It’s Time to PREVENT a Dem from POTUS

Happier Days

John R. Houk

© May 4, 2016

I am a Cruzer. BUT Senator Cruz has suspended his candidacy for the GOP nomination for POTUS. YET, if Cruz has any kind national future as a leader in the United States – I will again be a Cruzer. The Financial Times provides a decent summary that correlates to the reason I chose to be a Cruzer:

A self-described fighter for “limited government, economic growth and the Constitution”, Mr Cruz joined the Senate in 2012, boosted by support from the anti-establishment Tea party. He quickly earned a reputation as a wrecker, championing controversial attempts to scupper the implementation of President Barack Obama’s healthcare law in 2013, in an effort that included a 21-hour filibuster in the Senate floor that helped pave the way to a government shutdown, and during which he read “Green Eggs and Ham” to his daughters on television. (Bold Text Mine - How Ted Cruz dropped the ball in his bid for the White House; By Sam Fleming & Demetri Sevastopulo; Financial Times; Last updated: 5/4/16 6:53 am)

I can add (Ted’s Website and OnTheIssues) that Senator Ted Cruz is an Evangelical Christian a son of a Pastor AND a huge supporter of Israel as America’s partner in the Middle East. I can also add Ted supported obliterating ISIS with the Rules of Engagement that would including a WWII-style crushing goal of victory at all costs. Gosh let me add the elimination of the Internal Revenue Service bureaucracy with an entirely different and simpler tax code AND a strong border to keep illegal alien out.

You can read the conventional wisdom of anti-Trump Conservative publication the National Review of the reasons Ted failed in 2016 in the article entitled “The Weaknesses that Doomed Ted Cruz”. But here’s the humble opinion of a small potatoes Christian Right blogger (i.e. me):

Ted Cruz failed to vigorously campaign based on the reasons he came from behind to win the Senate seat in Texas and take on the Republican Establishment at the National Level in both Houses of Congress. Rather Ted spent much of his campaign highlighting Trump’s negatives including The Donald’s propensity to communicate like a New York tycoon. As an ex-telemarketer I can tell you will not sell or have a pleasant conversation with a New York/New Jersey person by being a polite nice guy. The New Yorker will lose patience and rip you to shreds quite probably with insulting words you may not have used since becoming a responsible adult. I had to mirror the New Yorker language mannerism to come close to making a sale. I can’t recall how many times I nearly got into trouble with my managers for talking like a rude New Yorker until … I MADE A SALE.

When a Christian who has made his political stock on integrity and faithfulness to Conservative ideology, tries to match a New Yorker in tit-for-tat character devaluation, that Christian will fail and tarnish himself in the meantime. I pray Ted has learned that lesson for future campaigns or dialogues, because it was Ted’s demise in attempting to win the GOP nomination for President of the United States of America.

Let me be honest. I am no longer a registered Republican. In 2012 I was not a Romney guy. I considered him a RINO at best and a closet Liberal at worst. And yet he won the GOP nomination. In 2012 I was (and it holds true today!) that Obama was a Socialist in not also a closet Communist, who had huge sympathies toward the Islamic religion because of his Dad and stepfather. I am fairly convinced that Obama is neither a Muslim nor a Christian. Obama’s deceptive politics of the Left means at best he is a Progressive Christian denying the Divinity and the miraculous of the Bible as only adages rather than Truth. Shucks partner, for that matter Obama could be a Progressive Muslim (if such a thing can exist) denying all the absolutes of Islamic theo-politics while also looking to the Mecca portions of the Quran as an adage rather truth.

If Muslims in the West understood that Obama is using Islam to promote a Leftist New World Order in order to completely destroy the Christian influenced Old World Order, those violent absolutists would mark Obama for assassination. Obama should thank whatever Black Liberation Theology (BLT) deity he might believe in that he lives in a nation that is tolerant to all religious faiths to a fault and tolerant to both Left and Right ideologies. Americans have no clue that Obama’s “fundamental transformation” agenda for America correlates to the intolerance of Biblical Christian principles and the Founding Father principles that made America a great nation.

That lack of understanding of Obama’s “fundamental transformation” agenda led to American voters electing Obama in 2008 and reelecting Obama in 2012. Romney’s HUGE FAILURE was not attacking the Obama lies and the Benghazi lies of 2012 that should have elected Romney as President. Instead Romney stuck to political correctness of a RINO/Liberal and allowed Obama to back him into shadowland every time Romney dipped his little toe in the shallow pond of exposing Obama’s and essentially Hillary’s lies.

Romney’s failure to NOT expose the Obama/Hillary lies resulted in reelection in 2012 and me leaving the Republican Party and registering as an Independent.

I still believe Ted Cruz would have defeated any Dem Party candidate for President in this 2016 election cycle. Cruz was anti-establishment and a principled Conservative.

I am just not sure that Donald Trump can follow through in being a principled Conservative. Nonetheless, if Trump sticks to his guns on those anti-establishment and non-politically correct promises he has put forth, then Trump should be able to not only dip his little toe into the exposé-pond, but also should be able to immerse himself in the ability to expose Hillary Clinton as the lying crook that she inherently is.

AND so as a registered Independent I am voting for Donald Trump for President in November 2016.

JRH 5/4/16
Please Support SlantRight 2.0

2016 — The Math That Matters Most

Don Moore posted an interesting analysis focused on Donald Trump. The article is written by Mark Alexander of The Patriot Post. I actually also receive a Patriot Post subscription but I thought I’d give credit to where I read Alexander’s thoughts which Don Moore’s group on the Blind Conservative Group on IO.

It appears to me that Mark Alexander is not a Trump supporter; nonetheless Alexander provides a fairly decent examination that if Trump wins the GOP nomination and the Dem nominee is Hillary Clinton. Which is to say Trump loses unless these set of circumstances emerge …

JRH 4/8/16

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

**********************

2016 — The Math That Matters Most

A Trump v Clinton Matchup

By Mark Alexander

Sent: 4/6/2016 2:09 PM

Post Date: April 6, 2016

Original link: http://patriotpost.us/alexander/41763

Sent by Blind Conservative Group on IO

"Man, once surrendering his reason, has no remaining guard against absurdities the most monstrous, and like a ship without rudder, is the spot of every wind. With such persons, gullability [sic] takes the helm from the hand of reason and the mind becomes a wreck." -Thomas Jefferson (1822)

The 2016 general election will determine not just our next president; it will also determine which political party controls the Senate and House.

While the House is securely in Republican hands, Senate control is most assuredly in play¹. That's because Republicans will be defending 24 Senate

seats² while Democrats only need defend 10. Currently, Republicans hold a narrow 54-46 majority in the Senate.

Consequently, this election is not just a four-year decision but a generational one, because the next president will nominate the Supreme Court justice who will fill the swing-vote vacancy created by the death of Antonin Scalia³, and perhaps three additional seats - those of Justices Ginsberg, Kennedy and Breyer. If Hillary Clinton⁴ holds off the challenge from Socialist Bernie Sanders⁵ and is then elected president on November 8, only a Republican Senate would stand between her and the progressive dream of a statist-controlled Supreme Court for the next quarter-century.

We elect our presidents every four years, but those presidents nominate Supreme Court justices for life.

This is what Ronald Reagan meant when he said, "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction."

Let me be clear: If Republicans lose both the presidential election and control of the Senate, the Socialist Democratic Party⁶ will control the despotic Judicial Branch⁷ for the foreseeable future, and the tyranny of the so-called living constitution⁸ will reign supreme.

Thus, those of us who support Liberty and First Principles⁹ should engage in a vigorous debate about the qualifications of presidential candidates, and the consequences of who will run against Hillary Clinton this November. We should consider with great deliberation the character of our presidential candidates¹⁰.

For the record, that debate among those of us who advocate for Liberty by way of the ballot box, among other means, is not restrained by Ronald

Reagan's¹¹ admonition about fratricidal attacks - his "Eleventh Commandment¹²."

In his 1990 autobiography, "An American Life," President Reagan wrote of that brother-against-brother fratricide in his first campaign for the California governorship: "The personal attacks against me during the primary became so heavy that the state Republican chairman, Gaylord Parkinson, postulated what he called the Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican. It's a rule I followed during that campaign and have ever since."

Reagan fared well by following that rule, and after soundly defeating Jimmy Carter for the presidency in 1980, he won 49 of 50 states during his re-election campaign of 1984 - losing just Minnesota, the home state of his opponent Walter Mondale, by a mere 3,800 votes. (Oh, and he also lost the District of Columbia - an outcome that speaks for itself.)

Unfortunately, Republican presidential contenders since, most notably the 17 GOP candidates¹³ who began this primary, have taken the art of fratricidal attacks to new lows.

In every respect, this election cycle is like no other I have ever witnessed

- or read about - and primarily for one reason: The "establishment politicians," the professional political class, are disconnected from those of us who live outside the Washington Beltway.

It's no wonder that Bernie Sanders is nipping at Hillary Clinton's heels, having thumped her in seven of the last eight contests - including last night's double-digit win in Wisconsin¹⁴ - and I totally understand the popular appeal of Donald Trump¹⁵. According to the most recent (and reliable) Quinnipiac University political poll¹⁶, 57% of Americans agree that "America has lost its identity." The same percentage say that they are "falling further and further behind economically," and 53% say they want "a leader who is willing to say or do anything to solve America's problems."

These findings are consistent with our analysis and what we hear from our fellow grassroots Patriots¹⁷, most of whom have expressed their support for Ted Cruz or Donald Trump over the more centrist John Kasich.

But unlike each of these remaining three candidates who have broken their

pledges¹⁸ to support the eventual GOP nominee, I will support that nominee because I know for certain the perilous threat that "President Hillary Clinton" poses to the future of Liberty.

Last night's Wisconsin win for Ted Cruz notwithstanding, Mr. Trump still has a commanding delegate lead in the race to see who will likely face Hillary Clinton.

But there are serious questions about the election math - not of the GOP convention math¹⁹ as determined by the delegates²⁰, but of the general election math.

That is the only math that matters.

Until recently, Donald Trump has frequently referenced his "lead in the polls." I tend not to reference most media polls because of what we define as the "Pollaganda Effect²¹," which is: Outcome-based opinion samples (polling instruments designed to generate a preferential outcome), which in large measure reflect prior-opinion indoctrination or cultivation by the same media conducting the poll. The incestuous results are then used to manipulate public opinion further by advancing the perception that a particular candidate or opinion on an issue enjoys majority support.

But that being said, there are some very distressing research polls assessing a matchup between Clinton and Trump in the general election.

Notably, the results of these polls have been affirmed consistently for several months now. Allow me to reference a couple of the most recent findings below, and, of course, you determine what to make of these findings.

On Monday, there was a report from Whit Ayres, president of the conservative polling firm North Star Opinion Research and author of "2016 and Beyond: How Republicans Can Elect a President in the New America."

According to Ayres's research, "A Trump nomination has as much chance of success in the general election as Trump University, or Trump Mortgage, or Trump Shuttle, or Trump Vodka, or Trump Casinos. Trump is an electoral disaster waiting to happen." He then notes the demographic trends²² that will have enormous impact in 2016: "A Republican nominee who hopes to win a majority of the popular vote in 2016 must gain either 30% of the nonwhite vote or 65% of the white vote, a level not seen since President Ronald Reagan's 49-state landslide sweep in 1984." There are more women than men voters, and "Trump's favorable to unfavorable ratings among white women are 29% to 68%. . Millennials have now passed baby boomers to become the largest generation. Trump's ratings among millennials are now 18% favorable to 80% unfavorable, with 70% strongly unfavorable." (Trump's unfavorable ratings with women are even higher in the latest Wall Street Journal/ABC News poll²³.)

Ayres continues, "Since 1984, no victorious Republican presidential candidate has received less than 91% support from Republicans. Trump's favorable to unfavorable ratings among Republicans are 52% to 47%, with 34% strongly unfavorable. A candidate beginning a general election campaign with almost half of his party holding unfavorable views is a non-starter.

Contrast that with Hillary Clinton's favorable to unfavorable ratings among Democrats of 78% to 20%. A Trump nomination would put a Democrat in the White House, seriously threaten Republican majorities in Congress and leave the Republican Party in shambles."

For the record, Trump's GOP unfavorable ratings are on par with those²⁴ of George W. Bush at his presidential low point.

Next up is the most recent research from Public Policy Polling²⁵ on the most popular Republican in the race - Donald Trump - unless Kasich drops out.

According to this and similar polls, 42% of Republican voters would support Trump if the election were held now. About 33% would support Cruz and 22% Kasich. However, when asked if Kasich were to drop out, 51% of his supporters go to Cruz while only 23% support Trump. That would put Trump and Cruz in a statistical dead heat.

Notably, the latest Reuters rolling averages²⁶ today put Cruz ahead of Trump nationally. These numbers have significant implications for the general election, particularly since Mr. Trump has yet to collect more than 49% of the votes in any primary.

The general election results, and the likelihood that Republicans will lose their Senate majority with Trump on the ticket, are upheld by both conservative and liberal media research, as noted both in New York Times poll summaries²⁷ and Washington Post poll summaries²⁸. They are also affirmed by the 30-day rolling average of polls²⁹.

Perhaps most ominously, Larry Sabato, a seasoned election forecaster at the University of Virginia's Center for Politics, concludes that in a Clinton v Trump contest, Democrats will go into Election Day with a whopping 347 electoral votes in their pocket or strongly leaning³⁰ toward Clinton. They only need 270 to win. And by way of affirmation, Clinton leads Trump by double digits in six of the most comprehensive polls taken in the last month.

The fact is, whether the polling source is Left, Centrist or Right, Trump takes a beating in a head-to-head general election matchup with Clinton.

Based on the total number of primary votes cast to date, about 5% of all eligible voters have checked ballots for Donald Trump. That means an even smaller percentage have cast primary votes for Ted Cruz and others - because until a few weeks ago, the field was still flooded with GOP candidates. But, the percentage of primary votes cast for a candidate is of less importance than the percentage of total eligible voters supporting a particular candidate.

All that having been said, as utterly perplexing as the current primary cycle is, it remains possible that once Trump and Clinton debate each other mano a mano (yes, the masculine applies to Hillary), Trump might pull enough blue-collar and rustbelt Demo support away from Clinton to defeat her. This will be especially true if the momentum generated by Sanders does not transfer to Clinton. (She is, after all, a historically weak, unpopular and untrustworthy candidate.)

And where can Clinton attack Trump³¹ without undermining her own campaign?

Not Wall Street connections, not personal integrity, not honesty, not wealth, not marriage infidelity, etc. Raising any of those issues with Trump will draw fire on her own record. Of course, there is that wild card: A Clinton indictment³².

Unfortunately, she is coated with as much non-stick Teflon as Bill Clinton³³. Even under the most unfavorable circumstances for Clinton, a Trump victory would still be a long shot.

If Trump is the nominee, I hope he can defeat Clinton - but I don't base my reasoned, critical analysis on popular opinion or "hope," and neither should any of us.

Again, this is not just a four-year decision but a quarter-century decision.

If Hillary Clinton wins and Republicans lose control of the Senate gauntlet against her judicial nominees, batten down the hatches.

Ultimately, the math that matters is the poll taken on November 8th of this year. I care less about the name of the GOP candidate than I do that candidate's ability to defeat Clinton at best, or leave the GOP Senate majority intact at worst.

 (Finally, a request for prayer: This morning, our nation lost another great Patriot. Sandy McMillan served with SEAL Team 2 and was a fellow Navy Leaguer. He was a family man, a long-time colleague and friend. Please pray for his wife and their family. Fair winds and following seas, my friend! We will miss you.)

Pro Deo et Constitutione - Libertas aut Mors Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis

Links

1.http://patriotpost.us/articles/41037

2.http://patriotpost.us/posts/41134

3.http://patriotpost.us/articles/40676

4.http://patriotpost.us/alexander/37087

5.http://patriotpost.us/alexander/40591

6.http://patriotpost.us/alexander/9235

7.http://patriotpost.us/alexander/2937

8.http://patriotpost.us/alexander/2970

9.http://patriotpost.us/alexander/7324

10.http://patriotpost.us/alexander/41349

11.http://patriotpost.us/alexander/8891

12.http://patriotpost.us/alexander/23978

13.http://patriotpost.us/opinion/36849

14.http://patriotpost.us/posts/41753

15.http://patriotpost.us/alexander/40890

16.http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2340

17.http://patriotpost.us/alexander/9612

18.http://patriotpost.us/posts/41617

19.http://patriotpost.us/articles/41755

20.http://www.nationalreview.com/article/433519/donald-trump-nomination-political-suicide-republicans

21.http://patriotpost.us/alexander/3060

22.http://www.wsj.com/articles/whit-ayres-a-daunting-demographic-challenge-f

or-the-gop-in-2016-1425513162

23.http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/examining-trump-s-problem-f

emale-voters-n544901

24.http://www.gallup.com/poll/116500/presidential-approval-ratings-george-bush.aspx

25.http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_National_32916.pdf

26.http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TR130/filters/LIKELY_PRIMARY15:1,PARTY_ID_:2/dates/20160101-20160405/type/day

27.http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/03/us/politics/donald-trump-general-election.html

28.https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2016/04/01/gop-wakes-up-polls-are-no-longer-trumps-friend/

29.http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/trump_favorableunfavorable-5493.html

30.http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/the-only-thing-that-matters/

31.http://patriotpost.us/posts/41374

32.http://patriotpost.us/articles/41642

33.http://patriotpost.us/alexander/24356

34.https://patriotpost.us/donation/new?ref=site_content

______________________

Copyright from The Patriot Post: © 2016, The Patriot Post.

Blind Conservative Group Description

A group for blind people and others for the discussion of politics and other conservative interests.

Subscribe to Blind Conservative: blind-conservative+subscribe@groups.io

A Devil's Pact

Justin Smith joins the long list of Conservatives – like the ones of the National Review – who believe Trump is swindling Conservatives through manipulation of voter anger with Obama’s policies and agenda.

On a personal level I am a Ted Cruz supporter. Nonetheless, I think I understand Trump’s popularity among Conservative-Republican voters. People are fed-up with Obama’s immigration policies whether they are illegal aliens from south of the border or refugee imparted status to Muslims fleeing conflicts originating with the Islamic Terrorists of ISIS-ISIL-IS-Daesh. Also Trump offers a Make-America-great theme. However, Trump is rather obscure on how that path will be achieved concretely. Yet angry Americans don’t care about the obscurity is long as there is the appearance someone intends to move heaven and earth to make America great again as in BEFORE Obama.

Ted Cruz is truly a Conservative. Offers a more concrete path to American greatness without making a bargain with a deal that validates his leadership more than upgrading America.

I could probably ramble on but this is Justin Smith’s time to share.

JRH 1/25/16

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

*************************

A Devil's Pact

Destroying the Heart of America

By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 1/24/2016 2:06 PM

Donning a conservative persona, Donald Trump is cleverly pandering to American conservative's and presenting his utopian hell as a Trump paradise, in which America is made "great again." And, while America's many virtues and time honored principles are still largely intact -- while suffering constant Progressive and fascist assaults -- Trump voters and fools are not concerned that Trump's policy plans shift with each successive speech, because they only want a strongman who shares their values. Their disregard for circumspect scrutiny and their failure to demand policy details from Trump will serve to further demolish constitutional governance in America.

Yes. In some instances, Trump has correctly identified certain areas of crisis in America, such as immigration and refugee policies, in a manner similar to that of any average ten-year old in the country, with a sincerity that is highly questionable. He rarely makes clear statements regarding America's problems, while stating that he will do "great things, without providing specifics, facts, details, substance or principles.

Trump is a dangerous anti-free market, crony capitalist, big government, statist demagogue, who never makes any arguments for libertarianism, conservatism or the Constitution. But he does brag of his own corrupt nature and just how easily he "buys" corrupt politicians.

Why on earth would any liberty loving, honest, selfless American, with an unshakable inner faith in God and America, want to replace Obama's corrupt administration with an equally corrupt Trump administration?

The few times Trump has managed a coherent thought, Americans have heard Trump brag about how he'll "get things done" with the Democrats, in compromise. Compromising the founding principles that built America with the foreign ideas of Marxism is the reason we're in this mess now. Conservative Americans do not want any more of such "compromise" -- "compromise" -- a Progressive code for "let's destroy the U.S. Constitution."

Representing big trouble for America, we recently witnessed statist Progressive Republicans, under Speaker Paul Ryan and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, give Obama a larger spending bill than even the Democrats had asked to receive. And Senator Ted Cruz notes: "Why is a Republican majority leader fighting to accomplish the priorities of the Democratic minority?"

With such an enormous Progressive presence in both parties inside the D.C. establishment and Trump's own acknowledged affinity to the Democratic Party and New York values [i.e. abortion and gun control], what can America really expect from Trump? It certainly won't be less government and more individual liberty.

In 2009, Trump told Neil Cavuto (Fox News) that Obama's stimulus "had to be done", which isn't accurate in light of U.S. bankruptcy laws and propagates the Marxist myth of financial institutes "too big to fail." Trump would later elaborate to the Conservative Review: [The stimulus was] "pork, as we call it, or ... gifts to certain people. But overall, I think he's [Pres. Obama] doing very well."

When the Tea Party Patriots asked Trump to commit to the Penny Plan and cut $0.01 per year from every dollar of Federal spending, Trump refused and stated: "I will propose budgets that freeze overall spending levels until such time as the budget comes into balance." [Scroll down to point 4]

This guarantees the continuation of trillion dollar budgets; and necessarily, the only way that the budget can be balanced is by increasing tax revenues by more than half a trillion dollars annually. This will happen only by raising taxes.

Most of the best known economic experts, the Tax Foundation [a nonpartisan tax research group], the Brookings Institute and the Tax Policy Center [TPC Details] contend that Trump's tax plans will increase the national debt by $10.14 trillion over a decade and $24.5 trillion in two decades, unless it includes huge spending cuts. This debt will eventually have to be paid, so Trump's tax cuts are only temporary at best; and payment will fall on the shoulders of the next generation of Americans.

Americans will also find Trump unsympathetic to their desire to protect their private property. He loves the Supreme Court's Kelo decision, which allows the transfer of less prosperous landowners' private property to wealthy private developers in a reprehensible abuse of eminent domain, if it provides a financial boost to the local community. Trump has utilized this maneuver several times in the past, starting with Vera Coking in the 1990s.

And can America trust Trump to lead a Congressional repeal of Obamacare, since he has often expressed his admiration for Sweden's single-payer healthcare system and the socialized systems of Canada and the U.K.?

Do we really want a President Trump, who has said he would like to appoint his partial-birth abortion supporting sister, Federal Judge Maryanne Trump Barry, to the U.S. Supreme Court? -- who once supported partial-birth abortion himself? [Charisma News weighs in by showing waffling back and forth on Obama. So question should be, “Can Conservatives trust a guy who pleases the audience listening to him?”]

Then one must consider Trump's protectionist trade philosophy. It is similar to the-19th century guild socialism that mutated into fascism and then Nazism, and, while I subscribe to a certain degree of "protectionism" to counter current continuing currency manipulations and regularly fume over the damage that the World Trade Agreement and NAFTA did to the U.S. economy, Trump's proposal of a 25% tax on foreign goods will surely result in a global trade war and punitive economic measures aimed at products made in America. America will see an untold number of U.S. firms leaving the country, as trade grinds to a halt along with our economy.

And, concerning the horrible Iran nuclear deal --  a simple agreement between two heads of state and unratified by Congress -- Presidential candidate Ted Cruz has said he would "rip it up" on entering office; and yet, Trump calls it a "contract" America must honor, but he would "renegotiate harder terms". It is not a contract or a treaty, and Trump's statement is one more example of his gross lack of knowledge and understanding of our U.S. Constitution.

Trump's brand of statism may not meet the classic text book definition of "fascism", but his statements echo an authoritarianism similar to fascism. He rarely speaks of working through Congress and he seems to assume he can accomplish his goals through his own will and the demands he will make upon his own authority, with or without Congress, just as he thinks he can force foreign powers to do his bidding. His administration will be heavy with crony capitalism, privilege for the few and bureaucracies controlling everything.

Donald Trump is manipulating the current political environment and conservative America's justifiable anger over the damage to U.S. domestic and foreign affairs, that resulted from Obama's Progressive Democrat policies; and in the process, through his populist message, insolent lies and glib propaganda, Trump is perpetrating a political swindle on America, second only to the one Obama managed. If conservative Americans give Trump the Republican nomination, they will be further destroying the principles that founded this nation -- the heart of America -- and entering a devil's pact with a fascist.

By Justin O. Smith

______________________

Edited by John R. Houk

All links are by the Editor. Text embraced by brackets are by the Editor.

© Justin O. Smith

It is Time to Push Conservative Credentials on Romney

John R. Houk

© April 11, 2012

Yesterday when I discovered that Rick Santorum was suspending his campaign for the GOP nomination, I along with many Conservatives felt that Newt Gingrich’s concession that Mitt Romney will probably be the nominee for the GOP was also a throwing in the towel:

In a virtual concession Gingrich has publically acquiesced that Romney will be the GOP nominee:

In an interview with “Fox News Sunday,” Mr. Gingrich called Mr. Romney “far and away the most likely Republican nominee,” adding that he would throw his support behind the front-runner if Mr. Romney secured the required delegates for the nomination.

Since then I have learned that Gingrich is remaining in the race for the GOP nomination. This amazes me because Gingrich has no money to continue. He has laid-off campaign staff, he had a $500 check bounce that would have secure his name on the Utah Primary and I have heard a Gingrich Think Tank has filed for bankruptcy. That is not a road map to election victory.

Don’t get me wrong. At this point I would love for Gingrich to be the GOP nomination rather than Mitt Romney. I don’t think the Brokered Convention strategy that Gingrich might have depended on will work without Santorum in the GOP race. This means a catastrophe of monumental proportions would have to occur for Newt to pull a GOP nomination out of his hat. The catastrophe would have to be along the line of an insurmountable scandal (like that which stabbed Cain’s campaign in the heart), a near death health issue or worse death itself.

The biggest reason I am not a Romney guy is Mormonism and questionable stands on social issues.

Yeah-Yeah I know. The accusations of bigotry will be flying my way now that everyone knows I am anti-Mormon. Frankly any Christian that takes a Biblical stand on the nature of Jesus Christ should have a problem with Mormonism. I have blogged on lots of issues that should catch the ear of a Christian; however there is one simple formula for orthodox (not Orthodox with capital “O”) Christian theology:

Jesus Christ is part of the Trinity: three equal persons consisting in ONE nature of God. That is to say each single member of the Christian Trinity is ONE Divine entity in union with no beginning and no ending – Eternal. Jesus Christ is simultaneously fully man and fully God. The Lord’s God nature purifies his man nature enabling the death of Christ on the Cross to be a Blood sacrifice that Redeems humanity from the twisted spiritual DNA nature bequeathed to all the ancestors of the first man Adam.

Let the Redeemed of the Lord say so: “I am Redeemed! I am Redeemed! I am Redeemed!

Mormon theology claims Jesus is a son of God in that the Father created Jesus. For that matter Satan is the brother of the created Jesus. Satan went bad and Jesus went good. In Christian orthodox theology that is bad theology. In the humble opinion of this blogger that has a traditional outlook of Christian theology; Romney’s Mormon theology is a Gnostic-cult off-shoot of Christianity. I do have a problem with that.

On the other hand if you are going to be a member of a Christian off-shoot cult Mormonism can’t be a bad choice. Mormons are family oriented, most Mormons are Pro-Life and most Mormons have Conservative family values. Currently I have questions about Romney’s commitment to Conservative Social Values. And yet as it stands now, I am voting for Romney for President.

If Newt benefited from some kind of catastrophic event that knocked Romney out of the GOP nomination, I would support Newt. On the other hand Santorum has officially only suspended his campaign and did not end his campaign. For that matter I believe Herman Cain only suspended his campaign as well. That means a Romney catastrophe may not only benefit Newt. I doubt that Cain would press for a nomination because of the lack of delegates; however Santorum does have delegates. I suspect if the situation arose that Romney’s delegates were no longer committed, that a majority would go to Santorum.

Remember though. The key word is “catastrophe.” There probably is as much of a chance of a catastrophe happening to Mitt Romney as there is for a passenger jet to crash without terrorist help.

Newt Gingrich may be the last active Conservative standing in the GOP race but it is extremely doubtful he will win the nomination.

So again, as Republicans it is time to unite behind Mitt Romney to defeat President Barack Hussein Obama for President.

JRH 4/11/12

Please Support SlantRight 2.0 - Donations are not tax deductible but are appreciated to help with the bills.

No-Romney BUT Especially No-Obama

John R. Houk

© March 10, 2012

In 2008 the candidates for the Office of President were Barack Hussein Obama (Democrat) and John McCain (Republican).

From the beginning of BHO’s campaign I perceived he was less than honest person that too many voters accepted the promise of Change as if that meant merely change from the GWOT-President policies of eight years. Voters ignored what was known of Obama’s past and didn’t care about the past that Obama has still successfully hidden from the public eye.

The Republicans needed a charismatic person to overcome voter weariness of President George W. Bush policies of his 8 year tenure. Frankly I don’t believe voters would have been so weary of President GW if the Left Slanted MSM had not hated him so much. You will never see the media vilify Obama the way it did Bush even though the deceptiveness of Obama is well worth the vilification.

The Republican elites therefore sought a nominee that could swing Center-Left on some issues and Center-Right on other issues. In the beginning that candidate appeared to be Mitt Romney. Then the cantankerousness of McCain and the Social Conservatism of Huckabee gave GOP voters an alternative to the former Governor of Massachusetts which is one of the most Liberal States in the U.S. Union. In the 2008 the Conservatives were still the nerve center of the Republican Party and Romney’s record did not jive with Conservative issues.

Eventually the GOP race in 2008 became a race between the self-described rogue in McCain and the Social Conservative (but not necessarily a full-fledged fiscal Conservative) in Huckabee.

I believed then as I do now that McCain was a RINO. He was the perfect GOP Elite choice to try distance from Bush as a Center-Right and the hope of retaining the White House with McCain’s Center-Left thinking. McCain overcame Huckabee. By this time the Democrats had sold the voters that Obama would be the chosen one to bring back bi-partisan, transparent politics and the hope of ending an already long war in 2008.

Obama’s promises and vision was a bill of bad goods that a majority of American voters bought into. Obama had the leg up before McCain could paint a picture of a Moderate Centrist to receive the baton from Bush. In fact I am of the opinion McCain would have been crushed political even in worse terms if had not the foresight to choose a Family Values-Fiscal Conservative as a running mate. Indeed Sarah Palin captured the hearts of the GOP so much that the Left Wing MSM went on the attack on Palin to the point of making stories up to castigate her to the voters.

I did not like McCain but I did like Palin. I voted for the McCain/Palin ticket despite McCain’s RINO credentials because I knew Obama backed by the Clintonista political machine would take America down a path of “Change” that voters did not comprehend in 2008. I am no political pundit genius however Obama has lived up to everything I thought he would do.

The Obama mantra of “Change” had less to do with repudiating President Bush and more to do with transforming America into the Socialist European style democracy. Socialism European style means the shredding of the U.S. Constitution. The Living Constitution crap of the Left is turning the Original Intent of the U.S. Constitution into a historical fable of days gone by.

It appears that 2012 is a path that is mirroring 2008. Only this time Mitt Romney has more money and better organization. Romney has become the slow and steady tortoise racking up delegates while GOP Conservatives have been messing themselves up by splitting Conservative voters into fractured camps as Romney keeps collecting delegates. Many people are doing the math and the general consensus is Mr. slow and steady will win the GOP nomination because of the failure of Conservatives to unite behind one candidate.

Part of the problem is that the GOP candidates still in the running for the nomination have a bit of baggage that Conservative true-hearts find objectionable. An honest look at the records of Santorum and Gingrich will demonstrate their Conservative legislative decisions outweigh their Center-Left decisions. Can Romney make the same claim?

Anyway, I am still in the anyone-but-Romney crowd as a GOP voter and in the anyone-but-Obama voters when it comes to the General Election in November 2012. An Obama reelection will validate the course he has chosen for America. This means the Obamunistic Radical Left will continue to Change-Transform America into a Leftist Utopia solidifying Moral Relativity over Biblical Morality, Government intrusion over Limited Government, the agenda to denigrate Christianity over America’s Christian heritage, Demand Divisive Diversity over E Pluribus Unum (Out of many, ONE) and so on with the picture of Leftist Change.

I am voting for whoever wins the GOP nomination even if they are a RINO – again. It would take super star Conservative leadership to reverse the Leftist curse of EIGHT years of Obama. If the Tea Party Movement remains strong there will be a counter-balance of preventing a RINO from going too far to the Left. AND I know a RINO will not endorse the utopian agenda dreams of Obamunism.

Still there are Conservative purists that would rather vote on principle rather than succumb to a GOP President that might have tendencies to make some Center-Left decisions. My son Adam is one of those kind of Conservative purists. Another person is a Facebook friend Danny Jeffrey. Here is Jeffrey’s reasoning on sticking to principle.

JRH 3/10/12

*********************************

ANYONE BUT OBAMA?

By Danny Jeffrey

March 9, 2012

FREEDOM RINGS 1776

"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace."
Thomas Paine

In the years I have been writing on the Internet I have met many patriots, seen them display many beautiful flag images, watched soul stirring videos they have posted, and have read many profound thoughts posted by those who love America. Perhaps the most noble of those thoughts has been to protect future generations from the problems we have brought upon ourselves. Now I fear that I may lose some friends as I must travel a road different than the one they have chosen for themselves, for it is a road that conscience will not allow me to walk.
I have openly admitted that I did not vote in the 2008 election and have borne the criticism for that disclosure. It was, and is, my thoughts that McCain, Progressive RINO, and Obama, hardcore Marxist, both on the payroll of George Soros, were a great evil and a greater evil, and I could not in good faith vote for either, and I have no regrets for the omission! Obama, perhaps due to his youth, can probably dance a bit higher than John McCain as Soros pulls the strings, but both are dancers. Obama also articulates the Soros agenda better than the Senator from Arizona, but in a contest of morals, I cannot help but think it a dead heat.

My conservative friends voted dutifully for the GOP candidate who went on to advocate overthrowing the dictator of Libya. Now a flag of Al Qaeda flies unfurled in the Libyan winds and those weapons that Qaddafi hoarded are finding their way into the hands of terrorists. Always reaching for even greater achievements, McCain now advocates American pilots bombing Syria and bringing a Soros induced "Democracy" to that nation as well ... and in doing so he will be liberating Syria's WMDs for the upcoming war against Israel. It matters not to me who may criticize my failure to vote for a Presidential candidate in 2008, for I am glad that I did not vote for the Progressive little weasel.

And of the 2010 election? It was a sweeping victory for American conservatives, but what did it accomplish? Obama and his czars are still treading on the Constitution. The EPA continues to make headway in the dis-assembly of America. The courts are embracing Islam. Our allies are afraid to rely on our promises, and the enemies of our nation dine in style at the White House. And, perhaps worst of all, the Progressive press continues to reassure gullible citizens that everything is well in Obamaville and soon all will be better.

Then, as soon as that much hoped for 2010 election was over, campaigning for 2012 began.

We knew from the start that the RNC granted Romney the vaunted title of the Chosen One, and for a very brief time every conservative vowed to stop him as they knew that he has taken both sides of every issue ever put before him, and demonstrated his love of socialized medicine. Massachusetts! I cannot help but wonder if Americans are ready to watch the same man the people of Massachusetts chose as Governor, to lead America in its final days of decline. So, if it comes down to Romney vs Obama, we have the same choice we had in 2008 ... Hard core Progressive vs Hard core Marxist. Even George Soros admits there is little difference between them.

Those we have sent to our nation's capitol have long since grown accustomed to their comforts on the hill, and, as the Romans had bread and circus, we have food stamps and cell phones, and the greatest entertainment of all: The mistaken belief that things will be better after the next election. The last time things got better was when Reagan took a firm control of American events and both parties have vowed that will never happen again. So many profess to walk in his footsteps but they cannot fill his shoes while making deals with Progressives. Look at the RNC's choice for Speaker of the House. John Boehner. Just another RINO professing to be a Reagan loyalist. So many stand in the shadow of Ronald Reagan because they cannot let their true selves be seen in the light of day.

Concerning where the Progressives and the Marxists want to lead America ... It is the same destination. The only difference is the speed at which the two groups want to proceed. Hillary is a prime example. We watched her announce that she was a Progressive, not a Liberal. We also watched how easily she, as a Progressive, adopted the Marxist/Islamist cause. Whether you vote for a Marxist or a Progressive you are still going to watch the nation's descent to hell. Only those who are willing to bear the necessary sacrifices will make any difference in the future of America. Those seeking the rebirth of freedom by voting against a Marxist and for a Progressive have a lot to learn.

Many have long complained about Americans kicking the can down the road and allowing debt to pile up on our grandchildren, and yet now, to avoid the strife they know must happen, they are prepared to vote for Anyone But Obama. We are rapidly approaching the breaking point and it will most assuredly occur if Obama is reelected. If, on the unlikely chance that he is not, then we may be able to kick the can down the road another four, maybe even eight years, and let the next generation deal with what we would not. Sadly, due to anti gun laws Hillary is seeking, they may no longer have the implements necessary to resist the encroaching tyranny.

We all know that it is coming. Occupy Wall Street is ready to claim all streets this summer, and in all probability Obama will win reelection. He would love to have a reason to impose martial law across this land and the question remains ... Will Americans continue to meekly accept the whims of the anointed one and look longingly toward another election, or will they once again follow in the footsteps of real patriots? We must soon decide if we are to stand as patriots or bow as subjects. That decision, when made, will say so much about the Americans of today, for if they choose to cower submissively in the role of subjects, and deliver their grandchildren into bondage, then they deserve not freedom.


I leave you with the words of John Adams...

"I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy." John Adams

__________________________

No-Romney BUT Especially No-Obama

John R. Houk

© March 10, 2012

__________________________

ANYONE BUT OBAMA?

FREEDOM RINGS 1776 is a conservative voice, defending the views of those who still believe in the constitution and opposing any and all who would lead us from our tried and true beliefs. We who still believe in the spirit of 1776 must oppose anyone who would set this nation on a course that will fundamentally transform America.

Danny Jeffrey

About Danny Jeffrey:

I'm sixty seven and since Ronald Reagan left office I have watched my country slowly deteriorate as freedoms are lost and the value of our currency dwindles. This has been a slow but steady decline until Barrack Obama entered the White House. I will not refer to this man as President. That is a job that deserves respect and he has earned none at all. I am convinced that were it not for the Tea Party stirring up the public we would now be living under a total dictatorship. He seeks only power and has no loyalty at all to the United States, and as long as he is in office I shall write to any who will read and speak of what he is and what he is doing to this country. View Jeffrey complete profile

I am Still Leaning Toward Gingrich

John R. Houk

© March 2, 2012

The GOP race for the nomination for President has been whittled down to Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul. I am definitively no supporter of Romney and Paul.

That leaves me with Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich.

I like Santorum’s Social Conservatism.

I like Newt’s debating skills and the Conservative credentials that brought the Republican majority to the House for the first time in a quarter century when he became Speaker.

Newt has a checkered morals history in his personal life and some questionable choices in encouraging the thoughts of pseudo-Marxist Futurist Alvin Toffler. I have pretty much gotten over Gingrich’s past issues and believe in his present stands at his word.

Former Senator Santorum is big to claim he is the true Conservative. I am uncertain of the “true Conservative” claim as much as he is a better candidate than Romney claim (and everyone is better than Ron Paul because of an American anti-Exceptionalism stand in Foreign Policy). If the GOP race comes down to a choice between Romney and Santorum then I choose Santorum. At this point if the race involves Newt Gingrich I am still leaning toward Newt.

I am going to cross post a Townhall.com article by Rachel Alexander that sheds a light on Santorum’s Conservatism. The article is decidedly anti-Santorum; however if you look at the numbers you will notice that Newt’s numbers are better. Also I am guessing if one compares Santorum’s numbers to Romney’s gubernatorial numbers on Conservatism Santorum wins there. I think it is a good guess that even though Romney’s negative-Romney ads show Santorum is not as Conservative as the campaign claim, that Santorum still outshines Romney.

After the Townhall.com article I am posting a Newsmax ad email from Winning our Future Super PAC which is not Gingrich ran but is pro-Gingrich.

JRH 3/2/12

**************************

Is Rick Santorum Really the Most Conservative Presidential Candidate?

By Rachel Alexander

Mar 01, 2012

Townhall.com

The anyone-but-Romney conservatives have currently latched onto Rick Santorum as their candidate du jour, providing him with a surge shortly into the Republican primary elections. But is he really that conservative? Santorum is known for taking strong stands on social issues like abortion and gay marriage. As a result of his outspokenness on the sanctity of marriage, he has been the target of a cruel gay activist.

Up until his surge, most people took his conservative claims for granted without closely scrutinizing his record in Congress. But his record is sketchy. Santorum’s lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union is only 88. Newt Gingrich’s lifetime rating is 90. Santorum’s record was even worse in the past; during his first two years in Congress he received ratings of 83 and 81, which dipped to a low of 70 in 1993.

Santorum really hurt his conservative record in 2004 by backing abortion-rights supporter Arlen Specter for Senate over conservative challenger Pat Toomey, deciding that Toomey was unelectable. Specter narrowly won. Toomey went on to win the next election, as Specter switched parties and lost in the Democratic primary.

Santorum is not necessarily the best candidate for the Tea Party either, considering he expressed his distaste for the Tea Party a couple of years ago, “I have some real concerns about this movement within the Republican party…to sort of refashion conservatism. And I will vocally and publicly oppose it.”

Liberty Counsel Action put together a list of not 10, not 50, but 100 of Santorum’s disappointing votes on major issues over his 16 years in office. His record on social issues does not entirely live up to his rhetoric. He voted to fund Planned Parenthood as part of an appropriations bill that provided money for Title X family planning. He voted three years in a row against bills to end the National Endowment for the Arts, famous for funding artwork like a cross in urine.

The fiscal watchdog organization Club for Growth describes his performance in Congress as merely “above average.” Santorum voted for union-backed legislation that restricts steel imports. He opposed repeated attempts to reimpose the "pay-go" rules that would hold down spending increases and tax giveaways. He voted against the National Right to Work Act and voted for Fed Ex unionization. He supported a bill by the late Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) increasing the minimum wage. He voted for practically every "emergency supplemental" spending bill sought by the Bush administration, which added tens of billions to the deficit. He voted to increase the debt ceiling and voted against a flat tax. He voted against reforming welfare programs numerous times.

He requested billions of dollars of earmarks for his home state of Pennsylvania, and defends this practice by claiming that “there are good earmarks and bad earmarks.” He was one of only 25 Senators who voted for the Bridge to Nowhere, part of the $284 billion 2005 highway bill known for its bloated earmarks.

Santorum does not appear strongly principled, since he now admits some of his past votes were mistakes. He voted for the expensive Medicare Part D prescription-drug program, the largest entitlement program since Lyndon Johnson, which is expected to cost $68 billion this year. He said after the fact that his vote was a mistake since the program did not have funding. During last week’s presidential debate in Arizona he admitted that voting for the No Child Left Behind Act, which expanded the federal government’s role in education, was a mistake and he “took one for the team.”

There is a reason why presidential candidates rarely come from Congress. Their records are more extensive and visible than governors or non-politicians. The nature of being a member of Congress means voting for bills that include items you don’t agree with in order to get your own agenda passed. This kind of compromise will translate into compromising as president, since the president will need to sign bills in order to get anything accomplished. The question is whether a president will stand firm and compromise on very little, like Ronald Reagan, or whether a president will compromise their principles more often like both presidents Bush.

What may ultimately turn conservatives away from Santorum are the robocalls he ran in Michigan this past week attacking Mitt Romney. They were directed into Democratic households, urging Democrats to vote in the Republican primary against Romney since Romney opposed the auto bailouts. The calls sounded like they were coming from Democrats until the very end when the Santorum campaign was identified. This kind of dirty campaigning, which tricks opponents into voting for you, crosses the line, especially since Santorum also opposed the auto bailouts.

Santorum may be reasonably conservative, but he is not clearly the most conservative candidate in the race. To claim that he is the best choice for conservatives is debatable. Gingrich’s record is slightly better, and it is difficult to compare Santorum with Romney since Romney’s experience as governor was different and brief. Ron Paul has the most conservative record when it comes to fiscal issues, but the least conservative record on foreign policy and defense. Perhaps conservatives who claim Santorum is the best candidate are basing their preferences on criteria other than his record in office.

_________________________________

Important Letter - Our Next President

Sent by Newsmax

By Becky Burkett

From: Winning our Future Super PAC

Sent: Mar 1, 2012 at 10:53 AM

"Is The Idea of Mitt Romney Being the Voice and Face of the Conservative Movement for Possibly the Next Eight Years Keeping You Up at Night?"

Don’t Let the Establishment Fool You!

The GOP Presidential Nomination Fight Ain't Over. Here’s Why…

Dear Fellow Conservative,

In 2008, many conservatives secretly thought to themselves that while electing Barack Obama would be the worst thing that could happen to the country (and it was), electing John McCain would be the worst thing that could happen to the conservative movement (and it would have been).

Well, as Yogi Berra said, it’s déjà vu all over again.

Clearly, re-electing Barack Obama would be disastrous for our nation. It’d be the end of our country as we know it…and I say that without an ounce of hyperbole.

And electing Mitt Romney would inevitably force Republicans and conservatives to defend the same kinds of government-expanding programs John McCain would have pushed - such as his anti-free speech McCain-Feingold law.

Talk about being between a rock and a hard place. However…

It’s not too late this time.

Indeed, conservatives still have an opportunity to have our cake and eat it, too. We can both defeat Barack Obama next November…AND…do it with a Reagan conservative, not a Massachusetts moderate.

We can nominate Newt Gingrich.

While the elite media is desperately pushing the idea that "Newt can’t win," it's simply not so.

·         I'll remind you that that’s the same thing the media said about Newt leading Republicans to a majority in Congress in 1994.

·         And I'll remind you that the elite media declared Newt’s campaign "dead" last summer.

·         And I'll remind you that the elite media declared Newt’s campaign "dead" after Iowa.

·         And I'll remind you that the elite media declared Newt's campaign "dead" after Florida.

But like Rocky Balboa, no matter what they've thrown at Newt; no matter how hard or how low they've hit him…he’s still standing…and he's still fighting.

And again, quoting the immortal Yogi Berra, it ain’t over 'til it's over.

Now here's why it's not over…

While the Romney campaign - aided and abetted by the mainstream media – continue to talk about winning "states" in this year's GOP nomination process, the rules this time around have been radically changed.

In the "old days," if you won a state you won ALL of the states delegates. However, under new rules for this year’s contests, very few states which go to the polls before the end of March – including on Super Tuesday next week - are "winner take all."

Which means candidates coming in second, third and even fourth can rack up delegates.

For example: In the February 4 Nevada caucus – which Mitt Romney "won" – he was awarded 14 delegates. However, Newt picked up 6 delegates, Ron Paul got 5 delegates and Rick Santorum got 3.

Which makes it increasingly less likely that any candidate left in this race is going to wrap up the nomination anytime soon!

So like "Rocky Balboa," we don’t need to knock Mitt Romney out in the fifth round on Super Tuesday. We only need to still be standing.

We just need to slowly and methodically continue to rack up enough delegates to get us to the 12th round at the Republican National Convention in Tampa this August.

And if we do…all bets are off.

And those in the elite media - who are today saying "it can't be done" - will watch Newt Gingrich do the "impossible" once again.

And two months later…we’ll pull the plug on the Obama presidency!

·         We’ll repeal ObamaCare.

·         We’ll fire all the czars.

·         We’ll stop apologizing to terrorists and dictators.

·         We’ll stop spending our grandchildren into bankruptcy.

·         We’ll cut the cost of gasoline by drilling here, drilling now.

·         We’ll stop suing states for trying to enforce our immigration laws.

·         We’ll put America back to work.

·         We’ll put small businesses back in business.

With Newt Gingrich in the White House – along with Republican control of the House and Senate – we will finally realize the promise of 1994’s Contract with America, including a dramatically smaller and dramatically restructured government.

But none of those bold changes for America will happen if Republicans nominate a "pale pastel" Massachusetts moderate to go head-to-head with Obama's "Chicago Machine" in November – the same machine that rolled over, chewed up and spit out John McCain in 2008.

Indeed, before we get a shot at Obama, we need to win the GOP nomination.

Now is not the time to "go wobbly."

·         Now is the time to step up and stop the Republican establishment from forcing another Gerald Ford on us.

·         Now is the time to step up and stop the Republican establishment from forcing another Bob Dole on us.

·         Now is the time to step up and stop the Republican establishment from forcing another John McCain on us.

·         Now is the time to step up and stop the Republican establishment from forcing Mitt Romney on us.

Will you step up?

Can I count on you to help us help Newt stay in the fight all the way to Tampa?

I urgently need your help today. Super Tuesday is less than a week away. Please follow this link right now to make a donation of $25, $50, $100, $250 or more to help us help Newt…and give conservatives a true conservative nominee who can win!

Sincerely yours,

Becky Burkett
President
Winning Our Future Super PAC

P.S. In 1976, they gave us Gerald Ford. We got Jimmy Carter. In 1996, they gave us Bob Dole. We got Bill Clinton. In 2008, they gave us John McCain. We got Barak Obama. Now they're trying [to] sell us Mitt Romney. Don't let them. Not this time. Click this link right now to make a donation of $25, $50, $100, $250 or more…before we all wake up with a bad case of "buyer’s remorse" once again.

__________________________

I am Still Leaning Toward Gingrich

John R. Houk

© March 2, 2012

_______________________

Is Rick Santorum Really the Most Conservative Presidential Candidate?

Copyright © Townhall.com. All Rights Reserved.

_______________________

Important Letter - Our Next President

Paid for by Winning Our Future. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

This email was sent by: Newsmax.com4152 West Blue Heron Blvd., Ste. 1114
Riviera Beach, FL 33404 USA