CrispAds Blog Ads

Thursday, January 31, 2008


A McCain presidency for Liberals

Since losing to George W. Bush in the 2000 election cycle, Sen. John McCain may finally get what he's desired, since beating former Massachusettes Governor Mitt Romney in Florida, and picking up endorsements from Rudy Giuliani, and governor Terminator to become the so-called (current) front runner.

Conservatives Need to Rally for Romney, to stop John McCain and his liberal friends from taking-over the U.S. Government and killing the Reagan coalition.

McCain resorted to lying about what Romney said concerning timetables in Iraq, claiming falsely that Romney was in favor of a deadline for troop withdrawal. Romney never said he wanted that, only that timetables should be talked about in private as the Iraqis take over security. Romney shot back that McCain used "dirty tricks," which he did, much like the late president Richard Nixon did.

If McCain wins, he would have won on lies, which is typical of leftist politicians.

"Spending was not the reason why McCain said he opposed President Bush's tax cuts in 2001 and 2003." See: McCain Changes Story on Tax Cut Stance.

In 2001, McCain said the $1.35 trillion tax cut benefited the wealthy at the expense of the middle class.

McCain said then:

"I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us at the expense of middle-class Americans who most need tax relief."

This is the same failed class-warfare rhetoric liberals have tried to use against conservatives, and it has been proven wrong by the growth of the economy since the tax cuts were implemented. The effect of which brings in more money to the government in taxes from consumer spending, not government spending. Which is why more tax cuts are needed to keep the economy rolling.

McCain tried but failed to amend the bill to reduce income tax cuts for the wealthiest and give greater benefits to those earning less. He and Sen. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island were the only Republicans to oppose the 2001 tax cuts.

At the time, McCain was still at odds with Bush, who had dealt McCain a stinging defeat in the race for the GOP presidential nomination just one year before.

I like Romney's idea of giving workers past age 65 and over the added benefit to keep all the money they make, without being taxed on their wages.

This may turn out be the first election ever without a Governor in the contest after Super Tuesday, and may well spell disaster for the nation as none of the final contenders will have any executive experience required to be president. This is why Governors make better presidents than senators, they have actually run a state, and understand what is involved. America doesn't need a president that needs basic training running government.

The last senator to become president was JFK, as Democrat senator Barack Hussein Obama has been copying for months, right down to his mannerisms. Yes, the left still wants to bring JFK back from the dead, reminiscing over those Days of Camelot that ended in tragedy by the grassy knoll.

Democrats also see Obama as being far more likable than McCain in the general election. Young vs old, tall vs short, etc. Liberals and most Democrats always vote based on looks over substance, emotions over logic and power over people.

What we can expect from a Clinton or an Obama presidency will be socializm disguised as freedom, large tax hikes aimed at businesses and the middle class, reducing economic growth if not stalling it comletely. The military would be cut like it was under Bill Clinton, thus leaving us open to more terror attacks in the future, and liberal, activist judges appointed to keep the baby slaughtering industry of Planned Parenthood's oxymoron's alive and well.

Obama has received the grand endorsement of JFK's brother Senator Ted Kennedy and JFK's daughter Caroline, who said Obama would be the first president to inspire her like her father did for others. Barack's rhetoric is all the more deceitful as it tickle's their ear drums.

The little "maverick" is a little-hot-head who loves to go against the grain of conservatives. He loves to appease the left while dissing the right for his friends in the liberal media.

If McCain ends up as the nominee, we may have an old war horse in office with the war in Iraq winding down, who knows very little about the economy, (exposed by Sen. Ron Paul during the Florida debate) that could be headed for recession. Does this make sense?

Not at all, and this is why demonrats are loving it.

President Bush is chomping at the bit to sign the stimulus plan coming from Democrat House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that gives illegals making unreported incomes tax rebates without having paid income taxes. This appalling money making scheme is a give-away to be taken advantage of by criminals, that could even make some honest American's decide to declare themselves as illegal Mexicans if their finances get too tight.

Should the economy go into recession later this year or early next year, a president McCain would become essentially the demonrats puppet, and more so than ever, caving to the hysterics of Al Gore and his liberal misfits to raise taxes for non-existent global warming. Does McCain remember what happened to the first president Bush after he raised taxes?

McCain will also follow president Bush by allowing more illegals into the country to suck away social security money they never paid into, as Bush feels this is somehow good for the U.S. economy, and future generations.

With either McCain or one of the dems in office, America is headed further into unchartered territory, so hang on for a wild ride like never before.

Vote for Mitt Romney, and stop McCain's Train Wreck Express.

Labels: , , , , ,

© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.

Link |

Friday, January 25, 2008


Florida Debate, Winners and Losers

It appears that the Republican race has come down to two, Romney and McCain, er McCan't, as I like to call him.

The winner of the winner take all Republican Florida debate was Governor Mitt Romney. Mitt won easily with his vast knowledge and vision for America. The other candidates pale in comparison, especially John McCain, who looked lost on economic questions, having voted for against the Bush tax cuts twice and now supports their permanency. Ron Paul made McCain look like a deer in the headlights on economic policy, as McCain kept blabbing about asking others for advice. I was embarrassed for him.

With Fred Thompson dropping out of contention, his supporters will likely move to Romney, as he is now the only real conservative running.

Ron Paul exposes John McCain's ignorance of economic policy.

This clip proves that McCan't is simply a pauper of others making the real decisions. McCan't went from voting against the Bush tax cuts twice, to saying now he would make them permanent. He said he was for illegal immigration before being opposed to that too. McCain/Feingold, McCain/Kennedy bills prove he is nothing but an appeaser of the left for his own gain.
John McCan't simply can't be trusted.

Here is another clip of McCan't's recants...

Mitt Romney on the other hand was in complete control of the issues, especially on the economy. He rattled off positive points looking very presidential. Romney's vast education as a both a Harvard Business School and Harvard Law School graduate have served him well in both private and public sectors. Mitt's leadership experience and solid record of accomplishment is unmatched by any of the others.

While I certainly disagree with radio host Michael Medved's blithering promotion of old man McCain, he admittedly approves of Mitt Romney's performance in Florida, saying...

"Those who insist on selecting winners and losers on such occasions will no doubt see Romney as the contender who helped himself the most. He came across as smart, capable and polished, as usual, but with less palpable pandering and one-ups-manship, and more earnestness and authenticity, than ever before. His accomplished performance should solidify his status as the front-runner in the close race in Florida (a new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll just before the debate showed him 4 points up on McCain) but more importantly it should provide the template for approaching future debates—especially if he’s the Republican nominee."

Mitt Romney is the by far the best, most qualified man to become president of the United States of America.

Labels: , , , , ,

© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.


Wednesday, January 16, 2008


Romney Rocks Michigan, tops McCain

The 2008 presidential race is getting better attention now, with three of the Republican candidates having won a primary and/or caucus, Mike Huckabee taking Iowa, McCain New Hampshire, Romney Wyoming and now Michigan.

Mitt Romney also leads in delegates, which is all that really counts.

The race speeds down to South Carolina, where the two southerners, Huckabee and Fred Thompson should do well. But, Romney will do better than previously thought with the wind at his back, and may take a silver, or bronze, in the state where the economy ranks about even with the war effort.

Romney's win was due to his status of being a favorite son in Michigan, but that wasn't all. His business acumen and promises to fix the ailing state along with Washington in general, made the case for him. See: Romney's Economic Optimism Prevails

Mitt told the Associated Press,

"It's a victory of optimism over Washington-style pessimism," .

There are some interesting numbers from Jay Cost of Real Clear Politics concerning the outcomes so far....

"The exit polling data offers some counter-intuitive evidence about who is being helped by the conduct of the Iraq war. In New Hampshire, Romney won voters who approve of the conduct of the Iraq war, 37% to 33%. McCain won those who disapprove, 36% to 29%. The results were roughly the same in Michigan. Romney won approvers, 42% to 27%. McCain won disapprovers, 36% to 29%."

Most of the folks in S.C. agree that the war in Iraq is being won since the surge started, giving credit to the president for his better-late-than-never move to put General Petraeus in charge, which Romney strongly supported, taking the presidents side against Hike Muckabee's disgraceful criticisms using liberal propaganda.

Former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson may get his first win in S.C., in just four days, which would make for an ever-more tense race, until it slingshots to Nevada, where Arizona's senator McCain may have the upper hand.

With a possibility of four major candidates having wins, the race will heat-up further, splitting conservatives against moderates and social liberals – read Rompson vs. McHuck below for more – down in Florida, where the G-man is waiting. Should Rudy win in Florida, all becomes new again, like the second half of a tied football game.


Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.


Friday, January 11, 2008


Rompson vs. McHuck

After New Hampshire's primary, where Sen. John McCain won by 4-5 points, mainly by independent votes, the leading delegate holder is still Mitt Romney who has placed second twice and first once, or two silvers and a gold, as Mitt terms it.

Now it is on to Michigan where Mitt Romney must sell his turnaround credentials. Mitt needs to pound the theme that matters most wherever he is, as McCain did in N.H. with the war issue, and Huckabee's religious pander in Iowa.

Mitt's business acumen is taylor made for Michigan, where folks appreciate hard work and a can-do attitude.

Romney told supporters that he can win Michigan, where his father was a top auto executive before serving as Michigan's governor from 1962-66.

"The best strategic decision as far as paid messaging efforts, given the current state of the race, is to focus message efforts on Michigan," said Romney spokeswoman Sarah Pompei. "We have run enough [ads] in South Carolina and Florida up to this point, and the dynamic of this race has shifted, for now, to Michigan."

To a smaller crowd at Oakland County International Airport, McCain said he was making no secret of the fact he supported higher auto fuel-mileage standards, opposed by many Michigan voters.

"Michigan is the place with the technology, and Oakland County, with Automation Alley, is the place to do the technology to make us energy independent," he said. "We're going to have to invest the money to have the kind of technology to meet those standards."

Mitt Romney is an executive who favors the union worker, as did his father. But Mitt's is a better manager of information, being a data cruncher first, then making decisive moves for progress. Having lived in Michigan most of his life, where his father ran a car company, Mitt is well known in the state, where he should do well. He needs another win at this point, but even if he doesn't get it, the race is by no means over for him.

However, should Mitt place in MI, he will be dented, and they don't do great body work down there in the south, where Mitt has pulled his advertising to concentrate on Michigan. John McCain is hedging his bet on Florida, pouring everything he has there.

It is likely that McCain and Huckabee will be at each others throats in the south, along with Fred Thompson, who may also do well there as he did the South Carolina debate.

McHuck vs. Rompson at S.C. debate

If these pictures from the South Carolina debate on Thursday are any indication of a pairing, it looks like the big guys vs. the small guys. Also notice the ties they're wearing. The Romson team is wearing blue and white stripes while McHuck is wearing red with white dots.

Even though they all call themsevles Republicans, there are some major difference between these two pairings on the issues, with McHuck failing conservatives.

There is no doubt that the pairing is between more socialist, big government, higher taxes, amnesty for illegals, (false) global warming, with McHuck.

McCain voted against the tax cuts twice, but now flip-flopped.
“I believe the fundamentals of this economy are strong and I believe they will remain strong. This is a rough patch, but I think America’s greatness lies ahead of us,” the Arizona senator said, adding that he would make permanent President Bush’s tax cuts, which he voted against in 2001 and 2003.

While true conservatives for tax cuts, border enforcement, supply-side economic growth, free markets, match-up with Rompson.

Stopping the housing crisis, cutting taxes for the middle class, becoming energy independent and investing in research and development are the methods Romney said he would use to stop the country from sliding into a recession.

“Recessions hurt working families and people across the countries,” Romney said. “It’s time for us not just to talk about improving the economy, we have to do the hard work of rebuilding our economy and strengthening it.”

Labels: , , , ,

© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.


Monday, January 07, 2008


Post N.H. Debate-Two

In the second New Hampshire debate–that thankfully excluded Ron Paul–there was some real discussion, plans and vision on how best to run the country today, not centuries ago.

Governor Mitt Romney was the clear winner of the debate. He articulated his plans to fix the problems America faces in Washington on illegal immigration, taxes, healthcare, education and the war on terror, as the others ganged-up on him again, but again looking presidential Mitt rose above.

Romney exposed Senator John McCain as offering just more of the same old politics that have dragged on for far too many decades, and his voting against the Bush tax cuts twice, that helped the economy to remain vibrant by giving letting people keep more of what they earn with less government interference.

In essence, John McCain just wants to keep democrats happy with more taxes, rules and regulations in his old age, which is why the liberal media wants him to win, going against Mitt Romney who wants to shake things up in Washington.

Romney said that when he was a governor,

"In my first year, our budget actually went down. I vetoed hundreds of times."

"I cut taxes 19 times. You have a choice. You can select somebody who wants to fight for those things or you can select somebody who's actually done those things."

Romney denied opposing the Bush tax cuts, as Pastor Huckabee falsely charged.

"You know, Mike, you make up facts faster than you talk and that's saying something," he said. "So let's slow it down and let's get the facts correctly."

"Washington needs fundamental top-to-bottom change. We're not going to have someone in Washington turn Washington inside out.

"Sending the same people to Washington but in different chairs is not going to change the outcome,"
said Romney.

Fred Thompson said leadership is more important than calling for change, as is "having the courage to tell the American people the truth."

Romney also continued to hammer McCain for voting against tax cuts that President Bush endorsed. And he continued to portray the senator as incapable of shaking up politics.

"Americans are not looking for Washington insiders. They are looking for change, and change is what we are going to give them."

Hike Muckabee initially avoided a direct answer to Romney's tax question, prompting Romney to say, "You know, that's political speak ... Now, let me go back to the question I've asked you that you refused to answer three times."

The truth is that the only one who can beat Barak Obama is Mitt Romney. The gap in real world experience is oceanic. Obama is all talk and dreams, where Mitt has actually accomplished most of Obama's rhetoric, having been very successful in both the private and public sectors.

There is no escaping the fact that Barak Obama is a young liberal with a populist twist. But Barack has far too little real world experience to be president.

If America really wants change for the better, the man for job is Mitt Romney, who knows how to make things happen in the most efficient, cost effective way.

Better days are just over the horizon, as long as Mitt becomes president. Otherwise, America is in for who knows what?

And finally, in this day of extremist Islamic Jihad, we cannot take a chance on leftist dreamers tickling our ears trying to make us feel good the same way Bill Clinton did.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.


Sunday, January 06, 2008


Post N.H. Debate, One

The New Hampshire Republican debate quickly turned into a heated exchange between the candidates on many issues, even on a personal level against Mitt Romney,–who had just won the Wyoming caucus easily–making him like a target for the others who have little to run on, such as John McCain, who's gotten old and gray living off the people's dole for decades, going against the GOP on any number of issues for his own selfish benefit.

As it stands now, Romney is tied with the Huckster for delegates while McCain is desperately seeking a win, which hopefully he won't get.

But Romney looked very presidential in handling the barbs being thrown his way, (See video) which is required of the Commander in Chief.

John McCain on the other hand seemed like a brat name caller on the playground when the facts of his record were exposed by Romney, proving McCain–like Hillary–has an anger problem that's not fit for the job.

Romney said "it’s all well and good for McCain to attack his record, but the fact of the matter is he was successful as governor when it came to changing Massachusetts whereas McCain has been in Washington for 27 years and has battled for change unsuccessfully.

“He’s somebody who wants to change Washington. He talks about changing Washington. But he’s been there so long, he’s got so many lobbyists at each elbow, he’s worked so long — in many cases, he’s a maverick against his own party,” Romney said.

He added that he has changed his mind on some issues, but those changes have been for the better.

“Everybody over time is going to make an experienced judgment based on what they see at the time or what they think is right, and no candidate has been the same throughout the entire process. And if they have, I’ll show you a candidate that ought to be pushed aside, because you know what? You should learn from experience. And if you want somebody who’s never learned from experience, who’s never made a mistake, I’m not your guy.”

Mitt is exactly right, and on the issues too he's on the money. Coming out fully for life is a huge positive. Like Reagan before him, Romney made the best decision against the liberal selfishness of abortion.

Hike Muckabee, as I like to call him, was disgraceful as he literally brown-nosed Barak Obama over and over again, perhaps hoping to be his vice president if elected. After all, Hike fits right in with left on taxes and immigration, as does McCain, but what will he do about Obama's love of allowing the murdering of innocent babies, since bringing the largest abortion clinic to his state in Aurora, Illinois? Hike is simply another Bill Clinton, ready to do whatever he has to for power, moral or not.

Another candidate who did well at the first debate in N.H. was Fred Thompson, who also tried to get in some shots on Romney, that were easily deflected.

Fred seemed to be able to sum-up the questions with a big picture view that sounded presidential. Although he has some rough edges in his aged looks, Thompson is a smart man who could very well be on the final ticket in either position.

Ron Paul looks more loony per debate, as he blames America for the world's problems while appeasing terrorists regimes as victims. Romney took Paul to task for siding with the enemy, and the others agreed with Mitt.

Kudo's to FOX for kicking Paul's whiney-ass out of Sunday's debate. Paul is just a negative scold libertarian, who is not presidential material no matter how much his Kooky comrades give him.

One the democrat side, Hillary sounded mean and not in control of the issues, while Barak Obama and John Edwards again showed their inexperience while using populist rhetoric void of real plans to bring changes they claim are needed.
Richardson was humorous at times, but then serious on the issues, showing himself to be the only experienced executive on the dem stage, even though he, along with the other dems have been brainwashed by (non-existent) global warming and backward socialist ideology that puts the government above the people and individual rights.

Look for the Post N.H. Debate Two on Monday, with a summary of where things stand.

Labels: , , , , , ,

© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.


Saturday, January 05, 2008


Iowa caucus vs. New Hampshire primary

After placing second in the Iowa caucuses, Governor Mitt Romney is still in the game, as is Fred Thompson coming in third. Mitt's trouble is that he has to fight on many fronts at once, taking him away from his own message on how he will lead the nation. The media is on Mitts case, knowing he is the best qualified for the job, and the one democrats will need to beat later, so they're trying to push his rivals for an early knock-out.

Fred Thompson simply took too long to make up his mind about running, and placed a distant third with John McCain, but Fred has a good message, and now seems prepared to lead if he wins the nomination.

Despite these flaws, a Romney-Thompson ticket could be the best, in that order, for the Republicans against the Democrats next November.

Can Mitt come back with a win at the first primary in New Hampshire? Of course he can. He has the money and the organization to do it, right next door to where he was Governor. Besides that, there aren't nearly as many evangelicals there, to fall for feel good one-liners from a so-called minister holding the Bible in one hand, and flag in the other.

Mitt Romney sticks with the facts and records, which should be the real test of who is qualified to be president, and not one who panders to Christians with obvious ads trying to hood-wink voters with a Cross and Christmas tree, thus living up to his Huckster reputation.

Romney said he'd be satisfied with finishing second in New Hampshire. "I would like to take one of those two tickets out of New Hampshire," he told reporters.

Mitt realizes that Iowa's results showed voters are looking for someone who can bring fresh ideas to Washington, casting himself as the outsider.

"There is no way Sen. McCain is going to be able to come into New Hampshire and say he is the candidate that represents change," said Romney, who was once dubbed "Mr Turnaround" for rescuing the debt-ridden Salt Lake City Olympics in 2002 and erasing the Massachusetts state debt when governor.

"Every place I've been I've brought change."

Romney took a punch from the Huckster, who by the way is not a real conservative no matter how much he claims to be. The facts and his record as governor in Arkansas prove beyond doubt that Huck is far too liberal in raising taxes, and granting illegals sanctuary, as is New Hampshire rival John McCain, who voted against the Bush tax cuts twice while siding with democrats on legislation. Huck is also bad on national security and foreign policy as proven in debates.

Senator John McCain is way past his prime, while Romney is still in his. Also, McCain has been a senator for so long as to be a contributor of status-quo problems in Washington, whereas Mitt wants new solutions. Mitt handled security at the Olympic games soon after 9/11 with steady leadership, while McCain was giving excuses for bad legislation with his name on it.

McCain's problems stem from his dreadful CFR bill that was basically meant to appease democrats, but would effectively shut out the Republicans during election runs, thus giving the media full control over what gets advertised and talked about, which obviously would be for liberals and against conservatives. This is being proven now with the constant bashing by the media of Mitt Romney in favor of Hike Muckabee, who they see as an "easy kill" in the general election, or so they claim.

But perhaps the Huckster is the one they really want because he follows Bill Clinton, plays a musical instrument on Leno, just like Clinton did with the Saxaphone, and may do better for the democrats than Hillary would.

After all, the two former governors from Hope are selling the same moon shine, even as a new distributor, also running on H O PE, selling a 1970's dream of new-age utopia. The liberals are waiting in line with their Kool-aid cups ready to drink-up!

The inexperienced B. Hussein Obama won big in Iowa, because the alternative of Hillary Clinton seemed worse for folks in middle America. But their differences are only in age, color and gender, while the politics are the virtually identical, ie: promising the same old agenda of raising taxes as high as possible to increase dependence on bigger government, putting more constraints on businesses and free markets, increasing inflation, resulting recession. With the DNC pulling the strings, 1929 will seem like a good year compared to what could be coming if they dupe enough people with their same old schemes to pull off a win.

Dems are just a one-trick-pony with a bum leg.

The democrat controlled congress' approval rating shows beyond doubt that they cannot govern, as I predicted back before they won control of congress. Their presidents are incompetent, anti-American criminals, always pushing against freedom of the individual, with group-think-socializm, despite being proven wrong.

The current forecast for investors, business and the general economy calls for heavy storms if dems win, so batten down the hatches, prepare to get your money out of the market, and pray hard they don't. But most of all, VOTE!

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?