A Republican strategy worth considering.

MI State Representative Greg MacMaster posted the following on his facebook wall, and I think it deserves a response. First of all, nobody argues that Obamacare is a good law, and in fact, the resources Greg uses are HHS regulatory documents because, if you’ll recall from when we first started to learn about the law, is the ongoing, language within the bill.

Meaning, that the law is intentionally open-ended.

So, as citizens of this nation and state, we Michiganders are set up to accept any and all regulation as law, with no way to fight it? That may be, but if Republican legislators would inform the people on the absolute unconstitutionality of the law, and its legislation via regulation, we would be on better footing to increase the discontent of the people against the Democrat party.

Instead, those of us who know what this law means for America’s citizens, need to fight its implementation by Republicans. As Greg points out here, the federal power to implement an exchange is worse than if the States did it, but not if you consider that as time goes on, more and more people will be up in arms with its mandates. Mandates that, by the way, continue to be written. What we are looking for, amongst other things, is a clean-handed approach so we can then point out that it’s the Democrat party that is forcing us to do what is morally reprehensible, both in terms of our individual rights as well as the economic malfeasance of the law itself.

HealthCare – The Last Word.

There’s a ton of reading here but I would hope that those who have posted vile comments about my vote will truly understand what’s at play and how this monster has already made it in to Michigan with the Medical Device Tax implemented last year. Did you see the words (Last Year)? This is before any vote ever took place at the state level.

If you are looking to defund it, here’s a true account of how it will be funded. It’s not pretty and our President did a fine job using the Constitution against us.

• The ACA authorized funding for HHS to implement the law — HHS has a $1 billion implementation fund. It also allowed user fees to be assessed on insurance carriers that offer Qualified Health Plans in the exchange in order to fund an exchange’s operations.
o ACA Sections 1311 (user fees — Pages 74 & 75 ) and 1005 (Implementation Funding – Page 931): http://housedocs.house.gov/energycommerce/ppacacon.pdf

• HHS recently provided an update on the progress of the federal exchange where it stated that HHS has “…completed the technical design, and reference architecture for this work, is establishing a cross-agency security framework as well as the protocols for connectivity, and has begun testing the (Federal Data Services) hub.”
o http://cciio.cms.gov/resources/factsheets/ffe.html

• HHS has also now released a timeline showing the schedule of the federal exchange implementation.
o http://cciio.cms.gov/resources/files/marketplace-timeline.pdf

• HHS has also announced that it is going to charge health insurance carriers that are offering health coverage through the exchange a user fee of 3.5% of the monthly premium charged by the issuer. This fee will go up if the federally controlled plan takes effect. This will begin this year (i.e. Plan Year 2014) for states, who will be utilizing the federal infrastructure and it is intended to cover the services that the exchange offers, including its consumer outreach and education, consumer assistance tools, eligibility determinations, and enrollment functions. By the way, Michigan can get rid of the exchange user fee by migrating to the State Exchange. Which means a lower premium.

o Page 25: http://cciio.cms.gov/resources/files/proposed-hhs-payment-notice-11-30-2012.pdf

o A link to the final federal rule, including the HHS legal rationale and their responses to public comments (page 304): https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2013-04902.pdf

Even for states who are in defiance of Obamacare and are refusing to do nothing, the fees assessed will be higher (on top of the fines families have to pay as well as businesses too).

Other states are making a political statement in terms of keeping it out of their state as they are afraid to lose the vote. It’s tough to stand-up and face reality and be honest in conveying that to the constituents without retribution, believe me…I know.

Unless a compact can be arranged with a multitude of states ,which will take much more time than the few months left before the federally controlled plan takes over (jan 1st, 2014) and the President must approve it, the best course is to allow safeguards through multiple statutes to protect Michigan until a more suitable, sustainable model can be achieved. Too many are fighting it and not many are looking for ways to change it on the fly. All of us could vote ‘No’ and it will not change the outcome – we will have a Healthcare system. Voting for federally controlled verses Partnership remains to be seen.

By your emails, calls and facebook posts, all those who are forcing the feds to take it over (and you know who you are), are standing shoulder to shoulder to Obama in giving him what he wants. Obama’s is by choice and yours is by default. The exact same consequences will be felt. I refuse to stand next to Obama and will fight to take away any control possible, even if it is a little. It’s far better than doing nothing.

So it is with a heavy heart that I must tell Representative MacMaster that his assertion that, “all those who are forcing the feds to take it over (and you know who you are), are standing shoulder to shoulder to Obama in giving him what he wants,” is completely arrogant and profanely accusatory.


Every light pink state on this map is forcing the feds to do what many believe the feds cannot do. Twenty-six of them. It is the people who need to understand what the law entails, but we cannot educate them on that if we just go ahead and be good little boys and girls and take what is given to us.

There is no way that we who support freedom are standing shoulder to shoulder with Obama, but when election time comes, the case could be made, that both parties have a hand in it’s implementation. As I have said repeatedly, it is nearly impossible to argue for Republican dominance if they cannot or will not make what should be a federal case about the monumental overreach of the Democrat party.

Photos via Heritage.
Under both Attorney General’s Cox and Schuette, Michigan was one of the states who joined Flordia in a lawsuit against the law. It also is completely run by Republicans, politically, and the governor has decided to take the money to expand Medicaid, which still needs the approval of the Republican dominated legislature. But it is up to the people, not the Governor, to decide if they take the funny money now, and expand a terrible program, and head the state towards bankruptcy in the future. Florida’s Senate recently rejected its Governor’s decision to expand Medicaid, that expresses the view of many of those of us who are seeking the Michigan legislature’s rejection.

“The Senate Select Committee made the right decision today to reject placing a million more Floridians in a federal Medicaid system that has failed providers, patients and taxpayers.

“I appreciate the efforts of Senator Negron and members of the PPACA Select Committee as they seek a Florida solution, not a Washington solution, to the problem of low income, uninsured Floridians, the vast majority of whom have jobs and are working to support their families.

“The Senate looks forward to working with our colleagues in the House of Representatives to jointly explore how to provide private insurance options, not government-run health care as a replacement for traditional Medicaid. We welcome the Governor and others concerned about this issue to join us in getting Florida out of Medicaid as it has existed in the past.”

The longer this law’s implementation is dragged out, the more people will be able to see how it is going to affect them, and also, the more it will be difficult for the federal government to implement.

It is clear that the money given by the federal government, which, by the way, is completely broke, is too much of a temptation for temporary politicians to reject. But as in other states, who, by the way already have a sort of compact to allow the feds to take over under the idea that they will not be able to do so, creating more discontent against the Democrat party, Michigan can become a bit of a feet-dragger, laying its hesitation on the backs of the Democrats. A tactical move, if treated properly, will create discontent with the Democrat party’s continuing wish to, as Dingell said, “control the people,” leaving them a good reason to vote for Republicans, repeal the law, and enact free market solutions.

The only way anyone out there could see what is possible from a free nation, is if this law is rejected at every turn.

Please follow and like:

They didn’t really mean it.

Ever notice how you never hear Democrats brag about Obamacare?

Obama didn’t rest his reelection on Obamacare during his campaign last year, why is that?

Are the Democrats going to crash and burn because of this massive overreach of government-run healthcare?

Not if the Republicans have anything to say about it.

I just find it unreal that after all the rallies and activism and new Republican party members, that we are actually saying to the people of America, shut up about it already, and get used to it.

And it’s been probably a week or so that I have quietly become quite angry.

First of all, I’m an activist.  A true believer.  I believe in the greatness of America as founded, and we are so far from it, the most you can do is help people get elected who will begin to turn back the progressive expansion of government.  The left has their activists working full time, trying to completely destroy all that is decent and good.  And I got to thinking, would Democrat politicians ever try to completely piss off one of their activists?  I don’t think so. A Democrat politician would never tell one of his activists to sit down and shut up, because the Republicans passed a law, and that’s it, would he?  No, he wouldn’t.

No, a Democrat feeds off of the energy of his activists.  What do our guys do? They suck all the life and energy out of the party by their actions.

I left the Republican party in November because I heard John Boehner say, “Obamacare is the law of the land,” which is tantamount to saying that the Republicans will not fight its implementation.  That pissed me off so much, I took to facebook and twitter and told the world I was breaking from the Republican party.  Boehner had gone too far.  But then I came back, just to get backhanded again, this time from Republican politicians in my state.

You would think that a wildly unpopular Orwellian law that no Republican voted for, would be shut out of the State you live in if in fact, your state was run by Republicans.  Nope.  The damn Governor is one of the original cheerleaders for the exchange, and nearly every office you contact, some aide tells you, “Obamacare is the law of the land.”

So, the match is lit, and this time, no, I’m not leaving the party, but I know one hell of a lot of people who will.  And you know, they will be out there, making a very convincing argument.  They will say that though they tried to right the Republican party and bring it back to its limited government principles, they realized instead, that the modern Republican party wants to be just like the Democrat party, and be the ones to control your life.

It’s becoming clear that the elections we were involved in, in 2010 and 2012, were just for show, not because the Republican leadership is caving, but because they didn’t really mean it.  They didn’t really mean it when they said Obamacare was dreadful, and was just another way to control your life.  They didn’t really mean it when they told you they would repeal it.  They just didn’t really mean it, because if they did, they would be raising holy hell about this hateful law.  If they were truly concerned about America to ever be America again, every other phrase out of their mouths would be, Obamacare is deadly, or, Obamacare is rationing, or Obamacare will crush the Democrat party.

Why am I not leaving? I’m not leaving because of guys like Ted Cruz, and I believe that the strength of one righteous principled person can change people’s minds.

Boehner and the boys never meant it, Rick Snyder was completely for it, and it’s up to the Republican politicians in the States to educate the populace on the truly despicable attack on the sovereign people of this nation, but they actually want us to get used to it.

Please follow and like:

Republicans Must Not Fall Prey To This Manipulative President

Originally posted at

Three days ago, Barack Obama, president of all Americans, threatened to once again disrupt the flow of payments to our military and our elderly, raise the specter of food poisoning, plane crashes and nuclear spills, all because of Republicans.  The argument of raising the debt ceiling is old now, we’ve gone through this before, and the is quite aggressive.

If congressional Republicans refuse to pay America’s bills on time, Social Security checks, and veterans benefits will be delayed.

We might not be able to pay our troops, or honor our contracts with small business owners. Food inspectors, air traffic controllers, specialists who track down loose nuclear materials wouldn’t get their paychecks.

But as in her latest piece, the president is actually the one who would allow those things to happen, showing his manipulation of the facts and false premises.

On his radio show last night, Mark Levin emphasized the key :

“We, as a nation, will not go into default anytime soon because our revenue exceeds our debt payments. So the full faith and credit of the United States is not in danger unless the President puts it in danger.”

See what Levin did there? He told the truth, then put the debt ball right back in Obama’s court. In other words, Mr. President, we’re not giving you a limitless credit card to steal from future generations. And we’re not going to let you lie about the consequences of not hiking the ceiling, either.

In a recent segment with Levin, Sen. Ted Cruz articulated a similar :

“Not raising the debt ceiling does not mean we default on the debt. And President Obama saying that is just fear mongering and deliberately deceiving people. The average tax revenues for the federal government are roughly $200 billion a month. Service on the debt is between thirty and forty billion dollars a month. There is ample revenue to ensure that we service the debt…”

Covert Aggressive Personality could be the explanation of what the Republicans are.

The tactics they use are effective because they simultaneously accomplish two objectives very effectively:

  • The tactics conceal obvious aggressive intent. When the covert-aggressive is using the tactics, the other person has little objective reason to suspect that he is simply attempting to gain advantage over them.
  • The tactics covert-aggressive personalities use effectively play on the sensitivity, conscientiousness, and other vulnerabilities of most persons — especially neurotic individuals — and therefore effectively quash any resistance another person might have to giving-in to the demands of the aggressor.

So, it’s this one-two punch of the tactics: never really seeing what’s coming, and being vulnerable to succumbing to them, that’s at the heart of why most people get manipulated by them.

The president can be passive aggressive, and uses attribution to deflect blame as well, which might be explained by the thought that President Teleprompter’s public appearances and speeches are written by different people or groups, showcasing tactics most effective in manipulation given a certain set of circumstances.

My purpose here is not to diagnose Obama’s mental state, but to offer reasons why many Republicans continue to be manipulated by him.

So now we are on to gun control, started over an emotional set of circumstances, and the Republicans are setting up to be manipulated again.

IMG_8359[1]There are good arguments that the true reason that the president is pushing for his far-reaching gun control now, is because the nation’s leading gun rights advocate came down very hard on him last year.  Not because he’s a Democrat or that he’s black, or some other non-germane accusation by his loyalists, but because he has been systematically breaking down the right of the people to keep and bear arms.  And the fact that he’s doing it after this horrific crime at Sandy Hook Elementary is to use national emotion instead of facts to subvert the Constitution.

The outer cover of the NRA monthly magazine, American Rifleman, from November 2012, urged gun owners to defeat this man because of his 4 years of continued assault on the 2nd Amendment.  The NRA pointed to the nomination of two anti-gun Supreme Court Justices, Sotomayor, who signed an opinion that the American people do not have the individual right to bear arms, and Kagan, who was a policy advisor to Clinton’s ’94 gun ban, to reversing U.S. policy and participating in U.N. anti-gun treaty negotiations.

The left and the Obama Administration do not believe in the right of the NRA to exist, and instead of treating the 4 million members with good old-fashioned American respect, he’s declaring war on them.

But while Obama overtly blames all possible future economic ills on Republicans in the ‘old news’ debt ceiling debate, he uses subtlety, a dismissal of gun rights advocates in media , vague words in an Executive Order, cynicism of the true motivation of the NRA,  and a call to action for some Republicans to the implementation of his gun control measures.

There will be pundits and politicians and special interest lobbyists publicly warning of a tyrannical, all-out assault on liberty — not because that’s true, but because they want to gin up fear or higher ratings or revenue for themselves.  And behind the scenes, they’ll do everything they can to block any common-sense reform and make sure nothing changes whatsoever.

The only way we will be able to change is if their audience, their constituents, their membership says this time must be different — that this time, we must do something to protect our communities and our kids….

We’re going to need voices in those areas, in those congressional districts, where the tradition of gun ownership is strong to speak up and to say this is important.  It can’t just be the usual suspects.  We have to examine ourselves and our hearts, and ask ourselves what is important.

And it’s already happening.  One of the Republicans who was constantly bandied about as a Presidential nominee last year, and who is loudly asserting that he will be ready for 2016, is by this president.

“If all we talk about is just controlling guns, which we should talk about, then we’re not doing enough,” he said. He added that the “stigma about mental illness treatment in this country” is a contributing factor to gun violence. And he urged Americans to “talk about substance abuse” and the “violence in these video games.”

We should talk about controlling guns, and that’s not enough? Well, if every lead article from here until the president decides we’ve talked enough about the issue and demands congressional action starts like that, the members of the NRA, private citizens exercising their rights, will be indicted as the  reason the nation demands gun control.

While Christie apologists will argue that he is introducing reasons for the GOP to back some possible legislation in order to quell gun violence, it is clear Christie is falling into the manipulation of accepting the premise that it is because of the existence of guns, and gun owners who respect laws, that violence occurs.

At that point, when this national argument comes to a head, when everyone’s anger is heated to crystal-shattering pitch, the president will accuse law-abiding gun-owners of being the very reason violence occurs.

And to those who do not or will not recognize the manipulation, it will almost seem so.


Please follow and like:

Michigan’s Governor Snyder A True Disgrace To The Party

I keep asking the question of my fellow Republicans in Michigan, “When is Governor Rick Snyder going to join the Republican Party?”

I have been writing about him since he got into office, defying my fellow Republicans to tell me exactly what kind of Republican assaults the rights of the individual like this?  They look at me as if I’m the one who just doesn’t understand how to follow the leader.

Well, I suppose that’s true, I hate following people, if I’m behind you on the highway in my truck, I’m passing you.

But no conservative can accept Snyder’s actions.

A phone call from Dan from Traverse City, Michigan on last night’s Mark Levin radio show brought back some memories.

Dan was pleased with Governor Snyder for allowing private landowners to clear grasses and other vegetation from their beaches on Michigan’s Great Lakes.  , but landowners will still have to  “Mother may I?’  the Army Corps of Engineers.  The environmentalists had a cow, complaining that the little fish and microscopic animals that feed, hide, and spawn in the weeds will all meet a cataclysmic end, and it’s an abomination to allow the rich landowners to ruin our beautiful, natural coastline.


It is a step in the right direction, rather than what our wonderful Repubics (as Mark calls them) had been in line to do, and many still are, which is find a way to get government to do the work, and be the saviors, like Jason Allen’s little fix a couple of years back.

Allen was my Senator, and is still lurking out there somewhere to get back into legislating, but he made a big deal about declaring some grasses and reeds, “invasive species” and then sanctimoniously railed against these invasive species and that government had to do something about it.

Fine everyone, clean your beaches, don’t be stupid about it, there’s plenty of shoreline for the animals.  It’s not like he just approved fracking and directional drilling.

In fact, this little thing is a pebble next to what he should be doing.  And the massive changes he is trying to do, against his own party and packed congress is unreal.

Take for instance his constant drumbeat for high-speed rail.  By the way, those of you who don’t understand Michigan Republicans, they, as a group, as part of their platform, pushed for taking away local control of townships just so they could get the high-speed rail project between Detroit and Chicago in line.  There are some good conservatives in the House, but they are fighting hard against their own party, necessitated by the left-thinking of the Governor.  Once believed to be, another study, spending is in order.

Snyder just   Claiming that the idea that absentees must provide identification and proof of citizenship when showing up to collect an absentee ballot in person is somehow “confusing,” Snyder vetoed the efforts of his conservative Secretary of State, Ruth Johnson.

Ruth was a tea party darling and was voted in at the convention because of all the new tea party members of the Michigan Republican Party in 2010.  I’m sure she’s as disgusted with her fellow Republican as we are.  All her efforts stopped by the stroke of a pen.  And she talked about voter fraud, she railed against the SOS project by the liberals, and that’s what got her elected.  Snyder is a fool.

But wait, there’s more.  Mike Cox, our previous Attorney General signed Michigan on to the 26 States who sued to stop Obamacare.  When AG Schuette came into office in 2011, he pledged to continue on the path of trying to stop Obamacare.  So what does our feckless leader do?  He and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, became the only Republican Governors in the Nation to  Not only that, after Christie vetoed his legislature’s approach of putting together exchanges, Snyder (we have a super-majority of Republicans in the Senate) and the House refused to push it through prior to the Obamacare ruling.

Now, after the ruling, Snyder wants a study done on the expansion of Medicaid, but is still fretting over losing funding in creating exchanges overseen by the likes of Planned Parenthood and SEIU.  Now he wants to “partner” with the feds because Michigan is running out of time.  Hurry up, we have to destroy healthcare.

Freedom To Work?  No way says Rick the dick, not on his watch.

And he even twisted the Constitution’s meaning to get his stupid DRIC bridge built, partnering with Canada, and ignoring the will of the people by bypassing Congress.  Are moderates always bent on tyranny?

I have called for the primary-ing of this leftist before he ruins the party completely.  The pendulum is swinging the other way, and Rick is part of an old way of doing business, and he is infuriating conservatives.

When I joined the Republican Party 4 years ago, I was told ideology doesn’t have any place in determining new members.  Snyder is the best example I can think of, of where that mindset leads.  Principled leadership is all I’m asking for.

Here is the phone call from the Mark Levin Show that started me up:


Please follow and like:

Disgusting Michigan Female Democrat Lisa Brown’s Dishonest and Vulgar Mouth

Lisa Brown, a Democrat from West Bloomfield, made an ass of herself yesterday during the debate in the House over changes in abortion regulations. Presumably upset because the Michigan Republican Party is trying to lessen the number of abortions in the state, Brown took to the floor and said that prohibiting abortions after 20 weeks goes against Jewish beliefs that abortions are allowable, and mandatory, if necessary to save the life of the mother — at any stage of gestation. What Brown did not point out is that the bill would allow for abortions to save the life of the mother. Her point is moot, therefore she was only grandstanding.

She used her Jewish faith as a reason more abortions should be allowed, as if it is Jewish law to kill the unborn.

“I have not asked you to adopt and adhere to my religious beliefs, why are you asking me to adhere to yours?” she asked.

It is true that the Jewish faith does allow for stopping a pregnancy in the case of saving the life of the mother, so that she may go on to have a successful pregnancy, however, Brown’s comments were out of line because nobody was suggesting that abortions would be banned in those cases.

She finished with:

“I’m flattered that you want to get in my vagina, but no means no,” she said.

So today, she was banned from speaking on the House floor because of her comments. She is now trying to make the case that the evil white male Republicans are attacking her Jewish faith.


Now, the liberal bloggers and inane reporters are working upon the assumption that she has been barred from speaking because she “dared” to say the word “vagina.”

No, that’s not why. First of all, she got her facts wrong on the bill, and made it look as if her faith is being attacked when it was not. But her disgusting comment came when she said that she was flattered that the men in the House wanted to get in her vagina.

That’s outrageous! Flattered? She is flattered? Imagine if there were 10 men on a street corner cat-calling a woman, would she be flattered that the men want to “get in her vagina?” What a filthy mindset. It is so beneath the lowest form of communication to suggest that the men of the House want to get in her vagina, when the bill’s sole purpose was to decrease the number of abortions in the state. For Lisa Brown to make it sound as if the Republicans want anything to do with her most intimate and private, yes, God-given parts is so vulgar and unlady-like, I can’t describe it. Then she had the audacity to suggest that she had previously told the men of the House that they couldn’t have sex with her, and she now said no again…”no means no.”

Lisa Brown suggested that Republicans hate Jews, and keep insisting on having sex with her.

This woman is completely disgusting, outrageous, and vulgar.

How does this behavior advance the cause for women in the state? She does not speak for all women, nor does she speak for all Jewish women. This is a complete outrage!

Now, I have a friend, Eileen Hart, who is a conservative, pro Israel activist, fellow blogger and Orthodox Jew, and she adds,

The fact that she is probably so non-religious and so secular and only uses Judaism when it is convenient to get herself heard is shameful. No modest or Jewish woman who grew up with real Jewish values would even talk like that in public with such vulgar terms. We Orthodox Jewish women are taught from childhood to act with dignity and maturity. Ms. Brown is an example of what it was like to obviously grow up in a home where Hashem was not a big part of her life, nor was the core values that Hashem sets forth in the Torah. As it is stated in the laws of modesty, even our speech has serious implication when we speak lashon Hara, which is gossip or vulgar language. It shines a negative light on Israel and all Jews as we are supposed to be the light and example unto other nations. To discuss her private parts in front of men is the biggest aveira (sin) for Jewish women. She is using Judaism and desecrating G-d, what she is doing is shillul Hashem, a desceration of the laws G-d gave us in the Torah. We are commanded to be the light unto every other nation, and it is our duty as Jewish mothers and Jewish daughters to set the example of good behavior to the rest of the world. She is putting us all in a bad light, she should be ashamed of herself.

Well, well, well. It seems as though Lisa Brown, Democrat, should ban herself!

Update: Video of the exchange shows that Brown said, “so interested in my vagina,” not, “get in my vagina.”

Please follow and like:

Republican staffers and I do not get along.

It’s the most important election year ever, and I still find myself trying to get along with people who have little experience in life, and delude themselves into believing they are right.

Republican staffers all say the same thing, agree with each other, and suggest that grassroots people with life experience are simpletons with little influence.

They say that this election is about fiscal issues, not social issues, and because of that, those of us who voted for Santorum are focusing on the wrong issues. To be clear, if Newt Gingrich was the one closest to beating Romney in Michigan during the primary, I would have voted for him. I would have voted for anyone except Ron Paul to beat Romney.

But instead of asking me what I know, having the experience I have in my life situation, the three Republican staffers I spoke with this weekend took the occasion instead to suggest that I want the Democrats to win, that anyone who cares about social issues is stupid, and repeated that tired old, “we’re only half of a third” routine.

This whole election is about beating Obama. They believe that if the Republican Party speaks too much about social issues, that they will lose independent voters.

They do not see the massive voting block of Reagan Democrats and conservatives who see the loss of God’s blessings on this nation as a key issue.

They do not see that a Congress recently taken by tea party effort would be wildly popular if they had the guts to push hard, even if they lose, to keep the focus on how the Democrats are trying to change America. Instead, we get treated to the “we are only half of a third” crybaby whiny crap that puts them in a position of weakness.

The truth is, they would rather listen to so-called independents who somehow can’t quite figure out who to vote for until the last minute, being the staunchest people of conviction that they are, than mainstream conservatism, the likes of which are best exemplified by people of faith like Santorum or Palin.

They aren’t going to change their views, and I won’t change mine, but mine is shaped by experience in life, while theirs is shaped by the politics of the moment.

As much as I try to help them see where they are going wrong, they strike back with little interest in how I will take their reaction.

I’m sure they figure I have to vote for Romney now, so why bring this all up? Well, because we aren’t talking about what I will do, we are talking about defeating Obama, and the awesome opportunities being squandered by those in the Romney camp who believe mainstream social issues are now the third rail, nevermind that those issues got them elected in 2010.

I don’t know of any social conservative that is not a fiscal conservative. It is immoral to spend more than you take in. God says that if you do not work, you do not eat. Yet, these unmarried, inexperienced staffers think everyone who tries to show that God’s blessings on this nation are quintessential to an electoral landslide, are misinterpreting the purpose of this election.

The fact is, that they misunderstand the electorate, and are willing to lose the moral fabric of the nation as long as they don’t have to stand for social values.

I have written before about how the Democrats do not separate the social issues out of their agenda. That is on full display. When you have a Republican party not fighting for traditional values, you have the in-your-face, full-on, full-throttle advancement of the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic Party with no response.

That’s how we lose the country guys.

The Obama Presidency is a full assault on God’s presence in our lives and the moral fabric of our nation. If the Republican nominee chooses to avoid the topic because he doesn’t want to offend the left, he will offend the right and confuse the vote or even encourage many to stay home.

Please follow and like:

The Problem in Michigan and Saul Anuzis

Republican delegates from the State of Michigan will be meeting at Cobo Hall Saturday to, among other things, elect a National Committeeman and Committeewoman.

Anuzis is under fire from grassroots activists for what is perceived to be after the February 28th primary election here in Michigan.

Was the wrong? Not necessarily. Did he change the rules? Well, according to former AG Mike Cox, yes.

But the real problem is that Michigan moved up the primary to launch Mitt to Super Tuesday. Over-zealous committeeman aside, the whole fiasco can be attributed to Michigan voters basically rejecting the that Mitt was going to win.

When you have the entire establishment hanging on Mitt’s supposed strengths in Michigan, and a national committeeman about Mitt’s closest opponent gathering Reagan Democrat support as a “dirty trick” and “pathetic,” and then the next day looking like he changed the rules to favor his guy, people start to wonder.

That’s Saul Folks–
Pathetic: Democrats for Santorum – Dirty Tricks
Tuesday, February 28th, 2012

Good morning —

As the Primary Election Day gets rolling this morning I felt it very important to pass along some extremely disturbing news out of the Rick Santorum campaign. It seems that he has chosen to throw his hat in with the Barack Obama, Democrats and union bosses…

Now that the primary is over, and Mitt is the nominee for all intents and purposes, many establishment Republicans are appalled that we should even be talking about any sense of impropriety surrounding the primary.

It didn’t have to be this way.

Now if you take Saul’s word, you would believe that the memo sent to the campaigns regarding a 15-15 split in delegate allocation was in error, and that upon realizing this, the credentials committee convened to re-vote on a rule already voted upon, and to point out the error in the memo.

Four party people voted that the rules voted upon on February 4th were intact and the memo was in error. One of the persons who reportedly would have voted against that view was uninformed of the meeting until after the vote.

The thing that sticks in my mind, is that two accomplished lawyers, one, the sitting MRP counsel, and the other, the former AG of Michigan DISAGREED with Anuzis and the other party people.

It’s just one delegate. What’s all the fuss?

Well, all the fuss is that tea party activists are paying close attention after being told we had little to do with the victories in Michigan for the Republican Party in 2010.

Saul has been challenged by former State Legislator. Saul has been attacking Agema for things he voted on in the legislature, as evidence that he would be a terrible committeeman. Meanwhile, as a committeeman, Saul voted on things he claims were innocent clarifications after-the-fact.

Delegates will decide Saturday whether he stays in his position.

One thing is clear. Tea party activists are the conscience of the Republican Party.

Special Thanks to Right Michigan’s for such thorough work on this matter.

Please follow and like:

Well there’s your problem, Dick.

reported a statement given by losing 6 term Republican Senator Dick Lugar, from last night,

“In effect, what [Mourdock] has promised in this campaign is reflexive votes for a rejectionist orthodoxy and rigid opposition to the actions and proposals of the other party,” Lugar said in a statement released to the Evansville Courier and Press. “His answer to the inevitable roadblocks he will encounter in Congress is merely to campaign for more Republicans who embrace the same partisan outlook. He has pledged his support to groups whose prime mission is to cleanse the Republican party of those who stray from orthodoxy as they see it.”

Rejectionist orthodoxy
If Lugar was talking about rejecting the founders, or rejecting the constitution, that phrase could be used against the Democrats, but he was talking about rejection of Democrat party policy. He said that Mourdock, a Republican, intends to reject Democrat party policy.

Rigid opposition
As if there is such a thing as soft opposition. Lugar didn’t see the Democrat party as his opposition.

Partisan outlook
Tell me, what is the purpose of belonging to a party if you are non-partisan or bi-partisan? Either you believe in the party platform, or you don’t, and if you don’t, don’t join the party.

The three phrases Lugar used shows how very out of touch he is, and here’s to the great people of Indiana who chose wisely to primary him.

Lugar is opposed to what Mourdock intends to do, which is start the ball rolling for more conservatives to join congress. In fact, you could say that Lugar rejects the founders philosophy and stands in rigid opposition to a conservative outlook.

There’s your problem, Dick.

Watch Mourdock’s full victory speech .

Please follow and like:

Has Obama become just like everyone else?

Chris Wallace interviewed conservative superstar Marco Rubio on Fox News Sunday today, and Rubio lamented that President Obama has moved away from being a uniter, to being, “just like everyone else” in Washington, and that it’s a sad thing to see.


This talking point is beyond troubling. It calls into question whether or not the conservative faction of the Republican Party even believes there is a difference between Republicans and extremely liberal Democrats.

Am I to assume that Senator Rubio believes that a vote for Obama in 2008 was legitimate because he had such swagger? Am I to think that Republicans shouldn’t be partisan when trying to win over former Obama voters, because, heck, don’t hate the player, hate the game?

I’m disappointed in Rubio for this, and any Republican who hasn’t the guts to say what needs to be said. Obama is a far-left ideologue more interested in controlling the populace than allowing personal property and individualism to flourish.

I realize Rubio is a Senator, and that the Senate is supposed to be a place of high-mindedness, a place where rhetoric is scrubbed to mean almost anything to anyone, but this type of argument is dangerous.

President Obama is ripping the country apart. There can be no whitewashing of this fact. He is a far-left ideologue and the argument against him is profound and simple. He is too liberal for America. His crony-capitalism has reached toward fascism. We are at a turning point in history. There is a clear divide in America, not based on color, gender, or whatever other differences shallow politicians can conjure, but based on philosophy. Obama’s and the Founders.

Statesmanship is what this nation is starving for, and Marco Rubio throws a few crumbs. He should be throwing red meat because the nation needs to hear it from someone in a position such as his.

One more thing about that interview, Rubio stated that there is “diversity” in the Republican Party when it comes to abortion. He said pro-lifers have a home in the party, as do pro-choicers, and said that the Democrat Party has few pro-lifers with much influence. This shows, I guess, that Republicans are more “diverse.” Somehow, accepting pro-chioce views is supposed to make Republicans high-minded.

The nation is more pro-life than pro-abort. Why do we have to apologize for standing up for the unborn? It is no secret the Republican Party wishes not to broach the social issues, but suggesting that we are somehow better for advertising a home for pro-aborts muddies the philosophical pond. We should be proud to stand for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This is our mandate from the 2010 elections. Ignoring what happened in 2010 will be disastrous.

As a pro-life American, I shouldn’t be looked upon as “the old way of getting votes” or “ignorant or unfeeling” toward women. I am a woman. Yet these arguments are being used against those like me within the party.

If the Republican Party wishes to rip the party apart, continuing the liberal path and rhetoric is a sure way.

Please follow and like:

Childish Antics From The Romney Camp In Michigan

Mitt Romney is running for President of the United States, and yet, his supporters are acting like they can’t take competition.

Wait, maybe it’s top-down, after all, Mitt attacks his opponents with overwhelming force rather than explains his vision for the country. Who does that remind me of, let’s see, someone who would rather clear the playing field than fight fair and square…hmm, name escapes me, oh well.

But, the usual culprits are again, you can be sure that when something childish is happening, Dennis Lennox is in the thick of it. Ah Lennox, the guy who argued for a Con-Con, the guy who argued for the State to take over townships in order to expedite a high-speed rail system downstate, the guy who begged to be fired as Cheboygan Drain Commissioner to get 15 minutes of fame from the conservative press, the guy who resigned in shame after mailing campaign lit within his Christmas cards from his Cheboygan County office. Oh sure, he was on the other side of the street, but if the dude taking down Santorum signs was working for Santorum, he would have said so.

Combine that with the using Santorum’s voice from a 2008 endorsement, suggesting he endorses Romney now.


I’m gonna have to agree with Santorum here,

After the calls went out then, Santorum complained of “dirty politics,” something he said he’d expect from President Barack Obama but never a Republican.

Mitt Romney was furious that Gingrich won South Carolina. It gave Gingrich momentum going into Florida, further derailing Romney’s candidacy.

Gingrich’s win thus brought back the Romney liberal tactic of destroying your opponent, not on record but on rhetoric.

Romney won Florida in a landslide, due to negative ads against his main rival, further proving that Romney is running away from his absent record of Conservatism.

He can’t run on RomneyCare, he can’t run on his liberal record in Massachusetts, he simply cannot run on his merits.

Perhaps the way to tell if a person is a conservative is to determine if he actually has a conscience.

I’m not quite sure the country understands how Mitt Romney He should skate right through. He is now in danger both in Michigan

I’m looking forward to the debate tonight.

Please follow and like: