The Twisted Anti-Santorum Argument Regarding Santorum’s 2008 Romney Endorsement

As The Right Scoop and many others have noted, the Romney campaign is sending around robo-calls to voters in Michigan using the single most positive sentence Santorum had said about Romney in his endorsement in 2008 without mentioning that the statement is four years old.

The act of placing a robo-call on unsuspecting Michinganders as though his current top rival had suddenly endorsed him screams of desperation and hypocrisy. Shockingly, or perhaps not so shockingly, Romney supporters don’t see anything wrong with the above robo-call. They defend the Romney campaign’s actions with the response that Romney hadn’t done anything wrong; Santorum had simply flip-flopped away from his “support” for Romney from 2008, ignoring the complete Santorum statement of the time.

Rick Santorum had clearly stated in 2008 that he hesitated over endorsing anyone since they all had very serious flaws with McCain obviously being the worst of all as even his campaign platform was loaded with liberal rhetoric. He then went on to say that while Huckabee would’ve been great as a governor of the country, he’s got national security all wrong. That left him and the entire conservative movement with the very imperfect Mitt Romney.

Although I haven’t (yet) seen the official Romney team use quotes from others who’ve supported him in ’08 (not out of support but for lack of an alternative) but refuse to do so in 2012 since there are better options, Romney supporters repeatedly cite old endorsements without specifying that they’re from four years ago and that Romney hasn’t been the recipient of their endorsements in 2012.

In 2008, amidst John McCain’s cries against the “torture” of terrorists and the need for intervention to stop global warming, McCain expressed opposition to all earmarks, glad to having identified an almost insignificant item with which he can brand himself as a conservative. It’s interesting to note that Romney too has grasped at earmarks as “proof” of his conservatism and he had indeed received McCain’s endorsement, something no one else desired.

Romney’s opposition to earmarks though, as with everything else in his current campaign, is a direct contradiction to the Romney from prior this election. The Romney who was governor of Massachusetts didn’t only support earmarks; he begged, cajoled, and pleaded for them on his hands and knees. He lobbied for federal funds to help build the Fort Dix highway in Massachusetts and turned to Uncle Sam once again when arranging the Olympics which took place in Utah and which McCain had railed against during that time as the greatest boondoggling of earmarks.

Rick Santorum like Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, and many other prominent conservatives, endorsed Romney in 2008 as the anti-McCain. Additionally, Romney is now attempting to play conservative in the second election in a row, after falling back to supporting a liberal agenda in the interim, and is fooling far less people about his lack of loyalty to the conservative movement. Mitt Romney is now the John McCain of the GOP primary and we’re lucky we’ve got a true conservative as an alternative choice, unlike in 2008.

It is clear that both the actual Romney team and Romney supporters have decided that the end justifies the means and that misleading and lying is acceptable if it will get their preferred candidate elected. It is equally clear to me and many other conservatives that such behavior is unacceptable and we will not remain silent in expressing our opposition.

Resist We Much … Mr. Gingrich for he’s Character Assassination for Conservatism

Updated 12/21/12:

Newt Gingrich was confronted by a African American in South Carolina about his declaration that teenagers should work. Newt replied that "I know Al" and he'd be glad to discuss it with him. In the article below you will see Newt's relationship with Al Sharpton and exactly what's so wrong with that.

After election night of 2008 had passed with Obama having emerged victorious, many conservatives were disappointed to hear that a powerful McCain ad had gone unaired due to McCain’s refusal to mention Obama’s anti-American Pastor. The ad, leaked after the elections were over, highlighted the very different paths the two candidates had taken as young men.

Narrator: Long before anyone knew who John McCain or Barack Obama were, one chose to honor his fellow soldiers by refusing to walk out of a prisoner of war camp. The other chose not to even walk out of a church where a pastor was spewing hatred.

Rev. Wright: Not God bless America! God damn America!

Narrator: Character matters, especially when no one’s looking.

No candidate is perfect since no human being is without flaws. It is therefore crucial for every individual to carefully research the strengths and flaws of each candidate and then choose to support a candidate despite his or her flaws. Obviously each individual will tolerate different flaws. For instance, some consider social issues to be a major deciding factor while others focus on a candidate’s voting record and yet a third individual look at executive experience as a priority. For most conservatives all of these are pretty high on the list.

There is one vital component, however, which a candidate must have and which takes absolute priority above everything else; character. Character is what has made this country a beacon of light amongst the nations and what gives a person the strength to choose right from wrong. How can an individual be trusted to practice what they preach, fulfill their promises, and to make the correct choices in the unknown future if they lack basic character?

In 2008 McCain was of the minority amongst the conservative movement who opposed airing the above ad and who refused to denounce the fact that the Obamas had attended Wright’s church for over twenty years. The 2012 primary though is revealing that a considerable chunk and perhaps even a majority of the conservative movement no longer view character as a vital component of a candidate. With their support for a characterless candidate, they inevitably condone Obama’s friendship with terrorist William Ayers and the fact that Jeremiah Wright was privileged to have the Obama’s attend his church for over two decades.

Newt’s campaign has recently been gaining an increasing amount of traction as more and more conservative express their support for his candidacy. He has made a favorable impression on many thanks to his expert debating skills, his steadfastness to conservative talk, and his dignified presidential manner at the debates when he refused to engage in petty attacks against the others. These are indeed positive qualities and the excitement for an Obama/Gingrich debate is easily understood. However, it is crucial to stop and consider while one is still able, whether the serious implication that will result if the bulk of the conservative movement throws its support behind Newt is worth it, even it leads to victory. For Newt’s character is seriously lacking.

Two short years ago Gingrich had proudly teamed up, at the behalf of Obama, with the rabble-rousing demagogue Al Sharpton to promote the Obama administration’s education policies. Awareness of their joint project was accomplished via rallies across the country and appearances on Sunday TV Shows.

I couldn’t imagine where and what has qualified Al Sharpton to be an education expert until I remembered Obama’s response when questioned about his association with the terrorist William Ayers. Obama spoke of a guy he knew who worked in the education field with nary a mention of Ayers’ terrorist past, his continued support of terrorism after 9/11, or their true relationship. With education experts such as Ayers and Sharpton one has got the answer to the problems plaguing the education system at one’s fingertips.

Several months prior to the Gingrich/Sharpton education stint, Gingrich graced Al Sharpton’s annual National Action Network Conference. For those unfamiliar, the National Action Network serves as Sharpton’s front, is used by Sharpton to promote racial division, and whose actions often fall into the violent and criminal category.

Gingrich’s readiness to team up with an individual such as Al Sharpton, who has no experience in education or any other field except for stirring up violence and racial divisiveness, is appalling. With their project completed, Gingrich continued to act chummy with violence-inciting Al Sharpton. This past October, Gingrich surprised Sharpton by calling into his TV show to wish him happy birthday. He praised the opportunistic, race baiting, hatred-inciting, narcissist, Al Sharpton, as one who “did a lot of good things.”

For those unfamiliar with Al Sharpton’s rabble-rousing violent history, here’s a sprinkling of the many acts he’s directly responsible for.

1987: Sharpton spread the incendiary Tawana Brawley Hoax despite his knowledge of the true facts. He heatedly played defendant of the 15-year-old black girl who was supposedly abducted, raped, and smeared with feces by a group of white men, and singled out Steve Pagones, a young prosecutor, as guilty of a crime which never occurred. Despite Sharpton being aware of Pagones innocence, he taunted him, “If we’re lying, sue us, so we can . . . prove you did it.” Pagones courageously fought for his innocence, sued Sharpton, and eventually won a $345,000 verdict for defamation. To this day though, Sharpton refuses to recant the slander or apologize for his role in the odious affair.

1989: Al Sharpton also led a vitriolic campaign to vilify the young white woman who had been raped and viciously beaten in the Central Park "wilding" case, since the rapist was black. He led demonstrations against the victim and accused her boyfriend of being the real assailant. Here too Al Sharpton never owned up to the facts despite the criminal’s admittance of his guilt and the DNA testing which proved the black rapist to be guilty of the crime.

1991: A Hasidic Jewish driver in Brooklyn’s Crown Heights section accidentally killed Gavin Cato, a 7-year-old black child. An anti-Semitic riot erupted, and thanks to Sharpton’s arrival, it lasted for three full days. At Gavin’s funeral he railed against the “diamond merchants” -- code for Jews – who have “the blood of innocent babies” on their hands. He mobilized and led hundreds of demonstrators who marched through the Jewish neighborhood and chanted “No justice, no peace.” A rabbinical student, Yankel Rosenbaum, was surrounded by a frenzied mob shouting “Kill the Jews!” and was stabbed to death. Two weeks later, Italian-American Anthony Graziosi, whose full beard and dark clothing caused him to be mistaken for a Hasidic Jew, was dragged out of his passing car, brutally beaten and stabbed to death.

1995: The United House of Prayer, a large black landlord in Harlem, raised the rent on Freddy’s Fashion Mart. Freddy’s white Jewish owner was therefore forced to raise the rent on his subtenant, a black-owned music store. A landlord-tenant dispute ensued and before one could blink an eye Sharpton had arrived at the scene and jumped at the opportunity to incite racial hatred. “We will not stand by and allow them to move this brother so that some white interloper can expand his business,” Sharpton proclaimed. He ignored the original cause of the rent hike and the lack of racist action from Freddy’s, and had \the National Action Network, set up picket lines. They spat and cursed as “traitors” and “Uncle Toms” anyone who dared shop at Freddy’s, and shouts of “Burn down the Jew store!” were heard. Protestors simulated the striking of matches while Sharpton’s colleague Morris Powell kept the frenzy going with lines like “We’re going to see that this cracker suffers.” On Dec. 8, one of the protesters burst into Freddy’s, shot four employees point-blank, and then set the store on fire. Seven employees died in the inferno.

Al Sharpton has also shared a stage with gay-bashing, Jew-hating, anti-Catholic racist Khalid Muhammad and praised him as “an articulate and courageous brother."

Fellow conservatives, we don’t need such an individual to be associated with a candidate of ours. Besides for it disqualifying the campaign led against Obama, it brands us as hypocrites and portrays us as morally equivalent to liberals. Carefully vetting a candidate’s record is of extreme importance. Greater priority though should be given to the character of the individual.

Newt proudly referred to his partnership with Al Sharpton as the original “odd couple” and explained his actions with the “education comes before party” lines. Noble sounding indeed except that the left is notorious for having implemented and supported action which raised the bar for the teachers union bosses, not the bar of education. Obama wrongly stopped the DC school vouchers Scholarship Program which had greatly benefited minorities who were stuck in under-performing public schools.

The program had been economically smart since the government paid per voucher less than half of the price they currently spend for each child which is educated in a failing D.C. public schools Additionally, after the Department of Education researched eleven programs, they found that scholarship programs achieved the largest gains. Despite all these facts, Obama found it more important to curry favor with the teachers unions, and his Education Secretary, Duncan, revoked the scholarship of 216 students already on the program. Education “specialist” Al Sharpton who is usually the very first to protest any act with the slightest smell of racism, remained shockingly silent and did not utter a whimper in protest of Obama’s decision which hurt minorities most.

With the closure of the D.C. vouchers program, Obama’s, Duncan’s, and Sharpton’s true colors were exposed yet Gingrich agreed to join teams with these very same individuals in an effort to promote better education for minorities. It would be quite hilarious if the results wouldn’t be so pathetic. After meeting with Obama, Gingrich praised Obama’s stance on education. Throughout the tour, Gingrich didn’t find it necessary to question Sharpton for his inaction. Nor did he take to task Obama’s education Secretary Arne Duncan, who had joined them as a direct representative of Obama in their endeavor to publicly laud Obama’s efforts to reform public education.

Was Newt so stupid as to really think Obama, Duncan, and Sharpton are the type of people who would take positive action to help minorities stuck in failing public schools after their blatant disregard to the minorities in D.C.? Gingrich’s actions can be understood in one of two ways:

A- He’s often turned to government for solutions especially in regard to education. He voted for and helped gather the necessary support Carter needed in order to pass the legislation which created the Department of Education. Under his leadership, Congress passed the largest single spending increase on education in US history, a whopping $3.5 billion dollars! At times, his persuasive skills have sure come to use … for the Democrats.

B-His quest to expand the Republican tent have often led to compromises and bipartisan acts which somehow amounted to conservatives giving in to Democrat demands. (See below)

Either way, his recent actions are in direct contradiction to the image he’s attempted to create of himself throughout his current campaign.

In addition to his lack of character, which unfortunately is no longer considered as a deciding factor for many, Newt’s record is far from unblemished. Since some of his actions are downright disturbing, here’s a handful of some of the Newt controversies, both well-known and lesser -- known.

In a speech given to the Center For Strategic and International Affairs in 1995, Newt Gingrich said this: "The American challenge in leading the world is compounded by our Constitution…Either we are going to have to re-think our Constitution or we are going to have to re‑think our process of making decisions.”

He stumped for Bush's prescription drug bill and urged all conservatives to vote for it despite it having created an additional seventeen trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities. This is one more of many instances where Newt’s smooth talk was used not to promote conservatism, but to promote big government.

Newt agreed with John Kerry regarding the urgency to take action to stop global warming and a need for "Green Conservatism." He also participated in a global warming ad created by Al Gore’s company, in which he sat one couch with Pelosi (and for which he apologized after having launched his presidential campaign.)

Newt’s firm received 1.6 million dollars from Freddie Mac for “consulting services” and another $312,000 from the ethanol lobby (which may explain his confusion regarding the myth of global warming.)

He had been the recipient of President Clinton heartfelt thanks for his support of The Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 which placed many restrictions on the 2nd Amendment Right and federalized certain crimes involving a firearm. This increased both the size and the scope of the Federal Government, and wouldn’t have passed without Gingrich.

Newt has endorsed moderate and questionable individuals such as Dede Scozzafava, an ACORN-friendly, union-pandering, tax-and-spend radical Republican who ran against a solid conservative, Doug Hoffman. Newt defended his endorsement of Scozzafava (before backtracking once she backed out of the race) saying that “If you seek to be a perfect minority, you’ll remain a minority” thus revealing his true colors and history of compromising with the left rather than sticking to one’s guns. Never mind that it wasn’t even applicable in this case since NY-23 is a Republican district.

Newt supported individual mandates in his book released in 2008.

Gingrich called Paul Ryan’s plan “right-wing social engineering” despite Ryan’s bravery in being the very first to actually present a plan (and for this too he later apologized after receiving heavy flak from conservatives.)

Gingrich had been the only Speaker of the House ever to have been disciplined for ethics violations.

Newt Gingrich has been a member for the past twenty one years of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) which has been single-minded and dedicated to the goal of undermining our National Sovereignty in order to promote a One World Government!

My sincerest apologies for any Newt apologies inadvertently not mentioned. They are slightly difficult to keep track of. One thing is certain though. He hasn’t apologized for his teaming up with the Obama team, Obama’s education secretary, and most importantly, Al Sharpton. In fact, he honored Al Sharpton on his new MSNBC show with a surprise happy birthday call this past October in which he cited the time they’ve worked together as memorable and unforgettable. He then heaped lavish praise upon Sharpton’s head including saying that Sharpton “did a lot of good things.” Newt correctly assumed conservatives and family members of Sharpton’s victims weren’t listening to the show, thus providing him with the opportunity to reveal his chumminess with Al Sharpton without receiving any heavy backlash.

Last June, Newt Gingrich gave a speech for the Maryland Republican party in which he said that one only needs the courage to enter and communicate with the African American communities as to how Obama’s policies have caused their unemployment figures to rise and have only hurt the black people.

Mr. Gingrich, although you’re above statement is true there’s an additional reason why black communities’ sufferings are worse than that of the rest of the country, and you are part of the problem. Black communities are hurting precisely because of rabble rousers like Al Sharpton whose entire career is built through the suppression of blacks. He ensures they remain victims in their minds forever so that they remain thankful and faithful to their masters who provide them with food stamps and other programs in exchange for votes. Instead of denouncing and decrying these despicable racists, you’ve teamed up with him and continue to praise, embolden, and encourage Al Sharpton. This further validates this criminal and hurts the African American communities to no end, as detailed in a past article I’ve written.

If you truly seek better education for minorities, denounce Al Sharpton. Additionally, recognize that The Department of Education which you’ve supported from the start and the ridiculous union demands are the main components why minorities suffer from worse educations. Therefore, your promotion of additional government control and federal spending are not only not the solution, but actually part of the problem.

Conservatives have always stood a notch above liberals since conservatives are individuals with character. Conservatism dare not stoop to the level of liberals for America simply cannot afford another characterless president. We’ve got to prove that our values are not for sale. Vehement opposition against Gingrich’s association with Sharpton is necessary in order to demonstrate the truth behind our support of the unaired McCain ad and our opposition of Obama’s troubling past. Perhaps if character would have been given stronger focus in 2008 we wouldn’t be stuck now with our current president. The clock can’t be turned back, but the future is still open and waiting to be molded.


You will also want to read my article which appeared on American Thinker:
What Line Must Newt Gingrich Cross for Conservatives to Disown Him?

There was a strategy the Conservatives could’ve used in ’08 that would’ve led to victory which is a must-know for 2012.

No, it does not involve recreating history such as pretending that a different candidate other than McCain would’ve won the primary, or that the country’s economic situation wasn’t heading towards collapse.

Nor is it necessary to alter the fact that his campaign came after eight years of an unpopular president, George W. Bush, which created an entire new class of Republican haters.

Obama remains his Democratic rival and the then popular Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin as his vice presidential pick.

With all of the above, John McCain could’ve won with a landslide.

Here’s how.

During the ’08 campaign, McCain clearly differentiated time and again between Obama’s opposition to the Iraqi war and his support of the war and the surge as seen in this interview on CBS with Katie Couric where he said the following:

McCain: …He (Obama) was wrong. He said he still doesn't agree that surge has succeeded now that everybody knows that it has succeeded. I said at the time that I supported the surge. I would much rather lose a campaign than lose a war. Sen. Obama has indicated that by his failure to acknowledge the success of the surge, that he would rather lose a war than lose a campaign.

McCain’s constant defense of the war and the surge portrayed him as a man with principles whose values system remained intact. This irked the media to no end and they therefore questioned him how he dared portray Obama as unpatriotic. McCain didn’t allow the media to dictate the narrative and instead calmly responded that he wasn’t questioning anything, he was simply stating facts. When General Petraeus proclaimed the war is heading in the right direction, the left mocked General Petraeus and called him “Betray Us” and accused him in lying. Even when everyone admitted the surge worked, Obama still refused to give credit where credit was due. How patriotic does that come across?

Ultimately, regarding the war, the nation favored McCain over Obama with a significant percentage, and that pretty much tied the charismatic and cool Obama with the bland and white-haired McCain which caused Obama to drop his anti-war rhetoric. After McCain picked Sarah Palin as his vice president, his poll numbers slowly rose upwards and then surged a full ten percent ahead of Obama a week after the Republican convention amongst likely voters.

This came to a sudden halt at the “economic collapse.”

At first, when McCain was questioned about the direction of the economy, he responded in a reassuring and calm manner that although the economy is shaky the fundamentals are strong. The media mocked his reply as proof that he’s out of touch and as not living in reality.

At the same time, Obama’s approach to the failing economy was to sow panic and worry in the hearts of all. In his campaign rallies he portrayed the situation as a terrible catastrophe heading our way caused by Bush’s terrible policies (a line he still uses in almost every speech and press conference) which requires drastic actions or will lead to total economic collapse.

Shortly thereafter, McCain unwisely suspended his campaign due to the economy and flew to D.C. to join the Senate in their decision-making. His actions threw the entire country and media into a heated debate whether McCain should or shouldn’t support the TARP bailout; an act that is now known to all was a bad decision.

McCain’s handling of the economy was the turning point for his campaign which caused his poll numbers to begin slipping and sliding once again and ultimately led to his defeat.

There was an alternative path McCain could’ve taken through which he would’ve emerged as the strong and presidential candidate.

It’s actually not so different from his approach regarding the Iraqi war, which successfully presented him as the stronger candidate regarding the wars. Simply, instead of following Obama’s and the media’s narrative of fear and panic which require drastic solution, McCain should’ve set the narrative at a press conference where he would’ve explained his earlier statement with the following explanation (not necessarily these words):

My fellow citizens, the American people:

Yes, the economy is in a precarious situation and we will experience some, and possibly even a lot of turbulence. Precisely in such a time it is of utmost importance to remember that because the economy of our country is rooted in capitalism and is built upon free enterprise, this difficult period will soon be history and our economy will be even stronger than it had been before hitting tough times.

I know you’re constantly hearing about how the worst is still to come and that the future has never been so bleak, but I’m telling you, that if we give the control back to the private sector and allow freedom to reign we will be out of this mess in no time as we‘ve seen repeatedly in our nation’s history. The fundamentals of our economy are strong and we will continue to strengthen it so that no matter how strong the winds are blowing, we will remain standing strong and proud, and overcome these turbulent times.

I’ve told you earlier in the campaign that Obama is ready to have us lose the war in Iraq as long as it gets him into the oval office. It now appears that he’s ready to do even greater damage to this nation and destroy the entire economy in order to promote his agenda. Obama is ready to throw the entire country into turmoil and panic to benefit his campaign and help him win this election.

We’ve had greater depressions and economic failures than these times in our history, but never, no matter the crisis, have we had a leader constantly harping on the catastrophe and collapse awaiting us.

During the Great Depression, which is the darkest economic times in our history, Roosevelt came out and said words that have become famous and oft-quoted; “The only thing we have to fear is Fear itself.”

That is the proper behavior of a true leader.

I am convinced that if McCain would’ve clearly expressed the above points and repeated this message several times, a majority of citizens would recognize the truth in his words and would support him over Obama. Obama would’ve felt compelled to abandon the panic mode just as he was forced to stop his attacks at the Iraqi war, and McCain, whose poll numbers had been 10% ahead of Obama before the economic collapse, would’ve surged further ahead and been the victorious candidate on November 4, 2008.

Why is this so important now? It is imperative to constantly look back at history in order to see success in the future. History is studied to avoid the repetition of previous errors and emulate those that have made the correct choices.

Obama’s campaign focused on instilling fear into the hearts of the people, and once elected, Obama continued to use panic and play with people’s emotions to push through his radical agenda. Bailouts, Stimulus, Obamacare, and a barely failed Cap and Trade, all fit the above description. Obama is now attempting to do the same with the budget, with the media helping push his narrative by spreading false information such as that the Social Security checks will be stopped if the government is forced to a freeze. Unfortunately, most Republicans play right into the left’s hands by fighting on Obama’s terms rather than setting their own narrative.

Instead of simply responding to the left’s attacks, Conservatives must take the topics concerning voters and explain clearly why the Democrat’s talking points are totally off tangent and what the real solutions are.

For example, the left and the media have decided to focus the discussion regarding the debt ceiling on tax increases for the rich and claim the Conservatives want to cut programs from the poor while allowing the rich to get away without any additional taxes. In addition to responding to their false claims, the conservatives should focus on getting out the message that taxes are not the solution to solving our deficit since it’s spending that causes deficits, not insufficient taxes.

It can be explained in the following manner:

Many people earn decent incomes that can cover all their expenses but are deep in debt because of their spending habits which rack up tremendous credit card bills for items they don’t need. It’s foolish for these people to blame their debt on their bosses or friends for not providing them with money. Credit card debt doesn’t occur or increase if the card is swiped only when one has funds are available and pays their bills on time. The ABC’s of money management is to spend according to one’s income and to know what’s essential and what’s extra.

The Democrats are -- just like these shopaholics who blame others – blaming the higher earners who already pay most of the taxes for the debt that the Democrats have spent us into. We need to go back to the basics of budgeting and decide what’s truly necessary, and what can be cut away. It might be painful, as anyone who’s had to do it in their private lives will attest, but the alternative is in the long term downright dangerous.

Conservatives must put the left on defense by explaining how lower taxes has never caused a deficit because it’s not money coming out of the government’s pockets, it’s the other way around. We are in debt because of reckless spending and only by curbing the addiction can the debt be cured. Conservatives should also clarify the difference between handouts which is spending, and tax cuts which is less government -- taking. When Obama claims he cut taxes thus increasing spending, that is simply not true. It’s not money out, it’s less money in. Taxing is therefore not the solution; higher taxes are actually part of the problem because it promotes the outsourcing of businesses thus destroying thousands of jobs.

When conservatives choose their candidate for 2012, it is imperative that the candidate should be capable of and willing to clarify to one and all Obama’s method of inducing panic in the public and the results of his policies which were able to be passed only because of his fear mongering behavior.

We need someone who won’t be afraid to speak out against Obama and his destructive actions. We need an individual who understands the needs of this country, has a plan how to get there, and won’t rest until success is reached. We need a candidate that’s ready to lead this country back onto its original path of smaller government and individual freedom. We need a president that puts America first before any personal interest or anything else for that matter.

A campaign against Barack Obama must educate America what his panic causing rhetoric has accomplished. He said we have the worst health care system in the world and rammed through his 2,500 page health care in which is constantly discovered additional information he’s hidden from the public and even from many in congress who voted for the bill. We need someone who won’t be afraid to take him up on it, such as terming the end of life counseling “death panels” and confronting Pelosi’s, “you have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it” which is proving to contain many unpleasant surprises.

First, the death panels which were officially taken out of the bill and supposedly never even there in the first place were discovered. Then, waivers for certain groups and corporations were discovered, followed by the discovery of a loophole to extend Medicaid to middle class people. Who knows what else is hidden in there further destroying the best health care system in the universe and stripping the citizens from freedom.

We don’t need someone who first said that Obama’s policies haven’t made the economy worse; that it only remained at the same level. Nor do we need someone who speaks out against Obamneycare on a Sunday show but when it comes face to face in a debate suddenly softens his tone.

Barack Obama through his panic that the world is coming to an end, pushed through an economy -- destroying cap & trade bill in congress that attempts to turn the clock back on modernization and civilization several hundred years. Thankfully, Conservatives and Tea Partiers protested and spread the truth about the bill, causing it to fall through in the Senate.

Obama also rammed through a second stimulus package after warning we could not survive otherwise.

This country is in an economic slump yet Obama wants to spend even more even though unemployment is on the rise and the GDP was lower than estimated.

It is time for a Conservative leader to get up to Obama and confront him; Barack Obama, you’ve put America into panic and pushed through endless bills that no one even read worth trillions of dollars and have attempted to destroy coal mines all over the country. 

When the BP oil spill occurred in the Gulf you put a moratorium that banned any offshore drilling even though many judges ruled it as unconstitutional. It is clear how much your trillion dollar spending bills have done to better the economy, and what the real price of his healthcare bill is. We will no longer fall for your scare tactics.