RealDealPolitics.com

Out of the remaining politicians looking to get the GOP nomination, and that’s what some of them are, just politicians, we know that two of them have changed their mind or seem ambivalent on many issues of the day:  Romney and Gingrich.  There are also two left that have no record of reversal on any of the issues:  Paul and Santorum.

 

Representative Ron Paul is a great congressman and has been a good ally in the fight for limited government, less taxes, less spending, and less government intrusion.  Paul’s public record shows no record of flip flops, unlike Gingrich or Romney, and consequently seems very congruent to the words that he speaks.

Paul’s “stick our head in the sand” foreign policy scares the heck out of conservatives, but otherwise appeals to many liberals and moderates.  His common-sense limited government views are attractive to people across the political spectrum.

Paul, however, is somewhat unelectable as a presidential candidate.  He is old, has wrinkles, a few strands of white hair, and doesn’t “look presidential.”  I apologize for the reality check but that is the fact of the matter.  He comes across as a charming, doddering, old grandfather-type, which is very appealing to some people, but it doesn’t make him electable.

Given that nobody even knows what Romney or Gingrich actually stand for anymore, the stage has centered on former Senator Rick Santorum.  He has no set of flip flops, environmental or otherwise, unlike the two former frontrunners, Gingrich and Romney.  Oh and let’s not forget, he just swept three states, including an annihilation of the competition in the “show-me-state,” to the tune of 55%.

Just when you thought the race was almost over, and the establishment candidate, Romney, was about to run away with it, a former Senator that is just as knowledgeable on the issues, almost as good looking, and has adequate hair to be elected, has entered from stage right.

It is true that Santorum was fired from his job in the Senate in 2006 by an 18% margin. However, we know that the 2006 elections were a referendum against President George Bush, for his Big Government policies and “war-mongering” in the Middle East.  Some great senators such as Santorum and George Allen (VA) were casualties of this referendum.

American voters smartened up again in the last general election, having realized what a huge mistake Obama has been. If the 2006 election had been in 2010, Santorum and Allen would have likely won in landslides.  When analyzing an election, you always need to take into account the circumstances and the ruling party or president at the time.

The fact that Santorum lost his job is a liability to his candidacy, but appears to be his only real problem.  Normally, the lack of executive (state governor or VP) experience is somewhat of downfall as well, but given the fraudulent elections of Obama and former President John Kennedy (RIP), senatorial experience seems to be adequate.

Years ago, in 2004, I stood outside the voting precinct handing out GOP propaganda, primarily because I was rightfully horrified by the thought of a John Kerry presidency.  My democrat party counterpart engaged me in a discussion of our differences, and I never forgot what he said.

The democrat propagandist was averse to the incumbent President because Bush was a “moron,” primarily.  He had problems with the fact that someone that stupid could be president of the US.  I countered by saying that the president doesn’t need to be a genius, just someone with a vision, and the judgment to put smart people in charge of the cabinet positions, which Bush certainly did.

Another thing I did not forget the democrat saying was that if it were Rick Santorum running for president, he would have probably voted for him.  The democrat said, “Santorum, now that guy is smart. I can see voting for him.” Whoa!  A democrat would have voted for Santorum because he is one of few politicians that actually is intelligent. If you have heard him in a debate, then you understand.

I couldn’t believe my ears at the time, but he was serious, and he had a good point.  Many democrats think they’re intelligent, primarily because they can regurgitate the brainwashing they received from the liberal media and public schools.  Some of them actually are intelligent and just lean socialist, under the faulty conception that socialism can work on a national scale, which has been proven false. In other words, their historical notions are inaccurate.

But the fact that a democrat would vote for a die-hard, solid, unapologetic conservative because such a politician not only seems smart, but is clearly intelligent and has a solid grasp of the issues, was an awakening for me.  Democrats and others voted for Obama because they thought he was smart, which he really isn’t but apparently has done a good job convincing many in the public that he is of higher intelligence, with some help from the media that is in love with him.

Let’s go back to the available list of candidates.  Do you think any democrat would ever vote for Gingrich?  There is evidence that this would never happen, given his consistent opposition to the democrat party.  It is true that Newt passed some great measures in cutting government spending and welfare reform, all of which Clinton took credit for regardless of the fact that Congress would have overrode his veto.  However, all of the measures were very conservative and Newt has little support outside the GOP.

We already covered Ron Paul, a great congressman and good man, but he seems unelectable.  Move on to Mitt Romney, this year’s establishment candidate.  He has many sets of flip flops on just about every major issue from health care to environmentalism, much like Newt.  However, he is also (gasp) a Mormon, something that doesn’t sit too well with many people.  I have nothing against the church of LDS, but that church is a very small minority in the country, and many consider it a cult.  We are just talking about practical electability here, and sadly, certain religions are a liability.

Here we go around again, full circle to Rick Santorum, who recently said “when the government gives you rights, the government can take them away.”  Let’s face the fact that there is nothing Santorum says that doesn’t make sense.  Foreign policy, domestic policy, all of it is hard to argue with.  So why does the establishment dislike Santorum?  Primarily because he is a true conservative, and the only one left in the GOP race. The establishment desires someone to preside over the decline of America, not a president that might reverse it.

There are four candidates left in this race to oust Obama, and two are proven flip-floppers that will likely not get any votes from registered democrats.  The third is a libertarian that is portrayed as an old clown, and the fourth is a common-sense conservative who has very few drawbacks other than his devout Catholicism and unelection from the Senate.  However, recall that Kennedy also unequivocally proclaimed himself as a Catholic before his fraudulent election as president.

Yes, we realize the likelihood of getting a GOP candidate fraudulently elected is very slim, since those tactics are pretty much reserved for the democrat party. Any republican fraud would be met with the greatest media outrage of all time, while jack-ass-party fraud tactics go largely ignored by the media. That is simply the situation we are in.

However, the appeal of a smart conservative that has command of the issues and can articulate his positions on such can be felt across the political spectrum.  Many democrats, Hispanics, independents, and other special interest groups could be intrigued and interested in Mr. Santorum because of his failure to toe the party line, but instead stand up for his beliefs and principles.

The case being made here is that Senator Santorum, despite his two drawbacks, could be the most electable republican candidate for president this year.  If you can get past his devout Catholicism and his failure to be elected to a third term in the Senate, the latter of which can be blamed on the referendum on GW Bush, then what are the remaining problems? None.

What you have in Rick Santorum is a solid, common-sense, “compassionate” conservative, that is simply unapologetic for his beliefs and principles.  The reason I enclosed the above word in quotations is that the real meaning of “compassionate” is often misinterpreted because of GW Bush using it as a term to propagate a big government socialist agenda under the Republican banner.  Real compassion means getting people off of welfare with jobs, not enrolling them as wards of a state which increases spending.

But Santorum believes in no such socialism as far as we know.  He hasn’t changed his views on the various issues of the day, in order to become more popular or likeable. In fact, he admitted the other day that he has not lost his principles, which the two former front-runners apparently have. Now, Santorum might be the frontrunner, after sweeping CO, MO, and MN.

There is more to it than just being the frontrunner of the day, however.  It seems very likely, given the intelligence of Santorum that even democrats admit to, that he would destroy Obama in any debate.  That of course, may never happen, and might in fact be a pipe dream.  Obama is not required to participate in a debate.  Obama has nothing to gain from a debate, since any of the remaining GOP candidates would utterly demolish him, teleprompter or not.

Instead, Obama will happily continue to let the media prop him up as a legitimate statesman, rather than the miserable failure that he really is, and the “mainstream” media will be delighted to continue endorsing him as some kind of messiah, even as their ratings go down the tubes.  That is because they have an agenda that is the same as that of Obama: presiding over the death and destruction of America.  Santorum has other plans, and that’s a good enough reason to get my vote.

The following comments were recently made regarding Rick Santorum:

What They Say

“Rick won’t apologize for America being great, and he will defend Israel. He didn’t shy away from taking on the partial-birth abortion ban or welfare reform, and he’s certainly not going to shy away from getting this country back on track.” — Kim Lehman, Iowa’s National Republican Committeewoman and former president of Iowa Right to Life

“Not many politicians have spine; this one does.” — Talk-show host Glenn Beck, introducing Santorum before a June interview on Fox News

Location:  CNBC GOP Debate at Oakland University, Rochester Michigan

Date: November 9, 2011

Moderators:  Maria Bartaromo and John Harwood.  Several other CNBC reporters participated in the questioning, including the fiery and popular Jim Cramer of Mad Money.

Immediately below are the participants in order of how they performed in the debate, and their best quotes of the night.  Following that is the debate summary.

 

Ron Paul

Ron Paul  U.S. Representative (Texas); Physician “The symptom is the current tax code, but the disease is spending.” “We need to differentiate between capitalism and crony-capitalism.” “The fact that there is over $1 trillion in student debt is proof that the government loans program is a complete failure.”

 

Mitt Romney

Mitt Romney  Governor, Massachusetts;  CEO, 2002 Winter Olympics Organizing Comm.; Co-Founder, Bain Capital “The best way to improve the economy is to do the exact opposite of what Obama has done.” “The government needs to get out and let the markets work.”

 

Hermann Cain

Herman Cain  Chairman/CEO, Godfather’s Pizza; Chairman, Kansas City Federal Reserve Bank; CEO, National Restaurant Association “The tax code doesn’t raise taxes, politicians do.” “There are two other big problems with Dodd-Frank: Dodd, and Frank.”

 

Newt Gingrich

Newt Gingrich  Speaker of the House, U.S. Representative (Georgia); History Professor “I have yet to hear a single reporter ask a single Occupy Wall Street person a single rational question about the economy … for example, “Who is going to pay for the park you are occupying if there are no businesses making a profit?”"

 

Michele Bachmann

Michele BachmannU.S. Representative (Minnesota): State Senator; Attorney “We have the highest corporate tax rate in the world.  Capital is mobile… and moves to where the lower tax rates are.”

 

Jon Huntsman

Jon Huntsman  Ambassador to China, Governor, Utah; Deputy U.S. Trade Representative “People are sick and tired of taxpayer money to bailout big corporations, and we’re not having it anymore.”

 

Rick Perry

Rick Perry  Governor, Texas: State Representative; State Agriculture Commissioner “Washington shouldn’t pick winners or losers; if you’re too big to fail, you’re too big.” “All regulations starting in 2008 need to be examined, and if it’s killing jobs, then get rid of it.”

 

Rick Santorum

Rick Santorum  U.S. Senator, U.S. Representative (Pennsylvania); Attorney “We need to repeal all Obama regulations… repatriate those funds… have major energy development, and cut all subsidies.”

 

The debate was claimed to be almost entirely about the economy, and for the most part it was, but the line of questioning was somewhat odd, of course slanted, and specific questions demanded 30 second sound-byte answers, which kind of defeats the purpose about a general economic debate.

 

The first question was about whether we should let Italy’s economy fail, kind of an obscure question about the US economy, but no doubt CNBC wanted the participants to either commit or not to a foreign bailout, citing that if the IMF fails, US banks would.

 

Most of the contestants had different ways of saying we need to get government out of artificially propping up the banks, and let the market work by itself.  Paul was able to enunciate those points the best, and Newt added that Bernanke needs to be fired.

 

The next question from Maria, directed at Cain was apparently because CNBC was not satisfied with current level of infatuation by the media with the sexual harassment charges against Cain, but the audience became unruly at the question, and emitted some boos from being tired of hearing it already.

 

Cain stood his ground and was did not falter in vehemently denying what he called “unfounded accusations.”  He went further to say that for every accuser that has come forth, thousands of people would say that the behavior never came from Cain.

 

CNBC was still unsatisfied with the saturation of this topic, as Harwood asked Romney if, as a CEO he would have fired Cain for such behavior.  This was question was booed out by the crowd, and after the roar subsided, Romney wisely stepped back from the mic and said, “Cain has responded… I have nothing to say about it.”

 

Harwood then announced he would switch back to the economy, amid cheers from the crowd, and directed a class warfare question to Huntsman about 1% of the US making so much money, to which Huntsman said he wanted to be the president of the 1% and the 99%, but that America is sick and tired of taxpayer money going to bailouts.

Cramer then followed up with another class warfare oriented question to Romney on whether corporations have a “social responsibility” to create jobs, or whether they should just make profits.

 

Romney explained off the top of his head that profit is what’s left after all the employees and executives are paid, and are then used to expand business and grow jobs.  The profits and the job growth goes hand in hand, but Obama doesn’t like business and that’s the problem.

 

Newt then ripped into the media, “Sure. Look, obviously, corporations can and should do both. And what is amazing to me is the inability of much of our academic world and much of our news media and most of the people on Occupy Wall Street to have a clue about history.” Then added the media is inaccurate in reporting about the economy.

 

Maria took offense at this and asked him to be specific about the inaccurate reporting, to which Newt replied, “I have yet to hear a single reporter ask a single Occupy Wall Street person a single rational question about the economy that would lead them to say, for example, “Who is going to pay for the park you are occupying if there are no businesses making a profit?”

 

Then questioning ensued about why Romney doesn’t have a flat tax like the rest of his opponents.  Mitt responded that he’d like to focus on what can be done immediately to help the middle class, which has been hurt the most, by lowering their taxes.  But he’s not opposed to a flat tax in the future.

 

Others were asked to justify the “fairness” of their plans by making poor people pay more and rich people pay less, obviously with no regard to the fact that the poor pay nothing and the top 25% of income earners pay over 85% of the taxes under the current code.

 

Bachmann explained it best by saying 53% pay income tax and 47% do not, which is a big problem.  She said everyone should pay something even if it’s only $10, because everyone benefits from living here.

 

Most of the other candidates agreed that taxes and regulations need to be lowered, and support some sort of flat tax which grows employment, which takes care of most of the problems.  What they forgot to emphasize was that cutting taxes on the job creators is one sure way to create jobs, and we’d rather have poor people working then collecting government welfare.

 

Maria then gave them 30 seconds to say what they would do instead after repealing Obamacare, to which Newt scoffed and said it’s an $18 billion industry that affects everyone’s lives, and it can’t possibly be answered in 30 seconds.

 

Most of the others stated in some form that the problem can be resolved by states,  tort reform, and that doctors and patients can work out plans without the government regulating something.  Bachmann added that individuals should be allowed to buy any health insurance they want, outside the office, with no minimum requirements.

 

Perry said that we need to focus on providing health care rather than sick care, and need to get rid of frivolous lawsuits.  Cain said that the bill was already written called HR3000, which “Princess Pelosi” held in committee and never brought out for a vote.

 

On student government loan programs, most agreed that the government needs to get out of education, leading to Paul’s great quote about the loan program being a disaster that lowers the quality of education, and raises tuition rates. The subject then changed rapidly depending on the candidate’s talking points.

 

In the media highlight of the night, Perry announced he would cut out three cabinet level departments: Education, Commerce, and he forgot the third one.  He appealed to Paul for the third, to which Paul replied he had 5 departments to cut.  Perry would not remember until the next question that the third was Energy. It should be noted here that Perry would have finished about 3rd in this debate without this gaffe.

 

The media didn’t care that Obama thought there were 57 states, or that he couldn’t name even ONE program he would cut in the debates with McCain, but there will be no such forgiveness for Perry. Similarly, they didn’t care that Clinton was accused of actual physical sexual aggravation charges bordering on rape, but there will be no such forgiveness for Cain.

 

The question was proposed about how to avoid companies outsourcing to China to save on costs.  Most contestants said that lowering US taxes would level the playing field.  Mitt was most vocal, saying that China was a cheater, and he would label China as a currency manipulator and slap tariffs on them, due to China artificially devaluing their currency, stealing US info through hacking, and piracy.

 

Newt said the problem was complex and he would probably rely on someone like Huntsman who had a lot of experience with China.  Huntsman said applause-lines like slapping them with tariffs wouldn’t work, and China could claim the US was manipulating their own currency via “quantitative easing,” and then retaliate with tariffs on US products, creating a trade war.

 

The question was posed about how to gain bipartisan support, and only a few answered it with lackluster responses.  What I really wanted to hear was one of them say: the answer is to get rid of all the democrats in congress that have been steadily destroying this country, and replace them with people that will work for the country rather than against it.

Now that Hermann Cain has established himself as a leading contender in the GOP Presidential Primary, it’s time for the left wing to start attacking him.

They won’t attack him on his record of running successful businesses or his common sense political views however; it’s time to get personal.

Like Clarence Thomas, who the leftists still hate vehemently, they brought up some old sexual harassment allegations against Cain that were apparently never proven.

The facts seem to be that Cain, as president of the National Restaurant Association, fired a woman, who retaliated with a sexual harassment claim, in order to get some severance pay, which she then received in order to dismiss the matter.

If you’re not familiar with this type of business, what happens especially with large corporate organizations, is they will consider the cost of sending the CEO to court to defend charges versus a payoff to shut up the alleged victims. The cost of the settlement normally pales in comparison to that of the legal battle, which can drag out into massive attorney fees, not to mention horrible publicity for the executive and the company. Even if the charges have no substantiation, some kind of settlement is always far cheaper.

Why is this subject so important anyway? It’s not, but to the Democrat-controlled media it is a big part of their smear campaign against Cain.

It wasn’t important that Bill Clinton had numerous sexual harassment allegations against him, some of which included rape-like cases, rather than just “inappropriate comments” that Cain and Thomas were accused of. They tried to cover up the Weiner episodes and instead go after the accusers to vilify them instead.

It wasn’t important that Obama admitted in his book before being fraudulently elected, that he had been a drug abuser in college. Who cares if the person controlling the world’s largest nuclear arsenal is a drug abuser?

Things like that aren’t important. What is important is to smear conservatives on unsubstantiated personal attacks, because you can’t beat them on the issues.

In a disgustingly biased personal attack on Cain, posing as an actual news article in the Huffington Post titled “Intellectual Rigor vs Rigor Mortis,” the writer tries to portray Cain as some kind of idiot that would get wasted by the intellectually superior Obama in a debate.

No really, this is what they wrote about. The former CEO of a successful restaurant chain and the major national trade association for restaurants, is some kind of a dunce.

Obama, who has never run anything except a successful campaign, would beat up on Cain like Ali vs Urkel, it claims.

Here’s an excerpt:
“Beauty and brains against bigotry and bias. Truffle against trifle. You get the point. Obama does his homework and is not afraid of facts. But taking a look at Cain’s political positions, there is a consistent pattern of obstinate wrongheadedness.”

Wow, no bias there. The Obama “beauty and brains” comment is so nauseating that it’s hard to even read it, or any of the rest of that piece of garbage disguised as an article, but it was worth quoting just so you can see their vile, slanted, hatred towards conservatives.

Obama isn’t afraid of the facts that he has almost completely destroyed the US economy, and would have succeeded by now if the GOP hadn’t taken control of the house? Or the fact that he increased federal spending by over 30% his first year in office? Or the fact that he’s getting beat in the polls by a generic GOP candidate?

There are few facts that Obama should not be frightened about, such as the majority of the media who support him and his communist policies. Or the fact that he will likely raise more money from unknown sources than his opponent in next year’s election.

By far the majority of real facts do not reveal anything positive about Obama or his ability to run anything except a successful campaign using other people’s money.

Hermann Cain is infinitely more qualified than Obama to run anything, including his mouth. Cain actually understands how businesses operate and create jobs and wealth, since that is what he spent his career doing.

Obama only knows how to rob people of their wealth so that the government can spend it, while running his mouth about how great he is for doing so.

One of the best racist liberal rants about Cain is that “he knows his place in the back of the bus.” If the back of the bus includes being a CEO for a multimillion dollar company, maybe more people should be headed for the back seat.

Oops, Michelle Obama let the cat slip out of the bag once again. It turns out she still isn’t proud of her country despite her husband holding the highest office in the land. Of course, that is something for which we should all be duly embarrassed, but at least Obama and his family should be proud of it.

Perhaps she is, but Michelle still has no pride or respect for the American Flag, that’s for sure. You don’t have a to be an expert lip reader to see that in this video, after the flag ceremony at a funeral, that she turns to Obama and asks, “All this for a damned flag?” To which, Barry just nods as she shakes her ugly, disrespectful, pathetic head.

You may not have any respect for the flag, Michelle, but for many of us it stands for a country that once meant something for freedom and economic opportunity, something that your husband and his fascist commie henchmen have taken away with every passing day.

Please continue to share the truth about these communist tyrants that are pretending to run the country.

October 20, 2011

Jo Biden is already taking credit for the Gaddafi death, saying, “We spent only $2 billion without losing a single life, and he’s dead.” The fact is that US forces weren’t even part of the air strike or ground troops that found the dictator, which is the primary reason there was no US loss of life, and we had no business in Libya anyway.  Senator Mccain has jumped on the bandwagon, giving Obama credit.

A NATO strike on his compound at 6am sent his convoy speeding away, but they could not outrun more NATO jets that struck his vehicles. Obama will no doubt at some point falsely claim that he ordered the strike, just like he lied about the Bin Laden death, which he also had nothing to do with.

Gaddafi then tried to escape on foot but to no avail. Gaddafi was reported to have been found hiding in a concrete pipe, pleading for his life. He was shot in the head and legs, and the details are unclear, but it appears he was fatally shot after he was found, telling them to not shoot, as an execution.

The opposition forces who found the tyrant then paraded his body around for international TV so that everyone could see he was indeed dead, shouting “Allahu Akbar” (Allah is Great). They immediately released photos and videos, including the shaky video below provided by the UK Mirror. It has been reported that this rebel group is also persecuting Jews in the name Allah.

The bottom line is that the tyrant who once called Obama his muslim brother during a speech (that’s on video, it’s true) is now dead and it has nothing to do with this administration’s incompetent foreign policy.

All of Obama’s actions in sending US soldiers off to die in foreign lands that they shouldn’t be in, are geared to shore up his national security credentials, which he doesn’t have, so that he can claim he’s tough on foreign policy and so forth, to get re-elected.

.

 

A black guy, an Arab, an illegal alien, a Muslim, a Christian, a communist, a messiah, a democrat, a drug addict, a socialist, an idiot, and a pathological liar walk into a bar….

 

 

 

The bartender asks: What can I get you, Mr. President?

I’m predicting the catcalls from the “mainstream” (read: liberal) media (MSM) before they even start. They are so predictable in their cheap shots and personal attacks, that I know what their next move is even before they do.

Having been right about every social, political, and economic prediction I’ve made for the last 10 years, I will make a new one that I have complete 100% faith in. The media rallying cry against Perry within the next year will be: “Do we really need another Governor from Texas?”

And the answer to that, in short, is yes. But not just because Texas is one of the largest geographic, populous, and economic states in the union, but because of the man that has been running it successfully for over 10 years.

Perry, previously unknown to many outside of Texas, is actually the longest serving governor in Texas history, and has never lost an election. In addition, he has served as chairman of the GOP Governor’s Association.

Governor Perry is a proud patriot and unapologetic conservative who stands for the primary values espoused by the mainstream conservative movement.

But we’re not here to just hype him up with feel-good compliments as the MSM did for Obama, without even knowing anything about him. We are here to cover the details, specifics, and real factors.

Reasons why we need another Governor from Texas:

Conservative Values: Perry supports solid mainstream conservative values that most Americans believe in. This is a center-right nation, despite what the MSM pretends, and people do sympathize with mainstream conservatism. See Ronald Reagan, the best president of the 20th century. Principles like smaller government, lower taxes, and less government intrusion ring happily in the ears of most citizens. Further, Americans don’t elect moderate republicans as President. See Bob Dole, John McCain.

Intellect: Despite his cowboy mannerism, which is charming, he did write a book called “Fed Up” which delineates his disapproval of the Federal Government’s expansion into the huge monster that it is now, robbing Americans of their income, spending other people’s money, and interfering with everyone’s life. This is a sentiment that most Americans agree with, as shown in the TEA Party movement. Contrast that with Obama’s book about his college drug use and communist principles.

Common Sense: Whatever happened to this principle? Well it’s still alive and well with Perry. Any American with common sense realizes that we can’t sustain the Federal expansionist movement, including Perry, who can now vocalize those views with a national audience. We don’t need a genius as president, just someone who sympathizes with what his constituents want, understands how to implement it, and has the judgment to make the right decisions.

Common Bond: The way Perry comes across as an average southern American patriot is appealing to a great many people. The truth is, he’s well above average, but you wouldn’t know it by listening to him. Americans, right and left, are already tired of Obama talking down to us and lecturing us like we’re a bunch of idiot schoolchildren, especially those of us that have much higher IQ’s than Obama, but that’s another story. The citizens of this country like a man that talks to them straight up, as a peer or equal, and that’s what Perry does.

Longevity: Hopefully, after the 2008 election debacle, Americans learned their lesson about electing a half-term, unknown Senator, whose place of birth is still a matter of debate. The fact that nobody really seemed to know where Obama came from should have been a red flag. The fact that he was never in an executive position of any sort should have been a huge concern. Perry is the longest serving governor in Texas history, and has a known public record to run on.

Track Record: Perry’s accomplishments as Texas governor are well documented. He has presided over the state for over 10 years and enacted what the people wanted, despite a partisan legislature. At one point, he even hired a former Democrat opponent from a previous governor’s race to get a bipartisan bill passed, and it worked. His state is one of few that has had any job growth in the last few years, and other economic factors of the state rank in the top half of the union, despite the fact that it’s getting flooded by illegal aliens, which, as a group, bring down all the economic indicators.

Physical Qualifications: Let’s be honest, Obama is the first President of the modern era that doesn’t have a 14 inch part in his hair, but he does have a full head of hair. Perry does have the 14 inch part, plus he’s tall enough, ruggedly handsome, and although 61 he doesn’t look a day over 59. Most men wouldn’t mind looking that good at his age. As aforementioned, the old white haired or balding thing doesn’t work, see Dole or McCain; it just doesn’t work.

Cleanliness: Let’s be even more frank. To get elected as a Democrat, you can be a dirt-bag, and that’s fine. If you want to admit in your biography that you were a heavy drug abuser in college, and that you believe in the principles of communism, that’s fine, see Obama. If you’re a Republican, no such luck. If you had a DUI 30 years ago they will use it against you. If you once used the word “makaka” which means “monkey” to refer to a reporter, they can remove you from the Senate. You basically have to be a saint, which works more in Romney’s favor since he is actually a “latter day saint,” but that’s another story. So far, no skeletons have surfaced for Perry, but if they don’t, the MSM will create some, you can count on that.

Electability: Last but far from least, this is a factor that the GOP tends to overlook, much to their demise. People are not going to elect an old white haired Senator that has been part of the problem for 26 years. But they will definitely give a second look to a governor that’s literally “Fed Up” with the way Washington DC politics have been running the nation. Perry speaks with determination and sincerity, doesn’t mince words, doesn’t backpedal, and doesn’t need a teleprompter. He knows what he’s talking about and is not afraid to say it. In addition, he will certainly carry Texas, which has the 2nd highest amount of electoral votes, and would get Florida were Jeb Bush to officially endorse him, which is completely hypothetical at this point.

Concerns: Democrats love to point out that Perry used to be a Democrat that supported Al Gore. Of course they skip over the fact that Gore used to be more conservative than most Republicans. At the time, Gore preached fiscal responsibility, and he was even (gasp) pro-life! That was before the Clintons lured him to the dark side and he became a flaming liberal. At that point, Perry jumped ship, not only deserting Gore but the entire Democrat Party, realizing there was no hope for it. Another Governor once went through a similar story after spending the first half of his life as a Democrat; his name was Ronald Reagan. Any other character concerns that opponents will point to are likely some kind of slant on the facts or just outright slander.

That’s the full rap on Perry, and those should be good enough reasons why we need another governor from Texas. Let’s end it with a few quotes from Perry himself.

I stand before you today as a disciplined conservative Texan, a committed Republican and a proud American, united with you to restoring our nation and revive the American dream.

In Michigan, a liberal democrat raised taxes and kept their government programs at the same level. And guess what? Their economy continued into the toilet, it continued down.

Let’s stand up. Let’s speak with pride about our morals and our values and redouble our effort to elect more conservative Republicans.

Social Security is a Ponzi scheme; it’s a big lie to tell young people they will get anything out this program they’ve been paying into.

Texas has long been known as the nation’s largest energy producer, but we are equally proud of our distinction as the nation’s leading energy innovator.

Democracy functions best when we have an active citizenry.

The air we breathe, the water we drink, and the land we inhabit are not only critical elements in the quality of life we enjoy – they are a reflection of the majesty of our Creator.

Our party cannot be all things to all people. … Our loudest opponents on the left are never going to like us so let’s stop trying to curry favor with them.

The Obama administration is an affront to every freedom-loving American,and a threat to every private sector job in this country.

The people who illegally cross into the country are from countries that have very close ties to al Qaeda, whether it’s Yemen or Afghanistan, Pakistan, China. It is an absolute national disgrace.

This administration in Washington that’s in power now clearly believes that government is not only the answer to every need, but it’s the most qualified to make the most central decisions for every American in every area.

Under Obama, our federal tax dollars can now be used to fund abortion all over the world. With the stroke of a pen, abortion essentially became a U.S. foreign export.

We need to stop apologizing for celebrating life. We need to stop apologizing for wanting to protect an individual’s right to build a business.

Our shared conservative values, our belief in the individual is the great hope of our nation.

Maybe it’s time to have some provocative language in this country…

That about sums it up. It is time for some decisive language. It’s time to stop being a wussy about criticizing the useless idiot that is supposedly running the nation. Now, we have someone that’s not afraid to tell us like it is. That, my friend, is why we need another governor from Texas.

Let’s not forget it was highly trained Navy Seals that killed Bin Laden, not Obama, who is a cowardly fool that the old man Osama would whip with his cane.

Here’s Obama’s hypocrisy:

2008: “Navy Seal Team 6 is Cheney’s private assassination team.”
2011: “I put together Seal Team 6 to take out Bin Laden.”

2008: “Bin Laden is innocent until proven guilty, and must be captured alive and given a fair trial.”
2011: “I authorized Seal Team 6 to kill Bin Laden.”

2008: “Guantanamo is entirely unnecessary, and the detainees should not be interrogated.” “I will close Guantanamo.”
2011: “Vital intelligence was obtained from Guantanamo detainees that led to our locating Bin Laden.”

So why the change in heart over all of this? It’s quite simple, his aides told him he had to take credit for this, if it really happened, in order to get re-elected.

Obama is the same jackass whose administration tried to prosecute and court martial 3 Navy Seals for punching a terrorist while capturing him. So they’re not allowed hand to hand combat anymore? Soldiers can shoot, blow up, and otherwise maim the enemy, but can’t use martial arts?

If it sounds confusing, you’re not alone. Obama has no clue what he’s doing, doesn’t understand the purpose of the military, hates our armed forces, and has disdain for the entire Department of Defense. He is a naive, narcissistic, idiot pretending to be president, who will capitalize on any opportunity to lower his growing disapproval numbers.

Obama is not an American. Anyone who harbors such hatred for freedom, limited government, business people of all sorts, capitalism, the US Constitution and the US Armed Forces, and thinks the American people are stupid if they don’t agree with him, does not constitute an American.

In addition, anyone who aspires to increase government spending, taxes, and government control while decreasing the sovereignty, freedoms and bank accounts of the average citizen, can only be called anti-American.

An American is someone who believes in the American way as our founding fathers laid out and provided for us, not one who seeks to destroy it like the abomination called Obama.

Real Deal Politics, upon first hearing of George Allen’s intent to run for the US Senate in Virginia (again), hereby wholeheartedly and officially endorses the former Governor, Senator, House Rep, and lifetime public servant.

George Allen is a better man and patriot than he is a politician, but he is also a charismatic leader and excellent manager, who understand the issues and puts the constituency first in all of his decisions.

During my decades living in Virginia, Allen was the best governor by far. I was fortunate enough to meet him during a campaign season, and can say that he is as gracious and sincere as any “politician” that I’ve met.

The truth is that he became so scary to the left wing that they sabotaged his 2006 re-election campaign amid rumors he would run for President in 2008, honing in on one word he said that they didn’t know. Once they figured out what it meant, they used it against him incessantly to label him a racist (far from the truth) and enabling his opponent a narrow and undeserved victory.

Allen had decided to have fun and poke at an annoying cameraman, calling him “macaca,” a word meaning monkey. It was a simple lighthearted jab that the leftist media harped on relentlessly until they convinced enough people it was some kind of racial slur, which it is not and was not intended as such.

You see, the media doesn’t care that Barney Frank was having carnal relations with an executive at Fannie Mae, regardless of gender, while Frank passed laws to relax their lending restrictions, leading up to the real estate collapse of the century.

They also don’t seem to care that Mr. Obama admitted in his own book to spending college in a drug-induced haze and a desire to carry out the communist dreams of his father who abandoned him. In fact, they don’t mind that he can’t prove he’s a US citizen either.

But they did care greatly that Allen used a word they didn’t understand to make fun of one of their own people. Hopefully for everyone’s sake, Senator Allen will refrain from insulting media members again, and using words they’re not familiar with.

Times have past and Allen has apologized for his insult and use of the word, admits responsibility for it, and wants to move on with the important task of repairing the recent damage to America by leftist politicians.

George Allen represents those who want a limited, less intrusive, less expensive federal government, and lower taxes for individuals and corporations. In other words, he desires some fiscal responsibility that will help recreate jobs.

Allen is also in favor of common sense energy policies, excessive spending reductions, and a line-item veto to help remove pork-barrel additions to bills going to the White House. Wouldn’t that be nice?

Keep in mind that George Allen is only one man, and will need people to support him and others like him who want to get this country back on track before it completely derails.

At the link below, watch the interview with Allen and the story of how none other than Ronald Reagan, the greatest president of the 20th century, hand picked him to become involved in organized politics. We could use someone in the Reagan mold right about now.

Newsmax: Kathleen Walter interviews George Allen

Drink indicated amount when you hear the following keywords:

1 sip Jobs
2 sips Bipartisan
3 sips Economy
4 sips Republicans
5 sips Investment
6 sips Healthcare
7 sips Competitive
8 sips Civility
9 sips Unprecedented
10 sips Uninsured
11 sips Rhetoric
12 sips Patriotism

To win game, correctly add up the total amount the filler words “and” or “uh” are used. Have a designated driver if traveling.