Biden: Romney "Wants Blacks Back in Chains"

Wonder if this was what he had in mind?

Romney and Ryan on Sixty Minutes (video)

For those of you otherwise engaged...

Most of What You've Heard about Bain is Bull...

Michael Ramirez of IBD in the ten ring once again!

H/T John Lott

New Romney Ryan Ad

Ryan certainly brings a new dynamic to the race! This is a great ad!

H/T Tammy Bruce

Obama Taps Veteran Media Spokesman

Romney Counters Obama's* Sleazy Ads

*Yes. It's an Obama Super PAC ad, but Obama and Co. are not exactly covering themselves in glory in not condemning the ad or acknowledging what they knew about the falsehoods in it.

GOP Confronts Lies of Obama's Admin and His Super PAC

Even the tepid defense, "We can't coordinate with them" pales before the lack of moral authority to condemn the lies or plead for an honest campaign. Obama's failure to do either or both shows a demonstrable lack of character, with what appears to be tacit approval.

One can show displeasure or disapproval of a Political Action Committee's advertising without "coordination" of any sort. The law does not let Obama off the hook morally for not denouncing the lies and falsehoods put forth by his supporters.

H/T Breitbart TV

Dinesh D'Souza at CPAC -2012

First a trailer for D'Souza's upcoming film "2016", then a really great speech.

"to give you the wherewithal, the information, the intellectual ammunition to contest what may be the most important election since 1980."

The More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same

I don't always comment on the content of the blog header, but in honor of Mr. Eastwood's recent endorsement of Gov. Romney, we welcome Dirty Harry back to the top of the page!

#Occupy Chick-Fil-A

I have been pretty quiet on the Chick-Fil-A kerfluffle of late, other than a few timely and somewhat barbed tweets. Mostly because it had been given so much coverage by virtually everyone outside the MSM, I felt there was little more that needed saying. Other than perhaps this:

Reading my dead tree paper this AM, I stumbled across an AP story on some of the folks protesting Chick-Fil-A.

BOSTON (AP) —About a dozen members of Boston-area gay rights groups staged a kiss-in at the food court at the Burlington mall Friday.

"About a dozen". Let me call upon the expertise of my readers: You've probably gone into a fast food restaurant around lunchtime, at least once in your life, if there were a dozen people ahead of you in line, about how long would it take you to get served? Twenty minutes? Half an hour??

I was down in Fresno on Chick-Fil-A appreciation day, and the radio reports there were of people standing in line for hours in one hundred plus degree heat, to buy a chicken sandwich. (Or whatever else they had before they ran out of food!) There were reports of neighboring businesses and Good Samaritans handing out bottles of water freely to the people standing in line so they wouldn't get heat stroke.

There were also reports of traffic jams around the Chick-Fil-As, as cars in drive through lanes backed up around the block and further. (Just think of the carbon footprint of Chick-Fil-A, grilling up all those extra sandwiches while internal combustion vehicles idled, getting nearly zero MPG! Take that, Al Gore!)

Most of the protests against Chick-Fil-A involved "a dozen", "a couple dozen" protesters. Even with two dozen people standing in line in front of you, do you think it would have taken two to three hours to get your food? And if it did, would you even hang around that long, or go find a place with faster service?

The CEO of Chick-Fil-A expressed an opinion on gay marriage, that was nearly identical to the one held by Barack Obama when he ran for president in 2008, yet thuggish Democrat mayors wanted to deny this man the right to do business in their cities. Chick-Fil-A doesn't discriminate against gays or anyone else. The man who runs the business used his First Amendment rights to express that opinion. Agree with him or not, he has the right, in this country, to express that publicly, and thousands upon thousands of people rallied to his support.

Now it is true that Barack "I don't have a record I can run on" Obama would rather talk about gay marriage than his record, and his willing accomplices in Democrat mayors, #OWS and the MSM are more than willing to help him out. The overwhelming support of Chick-Fil-A and the right of Dan Cathy to exercise his freedom of speech, by hundreds, not dozens of supporters, and nationwide, thousands not maybe a hundred, like their "Kiss-in cousins", was a sight to behold.

The joke now, is how to get Rahm Emanuel to criticize MY business, so I can have a windfall of business like this!

#ChickFilA's success yesterday was beyond everyone's wildest dreams. I just heard Ronald McDonald making gay slurs to a Newsweek reporter.

Obama should ask himself, "With surrogates like these, who needs enemies?"


Cross posted at LCR, Say Anything,
Lady Cincinnatus

Obama the Descendant of Slaves?

On his mother's side???

WASHINGTON — For genealogists, President Obama’s family tree is the gift that keeps on giving.

There was Dick Cheney, Warren Buffett and Sarah Palin. On Monday, genealogists added another notable figure to Obama's unlikely list of relatives: John Punch, a Virginia slave who some historians consider the first African enslaved in the colonies.

The connection to Punch, an indentured servant forced into slavery in 1640, comes from Obama’s mother’s side of the family, said Joseph Shumway, a genealogist with Ancestry.com, the website that has been researching the president’s family tree for years.

In a not so rare bit of Fauxcahontas envy, with less than 100 days before the 2012 election, genealogists have "uncovered" a link between Obama and slavery. AP might have thought this nothingburger story might give the 'Bamster a little more street cred, to have the "blood of slaves" flowing through his veins, but I don't think there are that many people in this country that give a rat's patoot whether Barry is 50% or 51% or 52% black.

Even if it were true, having an ancestor that far back on the family tree did nothing to shape his thinking in his formative years or beyond. Besides, it doesn't matter who Obama is so much as what he has done, which is nothing helpful and much to harm the economy and prolong the recession. That's why Obama is running on his "vision" for America, because he cannot run on his record.

And if you read this story all the way through, three paragraphs from the end, you are treated to this:

Obama’s connection to Punch is similarly inconclusive

Inconclusive, eh? Color me unimpressed.


But, the choicest irony of the story, and the one reason why Obama would be wisest not to incorporate this into his re-election narrative, is that Obama's tenuous claim to the blood of slaves, comes through his "typical white grandmother". Being two generations closer to her slave roots did nothing at all, according to Obama, to make her more sensitive to the plight of minorities. It might be entertaining to hear Obama try to make the case, though.

Cross posted at Say Anything

Batman? Or Joker?

There's a rumor going around that desperate Democrats will somehow try to tie Mitt Romney to the villain, Bane, in the newest Batman movie opening this week. As lame as that sounds, it got me to thinking what to look for if we were casting one of our presidential candidates in the title role of "Batman":

If Dr. Thomas Wayne had a son, he'd look like...Mitt.
-Advantage Romney

If the cowl fits? With that lantern jaw, advantage Romney! (see above)

Ditto the utility belt and tights. Does anyone really want to see the skinny kid from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in a Batsuit?
-Advantage Romney

Which candidate can you imagine having the cash to create all those marvelous toys Batman has at his disposal? (Or his wife letting him spend it?)
-Advantage Romney

The Batmobile: Does it get better mileage than a Prius? Can't see Obama driving an armored gas hog.
-Advantage Romney.

Which candidate can you imagine having a life long relationship with the family butler, Alfred?
-Advantage Romney

Tony Rezko sold Obama a house with an adjacent lot he didn't pay for, but sadly, no BatCave. Romney caught a lot of flack for installing an elevator for his automobiles in one of his stately mansions. Can you say, "To the BatCave, Robin?"
-Advantage Romney


Finally, does Batman seem to be the type to pal around with domestic terrorists and those who would bomb government buildings or does that seem more like his nemesis, the Joker? Doesn't Batman sound more like the type who would hang around with Donnie and Marie?
-Advantage Romney

Looks like our man Romney would be our Caped Crusader, hands down. But, as far as jokesters go, we still have the guy who assured us the private sector was doing well, that paralegals would assist you if you faint, and that he was going to visit all 57 states in his campaign as well as a close association with members of the Weather Underground.

Ladies and gentlemen, I think we have a Joker!

This Last Week's Poll

This Last Week's Poll: When Obama says we can't afford to go back to the disastrous policies of the past, is the "past" he's talking about...

The answers were "2009", "2010", "2011" and "All of the above". For the first time in Proof Positive Polls, we have a unanimous response. 100% of all respondents chose "All of the above".

Multiple choices and Obama's crack budget office accountants may account for totals greater than 100% Thank you for your participation!

Not a scientific poll. Respondents are self selecting. Questions are drawn from fortune cookies, hieroglyphics and tomorrow’s New York Times.

Please make your opinion known in this week's poll.

New Romney Ad: "No Evidence"

What do you think? I don't dislike the ad, but it isn't, IMHO, a home run either. If you were writing or running ads for candidate Romney, what would yours say? What is the message Mitt needs to put out or conversely the Achilles Heel that Obama cannot gainsay?

Bamboozler-in-Chief At it Again!

Here's the latest ad that Obama "approved":


"The Obama campaign fails to make its case. On just about every level, this ad is misleading, unfair and untrue, from the use of “corporate raider” to its examples of alleged outsourcing." -Wa Po

I'm shocked, SHOCKED that anyone would outsource jobs to China, says Barack. But, didn't Obama choose the CEO of GE, Jeffrey Immelt, to be the head of his Jobs Council, to be a close Business adviser? And hasn't GE been outsourcing jobs , shipping manufacturing and engineering and development jobs to China, too?

Other than rank hypocrisy, how is what Romney is accused of doing any different that what Obama's closest business adviser does regularly?

And the Washington Post's Fact Checker gives Obama's crew four "Pinocchios" for their dishonesty.

The claim that Romney outsourced jobs as governor is equally overblown.

This concerns Romney’s veto of a bill that would have prohibited Massachusetts from contracting with companies that outsourced the state’s work to other countries. Lawmakers were especially concerned about a $160,000-a-month contract with Citigroup to operate a system of electronic food-stamp cards that included a customer phone service center in India.

Both the liberal editorial page of the Boston Globe and conservative editorial page of the Boston Herald urged Romney to veto the amendment, saying it would cost the state money. Romney agreed, saying the measure did not protect state jobs — the call center might have moved from India to another state — but “had the potential of costing our citizens a lot more money.” The Democratic-dominated Massachusetts legislature did not override his veto, even though it overturned 117 others, suggesting that there was little real support for the measure.

When the food-stamp contract expired, the Massachusetts Department of Transitional Assistance insisted that those jobs be returned to the United States. But they ended up in a call center based in Utah — just as Romney had predicted.

Outsourcing jobs to Utah. Perhaps if Obama is re-elected (God forbid), he could see about making Utah the 58th state?


Cross posted at LCR, Say Anything.

Obama's "Evolution" on Gay Marriage

- cartoon by Bok

One of the charges that Obama wants desperately to avoid this November is that of being a "Flip flopper". To that end, a story was concocted that Obama somehow "evolved" on his position on gay marriage.

Now, whether or not you believe in evolution, since evolution is typically portrayed as a linear progression from the simple to the complex, you must admit that this must have been one strange and unusual evolutionary process to flip flop, er, change back and forth between his positions.

In 1996, when he ran for the Illinois senate, as liberal Democrat, he believed it was in his best political interests to support gay marriage. Which he did. Eight years later, when he was running for national office, he determined it might not be in his best political interests to support gay marriage, so he came out against it - a view which he still publicly held in 2008 when he ran for president. Finally, in yet another election year, he came out with a supposedly more "enlightened view, where he would now recognize gay marriage, (providing enough gays support him, contribute to his campaign, etc). In other words, it has once again been perceived as beneficial to his campaign (and fund raising) for him to "evolve" into his current beliefs.

A couple of questions: One, if his "evolution" is genuine, perhaps Mr. Obama would tell us what were the pivotal moments in his beliefs, what events and circumstances, caused him to flip flop, er, retreat from his position on gay marriage between 1996 and 2004? (Other than political expediency, I mean!) Some crisis of conscience? Some observed aberration from what he believed? Surely there must have been some tragic event, some seismic cataclysm on his way of thinking that would cause him to change his mind. What was it?

If his change was principled at all, and not merely sticking his finger in the wind to see what positions would garner him the most votes, perhaps the man who has written two autobiographies to date, and never seems to tire talking about himself, could explain the thought processes and soul searching involved in making that retrograde portion of his "evolutionary" journey? Or was the man who voted "present", like Teddy Kennedy at Chappaquiddick, merely trying to "preserve his political viability"?

Two, how can one say he has "evolved", when the end result sees him in the same place as as where he started, at the beginning of his "evolutionary" process? How is that "evolution" and not the "F-F" word? And if the acceptance of gay marriage is the most enlightened position, how can you describe it as "evolutionary" to regress as he must have between 1996 and 2004? (Unless it was simply the most crass of political opportunism, telling prospective voters whatever he thought they wanted to hear, and adapting or hiding his beliefs to bamboozle the greatest number of people to vote for him?)

Funny, too, how all the major changes of Obama's "evolution" can be traced to different election years and different bases of voters, isn't it? That's right! You're looking for the "H" word now!

Some of Obama's more rabid supporters will try to paint Romney as a "flip flopper" between now and November. Without even getting into all the campaign promise made and broken by Obama, Mr. Romney has a long way to go before he fills Obama's sandals!




Cross posted at LCR, Say Anything.

Jack Lew, Obama's Chief of Flack, on Obamacare

Jack Lew, Chief of Flack for the Obama Administration was on Fox News Sunday this AM. He's a smooth talker, all right, but what he had to say had as much familiarity with the truth as Michael Jordan had with being chosen last for a pick up basketball game.

"One thing that's great about our system, is that we the Supreme Court rules, we have a final answer."

Really, Mr. Lew? Because the final answer from the Supreme Court was that Obamacare is a tax. Why do you keep denying this if the Supreme Court affirmed it in their "final answer"?

"We sent Congress plans, which if they were enacted, would have create a million new jobs: policemen, firemen, teachers..."

Noble professions, to be sure, but all on the government payroll. All of them funded by the private sector and all of them contributing to public sector unions, which contribute heavily (Read: almost exclusively) to Democrats. Since the federal government and many of the states , cities and counties are broke, the money to pay these employees and their benefits would have to be borrowed, and add to the National debt, or printed by the government, which leads to inflation. This president's plan, his "focus" if you will, is to spend more money from Washington to stimulate the economy and end the recession.

But, that's exactly what he's been promising and doing for the last almost four years. How would the next four years of doing the exact same thing be any different? Other than to perhaps, take America's credit rating down another notch?

"...the American people want the divisive debate on Healthcare to stop."

Stop??? It never even got good started before Congress by the barest of majorities and not in any way a bi-partisan bill, passed a 2000+ page bill that most of them had never read and the people they supposedly represent didn't have the time to read, or reflect on or give any feedback to their elected representatives.

A majority of the American public, when asked, say they not only don't like Obamacare, but want to see it repealed. Of course, you would prefer that the matter be settled, Mr. Lew. Obamacare and the economy, the crowning jewel of his first (and hopefully only) term and his primary responsibility after securing the national defense, are both colossal failures. (I was going to say national "borders", but we all know what a miserable job he's done at that, too!)

Jack Lew, like the Moooove-on people, wants us to "move on" from a discussion of Obamacare to its implementation. He even used those exact words: move on. That way, the Bamboozler-in-Chief could natter on about his "vision" for what he wants America to look like. And his "vision" is very flowery and full of high sounding words. Just words, as someone might say.

He wants to run on his "vision" because he cannot run on his record. His primary achievement has been to push a phony "healthcare" reform down the throats of the American people instead of addressing any of the problems with the cost of healthcare. Like tort reform, for example. Tort reform is opposed by the Democrat Party, which is a subsidiary of the Trial Lawyers Association, which doesn't want tort reform. (See: How John Edwards became a millionaire.)

During the interview, Jack Lew spoke of how much President Obama had lowered people's taxes. Lowering your income will certainly do that to you!

If you listen to the whole interview, you can here him lie about how Obama wants to "reach across the aisle" to work with Republicans (like he did when he rejected all their input and amendments to Obamacare) and the lie ( around 13:21)that "Fast and Furious" started in the Bush administration, when in fact the Bush program Wide Receiver had been shut down for two years before Obama, Holder and Co. ever started Fast and Furious.

I don't know about you, but whenever I catch someone in an obvious lie, I have a hard time believing anything that person says.

Now, I'm wondering...is his name really Jack Lew???


Cross posted at LCR, Say Anything.

Fauxcahontas

Just how much truth is in your claim to Native American heritage, Ms. Warren?

I see...

The Real Reason Obama Speaks About His "Vision" for the US

It's because he can't run on his record!

Campaign Pranks Have a Way of Backfiring

You may be familiar with the story of the Romney Campaign bus driving around one of Obama's events, honking its horn. That was pretty lame. Now we hear that presumably, overzealous Obama supporters have hired a plane to tow a sign above Romney campaign events that says

"Romney's Every Millionaire Counts Tour".

Really? Romney is supposedly the "friend of millionaires"? As if Barack wasn't?? When Barack Obama just recently hit up fifty people at Sarah Jessica Parker's house for $40,000 a pop??? (Two million dollars, for those of you in Rio Linda) Is there anyone other than a "millionaire" or "billionaires" who could afford, in this economy, to spend forty grand to have dinner with a politician?

Barack Obama, who himself is the author of dog eating, girl shoving, composite girlfriend, semi-fictional and/or ghost written books, named after sermons he didn't listen to for twenty years, which, added to his salary as amateur golf pro wannabee, have made him a multi-millionaire, might have a hard sell portraying Mitt, with a straight face, as a fellow millionaire, and thus, to be feared.

Of course, he'll have a much easier time of that, than convincing anyone that he is a frugal, fiscally responsible president who can be trusted to rescue the economy, or to run on the record of what he's actually done and not what his "vision" is of how things should be.

Cross posted at Say Anything