. That leaves people with a lot more money. They can now invest more in their businesses, hiring more people. Every person they hire is a taxpayer. The more taxpayers you have, the more taxes are collected, the more money coming in. The pot just got a lot larger.

The Hug Said It All

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Well, it took me a while to realize what I was actually watching during the final Romney/Obama debate.

As Charles Krauthammer so aptly described in his post-debate analysis; it was Romney going big and Obama going small. I might add that Obama didn’t just go small, but also petty.

Obama did his darndest to pull Romney into his own micro-squabbling world, but Mitt just would not take the bait and one could tell by the look on the presidents face that his, or someone’s (maybe Axelrod’s) strategy wasn’t working.

This is what took me some time to figure out. I finally realized that Romney was Ronald Reagan and Obama was Saul Alinsky.

Romney’s strategy seemed to be to stay above the fray. Be friendly and likeable while choosing the battles he could frame with big overarching themes. Romney appeared more likeable as Obama insulted and demeaned him.

The times Mitt did engage Obama, he showed he had a firm grasp of the issues. He felt he did not have to dwell on any particular issue or go into detail. Instead, just to reassure the American public that he knows his stuff and can be trusted. This would, of course, drew the ire and insults from the president.

Frankly, if one didn’t know better, one would think Romney was president and Obama was the challenger.

Now, for those of us who are conservative and keep abreast of all the issues, the overly agreeable and aisle-crossing Romney was a bit frustrating, but this debate was not intended for us. It was the final debate and Romney calculated that he could pull in the balance of the “undecideds” with a grander theme. I think it worked and the Obama team appeared to be blind-sided by it.

About 30 minutes in, I realized we were not watching a debate on foreign policy at all. Romney masterfully kept bringing it back to the American economy, his strongest suit. He reiterated time and again that American foreign policy was dependent upon a strong economy, which only he could restore.

The specific points he did make were fact-checked and he was found to be 100% correct.

The matter of General Motors was a great example. Romney claimed he wrote an op-ed in the Wallstreet journal describing how he thought GM should be guided through a controlled bankruptcy, enabling the car company to free itself from debt and other obligations. He said that the government should guarantee loans and such to help them recover. Obama flatly stated that Romney was not telling the truth and he did not say this. It was fact-checked and what Romney had written years earlier was exactly as he described it during the debate.

The lowest light (there were many low lights) for Obama was, of course, the discussion over the size of our Navy. Romney stated that our Navy is smaller than any time since the early 20th century. He is correct, by the way.

Obama, in a condescending tone, explained that things are different now and we also don’t use horses and bayonets any longer either. Mr. Romney must just not understand modern warfare. Well, in fact, Mr. Obama, the military still uses bayonets and have many times, utilized the horse in Afghanistan. How odd you didn’t know that.

Toward the close of the debate was a discussion on trade and the imbalance with China. This was a walk-off home run for Romney. It was even more satisfying seeing the moderator, Bob Schieffer, desperately trying to help the beleaguered president, to no avail. They could do nothing but watch as Mitt calmly and succinctly presented his case for dealing with China.

This brings me to the hug. Romney won the debate and both he and Obama knew it, the minute it was over. How can I be so sure? Easy; body language.

As the debate ended they both got up, shook hands, at which time, their wives approached them on stage. Mitt was all smiles as he hugged his wife. The cameras were rolling on both the candidates. Simultaneously, Obama hugged Michelle. No smile, eyes closed, with a rather somber look on his face. His expression gave me the impression he knew it was over.

A simple hug was all it took for me to declare a winner, although, by that time, I and most others already knew.