Thursday, July 22, 2010

Remember LBJ's Daisy Ad?

Today our campaign is launching a TV commercial with the objective of encouraging voters to think about the importance of the decision we are facing on August 3rd, 2010.

The original daisy ad was very controversial because of its imagery and language. This ad borrows the edge from that ad but pretty much serves as a very valid warning about our national debt and Obama's spending spree. That's Bill's third daughter, Grace, in the film. We babysit for the three girls and she is a hoot, and I dare say better than the little girl in the original ad from 1964.

Here's what my friend, Bill Cooper, says about the ad on his web site.

In 1964, one of the most powerful political ads ever produced depicted a little girl in a field counting daisy petals. As the camera zoomed in, the reflection in her eye was that of an atomic bomb exploding. The ad was effective because during the Cold War, a nuclear holocaust with the Soviet Union was one of our greatest fears.

In 2010, we face a threat that has the potential to collapse our economy and cause the complete destruction of the free enterprise system. Our country is currently more than $13 trillion in debt, with more than $90 trillion of unfunded entitlements in the not so distant future. Our federal government has gone from spending 8% of GNP (Gross National Product) in 1913 to 44% in 2009, before the recent healthcare legislation was passed.

Does anyone really believe that the answer to reining in out-of-control federal spending is to send the same career politicians to Washington who have presided over the most poorly run state economy in the country?

Would it make sense to send a person whose resume consists of playing a game? [He's running against a former professional foot ball player and two career state politicians.]
Shouldn’t we elect the only candidate running in the 2nd Congressional District who has actually created jobs and is a proven and successful leader?

One difference between the business world and the political “Ruling Class,” is accountability. 90% of all businesses fail – 90% of all incumbent politicians are re-elected. In business you live with the consequences of every decision you make.

Making tough decisions and solving complex problems is critical to survival! Bill Cooper is the only candidate in the 2nd District with that type of experience.

Monday, July 19, 2010

A Spot of Tea, Anyone?

I am not a member of the Tea Party because in fact no such "party" exists. It is instead a term that signifies a grass-roots groundswell against the ill-fated economic steps taken by President Obama (and those incumbents who followed his lead). Perhaps the best explanation of what the Tea Party is can be found in this article by Matthew Continetti June 28, 2010, Vol. 15, No. 39 The Weekly Standard.

Even without "joining" the local organization, I can appreciate the effects of Tea Party Momentum. I am pleased to say that a few weeks back, my friend Bill Cooper who is running for the U.S. Congress became the "Tea Party endorsed" candidate, which means he is the man who can do in Michigan what so many other non-politicians have done already in other states. Tea Party endorsed candidates have won something like five out of five major primaries nationwide thus far. Bill is happy to have earned their support. He is a hard-working, successful businessman with boundless energy. In addition to his run for office, he has also implemented an ingenious solution to help meet needs during these hard times.

So regardless of where you stand on the topic of "Tea Party," it's interesting to know that it is having a very real effect on this year's races. Continetti suggests that the Tea Party has two unofficial "founders": Glenn Beck and Rick Santelli. He also thinks that the future of the movement will fair better under the influence of the latter. It was the following moment that launched Santelli's common sense rocket into Obama's orbit.


Monday, July 12, 2010

Governors Shaking in Their Boots

about Obama's Arizona Law Suit

The New York Times, reporting on thie weekend's three-day Governor's Conference in Boston, says the topic not on the main agenda was on everybody's mind behind closed doors--esspecially the 19 Democrat governors who are either leaving office or trying to hold their office through the November elections: How can we defend Obama's law suit against a fellow governor when summaries of her law are forced to say stupid things like "the law makes it a crime to be an illigal immigrant"? Duh! Do Democrats not see the relationship between the words crime and illigal?

An excertp of the Times piece fowllows. Read the full article here.

The Arizona law — which Ms. Brewer signed in April and which, barring an injunction, takes effect July 29 — makes it a crime to be an illegal immigrant there. It also requires police officers to determine the immigration status of people they stop for other offenses if there is a “reasonable suspicion” that they might be illegal immigrants.

The lawsuit contends that controlling immigration is a federal responsibility, but polls suggest that a majority of Americans support the Arizona law, or at least the concept of a state having a strong role in immigration enforcement.

Republican governors at the Boston meeting were also critical of the lawsuit, saying it infringed on states’ rights and rallying around Ms. Brewer, whose presence spurred a raucous protest around the downtown hotel where the governors gathered.

“I’d be willing to bet a lot of money that almost every state in America next January is going to see a bill similar to Arizona’s,” said Gov. Dave Heineman of Nebraska, a Republican seeking re-election.

But the unease of Democratic governors, seven of whom are seeking re-election this year, was more striking.


Thursday, July 8, 2010

How Dare an Administration...

How dare a country that is on the road to bankruptcy, a congress that cannot live within its means, an administration who is clearly failing at economics.... How dare they talk about redistributing wealth until they understand how individual wealth (i.e. middle class sustainable income) is generated.

Remember when the controversial healthcare bill was approaching a vote? Remember how concerned Americans were calling it the first step toward the financially unsustainable "socialized" systems of Canada and Europe? Remember how President Obama assured the country that his plan would not affect the current system for those who prefer it? Remember how we all knew he was not telling the truth when he said we had enough money and doctors to take on 30 million uninsured people (including millions of illegal aliens whom he intends to make "legal")? Remember when Obama told Joe the Plumber it was time to "spread the wealth" in the form of redistribution? Remember conservatives pointing out that equalizing wealth is unconstitutional and not the role of government? Remember those who pointed out that equalizing healthcare does not mean making it excellent for everyone--it means making it mediocre for everyone and will eventually mean poorer care, longer lines, rationed services, quitting doctors and less people choosing to become doctors, higher taxes?

I remember that, too. Today, with no input from congress, officially made Donald Berwick his recess appointment to be the administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. If only this guy would have been named and quoted before the vote... it never would have passed.

Healthcare is not a right; it is service. Rights are inherent and cannot be purchased or distributed like candy by those in power. Any nation that confuses true RIGHTs with purchased services is on the road to socialism and bankruptcy. Here's our new tour guide on that road.

website tracking statistics
Flat-Panel Television