Obama's New 2012 Re-election Strategy

Was Sarah Palin Properly Vetted By The McCain Team?

Right Wingnut, a blogger who writes for Right Speak, has initiated a debate with me claims that the liberal media started pushing the meme that Sarah Palin wasn't properly vetted and that meme is now being pushed by bitter Romney supporters such as myself: 

A few weeks ago, I started to notice a theme developing - designed to discredit Sarah Palin and the amount of vetting that was done prior to adding her to the ticket in 2008. Nearly every MSM article about the topic suggested that the GOP nominee would be more cautious in their vetting process to avoid making the same "mistake" the McCain campaign made.

Initially, the propagation of this false meme was mostly limited to left-wing journalists with an axe to grind. Lately, it seems that some on the right (mostly Romney supporters who are still bitter that McCain picked her over Mitt) are seizing on the opportunity to pile on.

This claim is false. 

The claim that Sarah Palin wasn't properly vetted was mentioned almost immediately after John McCain announced her as his running mate and it was an observation that was made by people both on the left and the right during the 2008 campaign. For example, Jazz Shaw, a well known conservative blogger who writes articles for the popular conservative website, Hot Air, said back in 2008 that he suspects that Sarah Palin wasn't properly vetted:

Ok, team, we clearly need to address this a bit more. First, let’s start with a bit of background. The original intent of this post, as a follow-on to a previous one, was to express not only my personal dissatisfaction with McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin as the running mate, but to highlight my suspicions that Ms. Palin had not been vetted as fully as some of the other potential nominees.  

Back in 2008, Allahpundit, writing for Hot Air had an article that had links to other articles that raised questions over whether or not she was properly vetted. Other conservative websites such as Townhall.com,  Little Green Football, Right Wing News and Red State all discussed the issue of whether or not Palin was properly vetted during the 2008 Presidential election. Conservatives during the 2008 election had every right to be concerned about whether or not Sarah Palin was properly vetted.

John Aravosis, a blogger, carried a short little article in 2008 on his blog, AmericaBlog about how Sarah Palin wasn't vetted.

Let us review the facts why so many people on the left, right and center who were in the media, in the political trenches and at home were concerned about the vetting of Sarah Palin.

There were news reports that John McCain deliberately chose not to involve some of his top senior campaign advisors when they were deciding who to pick as his running mate. For example, McCain spokeswoman Nancy Pfotenhauer didn't even know how McCain and Palin knew  each other:

"You're running flat into the wall of my ignorance here," she said. "I truly have no indication whatsoever the extent of a relationship that exists with the Governor of Alaska."

There are also reports that the McCain team did not contact state political leaders or business leaders about Sarah Palin. Moreover, it appears that the McCain team didn't even look at the local newspaper archives to see what they had to say about Palin.  They didn't even contact Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan, a man that Palin tried to fire after he refused to fire a family member from the Alaskan police force. Even more surprisingly, there is a report by Marc Ambinder that the McCain team didn't even conduct an FBI background check on the governor.

In fact, it appears that a intensive vetting of Sarah Palin didn't occur until shortly before it was announced she was McCain's running mate:

Aides to Mr. McCain said they had a team on the ground in Alaska now to look more thoroughly into Ms. Palin’s background. A Republican with ties to the campaign said the team assigned to vet Ms. Palin in Alaska had not arrived there until Thursday, a day before Mr. McCain stunned the political world with his vice-presidential choice. The campaign was still calling Republican operatives as late as Sunday night asking them to go to Alaska to deal with the unexpected candidacy of Ms. Palin.

It appears to conservatives and liberals and reporters that the McCain team was trying to close the barn door after the horse has already bolted.

Lets not forget that experienced Conservative campaign advisors have always believed that she was not properly vetted. For example, Sara Fagen, a former political director for President George W. Bush.had this to say about the vetting process of Sarah Palin:

"There's one thing the people in the Republican establishment agree on: There was clearly not a thorough thought process or vetting that went into the vetting of Sarah Palin. They didn't ask the fundamental questions or spend enough time with her,"

Finally, McCain advisor, A.B. Culvahouse, who says that the vetting process was fully conducted. In contrast, we have at least two McCain staffers who say she wasn't vetted. For example, Nicolle Wallace, one of the ’08 campaign’s top advisors, said that the HBO movie, Game Change, was too close to the truth as to make it uncomfortable. to watch. We also have Steve Schmidt who also says Sarah Palin wasn't vetted:

“It’s a story of when cynicism and idealism collide, when you have to do the things that are necessary to win to try to get in office to do the great things you want to do for the country,” Schmidt said. “And I think it showed a process of vetting that was debilitated by secrecy, that was compartmentalized, that failed, that led to a result that was reckless for the country. And I think when you look back at that race, you see this person who is just so phenomenally talented at so many levels, an ability to connect. But also someone who had a lot of flaws as someone running to be in the national command authority who clearly wasn’t prepared.”

Its clear to me that the McCain team is still in disagreement on the issue of whether she was properly vetted or not. Steve Schmidt and Nicole Wallace have been vilified for reporting their observation about what they saw and as controversial as their testimony may be, we still have to take it into consideration given what we know of the facts as reviewed above. 

In the end, the debate over whether or not Sarah Palin was properly vetted or not will go on for a very long time. Historians, journalists, academics, politicians, bloggers, activists and people will debate this issue for many years to come. However, there are enough facts, individually and collectively, to give a reasonable person a legitimate and rational basis for their belief that Sarah Palin wasn't properly vetted. This belief isn't some fringe conspiracy but a belief held by a lot of people on a wide range of the political spectrum. More importantly, conservatives of all stripes and in various levels of power and influence in the Republican party such as Dick Cheney and Ann Coulter believe she wasn't properly vetted. 

In conclusion, it isn't just some blogger such as myself that believes she wasn't properly vetted. This belief isn't just some meme that is being pushed by people on the left or the right because they don't like Sarah Paln and have some sort of axe to grind against her. There are plenty of facts and evidence from a wide range of sources and people that are independent of each other that gives people reasonable doubt that she was vetted. As a result, I stand by my belief that the McCain team did a shoddy job vetting Sarah Palin.

Mitt Romney & Mormon Underwear

Bob Lonsberry, who is a well known conservative talk show host, has penned an article about the LDS use of temple garments which are known to members outside of the LDS Church as Mormon underwear or "magic underwear" as detractors of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints like to call it. 

Here's a portion of Bob Lonsberry's article below: 

What about Mitt Romney’s magic underwear?

Mitt Romney is a Mormon. That is a Christian religion founded in 1830 in upstate New York. Some Mormons do wear a religious garment under their outer clothes. Presumably, Mitt Romney is one of those Mormons.

What is a religious garment?

Well, it depends on the religion. Several faiths have unique bits of clothing that mostly seem to have the same purpose – to remind believers of who they are and what they have promised to God.

Thus the headwear of the Sikh, and the beads, prayer feathers, medicine pouches and shamanic robes of various Indian tribes.

As well as the yarmulke of some Jewish men and the head coverings of some Jewish women, and the aprons, trailing strings and hats of yet more followers of Judaism.

Or the phylacteries and other garments and devices described in particular detail in the Bible.

In that regard, it’s quite possible that Jesus, following the Old Testament Law of Moses and being an observant Jew, wore religiously prescribed garments.

Roman Catholic religious have worn sacred garments for 1,700 years. Similarly, religious garments – or “habits” – have been worn by Anglicans and religious of the Eastern Orthodox, Coptic and Greek Orthodox churches. Some of these garments are priestly, and just for ceremonial purposes, while others are worn constantly as a declaration of faith.

In the Judeo-Christian tradition, specialized articles of religious clothing, of one type or another, have been worn for at least 4,000 years. Some of these have been visible, as a sign to the world, and some have been worn under other clothes, as a reminder to the wearer.

In Islam, many women wear religiously prescribed head coverings, as they have since the religion’s founding. Some Muslim women also wear a veil.

The notion of a religious head covering and even a veil is a belief also held for centuries by Christians and Jews. The Bible teaches men and women about the propriety of covering or uncovering their heads, particularly during prayer and worship. Some Christian denominations in America today, including some conservative Evangelicals and Mennonites, follow these teachings. Until a couple of generations ago, it was common for women to wear hats or scarves to mainstream American churches, to obey the biblical command to cover their heads.

The “babushkas” of many Eastern European women are worn in obedience to their understanding of their Catholic faith.

The point of all this is that religions around the world have various types of religious garments. If you do the math, most believers on earth belong to a religion that commands its followers or leaders to wear religiously significant clothing.

While some people find it odd or funny that the Mormons consider the temple garment to be sacred underwear, it is, nonetheless, like all other religious clothing, designed to help the believer of that faith remain more committed to their faith. For Mormons, the temple garments are religious clothing designed to help members of the LDS Church follow the teachings of that religion. It helps that person to be more focused on Jesus Christ, to be more diligent in keeping the commandments and covenants and to dress modestly when required.

While the temple garments may odd or strange to you, the idea of clothing being used to demonstrate commitment to one's faith is something everyone understand. Other items such as rings, earrings, pendants and jewelry also help people to be more dedicated to their faith. A well known example is people wearing crosses for necklaces or rings. As a result, the way people of other faiths demonstrate their commitment to their faith might be different from your own, it deserves respect and understanding.

Who Will Be Mitt Romney's Running Mate?

People have been speculating on who Mitt Romney will pick to have as his running mate and future Vice President. Romney has so far hasn't said much about who he will pick, but in an interview with National Review, he's said that he hasn't made a list yet but that he's in the process of making one. that he's looking for someone who can also lead the nation if necessary: 

NRO: Let’s begin with your process of selecting your running mate. As you’ve interacted with elected officials throughout this primary season, have you thought about any of them as potential running mates and whether you would trust that person to be a heartbeat away from the presidency?

Mitt Romney: [Laughter.] I’m not going to give you any names!
NRO: You don’t have to give names. Just . . . has anybody piqued your interest?

Romney: There are a lot of terrific people in our party, as I’m sure you know. We will begin to put together a list of folks to do a deep-dive vetting. That’s something which Beth Myers, my former chief of staff and former campaign manager, is guiding. I’ve been very impressed with a lot of folks I’ve worked with, and I’m impressed with others that have not been in battleground states, but who nonetheless are key leaders in our party. At this point, it is a wide-open process.
NRO: Is there one trait or quality that you think is particularly important for a running mate and vice president?

Romney: The vice president has to be someone who would be seen as having the capability to become president and lead the country if that were to become necessary. That is, without question, the most important quality that you consider.

Romney has already selected campaign advisor Beth Meyers to assist him in making his selection. Here a list of possible running mates that Beth Meyers might be looking at:

Marco Rubio

Mitch Daniel 

Rob Portman

John Kasich

Condoleezza Rice

Chris Christie

Cathy Morris Rodger 

Paul Ryan 

Bobby Jindal

Bob McDonnell 

Luis Fortuno

Susana Martinez

Nikki Haley

Allen West 

Kelly Ayotte

Jeb Bush

Tim Pawlenty 

Rick Santorum  

Many candidates have either stated that they will or will not be Mitt Romney's running mate. Marco Rubio has consistently stated that he will not be Romney's Vice President. Many people have recommended Marco Rubio to be Mitt's VP like Jeb Bush. However, Marco Rubio said that Jeb Bush would make a good running mate for Mitt Romney and Jeb Bush said he would be Mitt's VP if asked. 

Bobby Jindal has also stated that he's not interested in being Mitt's running mate because he likes being the governor of Louisiana. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has given conflicting answers in which he has said he wouldn't mind being Romney's VP but has said at other times that he wouldn't be his running mate. 

South Carolina Govenor Nikki Haley has said she would not be Mitt Romney's running mate and suggested that Allen West would make a great pick and then backtracked on that recommendation. Other people such as Sarah Palin and Herman Cain have also endorsed Allen West. Allen West has stated that he would accept the invitation to be Mitt Romney's VP if asked.

Many people have talked about Virginia Govenor Bob McDonnell as being Mitt Romney's Vice President. Although, Governor McDonnell has down played talk of him being selected as Romney's running mate.

Paul Ryan has been widely discussed as Mitt's VP. Although people know Paul Ryan for his mastery of economic issues, he's equally powerful when it comes to foreign policy. Paul Ryan hasn't publicly denied a hypothetical offer from Mitt Romney but he's remained mostly quiet on the subject of being Romney's VP other than to say that the discussion hasn't been brought up by Mitt Romney and that he would think about it when the offer actually is presented to him.

There are a lot of good people on the list and most of them would be a great running mate for Mitt Romney. Personally, my list of who I would pick for Mitt's running mate would be quite short. I personally like Paul Ryan, John Kasich, Rob Portman, Nikki Haley, Bob McDonnell, Allen West and Condoleezza Rice. There are others who I know will not make a good running mate for Mitt Romney and as a result, they are probably not on Mitt's short list. Those people are Ron Paul, Rick Santorum, Tim Pawlenty, Bobby Jindal, Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, and Mitch Daniel. 

Who ever Mitt Romney picks, the vetting process will be much more intense than in the past due to the shoddy vetting process the McCain team did with Sarah Palin. However, I am confident that Mitt Romney will make the right choice. It will be someone who will be just as equally competent in leading the country as Mitt Romney is, who will work well with the President and with Congress in passing the necessary laws, who can help Mitt win the necessary votes needed to win the election and who can go one on one with Biden in a debate.   

I am excited for Mitt Romney's running mate and I can't wait for Mitt to make his announcement. I suspect that Mitt Romney will make his announcement shortly before the Republican convention in Florida. Whoever Mitt picks, it will be a good choice for America.

Robert Jeffress Endorses Mitt Romney

I was very critical of Rick Perry's campaign for stubbornly allowing Pastor Robert Jeffress to spew religious bigotry on behalf of their campaign. Other people were quick to condemn Robert Jeffress for his comments about the LDS religion. Robert Jeffress wrote an op-ed defending his religious bigotry and I wrote a blog article dismantling his arguments.

As much as I strongly disagree with Pastor Robert Jeffress' opinions about the LDS Church being a non-Christian cult, he has kept his promise that he would get behind Mitt Romney if he became the Republican nominee. Here's what he said in October of 2011: 

ACOSTA: Wolf is asking me to ask you, are you saying that because of Mitt Romney's faith, that people should not vote for him? That people should not go into the voting booth and flip the switch for Mitt Romney because of his faith? Should that be held against him?

JEFFRESS: Look, I think if it came down to a contest between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama, I would hold my nose and hope for Mitt Romney. I would rather have a non-Christian who at least supports biblical principles than a professing-Christian like Barack Obama who embraces unbiblical positions.

True to his word, Robert Jeffress is now getting behind Mitt Romney: 

The Southern Baptist pastor who last October called Mormonism a cult and said Mitt Romney is not a Christian is now endorsing the presumptive Republican presidential nominee.

The pastor of the First Baptist Church of Dallas, the Rev. Robert Jeffress, tells The Associated Press that he still doesn't believe Mormons are Christians.

But Jeffress says voters will have to choose between a Christian like President Barack Obama and a Mormon like Romney. He says the difference is that Obama embraces non-biblical principles while Romney embraces biblical principles like the sanctity of life and the sanctity of marriage.

Given that choice, Jeffress says he believes Christians should support Romney in November "in spite of his Mormon faith."

Jeffress says that there are no perfect candidates - and no perfect pastors either.

Here's the video of the Pastor talking about his support for Mitt Romney: 

My respect for the Pastor has increased because he kept his word on supporting Mitt Romney. I agree with Ed Morrisey's observation about Robert Jeffress' endorsement: 

But hopefully Jeffress has learned a lesson about having to eat one’s words down the line, if not the dangers of indulging in ecumenical combat in the middle of a political campaign.

I hope he's learned his lesson because there is more at stake in Presidential elections than worrying about a candidate's faith or insisting that the Republican nominee be of a particular religion. As a result of Romney becoming the nominee, I don't think he will have to hold his nose in voting for Mitt Romney as he said he would last October and that he will be enthusiastic in voting for him. Moreover, other evangelicals have come out and said that they will vote for Romney in the general election. Even more interesting is that a recent poll taken in Virginia shows that evangelicals in that state would overwhelmingly vote for Romney. This poll that was conducted in Virginia might be true across the country in which evangelicals either don't care about Romney's faith or that they are so strongly opposed to Obama that are willing to vote for Mitt Romney and help the Republican party regain the White House in 2012.

Who Has A Better Economic Record: Obama Or Romney?

With the general election underway in which Mitt Romney will challenge Barack Obama for the Presidency, both candidates will try to make the case that they are the one who can turn this economy around.

Unfortunately, Obama cannot make that case because he's never been serious about improving the U.S. economy. And it shows. Now that Obama has been in office for almost four years, his economic record is something that Americans are not proud of. 

Obama's reelection strategy is to blame the previous administration for the current problems. If that's the strategy he wants to use in this election, its not a very good one because he hasn't done anything to fix the problems he has inherited from the Bush Administration. Take a good look at the chart below and you'll see why: 

When Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts, the previous administration had left him with a terrible financial mess for him to deal with. When Mitt entered into office in 2003, he was a left with a massive deficit of approximately $3 billion. Mitt Romney did not complain about the previous administration nor did he attempt to place the blame on anyone else. He simply went to work to balance the budget. By 2005, Mitt Romney had a budget surplus of $1 billion and by the time he left office in 2007, he left the state had a $ 2 billion surplus. Moreover, when the state was threatened with a loss in credit rating, Mitt Romney took swift action to take care of the problem.

Mitt Romney's economic record stands in stark contrast with Barak Obama's. Our economy is in grave danger and we need a candidate who knows how businesses work, knows how to create jobs, and how to whip a government back into financial shape. 

The choice for who should be the President is clear. We need Mitt Romney in the White House. You can make that happen by voting for Mitt in November.

Video: What Is At Stake For 2012