South Carolina should slow Romney down

On January 21, 2012, South Carolina’s GOP voters will have a chance to draw a line in the sand. They can make a decisive statement by soundly repudiating Willard Romney. And they might want to do just that.

SIDE NOTE: A scary thought just occurred to me. It’s entirely possible that South Carolina’s evangelical Christians might assume the role of Devil’s Advocate. They might decide to vote for Romney even though they suspect he could very well be the Anti-Christ. Their reasoning? The sooner the Anti-Christ makes the scene, the sooner Jesus will appear to make things right. I know this sounds like a stretch, but I’m hard put to otherwise explain Romney’s high poll numbers in that state. [See my post Mitt Romney, Anti-Christ? at http://ind4prez2012.blogspot.com/2011/11/mitt-romney-anti-christ.html ]

With the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary behind us, we have one week before South Carolina weighs in. A lot of pundits are claiming that a Romney win there would virtually seal the deal. Hard to believe, isn’t it – that Willard’s coronation would be a foregone conclusion after only three contests? And yet, there is a certain logic at work here: If Willard’s foes haven’t been able to stop him by now, by what magic could they do so as the primary season grinds on?

What SC’s GOP rank-and-file should be thinking

In 25 words or less: Make Romney sweat a little bit. Local opinion shapers in South Carolina should urge the rank-and-file to vote against Romney with the sole purpose of denying him an outright victory. And, if this could be managed, prevent Romney from coming even close. My suggestion is: vote for Rick Santorum. That would send three messages:

·       We don’t want to make it so easy for Willard to steamroll his way to the nomination.

·       “Willard, keep open the possibility of nominating a true conservative as your running mate. That would be the price of our support.” [NOTE: There’s no rule that says Willard can’t name his VP right now.]

·       We want to make it known that we want a true conservative to step up to the plate.

About that last point, it’s not too late for a new face to present itself – for instance, Marco Rubio or even Jeb Bush:

·       Even though Rubio is new to the national political scene, he could be seen as a fresh-face alternative to the truly mediocre GOP field presently vying for the nomination. As for “what’s in it for him?” If he wins, no comment necessary. He’ll be well poised for another attempt in 2016 if he runs a competent and vigorous campaign against Obama now.

·       Jeb Bush could give Barack Obama a real run for his money. I’m not saying the public’s memory is short, but Jeb could very well say to Obama: “You did a good job of bringing to conclusion the efforts of my brother in Iraq and Afghanistan. In fact, you did such a good job, you might as well have been George W. Bush himself! As for the economy, your leadership has been a disaster.”

It would really help if a Draft Jeb or Draft Rubio groundswell of grassroots support could be generated. But time is running out for that to be a practical option. However, a resounding refusal by South Carolina’s voters to rubberstamp Romney could help buy that time. Indeed, if Romney were to lose badly in SC, the speculation from the chattering classes would rise to a deafening roar.

Why should we make Romney sweat?

Romney’s had it too easy for too long. He’s had the advantage of the experience gained from having run in 2008. He’s got lots of money – of his own and from others. He hasn’t stumbled on the debate platform as badly as have some of the others. But…Willard is only human. He’s already made a couple of statements I’m sure he wishes he could rephrase:

·       “Corporations are people, my friend.”

·       “I like being able to fire people who provide services to me.”

·       “You know, I think it’s about envy. I think it’s about class warfare.” That was in response to a question asked by Matt Lauer:  “Did you suggest that…anyone who has questions about the distribution of wealth and power in this country, is envious? Is it about jealousy, or fairness?”

We should make Romney sweat because if he does, if he comes to feel that the wheels are coming off his bandwagon, he might do or say something desperate. And desperate men make mistakes. Mistakes that a newcomer (or even a current rival) could take advantage of.

And why shouldn’t we subject him to this kind of test? Surely Obama’s team (official and, in the guise of the Super PACs, unofficial) are going to do their best to make him sweat. And, though this is very obvious, the office of the presidency is enough to make anybody sweat. So a word to the wise: “Willard, get used to sweating. Hope you can handle it.”

Actually, I think Willard Romney will cave and show us the shallow man that he really is. If he’s made of stern stuff than that, the only way we’ll find out is if we can see how he responds under pressure. I hope Willard says to that: “Bring it on!” [NOTE: That “bring it on” stuff is easy to say, but it’s oh so hard to respond to.]

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

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party

“After all is said and done, I hope people walk away from the 2012 election concluding, ‘It’s too bad so much has to depend on one man – that is, which one man ends up being president’” – Steve.

Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

Mitt Romney, South Carolina primary, Marco Rubio, GOP conservative, Jeb Bush

US President’s Weekly Yahoo News Updates

Once per week, I consolidate comments I’d posted to recent articles appearing on Yahoo News. I share my views, written as if I actually were the US President. [I’m working on that.] The following were posted between Dec. 11 and today, though appear below in no particular order. As is my usual custom, if I open with a quoted item, that’s from the article itself.

It took more than three days to re-enable the posting of readers’ comments to Yahoo News! articles. I still maintain, though, Yahoo’s censorship is intentional, and that posts like mine will be screened out or earmarked for limited-distribution only.

I hope you enjoy all 17 of these mini-essays/comments:

ONE:

So Gingrich won’t go negative, eh? What if Willard Romney were to challenge Newt by asking in his face: “Do you think it would be appropriate for your wife, Callista, to sign a marital fidelity pledge as you did, especially the part that says ‘[I pledge to have] respect for the marital bonds of others?’”

It doesn’t seem to take much to set Gingrich off, though this would be a good question for Willard (or for anyone) to ask. After all, Callista was “liaisoning” with Newt when he was still married to wife #2. Isn’t it important that the First Lady sign such a pledge…considering? Huh, huh, huh…isn’t it? Why aren't you answering, Newt? Come on, man. Inquiring minds want to know.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“When I found out Jon Huntsman wouldn’t sign anyone’s pledges, I had to give him a lot of points for that.”

TWO:

I wonder if a space ship could fly through the sun if it were sufficiently close to flying at the speed of light. The word “sufficiently” is the key, for of course the closer to that speed an object attains, the closer to attaining infinite mass. And that’s a definite barrier, since no single object could attain infinite mass (which is more mass than contained in this universe, though I wonder if we could somehow tap into the masses of other universes and if that would be "enough").

The mass of such a fast-moving ship would be so many times the mass of the sun as to make the latter’s negligible. But then there’s the matter of such a ship surviving the sun’s heat. Or would heat also have a negligible effect on such a massive spaceship? For what reason, one wonders?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Maybe whoever piloted the ‘Comet’ Lovejoy can answer such questions.”

THREE:

Gingrich should challenge Romney and Ron Paul to promise to support the GOP nominee, whomever he or she turns out to be.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“And make Romney swear to that upon the Book of Mormon. That ought to give him pause. As for Ron Paul? His hesitation will speaks volumes more than his voice ever did.”

FOUR:

[This is my response to BRI 3 D.]

The idea behind having a political party in the first place is that you don’t disagree so profoundly that you couldn’t unite behind your party’s standard bearer. But we already know Ron Paul is an opportunist. He was a Libertarian once and then he (as you put it) “sold out” to become a RINO once again.

Ron Paul deserves all the scorn that can be heaped upon one who sold out to the Two Party System hoping he could buck it someday to his own personal advantage. And that’s all that’s at stake here, isn’t it? For Ron Paul would get to smile on his death bed after having been elected President.

Too bad he didn’t do the work necessary to assure the election of an independent Congress (by himself remaining an independent while in Congress), which an independent president would need to advance his agenda. But after all gets said and done, it will be seen that Ron Paul didn’t care as much about getting anything done as he cared about being called “Mr. President.” Ron Paul makes me sick.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Why don’t you Ron Paulonians ditch your Saviour Complex. I’m embarrassed for you.”

FIVE:

This is what Yahoo! posted: “We're having problems with Reading Activity and Commenting features on our site. We're working to re-enable them as soon as possible. We apologize for any inconvenience.”

This is what Yahoo meant: “We’ve had to shut down this extremely popular feature for 3 days while we figure out how to more efficiently screen out undesirable posts without being so obvious about it. The candidates are starting to complain.”

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“It’s ironic how I blasted Yahoo for censorship on my personal blog on Sunday, and the very next day ‘We’re having problems…’ Go figure.”

SIX:

[This was posted before Yahoo finally “fixed” (after three days) whatever prevented readers from posting their comments to all of its news articles.]

It's good to see Yahoo is at least allowing readers to post comments to its sports articles. I guess that's safe enough.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"But...if someone tries to slip in a political comment to its sports articles, Yahoo will probably shut down that venue as well."

SEVEN:

“The pipeline would carry millions of barrels of Alberta oilsands crude through six U.S. states to Gulf Coast refineries.”

What’s all this noise about “Gulf Coast refineries?” Why not build a refinery closer to those oilsands? Or, better yet, why doesn’t Canada decide to construct its own refinery and sell us the end-products? Surely the Canadians wouldn’t need so much pipeline over such a long distance to get the job done.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Why haven’t we heard anything about these options?”

[Added note (not posted to Yahoo): I’m not the only Yahoo commenter who made this observation, though I’ll at least pretend to be surprised that this issue hasn’t made its way into the dialog between the Two Parties.]

EIGHT:

I agree. Jeb Bush would be the GOP's best shot at Obama, who tried his level best to be George III. Deeper into Afghanistan? Dubya would have approved. Foreign policywise, there's not much difference between Obama and Dubya.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"And to those Democrats who are laughing at my suggestion, I ask, 'Is that nervous laughter I'm hearing?'"

NINE:

John S, I disagree. What Yahoo is doing is catering to whatever agenda pleases the Elite (liberal or conservative are really just buzz words) and assuring its own maximum profits.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"The old divide between Liberal and Conservative is only superfically relevant. The real battlelines are drawn between the ultrarich (and their supporters who delude themselves into thinking they're part of the people who count), and everybody else."

TEN:

JeromeB,

You might be interested in the words of Greg Palast, concerning “the [Iraq] war was for oil:”

“Specifically, the system ordered up by the Bush cabal would keep a lid on Iraq's oil production -- limiting Iraq's oil pumping to the tight quota set by Saudi Arabia and the OPEC cartel. There you have it. Yes, Bush went in for the oil -- not to get more of Iraq's oil, but to prevent Iraq from producing too much of it."

The idea being, the less the supply, the more that can be charged for it.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“There is more than one way in which a war can be for oil.”

ELEVEN:

I saw the Sherlock Holmes movie yesterday and walked away with one depressing realization. The elegance of the dialog was way over the heads of too many in the audience. Maybe too many people are being dumbed-down by overexposure to the content on Yahoo News’ comments. Also, I was kind of hoping for a moment of frivolous indulgence, such as Dr. Watson responding with a “No shit, Sherlock!” Oh, please, please let that line be in the next installment.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Though her role wasn’t very challenging, I was glad to see Noomi Rapace get this kind of major exposure.”

TWELVE:

“‘…when it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, typically it's a duck,’ Romney said.” That old truism has been heard by generations as they went through law school. However, I wonder if it’s been updated to take DNA testing into account. If so, then it wouldn’t matter what “it” walks like or quacks like. That aside, we don’t need DNA testing here, just a simple application of common  sense.

For instance, why doesn’t Knute Gettin’-Rich open his books in the name of transparency? Be specific and tell us exactly what kind of advice you gave Freddie Mac?  You say, “most of that money went to pay overhead?” Fine, open those books and show us. You don’t have anything against transparency, do you Knute?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“You know what? I think Knute’s lying about only advising. Even if he didn’t covertly lobby, his name attached to Freddie Mac surely didn’t hurt their cause, now did it?”

[Post Script (not posted to Yahoo): To: Law School professors: Have you updated this “duck” talk to include the concept of the virtual duck? Just asking.]

THIRTEEN:

“He said he was inclined to hold teleconferences every few days…” Yes, but does that mean Knute actually holds such conferences every few days? There’s a world of difference between actually doing something and being “inclined” to do something.

"We don't have our advertising versus their advertising, but you get to ask me directly." Maybe so, but do you post all of those questions (and all of your responses) on your website? There’s a world of difference between (a select few by means of teleconferencing) getting to “ask me directly” and truly opening up the floodgates to allow anyone to ask questions (and then  posting all of your replies).

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“You’ve got to be careful with someone as slick as Knute Gettin’-Rich by keeping on firing question after question, each seeking refinements of his previous answers. Sooner or later, he won’t be able to outrun your questions and the truth with come out.”

FOURTEEN:

“The mission cost nearly 4,500 American … lives…” If Iraq adopts another strongman (like Saddam Hussein) or if Iraq aligns itself with Iran, we would have to go back in there with guns blazing. If not, then those 4,500 Americans would have died in vain.

You can see it now, can’t you? Ten years down the pike? If Iraq misbehaves, it would go without saying that our Congress would be right on top of the situation, giving President Rubio authority to re-invade. No, not merely “giving” that authority, but demanding that he take action, no matter what the cost. No doubt about any of this, right? Right!? Yoo hoo, anybody listening?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Goes without saying for we never leave anything half done, right? Right? Anybody out there?”

FIFTEEN:

Ron Paul is a fatally flawed candidate simply because, if elected, he won't have an independent Congress to work with. Even elements within his own party will try to cut him off at the knees.

The sad part? Ron Paul doesn't seem to have the slightest clue about this.

The sadder part? Neither do his supporters who think (as do too many) that simply electing One Great Man/Saviour can fix everything.

The saddest part? Ron Paul could have been working all these years as a Congressman trying to drum up support for independents in Congress by shedding his Pubber label.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“But, no. Instead we have Sheeple bleating, ‘Far out, man. Vote for Ron Paul and he’ll fix everything all by himself.’ What a bunch of cheeseheads!”

SIXTEEN:

Obama doesn’t deserve another term in office, since he’s proved he’s not a man of his word. So that means…what? We’re stuck with a Pubber for Prez? Even as a lifelong liberal (that is, an open-minded one) I say, “Why not?” I’m open-minded enough to know that the road to our ideals is sometimes paved with the bodies of our opponents – figuratively speaking, of course.

Obama was foisted on us as an agent of change by a media which didn’t ask him any hard questions during his meteoric rise. [You didn’t think that was an oversight, did you?] What better way to dig us deeper into Afghanistan than to have our liberal sweetheart do the digging? People will swallow all kinds of crap depending on who’s doing the dishing.

OK, fine, lesson learned. Next time? Stop being so predictable and vote against your conscience. Vote for the guy you'd hate to be our next prez. The only viable, grand strategy is to deny the incumbents their “social security.” If we can muster the will to vote against all incumbents – the good, the bad, and the ugly – we’ll badly frighten an establishment that counts on our predictability. How else do you think they market so successfully – everything from pet rocks to the cola you drink to the Leader of the Free World?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Vote for me and I’ll set you free – that is, once you get around to voting in an independent Congress that I won’t have to fight with for four years.”

SEVENTEEN:

[In response to Comet Lovejoy flying through the sun’s atmosphere and emerging intact.]

A good friend of mine said, "It's a spaceship, idiots!" Well...there has to be some reason why it survived solar grazing. What kind of technology could do that? You better believe the Pentagon is taking far more than a casual interest in this.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"If there really are ET's out there, maybe they're just toying with us by putting on an occasional show."

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

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party

“An interesting question for Ron Paul: ‘If we closed every military base overseas and, correspondingly, reduced our military manpower, wouldn’t you be a little nervous about the presence of so many (unemployed!) people within our borders – who know how to shoot?’” – Steve.


Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

US President’s weekly Yahoo! News updates

[NOTE: No, I am not really the US President. However, by acting the way I think he should act and saying the things I think he should say, perhaps that could change.]

Once per week, I share comments I’d posted to articles appearing on Yahoo News. These were posted between May 22 and today, though appear below in no particular order. As is my usual custom, if I open with a quoted item, that’s from the article itself.

Posted on Yahoo! News

ONE:

“I wish Jeb Bush had a different last name. He’d be fantastic,” said Henry Barbour...

Not so fast...Maybe being a Bush is an asset. Obama followed in Bush's footsteps to such a profound degree, he basically rehabilitated the name. I even wrote a blog about Obama adding Dubya's head (that is, a sculpted version thereof) to Mount Rushmore. Blogging can be such fun!

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"Wouldn't it be amazing if Obama, who magically took away much of Dubya's stigma, lost the election to Jeb...for precisely that reason!?"

TWO:

[This was my response to an article about a search warrant executed in the California home of a 91-year-old woman who sold suicide kits.]

“...but said he could not comment on the contents of the warrant..." Could not or would not? Sounds like the feds were acting way beyond the bounds of what the warrant authorized. Unless they found a judge who gave them a blank check (not supposed to do that).

“…and spent the next 10 hours packing up ‘boxes and boxes and boxes’ of stuff and leaving a mess.”  If these invaders can spend 10 hours executing a blank-check warrant, they can spend an hour, under the strict guidance of the homeowner, to clean up. What’s wrong with people? Doesn't Obama's terrorist squad have anything better to do? Remember, people, you're paying for this.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“(sigh) This is just another instance of the feds trying to make an example out of someone.”

THREE:

"...reconsider the deadline for the sake of the country's security."

No extension of deadline will enhance Iraq's security. Only pulling out those troops will give the better chance of long-term success. But...we don't anticipate long-term very well.

Five years ago, I predicted that the "real" War in Iraq will begin once our troops were significantly drawn down. Reassertion: We should never have gone there in the first place, and should have left way before now. But Obama won the election and decided to maintain the Bush Doctrine. Fool! And fool on us for going for the Change rap.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"The more things 'Change,' the more they remain the same."

FOUR [I wish some reporter would actually ask this question.]

Reporter to Romney after he announces prez run: "Mr. Romney, if you're elected, will you take the oath of office with your hand on the Bible or on the Book of Mormon [which, as an article of faith, you claim to be superior to the Bible]?"

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"This is not a 'religious test' question, it's a question of consistency of values. FYI, were I to be sworn in, my hand will be on the Lotus Sutra. Nothing less will do. [I don't have a problem with such questions.]"

FIVE [On the proposed introduction of NATO helicopters in Libya]:

Well, looks like we're trying to pick a winner in Libya. Be careful what you ask for. As soon as an RPG brings down one of those choppers, the din of cheering from the EU will turn to stone silence. Even worse? If one of those choppers has to land due to mechanical problems and the locals decide to take the crew, skin them alive, and post that on the internet.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"These kinds of decisions make me wonder about the effects of inbreeding among the leadership."

SIX:

“The 12,000 police officers securing the seaside town of Deauville…spent most of their time checking entry badges.”

If those 12,000 officers are tied down to petty duty in Deauville, that means there are security gaps where those officers would normally otherwise be. French authorities worried about Islamic militants have just made it that much easier for militants to attack the unguarded places.

The basic principle of judo: When facing a bigger, stronger opponent, just look for the places where he’s vulnerable (that is, where his forces are absent). It doesn’t get any simpler than that. No wonder these guys can’t take out Gadhaffi.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“The most telling part of this story is that the police found it necessary to take away the [Buddhist] monk’s banner. What on earth are these people afraid of?”

SEVEN:

Let’s get one thing straight: The people of these Middle Eastern nations aren’t necessarily clamoring for democracy. What they oppose are their crushing autocratic regimes, and lack of opportunity to live decent lives. They would accept a benevolent king if one could be found. Problem is: Corruption and cronyism. Which are problems found everywhere the world over – even in democracies.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“As a Buddhist, I don’t support democracy simply because it can’t work (all pretensions to the contrary); I support either a benevolent kingship (example: rule by Jesus) or a pure democracy – without the thwarting mechanisms we find near and dear (like the filibuster, for example).”

EIGHT [My reply to another blogger’s observations]:

What do you mean "as long as?" Even if all of these negatives you cite magically disappeared, Israel still would not allow for an independent Palestinian nation to arise. The Zionists within Israel are too strong and they think they're entitled (by God, no less) to keep permanent possession of all of the West Bank. And a lot more than that, truth be told, but that's another story.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"When God told the Israelites He was 'giving' them that land, he was only testing them. And they've failed that test miserably."

NINE:

“[Huntsman] must strike a balance between emphasizing the fiscally conservative policies likely to attract GOP primary voters and explaining others certain to repel them.”

“Explaining” will turn out to be quite easy. All Huntsman will have to do is simply tell the GOP base the facts of life, “You can’t nominate the dream candidate who adheres to all of your positions with any hope he’d actually win the presidency. Those things that repel you might attract votes from those who otherwise wouldn’t vote for me. That’s how elections are won.”

If elected, though, I’m afraid we’ll all find out much sooner than later what Huntsman himself must already know: “What I did as governor for the state of Utah cannot be replicated as President of the United States.”

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“No matter who the GOP nominates, Obama’s going to be reelected – so that’s that. And the GOP knows this, which is why they’re really aiming for election 2016.”

TEN:

“Canada will back Israel whatever the cost."

Hey, wait a minute, I thought that was the job our leaders foisted on us.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"I guess everybody missed the part PM Harper mumbled under his breath. Here's the full quote, 'Canada will back Israel whatever the cost to the ideals of human decency, honor, and fair play."

ELEVEN:

"We are not trying to physically target individuals in Gaddafi's inner circle on whom he relies but we are certainly sending them increasingly loud messages," British Defense Secretary Liam Fox said in a statement.

The UN mandate was for a no-fly zone and to protect civilians. How do bunker-buster bombs protect civilians? Where in the mandate does it say Britain gets to send them "increasingly loud messages?" Sounds rather indiscriminate to me.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"Without the rule of law, we are no better than terrorists."

TWELVE:

Consider these two statements side-by-side:

“NATO spokesman Maj. Tim James … didn't confirm the airstrike and provided no details about it...” [and]

“President Karzai blamed “American troops for airstrikes that killed the 14…”

Looks like NATO doesn’t have to bother to confirm that strike because Karzai already did so. Isn’t coordination among allies a wonder to behold? Although…it seems a lack of coordination caused those 14 deaths in the first place.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“If I’d been elected instead of Obama, we’d have been out of Afghanistan long ago and those 14 wouldn’t have died. Now that’s a change I can believe in!”

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

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party

“I amazed that even someone as low down on the social totem pole as I can read the heavily censored/controlled news issued by an outlet such as Yahoo, and can still punch holes in their mainstreamed propagandized narrative.”

Contract me a bpa_cinc@yahoo.com