GINGRICH and FREDDIE MAC

This morning, Speaker Gingrich told George Stephanopoulas that " He would be very comfortable with the release of his contract with Freddie Mac " . A decision rests with his former company, The Center for Health Transformation, and its attorney, Steven Passantino.

There is a slight problem. Steven Passantino.....is national counsel for the Gingrich campaign. So, we are asked to believe that release of the document awaits a resolution of the debate between Passantino and Passantino.

This narrative is a characteristic of Speaker Gingrich. To say he lies.....is an overstatement . To say he dissembles is better. He is a moving target answerable only to himself and his Godlike interpretation of his own standards. Let's look at Freddie Mac in some detail.

Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae presided over the worst housing crisis in American history, all the more relevant now in a state like Florida which is only second to Nevada in foreclosed homes, culminating in the economic disaster of 2008-2009 that we are still in.
Newt Gingrich had two separate contracts with Freddie Mac over that very same period , from 2006 to 2008, during which he was paid over $ 1.6 million at a rate of $ 30,000 per month .A bargain, Freddie Mac would probably argue, since the Speaker charged $ 60,000 an HOUR for speeches. Mr Gingrich said he was paid as an " Historian" . Nevertheless, he has since said that he recommended Freddie Mac rein in its business model and that he argued that he was opposed to a subsequent government takeover of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae when they collapsed.
Yet.....in a 2007 internal Freddie Mac interview reported by a SF newspaper, Gingrich
1. Defended the basic structure of Freddie Mac
2. Encouraged the government to expand the Freddie Mac model to other government
agencies like the space program. He is quoted " NASA would have been able to send
men to MARS if it had the same business model as Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae"
This was in the middle of Gingrich's contract period

BAIN and ROMNEY

The issue of Mitt Romney , Bain Capital and the American business system seems to be front and center for Newt Gingrich and the Occupy Wall Street crowd including the NYT.
It is impossible to exaggerate the colossal depth of ignorance reflected by Newt Gingrich ( surprisingly ) and Rick Perry ( not surprisingly ) as they mirror the always profoundly stupid national media regarding the Bain controversy. The ignorance of Newt Gingrich is particularly apalling as one would assume he knows the reality and can distinguish it from the politically motivated diatribes of the DNC, the NY Times , Barack Obama, et al. But he has signed on to the anti capitalist bandwagon, perhaps hoping to take a run at the Democratic nomination if he fails in the GOP.
Recently, the NYT ran an article, as a follow up to Gingrich's Sheldon Adelson sponsored acquisition of the film " When Bain Came to Town ". Most of the media have picked up on the NYT story and the anti Bain / Romney film, including Andrew Sullivan in The Daily Beast . All reprint the main points of the article and the film without the remotest effort to actually CHECK REAL FACTS.
So, in a futile effort, to discuss what actually happened .....and provide an insight for these political and journalism clowns , I submit the following. Bear in mind that Romney was at Bain from 1984 to 1998 :

The Daily Beast and Andrew Sullivan excerpt the following from the NYT story:

Bain invested 22 % of the money it raised from 1987 to 1995 in five businesses and made $ 578 million in profit. Sullivan then goes on to identify FOUR companies and about $ 300 million in profit, on about $ 200 million in investment. I'm sure he knows the fifth and just forgot it from the NYT. But, here are the four:

Merry Christmas Everyone!

Merry Christmas and a Happy Holiday Season Everyone!

Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.

21 Reasons Why Newt gingrich wont be Nominated

A big HT to Ezra Klein of the Washington Post for the following list ;

" To believe Republicans will choose Gingrich, you have to believe they will choose someone who :

1. Previously supported a cap- and- trade plan to reduce carbon emissions and even filmed a commercial alongside Nancy Pelosi to that effect

2. Previously supported a health care plan with an individual mandate

3. Proposed blasting North Korea with...wait for it....lasers.

4. Took $ 1.6 million from Freddie Mac

5. Began the campaign with six figures in debt to Tiffany's

6. Carried on an extramarital affair with a House staffer 20 years his junior during the
Clinton

7. Tried to explain away said extramarital affair by saying, " There's no question in my life,
partially driven by how passionately I felt about this country, that I worked too hard and
things happened in my life that were not appropriate"

8. scribbled a note describing himself as an " Advocate of civilization, defender of civilization,
teacher of the rules of civilization, arouser of those who form civilization, organizer of the
pro-civilization activists, and leader ' possibly' of the civilizing forces."

9. worked for ethanol and pharmaceutical interests

10. supported the TARP bailout

11. is loathed by almost every conservative thought leader writing today.

12. and by most every member of the Republican and libertarian / conservative political
establishments

13. called Paul Ryan's budget " right-wing social engineering" and then, two days later, said,
"The budget vote is one that I'm happy to say I would have voted for...So, let me say on the
record: Any ad which quotes what I said Sunday is a falsehood ."

14. called for " a massive new program to build a permanent lunar colony to exploit the
Moon's resources"

15. called child labor laws " truly stupid."

16. suggested that " a mirror system in space could provide the light equivalent of many full
moons so that there would be no need for nighttime lighting of highways."

17. said that" the most profound insight I have read in the last six years about Barack Obama"
is that ( Obama) is so outside our comprehension, that only if you understand Kenyan,
anti-colonial behavior, can you begin to piece together ( his actions )"

18. was fined $ 300,000 by the House Ethics Committee for offering " incomplete, unreliable,
and inaccurate" information during an investigation of a for-profit college course he
developed while serving in college

19. helped the GOP lose the 1995 government-shutdown by saying that " part of why you
ended up with us sending down a tougher continuing resolution was that he didn't get good
enough seats on Air Force One

20. was a dues paying member of the Sierra Club

21. supported the 1989 Global Warming Prevention Act, which included a provision
encouraging the U.N. to work to control population growth through, among other methods,
family-planning services.

And I don't believe Republicans will choose someone like that "

Good for a great conservative writer and required reading for all conservatives

CraigS
impeachment trial ( they're now married )

Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.

Commander-in-Chief Gingrich

This picture says it all.........Daffy Duck at the front.

CraigS

GINGRICH, the HIGHEST PAID LOBBYIST in WASHINGTON

In the rapidly accelerating world of Gingrich revelations, it is increasingly obvious to all that Newt Gingrich is not marketing his acquired history acumen acquired as a Professor at West Georgia College to dozens of major American companies. The $ 100 million in fees reported by the NY Times was certainly not paid for an insight into Grant's winning strategy in the Civil War. So what was it paid for?

The definition of a lobbyist is " a person who tries to influence legislators ". This is from the academic Foresman Advanced Dictionary that Gingrich would be familiar with at West Georgia.

After resigning from the Congress upon his fine and condemnation in 1998, Newt began a process of enriching himself by trading on his resume.........not the experience and contacts of a tenured history professor, but the 10 terms in Washington as a " tenured " Congressman. There are an almost limitless number of instances of personal benefit by trading access but lets speak of Newt's role withing the think tank he set up in 2003 called The Center for Health Transformation ( CHT ). This is a For Profit Consultancy with three levels of membership:

1. Charter Members ( 19 ) including:
Astra Zeneca, Blue Cross, Gallup , Glaxo Smith, United Healthcare
These premium members paid an annual dues of $ 200,000 and were promised
" ACCESS to Newt Gingrich on your company's strategy "
Note: The speaker is not noted as a business strategist, having never run a
business. What Gingrich does have is a congressional Rolodex of political
and legislative contacts of obvious value to these clients.

2. Platinum Members ( 7 ) including Barr Laboratories, Integris Health, etc.
These platinum members paid annual dues between $ 20,000 and $ 200,000 and were
promised " LIMITED Access to Newt Gingrich on your companies strategy"

3. Premium Members ( 35 ) including ALL medical companies . These members paid as little
as $ 20,000 annually, but, importantly , were promised no access to Newt Gingrich

So, we have an assortment of major companies paying significant annual fees to a FOR PROFIT company for access to:
a. One another
b. Newt Gingrich

It is important to point out that CHT states that " it does NOT provide lobbying services nor directly or indirectly participate in lobbying activities of any kind " That is NOT to say that such activities are not provided by Newt Gingrich. Certainly, a $ 55 million dollars in pharmaceutical industry " dues" to CHT was not paid for strategic advice from a history professor. let's see what Gingrich really did:

Gingrich arranged meetings between healthcare executives and government officials. I multiple presentations to lawmakers Gingrich constantly pitced the services and wares of CHT's clients . for example

In March of 2006, at a Health Transformation Summit in Tallahassee, after listening to a speech by CHT founder, Newt Gingrich, lawmakers got booklets promoting the services of two dozen of CHT's clients and client executives sat on panels with Florida lawmakers. Clearwave, paying CHT $ 50,000 pitched their medical data system
In March of 2004, Gingrich made a presentation to Georgia lawmakers promoting the goods and services of CHT's clients by citing benefits with comments like " Vita Spring could save the State Employee Program $ 20 million per year ."

Gingrich constantly arranged joint meetings with clients and lawmakers . He set up a meeting with top Federal officials so clients could present information on their electronic health records products. Gingrich subsequently reported that there was " very positive feedback overall from the meetings "

In addition to CHT, Gingrich had direct consulting contracts with clients. Millenium Plastics paid Gingrich $ 7500 per month plus stock options to " direct them to the right places and people in Washington "

Gingrich even lobbied directly with Congressmen for legislature. He pressed for passage of a Federal IT healthcare bill with co sponsors, Hillary Clinton and Patrick Kennedy, telling Fox News " we're launching a bill."

No matter your definition of lobbying.........Gingrich, the consummate insider, was and is a world class practitioner of this art of paid access. Gingrich said he wasn't pushing individual mandates in his interview with the Manchester Union Leader. This, as is the case with dozens of other Gingrich statements ....is just not true.

In a healthcare debate with Hillary Clinton in 2005, Gingrich called for a transfer of finances.

Gingrich said, on tape " Some aspect of the working poor has to involve a transfer of finances. To ask people in the lowest paying jobs to bear the full burden of their own health care is just irrational. Unless you have 100 % coverage, you can't have a rational health care system. We have no room in this society to have a free rider approach if you're well off economically. You shouldn't cheat your neighbor. If I see someone who's earning over $ 50,000 a year, who has made the calculated decision not to buy health insurance, I'm looking at someone who's absolutely irresponsible as anyone who is ever on welfare. Whatever the appropriate income is , you ought to have health insurance or post a bond .

Note: this language is IDENTICAL to the Massachusetts HealthCare rationale that Mitt Romney has been criticized repeatedly for......but Gingrich argued for its NATIONAL adoption.

So......what do we have. According to the dictionary , we have a highly paid lobbyist, trading access in Washington for millions of dollars in client fees and dues. We have an ethically challenged, life time politician who has become far more successful than any of his former colleagues , by doing exactly what sent Jack Abramoff to jail........only doing it better.

Now.........he wants to be President, and many conservatives agree with him

" Core beliefs" according to Joe McQuaid of the Union leader
Care to guess what he had in mind with Gingrich ???

Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.

CraigS

GINGRICH for PRESIDENT ????

I chanced upon an interesting coterie of Gingrich nuggets while digesting the Union Leaders Op -Ed page that suggested they endorsed Gingrich because of his " Character ."

Here are some Gingrich items, all substantiated by reams of background information, that I was not that familiar with . It is truly a political chamber of horrors:

Adultery

Tim Burger and Owen Moritz, NY Daily News, August 12, 1999
Andy Soltis, NY Post August 12, 1999

Several newspapers are now reporting that Newt Gingrich is dating and basically living with Callista Bisek a " willowy blond Congressional aide 23 years his junior. Bisek, 33, has been spending nights at Gingrich's apartment near the Capitol and has her own key. In an amazing act of hypocrisy, Gingrich was apparently dating Bisek all during the Clinton-Lewinsky adultery scandal, even as he proclaimed family values and bitterly criticized the President for his adultery

Reporters and other Washington insiders have known about this relationship since 1994, even before Gingrich became Speaker of the House. Gingrich had been married all that time and only filed for divorce in 1999

Newt is trying to create a new hybrid form, Christian adultery. According to MSNBC, Bisek sings in the National Shrine Choir and Newt would meet her at the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception and listen to her sing while he read the bible.

" It was common knowledge that Newt was involved with other women during his first marriage. One woman, Anne manning , has already confirmed an affair with Newt at that time

Family Values ?

" He walked out in the spring of 1980..By September, I went to the hospital for my third surgery. The two girls came to see me and said " daddy is downstairs. Could he come up ? when he got there he wanted to discuss the terms of the divorce while I was recovering from my surgery, " said his first wife, Jackie. She had to later take Newt to court to get him to pay his child support so Jackie could pay the utility bill
Newt later said of his first wife " She isn't young enough or pretty enough to be the President's wife."
His second wife , Marianne, said " I don't want him to be President and I don't think he should be ."

Banking Scandal

During the House banking scandal in 1992, where so many congressmen wrote rubber checks on government money, Gingrich bounced 22 checks plus his vote on a secret pay raise for the House.

Murdochs' Book Deal

Here's an interesting tidbit.

In 1995, Rupert Murdoch was having regulatory problems with NBC claiming Fox News was Foreign Owned which is against U.S law. Typically, Murdoch offered lucrative book deals with leaders in countries like the U.K and China to solve his regulatory problems . Murdoch used his control of publisher Harper Collins in these efforts.

Murdoch offered $ 2.5 MM to Newt for his book and then raised the ante to $ 4.5 MM. When the details of the book deal were made public, Gingrich met personally with Murdoch on a park bench and negotiated an equally lucrative royalties based pay out.

In an earlier book deal in 1984, Gingrich's administrative assistant resigned over the ethics of using U.S taxpayer equipment to publish a personal book for profit

GOPAC

Even more sleaze, if you can believe it;

Newt in his political career was the king of using tax-payer subsidized donations for his personal and political purposes. He evidently even hijacked not one but two charities for poor inner city kids and used their donations for his personal goals

GOPAC was Newts long time political action committee. In an act of incredible hypocrisy, this crusader against taxes obtained taxpayer subsidies for his personal and political goals , by misusing these tax exempt groups GOPAC paid for a television program promoting a " grassroots"movement to reform government; publicly they claimed it was non partisan, but privately internal documents proved otherwise. When the program got too expensive , they transferred it to the " Abraham Lincoln Opportunity Foundation ", a tax -exempt group controlled by a GOPAC official named Bo Callaway. This group had been set up years earlier to help inner city kids , which is why it was tax exempt. The group spent $ 260,000 on the program in 1990. That same year, Newt started another tax exempt group that paid poor students for reading books. Most of this foundations money went to a former Gingrich aide who was Newt's official biographer.

There is lots more . The Gingrich sewer has just been opened the stench is beginning to rise.

CraigS

Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.

AN ENDORSEMENT

In this season of personal and media endorsement, often by well intentioned people and institutions with real or imagined influence, I have tried to consider what a similar endorsement by an average American might look like if it were to be headlined on the editorial page of a major newspaper.

An Endorsement by a Common Man

“ These are the times that try men’s souls.” Words of history written 235 years ago by Thomas Paine to rally an America that had lost its spirit and had become depressed by a series of defeats that threatened a national dream yet unseen by most. The Crisis Papers rallied Americans to a cause greater than themselves and sought to set aside those “ sunshine patriots “ who are found only when difficulties are absent and when their own personal benefit exceeds that of the nation.

Now, we are at another crisis point in our nation’s history. The last thirty years have seen a steady descent by America into a black pit of debt, despair, selfishness, self- interest, personal immorality, absent ethics and an increasing inability to dream great dreams and set great tasks that can be achieved. America has lost its way, led by a succession of elected representatives remarkable only in their similarity to one another and the absence of their achievements. These “ Pied Pipers” of mediocrity have led, and we have followed, to a point of national despair.

The crisis is at hand. This nation can not continue to elect leaders so enmeshed in the Washington Club and their own personal fortunes that there will be no visible difference, regardless of the outcome of the national election. Leaders must be able to lead Democrats and Republicans and Independents. We must be done with finger pointing and the great litmus tests of ideological purity. We need steel in Washington, not pure, unadulterated...tin.
How exactly have we come to this stage in our national existence ? As another great American wrote, “Let facts be submitted to a candid world.”

America has spent itself into a debt so immense it can never realistically be repaid absent financial leadership in Washington and personal sacrifice at home. We have been agents in our personal and national indebtedness, following the siren song of the money lenders enriching themselves in the present by draining the soundness of the future.

America has lost its ability to dream of great achievement and great accomplishment. We are reduced to a national focus on trite and pithy items by a national media focused on short term profit and obsessed with daily fleeting sensationalism.

America has allowed the dilution of its national values like religion, education, ethics and laws. It has allowed the high standards of its founders to be drowned in a pool of self pity where a concern for low achievers has replaced the esteem for high achievers, where the average C has now become the Gold standard , replacing yesterday’s A.

America has lost its ability to lead itself and has become dependent upon a kaleidoscope of international economic and political players from China to Europe to the Middle East whose national interests are decidedly different from our own and whose achievement often is at our expense

America has lost its image of global leadership. No one will follow one who is lost. The world is adrift in an average sea without a pilot, without a financial chart and without a moral compass. There are no bright mornings and brilliant sunsets......only a dull grey colorless patina of bland.

Americans increasingly disdain the effort to find great leaders and instead rely on an often biased media to choose one for us.

Americans have abrogated the challenge of selecting national leaders of high accomplishment, superior ethics, unchallenged personal morality, great intelligence and broad vision.

In this election, there is one candidate who stands apart from the dull patina of the last thirty years . We have an opportunity to select an exception to the rule of mediocrity. We can alter our destiny. We can plot a new course. We can elect......

A person of great intelligence and deep insight

A person of great personal morality

A person of strong personal and family values

A person of great achievement in the American environment, in private business as well as public government

A person with broad and deep experience in the American economy, not the veneer that is often the signature of a political career, who can fashion an economic plan that corrects the nation’s downward spiral and , equally important, can lead the Congress to pass such a plan without the infantile political acrimony of the past.

A person of profound and deep patriotism who can sing the national anthem while others pose for camera angles

A person far removed from the self- enrichment and personal focus that is Washington today and equally unassociated with the cloying and self- promoting cadre of sham national leadership

A person with real American values who can lead a world desperate for leadership, in a time of global political and economic chaos.

A person who does not apologize for America’s past, but challenges all of us to create a new American tomorrow.

We can elect a person to lead the world in the 21st century........not the 19th

We can elect Mitt Romney............and I thoughtfully and enthusiastically endorse him for the office of President of the United States


CraigS

Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.

Gingrich and his New Ideas

With all the focus on Newt Gingrich regarding immigration, it is well to consider how the Dems would address the myriad of opportunities Newt has provided over the years including the latest, just about a week ago. Newt said :

" Child labor laws are just stupid, saying to people you shouldn't go to work before you're 14, 15, 16. You're totally poor, you're in a school that's failing with a teacher that's failing. I tried for years to have a very simple model. These schools should get rid of unionized janitors, have one master janitor, pay local students to take care of the school. The kids would actually do work. They'd have cash; they'd have pride in the schools. They'd begin the process of rising ."

This is an example of Newt's brilliant mind, thinking out of the envelope.

And here's the Democratic response, in part, in an open letter to voters :

" Dear Newt,
Our country outlawed child labor. Almost a hundred years later, in the middle of the worst unemployment crisis in decades, you want to bring it back ? Seriously ?
Doing janitorial work in schools entails cleaning toilets, handling hazardous chemicals and scrubbing floors. Hunched over a mop for hours . It's hard to imagine a nine year old doing any of these tasks. Come On.
The U.S outlawed child labor because it denied children the chance at a real education and allowed employers to exploit children.....and because children were often injured and killed on the job.
And the people you want to fire and replace with kids ? A lot of them are parents. That job puts a roof over kids heads, food on the table and provides them with healthcare and the chance to get an education. That job is the only thing between a kid and poverty.
Firing someone's Mom and hiring the kid for less money ......isn't the process of rising.
.................."

Newt's idea may sound attractive to many who are nostalgic for a hundred year old past unencumbered with an overwhelming government presence in our lives when Republicans were Republicans and RINO's hadn't been invented yet. But which side of this issue would you like our 2012 candidate to be on ? How about explaining the benefits of child labor in a debate with Barack Obama ?
Newt is on that cusp between genius and lunacy.
This is an example of lunacy

CraigS

Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.

ROMNEY AND ISRAEL

Over the course of the last few weeks, the issues of foreign policy have not been on center stage in the developing GOP race. Cain's ignorance of China's nuclear weapons status has begun to highlight this issue. The developing crisis with Israel and Iran is coming to the fore and Obama's microphone remarks with Sarkozy denigrating Bibi Netanayu will interject more discussion of America's relationship with its premier middle east ally.

To this point, this morning's Jerusalem Post published it's latest version of The Israel Factor. This is a panel of eight Jewish experts on American policy and politics , including former Ambassador Dore Gold who rate the GOP candidates against Barack Obama in terms of support for Isreal. Given the traditional support by American Jewish voters, these is an interesting poll from ISRAEL itself:

Barack Obama...........7

Mitt Romney.............7.9
Jon Huntsman..........6.5
Newt Gingrich...........6.2
Rick Perry..................5.5
Herman Cain.............5.3
Michelle Bachmann..5.1
Rick Santorum..........4.5
Ron Paul....................3.0

Obviously, only Mitt Romney is rated ahead of Obama ...and he is rated 10 - 15 % better.

This is yet another window into Romney's broad level of strength and potential appeal to critical voting blocs in the general election

CraigS

Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.

CAINS 9-9-9 Plan is a 16 year old Tax Plan

Interesting paper in Politico this A.M. from Ben Smith on Herman's 9-9-9 tax plan....or 9-0-9 as its now known.

It seems the Plan is a recycled 16 year old plan first proposed in 1994 by Gary Robbins and his wife for the Institute for Policy Innovation. Herman's plan uses 30 verbatim paragraphs and 2008 data to replace the 1994 data. Despite the passage of 16 years and drastically different economic times, the 1994 solutions are IDENTICAL to what is being proposed by Cain. (Unless Smith and Robbins and I have all misread the plan, which all of Cain's critics seemingly have done).

Anyway, all of the policy assumptions are exactly the same in 2011 as in 1994 despite the vastly different economic landscape and far lower tax burden. The only real change, it seems , is that the 9-9-9 plan uses an assumption of far more business tax revenue than 1994 because it DISALLOWS business deductions for wages and salaries. The obvious impact on businesses would be far fewer employees and far lower salaries and wages

CraigS

Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.

3rd Quarter Fundraising Detail

Under the broad publishing of 3rd quarter funds for the main candidates was the almost astonishing detail:

• Romney led Perry 35-15 in individual states

• Perry raised 57 % of his total funds from Texas

• Cain raised his most money from his native state of Georgia, but Romney raised almost twice as much as Cain and Perry in Georgia.
  
  

• Cain raised sums as low as $ 89,000 in California when Romney was raising $ 1.6 Million

• Cain raised $ 9,300 in Iowa and $ 8600 in N.Hampshire. Romney raised $ 28,000 in Iowa and $120,000 in New Hampshire
  

Cain has to raise major funding or he's dead in the water. You cannot run a campaign with these kinds of pocket change

CraigS

Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.

THE ABSURDITY OF THE CAIN TAX PLAN

In a blistering Op Ed piece in the NY Times this morning, Bruce Bartlett, a major player in the Reagan and Bush White Houses and a senior adviser to both Jack Kemp and Ron Paul, clinically dissects Herman Cain's 9-9-9 tax plan and concludes with the following :

" Even allowing for the poorly thought through promises made on the campaign trail, Mr. Cain's tax plan stands out as exceptionally ill conceived." See if you agree.....

**Phase One of Cain's tax plan is seen as an intermediate step to an overhaul of the U.S. tax system and a means of jump starting growth. In Phase One
The maximum rate for individual and business taxes are reducede from 35 % to 25 %. There is no mention of reduction sin the tax rates for those now in the 10%, 15 % or 25 % brackets, so only people in the 28 %, 33 % and 35 % will receive a tax cut.

ONLY 4 % OF U.S. TAX PAYERS PAY TAXES AT THESE RATES

Romney's Foreign Policy Team

While other candidates struggle to define who they are and speak in sound bites about Headlines without substance, Romney continues to add real structure to his Presidential resume. Case in point; an address today on Foreign Policy at the Citadel in Charlestown , S. Carolina while releasing the VERY substantive Foreign Policy team that will advise him . Take a look :

SPECIAL ADVISERS

Cofer Black.....VP Blackbird Technologies. Former Director of CIA Counter Terrorism
Chris Burnham...Former UN Undersecretary
Michael Chertoff... Former Secretary of Homeland Security
Eliot Cohen... Director of Strategic Studies at Johns Hopkins
Norm Coleman... Former Senator and adviser to GOP Jewish Coalition
John Danilovich... Triatlantic European Advisory Council
Paula Debriansky... Former Under Secretary of Stae for Global Affairs
Eric Edelman...Former Undersecretary of Defense
Michael Hayden...Former CIA Director
Kerry Healey
Kim Holmes...Former Assistant Sec. of State
Robert Joseph...Former Undersecretary of State for Arms Control
Robert Kagan... Brookings Institute
John Lehman... Former Secretary of the Navy
Walid Phares... Former Advisor to Dept of Homeland Security for Terrorism
Pierre Prosper... Former U.S. Ambassador at Large
Mitchell Reiss.. Former Director of Policy Planning at State Department
Dan Senor... U.S - Iraq Coalition Senior Advisor
Jim Talent...Former U.S Senator
Vin Weber... Former U.S Congressman
Richard Williamson...Former U.S Ambassador to the UN
Dov Zakheim... Former Undersecretary of Defense for Strategic and Intnl. Studies

In addition, Romney established specific chairs and teams for the following areas staffed by his foreign policy team as well as selected others:

AFGHANISTAN AND PAKISTAN
AFRICA
ASIA PACIFIC
COUNTER PROLIFERATION
COUNTER TERRORISM AND INTELLIGENCE
DEFENSE
EUROPE
HUMAN RIGHTS
INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
LATIN AMERICA
MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA
RUSSIA

It will be fascinating to see if other candidates like Rick Perry and Herman Cain ever put together detailed plans on economics and foreign policy and staff them like this

CraigS

Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.

CAIN and SOCIAL SECURITY

First, let me say that I live in Atlanta. I know and admire Herman Cain. I voted for Herman Cain. But Herman needs to do some research on the " CHEE-LAYIN " Social Security system, rather than take Cliff Notes from The Cato Institute.

I've been to Chile many times. I have many friends who are Chilean. Here's what I can tell you about the system:

The system is about 30 years old. It replaced an old Pay - as - You - Go system, after the overthrow of Pinochet , in 1981. The system is on VERY shaky financial grounds due to

1. High management fees: Almost a third of contributions go to management fees and the net return to workers over the last thirty years has been about 5 % or the same as a bank savings account.

2. Low participation rates: Half of Chilean workers do not participate, including the military, due to the structure of the country's economy.

3. Heavy dependence on an inadequate safety net: The government is obligated to provide subsidies to workers failing to accumulate enough money to earn a minimum pension. Thus, the government pays for all people who can't afford to contribute to a private system or whose private pensions have gone bankrupt or whose investments have failed. But, the government often can't access enough funds leaving retirees with a small fraction of their SS. Often, they receive nothing. Over 41 % of retirees continue to work in Chile because their investment accounts are too small or too infrequent.

4. Prohibitive costs to the government: The transition costs , from the old to the new system , averaged 6.1 % of GDP for the first ten years of transition and are now averaging about 4.5 % of GDP and are expected to continue at that rate for the next 25 + years.

The bottom line ? The old system, in 1980, paid a maximum of $ 1250 per month. To receive that under the new system requires a lifetime contribution of $ 250,000. Only 500 out of 7 MILLION retirees receive this maximum amount.

So, Herman, old friend, be careful what you advocate. Do your homework. Go the Chile ( Not Chilis ). I hope your 9-9-9 plan is better researched than your SS " FIX "

CraigS

Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.

ROMNEY's ECONOMIC PLAN

Click photo to read the plan

We are in the middle of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, made worse by the interconnection of the world's economies in the 21st century. The pending default in Greece and the downgrade of Italian debt have profound consequences on the U.S economy that were unthinkable in 1929. Yet, much of the GOP and the press seem focused on relatively inconsequential " fluff" , just as they were in 2008. Results and accomplishments are worth little and specifics involving economics and broader vocabularies are disdained by many as is , unfortunately, intellect. Many voters in this country are turned off by ideas and proposals.

Well, the following are ideas and proposals proposed by Dr Glenn Hubbard, the Dean of the Columbia Business School and Mitt Romney's chief economic adviser, on Bloomberg News today. Hubbard wrote the introduction to Mitt's 169 page Believe in America " economic plan for jobs and economic growth. What you read in this paper is a summary of key elements in Romney's plan. I challenge any other candidate to respond with the same kind of specifics :

ROMNEY and PERRY ECONOMIC PLANS

I happened to vote in an on line poll today on Romney - Perry Competitive Economic Plans. perry was leading by about 100 votes. Since I have a copy of Mitt's plan and have read it thoroughly, I was puzzled because Mitt's plan is 160 pages long and has 7 lengthy chapters on various policy plans. I must have missed Perry's plan. Fortunately, or unfortunately, I found Rick Perry's plan on the pages of the Texas Tribune under the headlines:

TEXAS SHED 1300 JOBS in AUGUST
UNEMPLOYMENT EDGES UP TO 8.5 PERCENT

PERRY'S FOUR POINT ECONOMIC PLAN;

PRINCIPLE NO. 1 : DON'T SPEND ALL THE MONEY

" Perry has talked about his influence in pushing the Texas legislature to balance the
state budget and leave $ 6 billion in the state's Rainy Day Fund. But....
* The state's constitution REQUIRES a balanced budget
* Across the board cuts slashed funding from public education to women's health to
mental health.
* Much of the Rainy Day Fund will be spent on the current budget long before the
legislature returns in 2013"

PRINCIPLE NO. 2: HAVE A TAX POLICY IN PLACE THAT DOESN'T PUT UNDO
BURDEN ON THE JOB CREATORS

" Under the governor's leadership lawmakers have expended the state's business taxes"

PRINCIPLE NO. 3: HAVE A REGULATORY CLIMATE THAT IS FAIR AND
PREDICTABLE

" The governor often says this as he attacks what he calls the federal government's " One
Size Fits All" regulations."

PRINCIPLE 4 : HAVE A LEGAL SYSTEM THAT DOESN'T ALLOW FOR
OVER-SUING

" Perry says that frivolous lawsuits are " job killers". He claims that this existing legal
requirement in Texas, based on the Napoleonic Code in Louisiana, created 21,000 new
Doctors in Texas. The Texas Medical Board says 13,000 directly proportional to the
increase in population in Texas"

That's it, folks. That's Perry's alternative Economic Plan; his answer to Mitt Romney 160 page, seven chapter plan. Wanna bet nobody who voted for Perry's plan in this poll ever read Mitt's plan, all 160 pages? Wanna bet a few have read Perry's 4 sentence plan; all 4 sentences ?

CraigS

PERRY and his MONEYMEN

evidently missed the following a week or so ago in the Dallas News:

Draw your own conclusions. I'm sure there are lots more taps on this money fountain

CraigS

Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.

DEMOCRATS for ROMNEY ?

DEMOCRATS for ROMNEY ?

That's the title of Dana Milbank's column in the Herald this morning. Milbank IS a Democrat but the column encoraged reading to see if the premise was an exercise in sarcasm or something more. It seems to be something more . Here are some excerpts:

"...In political campaigns, you always hope the opposing party nominates the most extreme of its possible candidates, thereby surrendering the middle of the electorate. And , in this sense, Rick Perry's candidacy is a Texas-sized gift to President Obama.

The Texas governor is an oppo researcher's dream, an impossible blend of secession and treason and Ponzi schemes and monstrous lies. His duel for the nomination with Mitt Romney promises to be the sort of donnybrook the Republican Party hasn't seen in many years, keeping the opposition party feuding over forced vaccinations and immigration rather than attacking Obama for his stewardship of the economy.

But what if the usual rules don't apply in 2012? Already, upward of seven in 10 Americans say the country is on the wrong track. What if things don't improve....or get worse....by November 2012? In that case, voters might well be willing to pull the lever for any alternative....even a Texan who boasted about shooting a coyote while jogging and suggested that Social Security is unconstitutional. In such a scenario, the only thing standing in the way of a President Perry is Mitt Romney.

So far, Democrats and like-minded interest groups have been willing to take the gamble that Obama can beat Perry more easily than Romney....and that they therefore need fear Perry less than Romney.
Rather than go after Perry for his statements about the Ponzi scheme known as Social Security, the Democratic National Committee has been trying to make the case that Perry and Romney are indistinguishable on the topic. The DNC arranged a news conference call last week to pronounce Romney " just as dangerous " as Perry.

Whether or not that's true, there's good reason why Democrats would try to make Romney look just as out there as Perry. A poll released Thursday by Bloomberg News found Obama with a comfortable lead over Perry, 49-40. But his edge over Romney was 48-43. That followed a Public Policy Polling survey finding Obama with an 11 - point lead over Perry but only a four- point lead over Romney. The key difference: Among independents, Obama trailed Romney by two percentage points but led Perry by 10......
So, given these growing fears that Obama will lose in 2012 to any Republican with a pulse, maybe its time for Democrats to stop hoping that Perry will be the next Barry Goldwater.

There may not be a whole lot of difference in their stated policies, but their temperaments couldn't be further apart. If Obama is doomed, who would Democrats rather have in possession of the nuclear suitcase; the technocratic Romney, or the coyote -shooting Perry ?"

I found this article an interesting and candid reflection of what reasonable Democrats ( Reagan Democrats ) might be thinking as the election process unfolds. I also keep reminding myself that over 30 % of ALL GOP delegates are chosen in states with OPEN primaries allowing these concerned Democrats to cross over in the Republican primaries. Indeed, the following states Do have OPEN PRIMARIES : Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana,Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, S Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin, Arizona and Massachusetts. The question Milbank propounds is not whether there will be a large cross over vote in these state primaries. There will be with no Democratic primary contest. The real question is whether Dems will vote for Perry as the easiest choice for Obama to defeat in a general election or a vote for Romney as the most competent candidate to be President after November 2012

CraigS

Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.

This from today's Frum Forum...

" Rick Perry’s Solyndras

September 16th, 2011 at 2:34 pm

“In Texas, we understand that high-tech companies don’t just happen overnight but are a product of forethought, sound vision and planning, and strategic investments by both the public and private sectors. Through our Emerging Technology Fund, we are bringing the best scientists and researchers to Texas, attracting high-tech jobs and helping start-up companies get off the ground faster.” –Gov. Rick Perry

The Obama Administration is taking well-deserved heat for its clumsy dabbling in the venture capital business. The failure of a prominent solar tech company partially funded with federally guaranteed loans is drawing attention to the flaws of direct government investment in private firms.

The Republicans have been quick to pounce on the company’s failure. They accuse the Obama Administration of pushing the Energy Department to fund Solyndra so they could use it as a stimulus-plan success story on the campaign trail. But one ordinarily mouthy Republican Presidential candidate has been slow to throw stones. Why isn’t Rick Perry taking shots at Obama over Solyndra?

CLICK HERE to ENLARGE PDF iimage

Because everything is bigger in Texas.

As Governor, Rick Perry presides over a fund that has doled out over $200m in grants to private firms. While Obama is in trouble because his aides might have begged the Energy Department accelerate lending to one promising solar panel maker, Perry is laughing his boots off.

The Texas Emerging Technology Fund (ETF) is practically Perry’s own, personal multi-million dollar fundraising machine. When it comes to doling out money to private firms he doesn’t have to beg anyone for anything.

The fund, signed into law largely by and for Perry in 2005, is controlled by his office and operates largely in secret. Many states have similar investment programs, but the concentration of power in the Governor’s office under Perry’s program is unique.

From the Dallas Morning News, “Under the law, companies that receive tech fund money must have approval from the governor, the lieutenant governor and the House speaker. However, the speaker and lieutenant governor don’t act until Perry decides to back an applicant or gives them detailed information prepared by his staff about the recommended firms, aides said.”

Here’s a successful Texas investment strategy. Put a $1000 of your own money into a business. Invest $75,000 in the Governor’s campaigns. Then fund the rest of your business with a $4.5m taxpayer funded grant from the Governor’s ETF. That’s not a loan like Solyndra received, that’s cash on the barrelhead, delivered from the state and never to be repaid.

What might you do with a pile of free taxpayer money and a ton of political influence? Perhaps you could get your hands on patents developed by the University of Texas.

Another Perry contributor cashed in his chits for a $1.5m investment from the Texas ETF. Charles Tate is a major Perry donor who had managed to get himself put in charge of a board that “vetted” candidates for the ETF. He recommended the ETF give money to Thrombovision, and then invested in the company himself.
He and his partners accepted that state grant in 2007. The company failed to submit annual reports and finally sought bankruptcy protection in 2010. Since the taxpayers under Perry’s program are doling out grants instead of loans and taking no equity interest in the companies to which they give money, the state gets nothing from the bankrupt entity, unlike the Solyndra case. The folks who got the state grant just walk away. And Perry doesn’t have to give back the campaign contributions.

That’s how you do business in Rick Perry’s Texas.

Perry is a guy who has had every bit as much private sector experience as Obama. In other words, none. Like Obama, he’s become a millionaire as a government employee. Like Obama, he is using taxpayers’ money and his deep well of business acumen to fund private business ventures that he thinks are a good idea. Like Obama, some of Perry’s investments have been stinking failures.

But unlike Obama, Perry has a personally tailored fund at his disposal with no meaningful oversight. Unlike Obama, he’s doling out taxpayer money in the form of grants, not loans to his campaign contributors. And most importantly of all, unlike Obama Perry’s getting away with it in broad daylight. The way Perry has been able to skate past scrutiny while Obama constantly stumbles has less to do with policy differences than political talent. "

Can you believe this? It just smells worse and worse


CraigS

Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.