Wednesday, February 08, 2012

Santorum's Super Tuesday 3 State Caucus Surge - Now What?

Santorum is going for the higher ground than Romney, avoiding the "jobs, jobs, jobs" mantra and talking about rights and big government. Here's a thought: how much of Santorum's good showing, and Romney's dismal performance, is related to the improving economic picture? Image Credit: Jeff Roberson | AP

Santorum's Super Tuesday 3 State Caucus Surge - Now What?

Going into the evening, most informed pundits and political communications resources believed that Rick Santorum, the only other candidate outside of Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich to win a state Republican Political Party nominee primary for President, had a strong chance to win in Missouri, a weak chance in Minnesota but was still way down by about 10% to Mitt Romney in Colorado.

This morning finds Rick Santorum with three momentum building caucus victories. The strong showing in Missouri had Santorum with nearly a 30% points spread at 55.2% to Romney’s 25.3% — The weak prediction in progressive Minnesota had Santorum at a 18% point advantage with 45% against Ron Paul’s 27.1% … leaving Romney and Gingrich to battle it out for third best — and the predicted loss by 10% points ended up with a 15% points swing to have Santorum win at 40.3% of the vote to Romney’s 34.9% showing … pretty weak for a “front-runner”!

What this leaves is a situation where Santorum and Gingrich possibly asking Romney to leave the race just as others have asked in previous victories in other state GOP primaries by Romney and Gingrich of Rick Santorum. The Republican ruling class elite are really in a pickle now, they have to ask themselves if they really wish to kick Conservative values aside just to maintain power, or will they step aside for the good of the party?

Honestly, the Haley Barbour’s, Karl Rove’s, any one of the Bush family (yes, this includes Jeb), the Boehner’s, the McConnell’s, and even the Anne Coulter’s of the Republican world must be having the feeling of their heads exploding!

Geez, even Donald Trump crawled out from under his desk at Trump Tower to lambast Rick Santorum after he, Santorum, and Gingrich were the only Republican candidates to commit to, the eventually cancelled, showcase TRUMP debate. The last thing Republican Party voters need to calculate on is … what if Donald Trump enters into the race as a third party candidate. If he does enter, everyone knows that he will hand Barack Obama a four year lame-duck rule of this country, killing off everyone’s freedoms through increased bureaucracy once and for all!

The Republican Political Party is a reflection of America, in that, it holds to the majority of what Americans believe in. Time after time, polls show that America is a Center-Right politically oriented and directed country and if the Republican ruling class elite wish to keep the power they currently have, they will have the eventual Republican nominee speak and teach to the values that allow everyone to keep their God-given rights recognized through the U.S. Constitution, the Bill-Of-Rights, and the re-establishment of the Rule-Of-Law.

Barack Obama campaigned on transparency, a reduction in spending over what was experienced during the 43ird Presidency of George W. Bush, of being a unite-er and negotiator of common ground between both political parties, and many other tenants found by being politically center to center-right even though he had no record of accomplishment to back these claims up.

So, now what?

It is time, unlike what the Republican ruling class elite believes and placed in play against Barack Obama in 2008 with John McCain … to campaign to the center to center-left, to have a Republican nominee for President campaign against the most progressively-left Presidency in the nation’s over 235 year history on solid Conservative political principles so that the cherished Independent registered voters (about 20%) become clearly educated on what is, and is not Conservative, and to emphasize self-reliance and a much smaller spending and services Government are chief among them.

… that’s the Now What?!

- Article first published as Santorum's Super Tuesday 3 State Caucus Surge - Now What? on Technorati -

Sunday, February 05, 2012

Romney And The Uphill Slog Of Transaction With Tea Party Trust

The pressure is on the rest of the Republican presidential field to knock Mitt Romney down a peg after the former Massachusetts governor sailed to victory in the Nevada caucuses following his big Florida win earlier in the week. Romney won Nevada by a decisive double-digit margin. The field charges next into a quartet of contests that will either fuel or check Romney’s momentum. Caption & Image Credit:

Romney And The Uphill Slog Of Transaction With Tea Party Trust

Mitt Romney wins big in Neveda - Romney 48% | Gingrich 23%. It says a lot about a man that due to his embrace of Mormon religious beliefs doesn't gamble, smoke, or drink to win by such a large double-digit margin in a state that made its name for a lax attitude for vices ... he deserves a serious look.

Mitt Romney claims he is a (big c) Conservative but has trouble proving it. When ever he opens his mouth shows he has a disconnect when it comes to firing people or the poor. We know what he meant to say but the method of articulation leaves a lot to be desired.

If one looks at the way Government has honorable business people follow the law, they actually believe the Government has adequate "safety net" program solutions to help the poor and if they need fixing, fix them. Afterall, businessmen provide jobs at every level of the scale and if someone wants a job ... they are available, even at a minimum wage.

This is one area a career businessman can be blind to the fact that minimum wage, which is legislated and has to be followed, may cloud the thinking on a Conservative level. It is hard to see the equation that a minimum wage creates dependency on a very deep level that can not be broken.

Mandated minimum wage, it could be argued, eliminated basic apprenticeship and building block skills through which young businesses learn how to treat entry level workers, and young entry level workers learn how to treat a businesses they work for.

Another issue that has voters uncomfortable with Romney is his ability to become a Chameleon in the face of what he feels is the path of least resistance to win. It is this quality, that if recognized to be the core political survival instinct of Mitt Romney, might be the path that Tea Party principled voters could embrace a Romney Republican party nomination for President of the United States.

This excerpted and edited from Townhall -

The Case For Romney

By: Jonah Goldberg - Townhall - Feb. 3, 2012

Years ago a friend told me a story from her days living in South America. The movie "Wayne's World" had come out, and she went to see it. She spoke English, but it was interesting to read the Spanish subtitles.

For instance, early in the film, Wayne says: "Shyeah, and monkeys might fly out of my butt!"

The Spanish subtitles read: "Yes, when judgment day comes."

Needless to say, something was lost in translation.

This, in a nutshell, is Mitt Romney's biggest problem.
Romney doesn't speak the language naturally.
He speaks conservatism as a second language, and his mastery of the basic grammar of politics is often spotty as well.
Many conservatives argue that Romney's stiffness is a superficial objection, and that he's a solid conservative who can appeal to moderates and independents. Other conservatives think Romney's lack of fluency is a real problem, not because it proves he's faking his conservatism but because it would put him at a severe disadvantage in the general election in the same way authentic but stiff liberals like Gore and John Kerry suffered from their inability to comfortably interface with carbon-based life.

And others simply think Romney's a big faker.

It's this last group of anti-Romney holdouts I'd like to address.
The Tea Party arose in no small part out of a delayed allergic reaction to the rhetorical and, to a lesser extent, policy problems of George W. Bush's presidency and the deep resentment that came with having to vote for John McCain in 2008. These disappointments were visited upon the conservative base by something the naysayers (often problematically) call "the Republican establishment."
With the raised expectations from the Tea Party's earlier successes, conservatives are extremely reluctant to settle or compromise simply on the say-so of the establishment. For good reasons and bad, Romney seems like a compromise. And no matter how begrudgingly a conservative comes to accept the reality of Romney's nomination, the diehards immediately proclaim any support for Romney to be proof of membership in the establishment. In fact, it seems like the best definition of a Republican establishment member these days is simply someone who has made peace with his disappointment prematurely.
It is better to have a president who owes you than to have one who claims to own you.

A President Romney would be on a very short leash. A President Gingrich would probably chew through his leash in the first 10 minutes of his presidency and wander off into trouble. If elected, Romney must follow through for conservatives and honor his vows to repeal ObamaCare, implement Rep. Paul Ryan's agenda, and stay true to his pro-life commitments.

Moreover, Romney is not a man of vision. He is a man of duty and purpose. He was told to "fix" health care in ways Massachusetts would like. He was told to fix the 2002 Olympics. He was told to create Bain Capital. He did it all. The man does his assignments.

In this light, voting for Romney isn't a betrayal, it's a transaction. No, that's not very exciting or reassuring for those who'd sooner see monkeys fly out their nethers than compromise again. But such a bargain may just be necessary before judgment day comes.
[Reference Here]

Before the Tea Party became the Tea Party, it was Tea Party principles that had George W. Bush withdraw Harriet Meyers name from being considered for the supreme court ... and GWB was never accused of having Chameleon political instincts.

Duty and purpose combined with Chameleon political instincts of Mitt Romney means that Mitt Romney could be turned through a dedicated focus put up from a Center-Right country. One might say that trust will not be earned or given, but ... applied.

After his decisive win in the GOP Nevada caucuses, if one were to count themselves as being convinced demand the best from Mitt Romney in his support of the Bill-Of-Rights, Rule-Of-Law, and an adherence to the Constitution of the United States.

- Article first seen as Romney And The Uphill Slog Of Transaction With Tea Party Trust at Technorati -

Friday, February 03, 2012

Susan B. Komen Flap: Corporate Responsibility In The Face Of Fanaticism

Ford created its Warriors in Pink campaign to, according to the company, “recognize the strength and courage it takes to deal with the everyday challenges of fighting breast cancer 365 days a year.” Caption & Image Credit: Ford Motor Company via

Susan G. Komen Flap: Corporate Responsibility In The Face Of Fanaticism

Tuesday of this week, the Susan G. Komen Foundation, the country’s largest breast cancer fund raising organization announced the withdrawal of donation financial support for Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion services organization.

Planned Parenthood affiliates received about $680,000 per year from the Susan G. Komen Foundation. Of the four million women who got breast exams through those clinics in the last five years, 70,000 were provided through the Foundation. Please note that Planned Parenthood performed 332,278 abortions over the last 365 days at a charge of about $500.00 per procedure … and operates from a $1,000,000,000.00 budget.

Immediately after the announcement Tuesday, the abortion rights group launched a program to make up for that lost funding. As of Wednesday afternoon, it had received $650,000 in donations, $250,000 of which came from oil tycoon Lee Fikes and his wife. Eric Ferrero, vice president for communications, said there’s been an “outpouring of support” from across the country.

Meanwhile, the Susan G. Komen Foundation — the Web site of which was hacked briefly late Wednesday — is under fire despite attempts to deflate the situation.

Multiple board members of the country’s largest breast cancer organization have resigned in the wake of the controversy. Dr. Kathy Plesser, a radiologist who sits on the New York chapter’s board, told the Huffington Post she was “disturbed” by the foundation’s decision. The executive director of the Los Angeles chapter also announced her resignation today, saying that her talents and skills no longer “fit their model.” And the foundation’s chief public health official, Mollie Williams, also reportedly resigned over the decision, though she has yet to confirm it.

Leaders of the Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation argue that their move was not political, but was spurred by a new criterion that bars them from giving money to organizations that are under investigation.

To be consistent, the Foundation should have stated that it was withdrawing support for Planned Parenthood because the Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation is an organization that works for curing cancer to extend one's life.

The very beginning of life is even more important unless one wishes to make the assumption that if a female baby is not born, there is one less potential case of breast cancer to actually cure.

Ford Motor Company posted a statement of support to the fact the company would continue to donate charitable contributions to the Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation and its outreach funding efforts.

This excerpted and edited from Facebook -

Ford Motor Company
Thank you for your sharing your thoughts. While we can’t speculate or comment on the motives behind Susan G. Komen for the Cure’s decision, we do understand the emotional reaction it has caused. Rather than focus on the politics, we prefer to keep the focus on the need for women to get screened for and educated about breast cancer.
· · · 10 hours ago ·

Edmund Jenks
American corporate courage in the face of fanaticism ... twice.

Going it alone when the Government tried to seduce the business enterprise into a Government and Union take-over in decision-making through the offer of the public's money, and now standing behind a partner's courageous decision to withdraw financial support where the agendas of the two efforts seemed conflicted in the support of living a life.


When the Susan G. Komen Foundation for the Cure announced on Tuesday that it was revoking its grant to Planned Parenthood for breast cancer screenings, officials cited a new internal policy that makes any organization under official investigation ineligible for grant money. Image Credit: SGK Foundation

UPDATE:Komen Kaves!

This excerpted and edited from The Atlantic -

Susan G. Komen Reverses Course, Will Allow Planned Parenthood Funding
By Jeffrey Goldberg - Feb 3 2012, 11:41 AM ET 2

Facing a revolt among donors and supporters, Susan G. Komen For the Cure has just announced it has reversed its decision to de-fund Planned Parenthood.

One day, public relations scholars -- if such a species exists -- will make this week's events at the Susan G. Komen For the Cure foundation a case study in what not to do in a controversy.

Here is the Komen statement:

We want to apologize to the American public for recent decisions that cast doubt upon our commitment to our mission of saving women's lives.

The events of this week have been deeply unsettling for our supporters, partners and friends and all of us at Susan G. Komen. We have been distressed at the presumption that the changes made to our funding criteria were done for political reasons or to specifically penalize Planned Parenthood. They were not.

Our original desire was to fulfill our fiduciary duty to our donors by not funding grant applications made by organizations under investigation. We will amend the criteria to make clear that disqualifying investigations must be criminal and conclusive in nature and not political. That is what is right and fair.

Our only goal for our granting process is to support women and families in the fight against breast cancer. Amending our criteria will ensure that politics has no place in our grant process. We will continue to fund existing grants, The Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation and its outreach funding efforts will now continue to donate money to an organization that has as its primary function is to stop life before it starts ... no female life, no breast cancer - DONE!those of Planned Parenthood, and preserve their eligibility to apply for future grants, while maintaining the ability of our affiliates to make funding decisions that meet the needs of their communities.

It is our hope and we believe it is time for everyone involved to pause, slow down and reflect on how grants can most effectively and directly be administered without controversies that hurt the cause of women. We urge everyone who has participated in this conversation across the country over the last few days to help us move past this issue. We do not want our mission marred or affected by politics - anyone's politics.

[Reference Here]

The Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation and its outreach funding efforts will now continue to donate money to an organization that has as its primary money making function - is to stop life before it starts ... no female life, no breast cancer - DONE!

As for Ford Motor Company, their corporate image remains intact because the company never did cave in on fanatic pressure from any quarter - Federal Government or those who have little regard for the precious gift of life.