MADDOG10's Blog

This Is Not Let’s Make A Deal and David Axelrod is Not Monty Hall

The White House re-election campaign wants to make a deal.  In exchange for GOP presidential challenger Mitt Romney releasing five years of tax returns, they will stop criticizing him for not releasing more.  While hiding behind the skirt of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, the White House campaign alleges there may be as many as ten years when Romney evaded paying income taxes.

Romney says that over the past decade he has paid at least 13 percent in federal income taxes.  According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, a non-partisan group, middle income families average paying 12.8 percent in federal income tax.

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-campaign-offers-romney-5-tax-disclosure-114057169.html

Critics complain that Romney pays too few taxes.  At his income level, Romney pays plenty of taxes.  Romney made every penny he has.  Hence every dime he uses to make investments has already been taxed at wage income rates.  Romney pays a lower tax rate than wage earners because a majority of his income comes from investments, which are taxed at a lower rate than wages.  Investment income is taxed at a lower rate because, unlike wages, investments are at risk.

If Romney was guilty of income tax evasion, the IRS would already be after him and his campaign for the White House would long be over.  The IRS falls within the Department of Treasury.  At the behest of the White House, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and the IRS would be all over Romney like a ravenous pack of hyenas.

Romney has released his 2010 tax records and vowed to release his 2011 returns.  That matches the number of returns released in 2008 by Senator John McCain when he was the GOP candidate.  The number of tax returns released by McCain was never an issue.

This is not Let’s Make A Deal, and David Axelrod is not Monty Hall.  For Mitt Romney only a booby prize or worse waits behind curtain number three.

This bait and switch by the White House and their “progressive” co-conspirators is more than simply a distraction from the issues.

Throughout a shadowy, veiled, mystery shrouded political career where his own past has been intentionally concealed, obtaining confidential information about political opponents and distorting that information to smear them has been the signature move of this candidate.

Remember, the current Oval Office occupier is the same clandestine, shadowy figure caught in an open-mic moment with then Russian president Dmitry Medvedev saying that after his re-election he would have “more flexibility”.

Flexibility for…?

Three members of a Russian punk band were found guilty and sentenced to two years in jail for protesting against Russian president Vladamir Putin.   The band members were arrested on March 3^rd and charged with “hooliganism”.  Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, 22, Maria Alyokhina, 24, and Yekaterina Samutsevich, 30 have been in jail ever since.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/russian-punk-band-verdict-found-guilty-hooliganism-115937812.html

What kind of flexibility is this secretive, anti-business, hostile to constitutionally protected individual Liberty White House promising to a Russian president who imprisons people for free speech?

Is this flexibility related to the Department of Homeland Security, the Social Security Administration, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Education, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Internal Revenue Service each purchasing multi-thousands of rounds of hollow point bullets?

Could this flexibility include plans to tighten the iron grip of power by imposing Martial Law and suspending elections to ensure he can finish the “fundamental transformation” of America through the imposition of a form of government completely foreign to every principle espoused by its Founding Fathers?

By agreeing to release any additional tax returns, Mitt Romney would be making a crucial mistake.  Let the White House re-election campaign go into grand mal seizure.  Let them scream like banshees and howl at the moon.  Let them cry like babies.  Let them wet themselves.  Let them posture, threaten, intimidate and bully.  You can bet your underwater sub-prime mortgage they will do anything, be it lie, cheat and steal to win this election.

To borrow a phrase from another popular television game show: No deal.

The Liberal Sisterhood of the Plundering Hacks

Hey, remember when Nancy Pelosi and a gaggle of Democratic women vowed to eradicate Washington’s culture of corruption? Tee-hee. Instead of breaking up the Good Ol’ Boys Club, Capitol Hill’s leading liberal ladies have established their very own taxpayer-funded Sisterhood of the Plundering Hacks.

This week, the names of two of Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano’s gal pals surfaced in a mortifying, Animal House-style scandal. If the allegations of whistleblowers pan out, DHS may soon be known as DSH: The Department of Sexual Harassment.

According to FoxNews.com’s Judson Berger, DHS chief of staff for Immigration and Customs Enforcement Suzanne Barr put herself on voluntary leave after details of her lewd behavior were disclosed as part of an ongoing discrimination and retaliation lawsuit. In “newly emerging affidavits,” Berger reported, “one of the employees claimed that in October 2009, while in a discussion about Halloween plans, the individual witnessed Barr turn to a senior ICE employee and say: ‘You a sexy (expletive deleted).’”

Striking a blow for equal opportunity pervs everywhere, Barr “then looked at his crotch and asked, ‘How long is it anyway?’ according to the affidavit.”

Barr is accused of numerous other acts intended to “humiliate and intimidate male employees.” Yet another account from the lawsuit detailed Barr’s vulgar text messages to a colleague while on a boozy trip to Colombia. On the same junket, Barr allegedly offered to perform oral sex on another DHS employee. Barr, a lawyer who previously served as Napolitano’s director of legislative affairs when the DHS secretary was governor of Arizona, had no law enforcement experience before ascending the federal ranks.

A few months after Barr followed Napolitano to DHS in 2009, another crony tagged along. Dora Schriro, who served as director of Arizona’s Department of Corrections under then-Gov. Napolitano, was appointed by her BFF to head the Detention and Removal Operations office despite zero experience in that critical homeland security policy area. The suit claims that Schriro had a “longstanding relationship with (Napolitano)” that resulted in preferential treatment.

A few plum posts here, a few plum posts there. Pretty soon, the sleaze piles up.

But DHS has nothing on the public relations slush fund created by Obamacare — and forked over to Obama on-air surrogate Kiki McLean. The longtime Democratic operative and self-described “true D.C. insider” heads up the global public affairs division at Porter Novelli, which secured a $20 million contract to peddle Obamacare to the public. The firm claims it struck gold after a “competitive bidding process.” But members of Congress on both sides of the aisle have called for probes into that and other shady business-as-usual PR contracts. And HHS, headed by Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, is dragging its feet on meeting information requests.

Such obstructionism is nothing new to Sebelius, whose tenure as Kansas governor is still the subject of an ongoing criminal court case against Planned Parenthood and the Sunflower State’s health officials. Last year, the plaintiffs discovered that health bureaucrats presided over the “routine” shredding of “documents related to felony charges the abortion giant faces.” Sebelius doggedly fought transparency motions in the proceedings for years.

Are Obama’s female inspectors general watching out for taxpayers any better than their male counterparts? As the boys in my family like to say: negatory.

Interior Department acting IG Mary Kendall is knee-stocking-deep in a conflict-of-interest scandal, which alleges that she potentially helped White House officials cover up their doctoring of scientific documents that led to the fraudulent, job-killing drilling moratorium of 2010.

Acting Department of Justice IG Cynthia Schnedar, a longtime employee and colleague of now-Attorney General Eric Holder, has an ethics imbroglio all her own. As I reported in June, she worked under Holder in the 1990s and co-filed several legal briefs with him. Schnedar recklessly released secret Fast and Furious audiotapes to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Phoenix before reviewing them. The tapes somehow found their way into the hands of the local ATF office. Both remain targets of congressional probes.

Over on Capitol Hill, Democratic women are too preoccupied with their own nest-feathering and backside-covering to police the Obama administration:

California Democratic Rep. Laura Richardson, a tax dodger and loan defaulter, received a House ethics wrist slap two weeks ago after investigators concluded she had “improperly pressured her congressional staffers to work on her campaign, verbally abused and intimidated them, used taxpayer-funded resources for personal and political activities, and obstructed the investigation,” as the Los Angeles Times summed it up.

Fellow California Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters still hasn’t faced an ethics trial over her meddling in minority-owned OneUnited Bank. The financial institution, in which her husband had invested, received $12 million in federal TARP bailout money after Waters’ office personally intervened and lobbied the Treasury Department in 2008.

Nevada Democratic Rep. Shelley Berkley faces a formal House ethics investigation into charges that she abused her position to benefit her husband’s business interests.

And investigative author Peter Schweizer exposed House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi and her husband’s smelly Obamacare insider deals involving the initial public offering of credit-card company Visa.

Out: Drain the swamp. In: Last one in is a rotten egg. Kick off your pumps and 3, 2, 1 … cannonball!

 Written By : Debra Saunders

Why Liberals Behave The Way They Do

My smash best-seller “Demonic: How the Liberal Mob Is Endangering America” has just come out in paperback — and not a moment too soon! Democrats always become especially mob-like during presidential election campaigns.

The “root cause” of the Democrats’ wild allegations against Republicans, their fear of change, their slogans and insane metaphors, are all explained by mass psychology, diagnosed more than a century ago by the French psychologist Gustave Le Bon, on whose work much of my own book is based.

Le Bon’s 1896 book, “The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind,” was carefully read by Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini in order to learn how to incite mobs. Our liberals could have been Le Bon’s study subjects.

With the country drowning in debt and Medicare and Social Security on high-speed bullet trains to bankruptcy, the entire Democratic Party refuses to acknowledge mathematical facts. Instead, they incite the Democratic mob to hate Republicans by accusing them of wanting to kill old people.

According to a 2009 report — before Obama added another $5 trillion to the national debt — Obama’s own treasury secretary, Tim Geithner, stated that in less than 10 years, spending on major entitlement programs, plus interest payments on the national debt, would consume 92 cents of every dollar in federal revenue.

That means no money for an army, a navy, rockets, national parks, food inspectors, air traffic controllers, highways, and so on. Basically, the entire federal budget will be required just to pay for Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security — and the cost of borrowing money to pay for these programs.

When Social Security was enacted in 1935, the average lifespan was 61.7 years. Today, it’s almost 79 and rising. But liberals believe the age at which people can begin collecting Social Security must never, ever be changed, even to save Social Security itself.

Mobs, according to Le Bon, have a “fetish-like respect” for tradition, except moral traditions because crowds are too impulsive to be moral. That’s why liberals say our Constitution is a “living, breathing” document that sprouts rights to gay marriage and abortion, but the age at which Social Security and Medicare benefits kick in is written in stone.

Le Bon says that it is lucky “for the progress of civilization that the power of crowds only began to exist when the great discoveries of science and industry had already been effected.” If “democracies possessed the power they wield today at the time of the invention of mechanical looms or of the introduction of steam-power and of railways, the realization of these inventions would have been impossible.”

Liberals exhibit this exact group-think fear of science not only toward light bulbs and nuclear power, but also toward medical inventions. Thus, when a majority of the country objected to Obamacare on the grounds that — among many other reasons — a government takeover of health care would destroy medical innovation, liberals stared in blank incomprehension.

They believe every drug, every diagnosis, every therapy, every cure that will ever be invented, has already been invented. Their job is to spread all the existing cures, while demonizing and stymieing pharmaceutical companies that make money by inventing new drugs.

Democrats haven’t the slightest concern about who will formulate new remedies because they are enraged at profit-making and suspicious of scientific advancement.

Apart from cures that will never be invented, liberal elites will be mostly untouched by the rotten medical care to which they are consigning the rest of us. Note how Democrats’ friends, such as government unions, immediately received waivers from Obamacare. Rich or connected liberals, such as George Soros, Warren Buffett, Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama, will always have access to the best doctors, just as Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez do.

It is similar to the way that Democrats, who refuse to pass school choice, always seem to bypass the disastrous public schools for their own children, who end up at Sidwell Friends or St. Albans.

Democrats don’t worry about how bankrupting Social Security and destroying the job market hurts black people, bitter divorcees and young people, because they can always demagogue these one-party Democratic voters simply by repeating that Republicans are racist, hate women and aren’t cool like Obama.

The truth is irrelevant; only slogans and fear-mongering delight mobs.

The rest of us are forced to live in a lawless universe of no new pharmaceuticals, foreign doctors, gay marriage, girl soldiers, a health care system run by the post office, and bankrupt Social Security and Medicare systems, because liberals can’t enjoy their wealth unless other people are living in squalor.

The country will have the economy of Uganda, but Democrats will be in total control.

Obama sides with an unlikely ally in Syria

A recent intelligence leak confirms something that regular readers of this column already know: that the Obama administration has officially authorized covert support of local “rebel” groups, through government agencies like the CIA, with the goal of destabilizing and subverting the Bashar al-Assad regime. The interesting consequence is that al-Qaeda is among the groups President Obama’s directive now supports.

Just think about this for a minute. The president of the United States, according to an intelligence leak initially reported by Reuters, has secretly authorized support of an undisclosed nature for armed fighters in a region, including members of the group now synonymous with terrorism against American and Western interests in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. Presumably, Obama is leaving it up to those responsible for distributing said “support” to ensure that no arms fall into the hands of any al-Qaeda members. But the reality is that, given the fog of war permeating Syria right now, Obama would have better luck determining which trick-or-treating children arriving at his door on any given Halloween are little hellions undeserving of candy.

Obama reportedly signed the order earlier this year, closer to when Director of National Intelligence James Clapper suggested to the Senate Armed Services Committee that al-Qaeda had taken a discreet approach in Syria, choosing not to draw attention to itself. The Washington Post quoted Defense Intelligence Agency Director Lt. Gen. Ronald Burgess as saying that there was no “clarion call to outsiders coming in.”

Well, Burgess must not have gotten the memo, because just a few days earlier, al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri had issued that call, declaring in an eight-minute video: “Wounded Syria is still bleeding day after day, and the butcher (Assad) isn’t deterred and doesn’t stop. However, the resistance of our people in Syria is escalating and growing despite all the pains, sacrifices and blood.”

Obama has now engaged America in a covert war AGAINST a regime trying to wipe out al-Qaeda. If this was at all about fighting global terrorism, Obama would just sit back and do precisely nothing while al-Qaeda spilled into Syria and Assad’s forces wiped them out. Assad is a horrible guy, but is it really worth getting in bed with al-Qaeda to have a hand in his ouster?

If Obama’s order had anything to do with humanitarian intervention to assist the Syrian civilian population, he would be following Canada’s lead in differentiating between genuinely innocent civilians and the undifferentiated mass of rebel fighters — providing strictly humanitarian aid and protection to the former while letting the latter fight it out with Assad.

Russian officials once rebuffed the Islamic extremists of the region when they actively sought Russian cooperation against America in Afghanistan post-9/11. Why couldn’t Obama find the sense to do the same?

It’s because this is about economics and position, nothing else. And for some harebrained reason, Obama sees fit to take a chance on dealing with al-Qaeda in order to make inroads rather than being upfront, honest and authentic with China and Russia over what America really wants out of Assad’s ouster in Syria: economic benefits and favorable geopolitical positioning. Could there possibly be a bigger slap in the face to the leaders of Russia and China than to suggest, via covert yet concrete action, that taking a chance on the group responsible for the most heinous act of terrorism on American soil is preferable to dealing with the leaders of those nations forthrightly and honestly?

Now it’s all too late, and a hangover likely awaits. Russia and China have every right to be offended by Obama trying to play them for fools all while attempting to bring them to the table under false pretenses. Does Obama think Vladimir Putin, a former director of Russian intelligence, doesn’t understand subversive tactics, or that the Chinese don’t understand Sun Tzu’s “Art of War” principle of leveraging chaos? It’s like a friend who’s constantly trying to rope you into some kind of pyramid scheme under the guise of a great business opportunity. At what point do you just get fed up with it all?

Obama could have done things much differently and laid out an economic impetus for action in Syria, bringing the two major opposing geopolitical players in this particular game to the table on an honest footing rather than insulting them in seemingly every way possible. Is there no one in this administration capable of constructing an honest, forthright, respectful diplomatic pitch? Subterfuge and deception should be reserved for those lacking the intelligence, creativity and character to do anything else.

Obama Campaign Goes Racist, Anti-Semitic

Mitt Romney’s selection of Paul Ryan as his running mate has utterly unhinged the Obama campaign. Last week they were happily jabbering about Romney’s record at Bain Capital, implying that he had killed a man’s wife, stating that he was a tax cheat and blaming him for outsourcing jobs. This week they’re stuck defending Barack Obama’s $700 billion cuts to Medicare and spending addiction.

That leaves the Democrats with one solution: get ugly.

Joe Biden led off the festivities in Virginia this week, where he informed the population of 49-percent-black Danville that “he said in the first 100 days, he’s going to let the big banks once again write their own rules — unchain Wall Street. They gonna put y’all back in chains.” That last line is a direct transcription — Biden lapsed into a heavy southern accent, clearly making a slavery reference. According to the Obama campaign, then, Romney’s Wall Street plans are the same as placing Americans in chains. If that isn’t insulting to black Americans, nothing will be.

But the Obama campaign wasn’t done. The same day Biden unleashed his inner race-baiter, the Obama campaign’s Julianna Smoot send out a mass email accusing Ryan of “making a pilgrimage” to Las Vegas to “kiss the ring” of Jewish mega donor Sheldon Adelson. This was an obvious attempt to drive a wedge between Ryan and blue-collar Catholics by invoking anti-Semitic imagery; the implication is that Ryan, instead of making a pilgrimage to Rome to kiss the ring of the Pope, was heading to Vegas to kiss the ring of a wealthy Jew. Ryan, the email implied, was a Judas willing to sacrifice religion for money in the Sodom and Gomorrah of Vegas.

This isn’t just nasty campaigning. It’s vile campaigning.

It wasn’t surprising, of course — not after the Obama campaign seemingly worked hand-in-glove with a super PAC to release an ad accusing Romney of murdering Joe Soptic’s wife of cancer after Bain Capital fired Soptic and Soptic lost his health insurance. It wasn’t surprising after the vulgarities that seem to spout daily from the Obama headquarters; their emails suggest that they must win the “<snip>” election and their staffers call Obamacare opponents “mother—ers.” No hope and change to be found here — just vulgarity and racism.

Just because the Obama campaign is running a disgusting campaign doesn’t mean it will hurt them. Negative campaigns remain extraordinarily effective. But it won’t work against the revitalized Romney-Ryan ticket. Ryan is simply too likeable — 50 percent of Americans like him, as opposed to 32 percent who don’t — and he is highly intelligent and scrupulously honest. That means he’ll be tough to categorize with the left’s three favorite anti-conservative insults: stupid (Palin), corrupt (Nixon) and mean (Bush). Ryan isn’t extreme; he’s praised by people like … Barack Obama and Erskine Bowles.

The question that remains for the American public is whether they can be polarized by the divide-and-conquer rhetoric of the Obama campaign. If Obama can’t convince Americans that Romney-Ryan will destroy America, he’ll have to destroy America himself to ensure re-election by separating Americans by race, sexuality and religion. That’s precisely what he’s doing.

Ben Shapiro, 28, is a graduate of UCLA and Harvard Law School, a radio host on KRLA 870 Los Angeles, and Editor-At-Large for Breitbart News. He is the four-time bestselling author of “Primetime Propaganda.”

 Written By : Cal Thomas

Watching some of the Sunday shows yesterday and reading the usual suspects online, I was struck by how even knowledgeable liberals still do not understand what Obamacare has done to them. They have a sense that health care is no longer a good issue for them, that it might have cost them the 2010 elections and will hurt in 2012, but they haven’t grasped that Medicare — which for decades has been a trusty battering ram against Republicans in the contest for the votes of seniors and others — is also no longer their issue.

This becomes evident in part when you consider that the arguments the Democrats naturally fall back upon regarding Medicare are just false now. So for instance David Axelrod on CNN’s State of the Union referred to “Congressman Ryan’s idea that we should turn Medicare into a voucher program, shifting thousands of dollars ultimately onto the backs of seniors.” But that’s simply a lie — Ryan’s actual Medicare proposal(which Romney has backed) simply doesn’t shift costs to seniors.

But it’s even more evident when liberals try to confront what they themselves — the supporters of Obamacare — propose to do to Medicare. Thus we find Rachel Maddow like a deer in headlights when Rich Lowry asked her a simple question on Meet the Press  yesterday: “Do you support $700 billion in cuts in Medicare over the next ten years?” Obamacare takes that amount out of the program and spends it on other things, especially its new exchange subsidies. Maddow literally refused to answer the question. At one point she even said she shouldn’t have to answer it because “I’m not running for anything,” even though her occupation, as I understand it, is to express her opinion. And in the end, her defense of the cuts (though she still never said she supported them) was that Paul Ryan’s budget actually keeps them in place, eliminating Obamacare’s spending but not its Medicare cuts.

It’s at least a bit odd for Democrats who say Ryan is the devil to defend President Obama’s raid on Medicare by saying Paul Ryan does the same thing — and what’s more, it’s not true. The Ryan budget puts those $700 billion into the Medicare trust fund, to shore up the program’s future and reduce the deficit, rather than spending the money on yet another new entitlement. And Mitt Romney proposes not to make those Obamacare cuts in the first place — keeping the money in Medicare’s operating budget and so leaving the program simply as it is for today’s seniors and starting his premium-support reform for younger Americans when they retire, beginning a decade from now. Both undo Obama’s raid on Medicare, and both support a plan to save Medicare from bankruptcy in the years ahead.

I don’t think Axelrod and Maddow were just setting out to lie exactly — it’s worse than that. Listening to them, it seemed as if they really hadn’t realized until now the situation they were in. They’re used to a certain order of things on Medicare and have not stopped to grasp what Obamacare has done to them. They assume it must be true that Republicans want to cut benefits and Democrats want to preserve them. But it’s not true, not anymore. You could see that panicked realization slowly rising in Maddow’s eyes as she was pressed.

What she was probably recognizing was this: Obamacare changed everything. In the wake of that law, it is now clearer than it ever could have been before that the market solution is also the best one for seniors — that the conservative approach that would dramatically reduce the deficit is also the one that would avoid any disruptions for current beneficiaries and the one that would save Medicare in the longer run without shifting costs to future beneficiaries. And the Left can’t claim any  of those benefits for its own approach to Medicare.

Even some conservatives haven’t quite realized this, and have been uneasy about criticizing Obama’s Medicare cuts — after all, aren’t we supposed to be for Medicare cuts? But this attitude fails to consider the nature of Obama’s cuts (an arbitrary raid of the system to fund a new unsustainable entitlement) and the nature of the Romney-Ryan alternative (a market solution that would turn recipients into consumers and make Medicare a model of how competition can create efficiency and reduce costs without undermining value or access). There’s a broad consensus in America that the elderly should have access to highly subsidized health coverage. Cutting the cost of the program does not need to mean cutting the level of that coverage — unless, that is, you think central planning is the only way to run the program. The Left apparently does believe that, and now they’ll have to face the consequences.

President Obama has put Democrats in the position of being the party that seeks to cut current seniors’ benefits (especially those in Medicare Advantage) and access to care (thanks to the IPAB) while still allowing the program to collapse in the coming years and so watching the deficit explode and bringing on fiscal disaster. And Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan have put the Republicans in the position of being the party that wants to protect current seniors’ benefits and make them available to future seniors while still saving the program from collapse in the coming years and so dramatically reducing the deficit and averting fiscal disaster.

Whether you’re now a senior and concerned about your health coverage, are younger and worry if you’ll have affordable coverage when you retire, or are most concerned about the nation’s fiscal health and economic future, the Democrats offer you a very bad deal on Medicare and the Republicans offer you a good one.

The Democrats still don’t see that, and think that turning to Medicare in the wake of Ryan’s selection will yield great political rewards. Perhaps Romney and Ryan should inform them of how the two parties actually stand on the issue. And they might think about informing some voters as well.

President Obama Has A Bridge to Sell You

By YOGI LOVE on 8.13.12 @ 11:53AM

Posted on August 11, 2012 by Greg Campbell

I’ll admit, I wasn’t sure that Romney would make the right choice. I was fearful that his pick for Vice President would revolve around the consideration of a prospect’s cultural identity than their ideas and what they bring to the table for Romney’s Campaign that, sad to say, is less than exciting at times.

I’ll admit, I’m a Paul Ryan supporter. Everybody’s got a niche, an area of expertise that they bring to the marketplace of ideas, and having a focus on reducing debt and forcing fiscal accountability upon government is tremendously appropriate at this low point in our nation’s history. While Ryan may ruffle a few feathers on the moderate side, and may be perceived as being a bit “radical”,  I’ll confess that somebody saying something meaningful with regards to getting us out of the hole we’re in is not radical, it’s sensible and welcomed. He isn’t radical, he’s focused, and he brings an element of excitement to a campaign that may have been dogged by a stink of quasi-moderate leanings.

Apparently, I am not the only one enthusiastic about Romney’s pick. In the three hours after Ryan was named as the Vice Presidential candidate, the Romney Campaign saw a fundraising windfall as the campaign received $1.2 million in donations. If money in politics is speech, then the $1.2 million dollars raised tells me the people are jazzed about this fiscal conservative being on the ticket.

Andrea Saul, the Romney Campaign Press Secretary, tweeted the good news, saying, “HERE FIRST: @MittRomney has raised over $1.2 million since pick of @PaulRyanVP #LessThan4Hours.”

But the fun didn’t stop there, however. Saul tweeted soon after, “Just passed $2 million raised since @MittRomney announced @PaulRyanVP #RomneyRyan2012.”

Let’s hope the fun continues and we see some real momentum for this campaign. While Romney may not have been my first choice for the Republican nod, I’ll admit that the campaign gained some points by including Ryan on the ticket.

Romney and Ryan: America’s comeback team

Today is the first day in the rebirth of America. With the exception of maybe Senator Marco Rubio, no other candidate for vice president has the ability to satisfy the base, energize the Tea Party, and appeal to Independents quite like Congressman Paul Ryan.

If the Democrats and the left underestimate Paul Ryan, they do so at their own peril.

Before I get into the meat and potatoes of this article, I will heed a warning to Mitt Romney and the Republican Party. If we allow the left to define Paul Ryan through vicious and unscrupulous attacks, then WE do so at our own peril.

If I was running the Romney Campaign the first thing I would do is immediately create multiple ads in which Paul Ryan is speaking to the camera and explaining the upcoming Medicare attacks. I would get out in front of this right now and not wait to respond to the coming attacks. Handicap the left by getting to the voters first. If anyone in the Romney Campaign happens to read this or has contacts within the campaign please get this to them as soon as possible.

Now that Mitt Romney has shown he can be bold; I would take it to the next level. The Romney Campaign should run an introductory ad in all 57 states. Excuse me, 50 states. Sorry, I couldn’t resist that one. The comeback team should introduce themselves to America in a big way. No voiceovers, no fancy music in the background, just the two of them looking at the camera and laying out in specific and clear details the vision they possess for the country. Most pundits or talking heads would ridicule an idea like this. They would say why would the Romney/Ryan ticket be trying to woo voters in the liberal states of Hawaii, Vermont, Oregon, etc?

The reason is because this time it is different. All Americans are suffering regardless of party. When a Democrat, Independent, or Republican loses his job it hurts just the same. More Americans are stuck in poverty than at any other time.

The Obama administration is a cancer. It is eating away at the very fabric of our nation. It is dissolving our rights, our freedoms, and our sovereignty. Unlike a nuclear bomb that would kill us quickly, the Obama Administration is killing us slowly and deliberately. It is a slow and painful death. A death by a thousand little cuts.

When a sitting president in a horrible economic environment is too busy to meet with his jobs council you know that this economic catastrophe was purposely caused. When a sitting president hasn’t even signed a budget in over 3 years you know this is intentional. When a sitting president guts welfare and removes the work requirement you know he is following the Cloward and Piven strategy. His goal is to overload the financial system by getting as many people as possible under the government dole. The more people Obama has eating out of his hand, the more control he has over Americans lives.

History has shown that when the iron fists of government comes down on its people there are typically only two outcomes. The people fight back, remove it, and cut it off at the wrist; or they embrace it, accept it, and hold and kiss it.

We need to cut it off at the wrist.

Today Mitt Romney just told the American people that he is serious about fixing the economy. Not with his words, but with his actions. Paul Ryan is a smart, articulate policy guy. He comes from middle class roots and understands the severity of the problems we face as a nation. He will be able to articulate complex financial issues to the electorate in a very simplistic way. He has a knack for talking to you, not over you. He will be able to out debate not only Joe Biden, but any left leaning pundit that dare tries to outsmart him.

The heartbeat of the nation has always been what the elitist’s on the left and right disdainfully refer to as fly over country. This is exactly where this election will be won or loss. The left and right coasts are mostly comprised of liberal ideology, Hollywood radicals, and politically correct demagoguery.

We have been programmed by this administration to accept mediocrity in the name of global fairness. We have settled for average when we know we are exceptional. We have been told that our businesses were not built by ourselves but rather by our government. We were told the private sector is doing fine even though unemployment is over 8% for a record 43 straight months.

This horrible experiment with hope and change has been an utter failure. We need to return America back to its greatness. As Reagan used to say we are the shining city on the hill. We are the last beacon for freedom. And we never lead from behind. Obama has emboldened our enemies, abandoned our allies, and bowed down to our adversaries. This President makes Jimmy Carter look competent. That is no easy task.

The Romney/Ryan ticket is a winning combination. They will show the American people what real leadership is. They combine the talent, ability, and desire to make America great once again.