Mitt Pulls A 'Weiner'

When Bill Clinton wagged his finger at us saying: "I - did - not - have - sex - with - that -woman", we all knew he was lying. When Anthony 'that's-not-my-weiner' said: that's not my weiner, we all knew, that was his weiner.

Now when Mitt Romney tells Fox News: "I don’t recall the incident myself, but I’ve seen the reports and I’m not going to argue with that," we all know he's a lying weiner. M-i-i-i-i-t, look at me, look at me -- you're telling me you don't recall, one way or the other, whether you were involved with a group of your buddies who held down a weaker classmate and cut off his hair during your senior year? Now Mitt knows he knows and he knows we know.

The problem for Mitt is he doesn't have the skill set, and never will, of a seasoned reprobate like a Clinton or a Weiner, so he tries to half-ass, middle-of-the-road it with an 'I don't recall'. Clinton and Weiner would have gotten in our face and snarled until the blue dress and more weiner pics showed up. However Mitt doesn't have the luxury of attending a week long Clinton - Weiner seminar. The Obama Nasties have been bragging for months that they have a stack two feet high of opposition research ready to be unloaded. This week's free haircut episode was just one tiny sheet off the very top.

Jason Horowitz, the reporter on the Post hit piece said they gave the Romney camp ample time to respond. Ample time, and this is the best the Romney team could come up with, "I don't recall"? To anyone paying close attention it's clear that Romney is simply not a skilled politician and the Romney campaign is very much overrated. Obama's boys have to be laughing it up in Chicago as they toy with Romney like a wooden marionette.

Talk radio and right-wing blogs have been saying this is trivial stuff and will have no effect on the election. They are wrong. This isn't about free haircuts and mischievous schoolboys, this is about portraying Mitt Romney as a deviant, someone who plays dirty. This week's objective was to show Romney playing dirty even as far back as high school. Just wait till the Bain Capital crap starts flying, there won't be five schoolboys telling stories of high school hijinks, but fifty businessmen recanting stories of just what a dishonest, ruthless, dirty dealer Romney was.

And finally how hard will it be to portray Romney as a dirty campaigning politician. The Obama Nasties shouldn't even get paid for that day. Perhaps this is why people who put their 'money where their mouth is' have Obama up 60 to 37 on Intrade.

You might have asked yourself, how did we get here, how did we allow for a presidential election between two lightweights with the main issues being; dogs on cars, dogs with ketchup, stay-at-home-moms, car elevators, golf, bullies, blouses, druggies, dresses? I've asked myself that question. I wish I had the answer.

The Spirit Airline Boycotters Are The Real Thugs

All the judge had to hear in the Spirit Airlines vs. Vietnam veteran case was, well just that, dying Vietnam war veteran vs. Spirit Airlines tightfisted CEO Ben Baldanza. In fact these were the precise terms used by Foxnews reporter J. Miller. However the judge in this case ended up being thirty thousand Facebookers threatening a boycott against Spirit Airlines.

Jerry Meekins, a Vietnam vet and cancer patient was told by his doctor not to fly. Spirit Airlines is a no-frills airline and charges for 'every extra' in order to offer rock bottom prices. This is were the problem began. Spirit Airlines has a strict, well publicized no-refund policy and Jerry is a Vietnam vet with cancer. Seems like an open and shut case, Jerry wins.

I have nothing but respect and admiration for a man like Jerry Meekins. However if I had the chance to talk with him I would explain why I believe he has responsibility in this disagreement as well. Passengers flying Spirit Airlines are aware of their no-refund policy and accept the added risk in exchange for a rock bottom fare. Many of you are now calling me a heartless bastard only worried about the evil rich, tightfisted CEO. But wait a minute, aren't we now taking the exact same position as Nancy Pelosi and the libs? The same position we rail about everyday as conservatives.

But Ben and Jerry are not the only ones involved here, I'm involved too. I fly Spirit Airlines all the time and one of the very reasons I choose Spirit is because I don't value the extras the same as other airline passengers do. I prefer to pay as little as possible to get from point A to point B and then spend the savings on a nice dinner or a new Callaway driver. Until last week I thought my relationship with Ben was absolutely perfect. I would give him a small amount of money and he would fly me where I wanted to go. But that was before I was told that Ben and I were doing it all wrong.

Ben was offering a service that was below the acceptable minimums for air travel. Now wait, don't minimum levels of service only apply to health care. With Obamacare I'm not allowed to purchase a bare bones major-medical-only policy. You can't just have major medical, then go to Target and give the clerk nine dollars for contraceptives.

Now it seems I'm being told I can't purchase air travel a-la-carte either. Jerry told Foxnews he appreciated Ben's willingness to refund his ticket out of his own pocket and write a check for $5,000 to the Wounded Warriors Foundation. But “I just want them to agree to take each case and review it, because there are others in my situation and they deserve to be heard”.

I have to disagree with Jerry here. This is exactly what Ben is trying to avoid at any cost. He can't determine whether a stay-at-home-mom deserves a refund but a single-mom-lawyer does not, without it affecting ticket prices. Ben also made the point that Spirit is often the only airline many passengers can afford to fly.

This story hit a nerve with me because the left's reflex is always to condemn the evil CEO. This time it seemed people on my side of the political divide had the same reflex.

Oh No He Di'int, Yup Romney 'Messed With Texas'

Romney has visited Texas several times during the primary. Not to sell his vision for the country, but more as an ATM stop. Legal experts we contacted agreed this could be considered 'messin with Texas' in a court of law. Most are aware of the risks you run when messin with Sasquatch. So why do people continue to insist on 'messin with Texas'? And more to the point, why do politicians even entertain the thought. Ok he 'messed with Texas', big deal? Well it is a big deal, you can't 'mess with Texas' without messin with Louisiana.

Once you've messed with Louisiana you've messed with Mississippi and Alabama. Within the hour the the 'good-ol-boy' parts of Florida as well as Georgia, South Carolina and Arkansas, are fully aware of the messin. Now with Twitter and Facebook, by the end of the day even their cousins in North Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Missouri and Oklahoma all know about the Texas Messin. Everyone below the Mason-Dixon line feels like they've been messed with, and that's not good, cause this is the 'base' of the Republican party.

More than the 'base' you might even call the South 'home freekin plate' of the republican party. The Vatican for Santoriums, Mecca for you Jihadis, and I can guarantee you, Reagan never referred to the South as 'an away game'. Ask James Carville, he'll tell you straight up, people in the South actually believe this 'conservative crap'. You can't just used-car-salesman your way through the South, the 'good-ol-boys' are watching your every step. If Romney tries to etch-a-sketch his way farther and farther to the left, it ain't gonna go over to well in the South.

Romney's going to have to find a way to better feign sincerity when dealing with the South. Now to his credit he's taking steps to do just that. Rumor has it that he has discreetly hired a key adviser for just this purpose. This cannot be independently confirmed, but an inside source, on the condition of anonymity, told an outside source about a conversation that went something like this:

Mitt: “How how long afterwards do you usually have to stay and cuddle, cause these conservatives are really starting to get on my nerves?”

Bill: “Did you tell them you love them?”

Mitt: “Well not exactly but I did call myself a 'severe conservative'”

Bill: “Wow, that's pretty good, try biting your bottom lip while waving your finger”

Mitt: “Got it, thanks, I'll call you back”

But many believe even these steps won't be enough. You can't just show up and say: “hey baby” and move on. Bill can, you can't. If you're playing defense with your own base your opponent is playing offense, and that's a losing hand.

Some of us are wondering why we're even playing this game. Why are we forcing ourselves to play defense on our own territory in states like Florida, North Carolina and Virginia? What's so damn important about Mitt Romney anyway? Some of my very close friends have even gone so far as to say: “screw the unwritten rule that the next one in line has to be the nominee.”

When your mom tried to force-feed your little brother Gerber's Lima Bean Jubilee, it didn't really work, did it? He just spit it out and then started turning his head from side-to-side, like a windshield wiper on high speed, kinda like keep away with his mouth. Well the 'good-ol-boys' ain't chockin down the Jubilee either, so stop trying to force it down all of our throats.

Why I won't vote for Romney

Because I want to defeat Obama.

The Romney argument from day one has been 'you have to vote for Romney because he's the only one that can beat Obama'. I won't vote for Romney precisely because I know he will lose to Obama. A few examples as to why he'll lose:

Romney's positive approval rating has been 20 points below even McCain and Dole's who both ended up losing. It will probably start to rise with the end of the primary, however this is before the Obama Nasties open fire with both barrels, and Romney is a very target rich environment.

McCain lost to Obama by five million votes. The retort is 'yes but the luster is off Obama this time', true, but the luster has never been and never will be on Romney. The apathy on the right is every bit as apathetic as the apathy on the left. However in addition to apathy there is almost a disdain on the right for Romney and the GOP. Romney will lose three types of voters. 1. Unmotivated voters who won't bother to turn off 'Dancing with the Stars' to go vote. 2. Voters like myself that know Romney is a liberal and are disgusted with the dishonest corrupt campaign he and the GOP have run. 3. Voters that hate Romney so much that as soon as the word 'Romney' leaves your mouth the conversation is over. So from where is Romney going to get his votes?

Romney is so stiff that it makes it almost too painful to watch. Part of his historically low 30 percent approval rating is simply that he is not a likeable candidate. It just seems as if he doesn't quite know how to relate to humans. The following video (cookiegate) of Romney talking to supporters is a perfect illustration of Romney's legendary awkwardness. If this were an isolated event it could be overlooked, but it's more the rule than the exception. http://thehill.com/video/campaign/222467-romneys-cookie-joke-prompts-cookie-gate-attack

Both Romney and Obama are desperate to avoid their records, causing them to run a vapid, mud slinging campaign with both candidates trying to bring the other down, rather than building himself up. Perhaps this is why we spent the last few weeks arguing about the value of stay-at-home-moms, roof carriers for dogs and yes dog meat. However this kind of campaign will not help Romney, on the contrary, this type of campaign is tailor-made for the democrats. Democrat voters are the quintessential mind-dead-voter. All David Axelrod has to say is: are you really going to fire the first black president? (Chris Matthews is already promoting this) and 'hope and change', or the 2012 equivalent.

If Obama wins the world will end

If Obama wins the earth will fly off it's axis, spin out of control and explode. In addition to the dishonest and corrupt campaign, the GOP has been forcing Romney down our throats since the primary began. As Americans we are genetically predispositioned to raise our middle finger whenever someone tells us we HAVE TO do something. The main argument for Romney is that we can't afford another four more years of Obama. The question is never raised, can we afford eight years of a liberal republican? I would argue, muddling through four more years of Obama is preferable to eight years of a directionless liberal Romney. Does anyone anywhere really think Mitt is going to bring a backbone to the table. On the budget battles Boehner and McConnell have caved every single time to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. Ann Coulter and Laura Ingraham even pleaded with the republican leadership, 'don't shut down the government or we'll get blamed'. Coulter might have an adam's apple but she has no cojones. Is Romney really going to stand up to Ann Coulter?

If Obama wins, the next two Supreme Court justices will alter the makeup of the court. Nonsense. Scalia, Alito, Thomas, Roberts aren't going anywhere. Kennedy probably isn't either. If he does, his replacement still has to be confirmed by the Senate. You simply don't confirm anyone less conservative than Kennedy, next problem.

We need someone with a spine. The only republicans in the last thirty years with guts were Reagan and Gingrich. Both shut down the government several times and Newt even forced Clinton to say “the era of big government is over”. Will Romney ever shut down the government, will he ever stand up to the liberals when they cry about draconian cuts? He's not going to fight the liberals because in truth he is a liberal and we all know that the democrats will keep spending until we become Greece. Just like the liberals in Greece kept spending until it became so bad people started committing suicide. We are on the exact same path and a liberal republican is barely going to slow us down on our inevitable run off the cliff.

Going on offense.

I started to write a section about forcing a brokered convention, but the more I wrote the more I realized, any candidate coming out of the GOP convention this year will still have to be GOP approved. In other words we'd still end up with a total bucket of mush, like Jeb Bush or Mitch Daniels, better, but not good enough for the mess we're in today.

Don't get me wrong I still think we need to flip off the GOP every chance we get. Such as:

1. Voting for Ron Paul in the remaining primaries as a protest vote.

2. Changing party affiliation to independent and telling the GOP why you're switching.

3. Stop sending money to RNC.

4. Throw your remote at the T.V. whenever Karl Rove shows up.

No, this time I think we need to go big. We need to enlist a true conservative as our third party nominee. We don't need a third party, at least not at this point. We just need a true conservative to represent us as a third party candidate in the presidential election. We'd still vote for the best republican in each race for congress. Many say this is a suicide mission, but I disagree. Rather I would argue that voting for Romney in this environment is the true suicide mission. Yes I've heard the argument over and over that Ross Perot is the reason we ended up with Bill Clinton, but had Ross Perot been a better candidate he could have actually won. He was shooting up like a rocket until he pulled out of the race, only to come back later and he still got 20 percent of the vote. Ross Perot was not a good candidate but we have time to find a truly great conservative candidate to represent us.

Not only was Ross Perot a poor candidate but H.W. Bush was not a horrible candidate either. But this time Romney is a horrible candidate. Also Clinton does not even come close to Barak Obama on the socialist meter, so things are very different this time. Can you imagine a true conservative debating these two liberal Bozos, with their socialist medicine legislation hanging around their necks?

As for the question, can a third party candidate really win? I'd point to Murkowski in Alaska who beat her republican rival with a write-in campaign and she wasn't even on the ballot. Granted our candidate will be underfunded but so were Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum and they still won states where they were outspent 10 to 1. On the other hand our third party candidate will start with a huge base of disenfranchised conservative voters in which to build on. The contrast between the conservative and the two liberals will suck voters from Romney until he's no longer viable. This happened recently in the Colorado Governor's race where the conservative independent destroyed the republican candidate making him into a non factor. Once Romney is made a non factor voters will turn to replacing the worst president in U.S. history.

In summary

If we don't stand up to the GOP this election we'll be be facing another thirty years of Doles and McCains and Romneys. We won't last thirty years with more Doles and McCains and Romneys. If Obama wins we muddle through for another four, but have another shot in four years for a true conservative. If Romney wins, the dramatic 'change of course' needed to save this country will not occur for at least the next eight years.