Humorist Will Rodgers -1932 Style Politics in 2012

"I don't want your vote for what I've done, but what I am going to do!"

The one minute message below will be airing in all swing states as the 2012 Presidential Election Day approaches.  Please take sixty seconds to watch it as it shows how important it is to know your facts on who said what in the debates.   

Time 1:00

The Romney Campaign is truly gaining momentum as their electioneering races toward winning the hearts of the electorate to clinch the Presidential nomination.  There are few voters left standing that have not heard all of the campaign rhetoric that has been spewed out into the media outlets.  It has taken a lot of voter patience, especially in the "swing states", to overcome the barrage of TV ads, radio commercials and social media.

Wil RogersIt still is important to understand what is said in a campaign, but far more to know who said it. That sounds like common sense; but Will Rodgers, the famous humorist and social commentator of 1920-30, said, “Common sense ain't common.” I guess Obama has doubled down since stating, "My Presidency Will Be 'A One-Term Proposition' If Economy Doesn't Turn In 3 Years." because the quote at the very beginning, at the top of my blog was also said last week in an Ohio stop-over last week by Barack Obama too.

After analyzing those two quotes, I think Joe Biden took lessons from Barack Obama.  Maybe a whole bunch of folks don't know about other gaffes and political high-jinks that have been done because they wrongly attribute more to George Romney than he deserves.  Take a look at the video below, for the proof is in the pudding:

Time 7:34

I don't think politics has changed much, do you?  LOL!

"If this depression stays with us, the loser Tuesday is going to be the winner." Nov 4, 1932 ~ Will Rodgers on the Franklin Roosevelt- Herbert Hoover Election.

Presidential 2012 Election Ground Games

Brent Bozell - President of Media Rearch CenterThe consensus is that the 2012 Election has come down to the "Ground Game" - the tediuous, long fought, close-up, hand-to-hand combat voter warfare. The swing states will decide the battlefields - the swing voters will decide the targets - the targets will decide the elections. Still, this all might come down to an "End Game" with a technical foul completed by the losing team that wins the game for them, because the Refs look the other way.

So, the methods on how to reach out to these critical undecided voters, however, is not perfect or easy and either is the real world too.

Prologue: The small participation by President Obama in this ten year effort to kill Osama Bin Laden is eclipsed by his failure to lead in the 9/11/12 Benghazi, Libya Embassy terrorist attack. To date, Obama has stonewalled over six weeks about providing any comments on the attack. Obama did not learn from any past history and was doomed to repeat them for which he so arrogantly did. This movie is also an insult to anyone who views it for a true factual story about President Obama.

A Perfect Example of an Imperfect World

The Media Research Center is calling on The National Geographic Channel to delay the airing of “SEAL Team Six: the Raid on Osama bin Laden” until after Election Day. The documentary is currently scheduled to premiere in prime-time on Sunday, November 4, two days before voters head to the polls to decide the 2012 Presidential Election.

One of the companies behind “SEAL Team Six” is The Weinstein Company, co-chaired by Harvey Weinstein, a major donor to the Democratic Party and long-time fundraiser for Barack Obama.

According to a report in the liberal New York Times, President Obama plays a “prominent” role in the film. The Times also reveals that since its debut at Cannes, “SEAL Team Six” has been recut to enhance Obama’s role at the request of Weinstein.  At one point in its production, the film even included a scene showing Obama’s Republican rival Mitt Romney opposing the raid.

Media Research President Brent Bozell reacts:

“National Geographic Channel’s decision to air “SEAL Team Six” two days before the election, along with Harvey Weinstein’s insistence Barack Obama be more prominently featured, is raising reasonable concerns. We don’t want to pass judgement on the content, because we haven’t watched the film. But timing is what matters.“

"If the National Geographic Channel puts off airing this documentary by just three days, and there’s absolutely no reason why they can’t, it shows they have no agenda. If they don’t postpone it by just 72 hours, it will clearly show that they do. We want to believe that they don’t have an agenda."  

"We’re asking the National Geographic Channel to delay the airing of this documentary until after Election Day.”

Why not make it a double feature film movie show?

JFK's epic picture "PT109" - Jack Kennedy's WW2 Heroic Saga about it's skipper who was a skinny, handsome and boyish Lieutenant from Boston, MA - all Presidential traits.

"PT109" Storyline - President John F. Kennedy's war time experiences during which he captained a PT boat, took it to battle and had it sunk by a Japanese destroyer. He and the survivors had to make their way to an island, find food and shelter and signal the Navy for rescue.

Movie Review:  I went to the 1963 private viewing at the Screen Director's Guide Theater in Hollywood.  It was a slow, plodding, corny production that was like a PT boat shipwrecked on Gilligan's Island, which aired (1964-76), a year later before his assassination.

---

To schedule an interview with MRC President Brent Bozell or another MRC spokesperson, please contact Jeremy Little - jlittle@crcpublicrelations.com (703)-683-5004

Presidential Final Debate - Ended at the First Debate: Romney Won!

"You mentioned....that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916.  Well, Governor, we also have fewer horse and bayonets - because the nature of our military's changed."

Obama explains his Arms Race reductions.The President is wrong on military nature!

I read in Newsweek Magazine in 2002 that the Chinese would have the largest "Deep Blue Water Navy" in the world by 2013. (That's warfare speak for "the country that controls all the shipping lanes under the ocean waters with a huge submarine fleet with an arsenal of sea to air missiles rules the world" as a super power.) It looks pretty doggone right on target in what I have read more recently.

Romney should have also stressed that it takes time, more important than money, to build ships to overtake adversaries and maintain our strategic lead. Despite our superior intelligence network, it only allows us to assess other nations operating within any regional theater, like the South China seas, not actively defend or attack aggressors. It's hardly an enviable position to find the most powerful government of the free world in to execute its agenda over foreign policies.

South China Seas - World Trade Sea Lanes

As Governor Romney hit on the point that our U.S. Navy was lacking in various warships. Many Americans are not even aware of why this region is important to the world.  It is the major sea trade route from the middle East to transport goods and services to Europe and beyond.  It passes through several national and international waters.

Why Is The South China Sea Important?

There are several reasons:

• Critical trade route: Much of the trade between Europe and the Middle East and East Asia passes from the Indian Ocean through the Malacca Strait, then up through the South China Sea to China, South Korea, and Japan. Japanese defence planners in particular don’t want this trade route dominated by China, even though the likelihood of interdiction is remote.
• Oil and gas reserves: Some of the islands are believed to contain significant hydrocarbon resources. Given that most Asian economies import the vast majority of their oil needs, mainly from the Middle East, they naturally wish to tap sources closer to home. The sea also has substantial fish resources.
• Global naval strategy: China is seeking naval preponderance in the South China Sea as part of its bid to become a global naval power. This would include projection capabilities in the Indian Ocean, which is fast becoming a zone of Great Power competition. Japan and South Korea, too, are seeking to strengthen their naval prowess.

Militarized States

Nov 22, 2010

China has recently been increasing its defense budget by more than 10 percent in most years, and building a real blue-water Navy. “The pace and scope of China’s military modernization have increased,” notes the Pentagon’s most recent report on the Chinese military. This buildup will “increase China’s options for using military force to gain diplomatic advantage or resolve disputes in its favor.”

The Nature of Modern War

As much as some nations today talk about nuclear armaments, I believe a majority of these nations really want just a saber to rattle to maintain a hegemony over other countries to rule geopolitically to sub-ordinate states by the implied means of power, the threat of the threat, rather than by direct military force. So, reasons vary in degree from persuasion to aggression too.  Obama's very technical explanation of U.S. Arms Defense to American Voters during debate.

It is true some seek bombs and want to use them, renegade regimes like North Korea and Iran are at the top of that list, other terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah and al Queda do too. It seems to be that these countries are after the big payloads for missiles and the terrorist groups specialize in smaller weapons such as dirty suitcase bombs or IED, improvised explosive devices that are easier to detonate.

Hand-to-hand combat war, however, is not going away anytime soon just because of nuclear options, sophisticated smart bombs, drone missile attacks or aircraft carriers that are floating around the oceans. Conventional warfare can still be fought effectively, witness the insurgents taking down governments around the middle East.  The U.S. Marine Corps trains with fixed bayonets in case of close combat situations too.

How can President Obama and his Administration be foolhardy to claim that less and smaller defense is better in today's world?

Internet to be Controlled by the United Nations

Stop UN Regulation & Fees on the Internet

Obama is waiting to unveil until after the 2012 Elections to curb "right-wing" conservative talk radio and like Internet sites. Secretly, behind closed doors, the nations of the world are negotiating a treaty — initiated by Russia and China — to regulate the Internet through the United Nations. The only reason we know about these talks in the first place is through a WikiLeaks anonymous posting by a participant in the talks. That and the fact that a signing ceremony has been scheduled in Dubai in December of 2012 that Secretary of State Clinton is attending.

The Russian and Chinese play to get control of the Internet is one of the major themes in the new book Here Come the Black Helicopters: UN Global Governance and the Loss of Freedom written by Dick Morris. The world learned of these negotiations only because Jerry Brito and Eli Dourado, George Mason University researchers, set up a website called WCITLeaks and encouraged anyone with knowledge of the negotiations to make an anonymous posting detailing their progress. Someone responded on June 12 of this year posting a 250-page synopsis of the proposed treaty and the talks surrounding it.

The World Internet Global Society

Crippling Internet freedom in the pursuit of protection from copyright infringement also masks massive underlying problems of government infringement on our free speech rights. Every Internet participant is a citizen in the World Internet Global Society and most agree that online piracy is wrong. It stifles creativity as well as stunts growth because it discourages not only original ideas but artistic expressions too. After all, who wants their efforts and works they created stolen by someone unduly assuming original credits or enriching themselves monetarily? 

The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) with its intrusive powers allows heavy-handed enforcement to bully legislation over responsible individuals or Internet sites by exerting onerous, ambiguous regulations and expensive litigation which could accomplish the same damaging effects as piracy by destroying Internet freedoms to create or share information.  

You Must Contact Your State Senators!

I believe that the Federal Communications Commission more than likely will ultimately enforce these SOPA regulations. This FCC is the same agency that Obama wants to administer the "Fairness Doctrine" that Obama is waiting to unveil until after the 2012 Elections to curb "right-wing" conservative talk radio and like Internet sites. (Too much regulation before an election is bad karma) These regulations will make a "more level broadcast playing field" on the airwaves because the "right-wing" talk shows will by law have to give up a percentage  of their net profits to subsidize the "left-wing" talk shows and offer programming time slots on the same stations or web sites too. What happened to listener ratings that dictate what programs that the people want to hear or the capitalistic motive of advertising profits to support a show too?

These SOPA regulations would require service providers to either block access or detach search engine links. However, the way to regulate the internet is to not to let Congress and the Justice Department dictate how to conduct Internet business. Instead, users need to learn that the illegal Copyright infringers can't make it if any users don't buy it. It is through the same type of public instruction programs that have taught personal self-regulations on how to drive automobiles safely to avoid accidents or use seat belts or possibly to use green conservation rules to reduce pollution or prevent littering.  Internet user awareness, attitudes and practices can be changed with current copyright and patent laws respected by users while laws should be enforced against violators.

Email to Your State Senator Today!

Share this with others ASAP!!

The Obama War on Terror Doctrine

Meaningful political discourse becomes a debate of words rather than substance as Obama argues semantics, which historically is his game of choice, so that issues cannot be discussed as the clock runs out, witness past Obama debates.

Cindy Crowley interferes with Debate regulations and rules.The Romney debate claim that Obama never said an "act of terror" was behind the Benghazi murders became a semantics argument. President Obama angrily looked over at Candy Crowley, the Town Hall moderator, and barked an order, "Candy, get the transcript!". Candy Crowley jumped to and quickly found a document and then interrupted the Presidential condidates' heated exchange to "fact check" for the President that he had said it, while adding about two weeks later it was indeed called a "terrorist attack" as Romney said too. Obama loudly called out, "Can you say that a little louder, Candy?", demanding Candy to speak up again and thereby avoided being put in a position of attacking his opponent to look mean spirited to maintain his "likeability poll percentage".  It hit me on how did Obama think he could even access a transcript to use in his debate? Then, Candy acted as she already knew her mark and pulled out that rose garden transcript on cue from her podium for the quick read.

A small applause broke out after Candy Crowley read the transcript, loudly from Michelle Obama and a few supporters too.  I never heard any applause from anyone else during the debate until the end.  I guess the request for the applause decorum rules went out the window along with the moderator comments butting in too.

The next day on CNN Candy said she had erred as Romney was “right in the main” but “picked the wrong word.”  She was not "neutral" and her retraction was too little, too late since many debate viewers would never hear it. Candy carried over Obama to clinch a win.

What Obama supporters are now saying is Romney wrongly stated that Obama never said "a terrorist attack" when he indeed called it. A video on the day after in the rose garden shows Obama mentioned "act of terror" in a general sense of world problems.  But Romney was right, implying there was no direct call out for the event as a "planned terrorist attack" and instead Obama later said "Libya was a protest caused by a video".

The fact still remains that Obama's Rose Garden words require some tortured logic to be considered Obama's declaration of terrorism at Benghazi.  Afterwards, Obama wouldn't even call it "terrorism" and blamed an anti-Muslim video when interviewed by The View women nearly 2 weeks after the murders while Susan Rice, Assistant Sec. of State, and Jay Carney, White House Secretary, repeated the mantra on all of the T.V. news outlets.  The next day at the UN all he could point as the cause of the violence was a Youtube  anti-Muslim video that virtually nobody in the Middle East had seen.

Obama lied to us at this town hall debate by parsing his rose garden speech and subsequent interviews leading people away from asking why our defenses were let down under The Obama War on Terror Doctrine: "Bin laden is dead, Kadafi is gone and the War of Terror is over."

The consensus of many observers concluded the debate performance was highly charged. Obama stopped his hemorrhaging after the first debate; but, according to his handlers, he did not have an appreciable net gain of voters, about nil. 

Romney actually won on personal issues while the debate points overall were judged by appearances as even. This is an important distinction since the Romney-Ryan budget plan, taxes and deficits, energy independence and Jobs with household income were Romney's strengths verses Obama's weak answers.

Romney, however, was the real winner from this debate since he will win the 2012 Presidential Election.

~  REMEMBER... 

VOTE EARLY - Nov 6, 2012!  ~

ROMNEY - RYAN