Tag Archives: Spending

Mitt Romney gaffe: Romney fails miserably in interview with Bret Baier

So everyone knows I don’t have a TV and that the only thing on TV that I think is worth watching is Bret Baier on Fox News’ Special Report. Let’s see why, below.

Here’s Bret Baier interviewing Mitt Romney:

The full transcript is here.

Excerpt:

BAIER: Like the “Union Leader,” your critics charge that you make decisions based on political expediency and not core conviction. You have been on the both sides of some issues, and there’s videotape of you going back years, speaking about different issues, climate change, abortion, immigration, gay rights.

How can voters trust what they hear from you today is what you will believe if you win the White House?

ROMNEY: Well, Bret, your list is just not accurate. So, one, we’re going to have to be better informed about my views on issues. My view is, you can look at what I’ve written in my book. You can look at a person who has devoted his life to his family, to his faith, to his country, and I’m running for president because of the things I believe I think I can do to help this country.

And I know in politics there are going to be those who try in every way they can to tear down one another, but the real question is, does Barack Obama have the capacity to lead this country out of a very difficult economic setting? And the answer is no. He’s proven he doesn’t. And I do.

That’s my experience. That’s what I know how to do. The American people want someone who knows how to lead, who believes in the free economy, and understands the principals it takes to get America strong, economically, militarily, and culturally.

BAIER: But I’m sure you’ve seen these ads, using videotape of you in previous years, speaking on various issues.

ROMNEY: Uh-huh.

BAIER: And it seems like it’s in direct contrast to positions you take now.

ROMNEY: Well, I’m glad that the Democratic ads are breaking through and you got —

BAIER: Jon Huntsman has a couple ads that do the exact same thing.

So Romney is saying to Republican voters “never mind what I am saying in my own words in those videos, just read my book instead”.

It’s easy to find videos of Mitt Romney speaking in his own words endorsing abortion, embryonic stem cell research, gay rights, gun control, man-made global warming, amnesty, and pretty much every position that Obama holds. His Romneycare health care plan is quite similar to Obamacare, and has created enormous budget deficits in Massachussetts.

Anyway, Bret’s questions seem fair to me, but it turns out that Romney was offended by them:

CNS News reports.

Excerpt:

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who is now seeking the Republican presidential nomination, complained to Fox News Special Report anchor Bret Baier after an interview on Tuesday that Baier’s questioning had been “overly aggressive” and “uncalled for,” according to Baier.

“He was irritated by the interview after we were done,” Baier said of Romney when he appeared on Fox News’s “O’Reilly Factor” on Wednesday to discuss the interview.

O’Reilly asked Baier: “How do you know he was irritated? Did he slap you? Or what did he do?”

Well, he just made it clear at the end of the interview,” said Baier.

“Tell me how he made it clear?” asked O’Reilly. “What it is–did he say something to you?

“He said he thought it was overly aggressive,” said Baier.

“He did, he said that to you?” said O’Reilly. “He said it was overly aggressive?”

“He did,” affirmed Baier.

“And as we were walking in the walk and talk and then after he finished he went to his holding room and then came back and said he didn’t like the interview and thought it was uncalled for,” said Baier.

Is this thin-skinned RINO the person we want in the Oval office in 2012? Why elect a clone of Obama?

You can see some of the videos featuring Mitt Romney in this post and this post.

A closer look at Obama’s three-point plan to create American jobs

Unemployment rate chart 2011
Democrats take over the House and Senate in January 2007

The Heritage Foundation outlines three of Obama’s job creation plans.

Excerpt:

This week, President Obama is again set to make a pitch for his latest plan to stimulate the economy, but meanwhile he is turning his back on projects that would put tens or even hundreds of thousands of Americans to work. And he’s doing it all to appease his left-wing, environmentalist base at the expense of domestic energy production.

Heritage’s Rob Bluey reported last week on a new finding by a New Orleans-based group that the Obama administration is approving just 35 percent of the oil drilling plans for the Gulf of Mexico so far this year. It is also taking an average of 115 days — nearly four months — to secure approval from the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement. Those numbers are a sharp drop from previous years, well below the historical average 73.4 percent approval rate and 61 days it takes to approve plans. And for plans that require drilling activity, the numbers are even worse with an average approval time of 222 days.

That’s bad news for job creation. One deepwater rig alone can create 700 jobs locally. But slowing down oil drilling in the Gulf isn’t the only way the President is blocking jobs. Earlier this month, the Obama Administration announced it would delay the construction of the $7 billion Keystone XL pipeline that would bring in more than 700,000 barrels of oil per day from Alberta, Canada, to the Texas Gulf coast–and could have produced upwards of 20,000 jobs. Heritage’s Nicolas Loris explains the impact:

What this delay really means is that President Obama is putting off an important election year decision in which two of his largest supporters–labor unions and environmentalists–are split on the issue. This tactic allows the decision to be delayed until after the 2012 elections.

More importantly, this means a delay in access to easy imports from our northern neighbor, the creation of thousands of jobs, and the generation of revenue for the states where the pipeline passes. Montana, South Dakota, Kansas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, and Texas are collectively projected to collect $5.2 billion in property tax revenue as a result of building the pipeline.

As if that weren’t enough, the White House made another decision blocking energy-related jobs in the United States. In mid-November, the Obama Administration delayed a mineral lease sale in Ohio’s Wayne National Forest for oil and gas drilling. Apart for providing Americans access to affordable energy, the project could have had a tremendous impact in the state, including the creation of an estimated 200,000 jobs, an overall wage and personal-income boost of $12 billion by 2015, and a billion-dollar boon to Ohio landowners, schools, businesses, and communities.

So Obama has three plans to create more American jobs:

  1. Block drilling in the Gulf of Mexico
  2. Block the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline
  3. Block drilling for oil and gas in Ohio

I don’t think Obama’s three job creation plans are working.

Maybe he just just do the opposite: 1) more drilling in the Gulf, 2) build the Keystone XL pipeline, and 3) allow development of the Ohio oil shale. And while he’s at it, 4) drill for oil in Alaska. That would create real jobs.

Has Obama succeeded in spreading the wealth around?

Obama Economic Record November 2011
Obama Economic Record November 2011

From Investors Business Daily.

Excerpt:

According to an IBD review of various economic data, while corporations and Wall Street investors have made significant gains under Obama’s economic leadership, average Americans have seen their fortunes steadily decline.

Since the start of the Obama administration, corporate profits have climbed 68% (about 59% after inflation), and are now 19% above their pre-recession peak, according to the latest Commerce Department data out Tuesday morning.

Meanwhile, companies are sitting on a pile of cash that’s grown 38% from Q1 2009 to Q2 2011, according to the Federal Reserve’s quarterly “Flow of Funds” report.

And since Obama’s inauguration, the Dow Jones Industrial Average has climbed 45%.

However, these solid gains haven’t translated into prosperity down the economic ladder.

Since Obama took office, median weekly earnings have dropped almost 5% after inflation, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Home prices are below their January 2009 levels; unemployment is higher, as is the inflation rate. Gas prices alone have more than doubled since January 2009.

[…]Household income: Since the recovery started, household income has fallen 6.7%, according to a study by former Census Bureau officials. That’s a bigger decline than during the 18-month recession, when income fell 3.2%.

Jobs: Despite job growth since the recession ended, there are still 1.4 million fewer private sector jobs today than when Obama was sworn in, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. And the pace of growth — 1.6 million new jobs over the past two years — is far below what’s needed just to keep up with growth in the labor force.

Income inequality: After remaining essentially flat under President Bush, the gap between rich and poor has climbed in each of Obama’s first two years, according to the Census Bureau.

Consumer confidence: The Consumer Confidence Index dropped to 39.8 in October, down almost 10 points from when the recession ended, and almost right where it stood when Obama took office.

Misery Index: This index, which combines the unemployment rate with the inflation rate and is meant as a proxy of middle class pain, is 60% higher than when Obama took office, and it’s at a level not seen since mid-1983.

Home prices: The median price for existing home sales has dropped 4.6% since January 2009, according to monthly National Association of Realtors data. And the number of underwater mortgages is up, according to Core Logic.

Union membership: The share of private sector workers who belong to a union fell to 6.9% in 2010, compared with 7.6% the year before Obama took office, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The article explains why Obama’s rhetoric differs from reality – it turns out that the very policies he enacted created the poverty he claims he was going to reduce. Because he’s not an economist. He’s trying to do things that sound good so that people will like him. But those things don’t work.