Truth Before Dishonor

I would rather be right than popular

Posts Tagged ‘Mitt Romney’

2012 Presidential Election Results As They Come In

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/11/06



Welcome to Truth Before Dishonor’s version of live-blogging the 2012 Presidential election. As a reminder, here’s how the 2008 elections turned out (via US Election

Note the Republican states are in blue and the Democrat states are in red. Republicans were not always red and Democrats were not always blue. It wasn’t until someone on MSNBC decided to employ some psychological propaganda that the colors were set in that way. As I noted in my Obama Wins 2008, In All Likelihood Loses 2012 article, it is my plan that Republicans and Democrats revert back to their appropriate colors.

This is set to be a long day of poll-watching from home. Stay tuned for the updates, and may Providence guide the election results.

UPDATE 8:00am Texas time: The longest day of 2012 has barely begun and we already have vote fraud allegations.

UPDATE 8:15am Texas time: It’s already old news, but the first official counts are in, with Barack Obama taking a commanding lead. Dixville Notch, NH and Hart’s Location, NH have opened and closed their precincts.
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Elections, media, Obama, Personal Responsibility, politics | Tagged: , , , , | 40 Comments »

Obama Wins 2008, In All Likelihood Loses 2012

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/11/01

Below are the 2008 election results from US Election

Note the Republican states are in blue while the Democrat states are in red. Republicans being red and Democrats being blue wasn’t always the case. Not until those folks at MSNBC switched it around (for propaganda benefits, since red is the color of Leftism and Communism and Socialism). It is my goal that here, at Truth Before Dishonor, the Democrats are once again reverted back to being red and the Republicans are once again reverted back to being blue. Because it is far more in keeping with the Truth about their respective political leanings.

Below is the 270 To Win Battleground States map (with my adjustments for Republican and Democrat. The Battleground states are unchanged.)

Compare the two maps. (singing)Do you see what I see?(/singing) That’s right, folks. Every Republican state in 2008 is Republican in 2012. Every Battleground state was Democrat in 2008. And Indiana, which was Democrat in 2008, with less than 50 percent of the vote (despite Obama having an ACORN-led 105 percent Registered Voter vs Adult Resident advantage in Indianapolis in 2008), is Republican in 2012.

The charts show what everyone in the know has known to be true: Obama is on the defensive, desperately trying to cling to territory he won in 2008 and losing ground. That has been the case since the day he was inaugurated. He has been doing his best to cling to territory won and hoping against hope that he doesn’t lose too much. That’s what happens when you push a lie-filled, anti-American, anti-Christian, Socialist agenda down the throats of American citizens, the majority of whom oppose what you’re doing. (ObamaCare: the majority of the population was against it before it became Law, the majority of the population wanted it repealed immediately after it became Law, the majority of the population wanted it repealed in 2010 when they swept 700 Democrats out of office nationwide, and the majority of the population wants it repealed today.)

How big is this inability to win states Obama won his first time through? Let’s look at previous two-term Presidents.

2000: George W Bush won 271 Electoral College votes.
2004: George W Bush won 286 Electoral College votes.
George W Bush gained 15 Electoral College votes for his second term in office.

1992: Bill Clinton got 370 Electoral College votes.
1996: Bill Clinton got 379 Electoral College votes.
Bill Clinton gained 9 Electoral College votes for his second term in office. (Ross Perot went from just under 19 percent of the overall vote to under 9 percent.)

1980: Ronald Reagan, a true Conservative I could back (but wasn’t Conservative enough on some issues, and I was ineligible to vote regardless), got 489 Electoral College votes.
1984: (The first year I was eligible to vote.) Ronald Reagan got 525 Electoral College votes (losing only Minnesota by 18/100ths of a percent and DC by a huge margin).
Ronald Reagan gained 36 Electoral College votes.

In fact, the last time a sitting President won re-election despite shedding Electoral College votes was the election year of 1944, when Franklin Delano Roosevelt won a fourth term with 432 Electoral College votes, compared to his third term win of 449 Electoral College votes and his second term win of 523 Electoral College votes. But even FDR improved his second term EC votes over his first term EC votes. To find a President who won a second term with fewer EC votes than his first term, you have to go all the way back to the wholly destructive “Progressive” Democrat Woodrow Wilson who won 435 Electoral College votes in 1912, but only gained 277 in 1916, a loss of 158 Electoral College votes for “Progressivism”. He also only garnered 49.24 percent of the popular vote. (Too bad for this country that he couldn’t have lost 170 instead of only 158. Our country would have turned out far better for it.)

The Socialist Barack Obama? He doesn’t have a 168 EC vote cushion to lose. And lose EC votes, he will. Even the pinko Democrat operatives will tell you that. Even the pinko polling firms with their “Democrats will vote in higher proportions than they did in 2008” polling numbers, will tell you that. Independent voters, who gave Obama an 8 point advantage in 2008, are giving Romney a 15 to 20 point advantage in 2012. And the above “battleground” map shows it. Obama has already lost Indiana. Obama cannot win any state he lost in 2008. The Census has reduced the EC number in states Obama won while increasing the EC number in states Obama lost. And every Battleground State is a state Obama won in 2008.

Will this be the first time in 96 years that a sitting President won re-election to a second term while shedding Electoral College votes? I think not. And since, it’s a foregone conclusion that Obama will shed Electoral College votes, I have declared Obama the loser of the 2012 election.

(Truth Before Dishonor intends to do its version of live-blogging the 2012 Presidential Election this upcoming Tuesday night. Tune in to TBD for the 2012 Presidential Election results as they happen. (hopefully))

Posted in Elections, history, media, Obama, politics, society, Vote Fraud | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

The Foreign Policy Debate or Kissing Your Cousin

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/10/22

I’ve been watching the third Presidential Debate and I’ve come to the conclusion that, for the most part, two cousins have been busily pecking each other’s cheeks and playfully punching each other’s shoulders. Mitt Romney’s Foreign Policy is clearly weak, but Obama’s Foreign Policy is disastrous, so there’s no win here for either one.

For the most part, both candidates have been respectful of each other. That’s standard operating procedure for Romney, but a great improvement for Obama, and a far cry from the insanity and inanity of Biden in his only debate. As I said, for the most part. When Romney talked about the number of Naval ships being the smallest since the World War I era, Obama countered mockingly and derisively. “It’s true we have fewer ships than 1914 but we also have fewer horses and chariots (or something to that effect).” That’s not going to win over undecided voters, but it is candy for the Loony Left. “We have these things that airplanes land on, called aircraft carriers, and ships that go underwater, called submarines.” That sort of garbage will not play among the independents.

Overall, the two candidates are differing by degree and not oppositional. And the moderator is doing his job correctly, asking the questions, moving the debate along, and then getting out of the way so the two candidates can make their own points (or not make any point at all) all on their own without his help.

Posted in Elections, Obama, Philosophy, politics | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

Military Endorsements, And The Winner Is…

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/10/17

Barack Obama has six high-profile military endorsements, all male. Mitt Romney has six retired female flag officers* (that’s general/admiral stuff for you non-military types) among his military endorsements. Actually, Mitt Romney has 359 retired flag officers who have endorsed him for President.

Who do you suppose those who have served this country in uniform support?

*I didn’t count names like “Terry” and “Chris” (there were no Danas) or names that were only initials, so the count could be higher.

Posted in Elections, military, Obama | Tagged: , , , , | 3 Comments »

Presidential Polling: Breaking The 50 Percent Barrier

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/10/17

Gallup has a new poll out from data it collected from October 10 to October 16, showing the 50 percent barrier has been crossed. This is important because when an incumbent has less than 50 percent of the likely voters this late in the stage, that incumbent is in serious danger of being defeated — even if the incumbent has the lead in the polls. Because people who are undecided this late in the game break very heavily toward the challenger. The incumbent has a record, and that record has not convinced the undecided voter. What’s left?

So, when a poll with the clout of Gallup comes out and declares that 51 percent of likely voters have stepped up to the plate and declared they will be voting for Obama and 45 percent will be voting for Romney, leaving only 4 percent undecided, that means something major.

Wait, what? Oh, that’s right. Never mind. The Gallup poll of likely voters shows Romney with 51 percent of the vote, a clear majority, to Obama’s 45 percent to give Romney a 6 point lead. Nothing to see here. Move along.

Perhaps it’s time to put down the dominoes. A storm surge is coming in.

HT Hot Air Headlines

Posted in Elections, media, Obama, politics | Tagged: , , , , , | Comments Off on Presidential Polling: Breaking The 50 Percent Barrier

Tonight’s Presidential Debate

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/10/16

Tonight is the second of three Presidential debates this campaign season. It is in a moderated and moderator-directed “townhall-lite” format. A great many sites will be all over all of Obama’s lies, whether it’s lying about what Romney actually said (and there are many of those Obama lies) or lying about Romney’s actual recort (and there are many of those Obama lies) or lying about what Obama himself actually said (and there are many of those Obama lies) or lying about what Obama himself actually accomplished (and there are many of those Obama lies) or any other manner of Obama lies. There is a lot of meat for honest fact-checkers to have very long-winded articles shredding the heavy amount of falsehoods Obama has put out in this debate.

There will also be a great many people on the Left and the Right who will have plenty negative to say about Romney. For one, Romney’s no Conservative, as his statements in this debate have proven.

As I said, you will be able to find all that information and more on a great many other sites. So I will not cover them in this article. What I want to point out, something that was very obvious for the 45 minutes I listened to the debate on my drive home from work, is the civility or incivility involved in the debate. The respectfulness or lack thereof.

***For the record, and to be perfectly clear, Truth Before Dishonor has never endorsed Mitt Romney. Dana Pico has endorsed him on this site and I have written scathing articles against Romney on this site, but Dana Pico and I will both agree that while Mitt Romney is no Conservative, he’s far better than the Socialist Barack Obama.

But re-listen to the debate in the memory banks of your mind. When it was Barack Obama’s turn to talk, Mitt Romney listened quietly and allowed Barack Obama to say whatever he wanted without interruption. But when it was Mitt Romney’s turn to talk, Barack Obama was constantly interrupting and trying to talk over top of Mitt Romney, trying to prevent Mitt Romney from saying whatever it was Romney was saying.

Who was the more respectful, more Presidential, more civil, more professional debater? Very clearly, it was Mitt Romney.

Who was the more impertinent, more disrespectful, more rabble-rousing, less civil, less professional debater? Very clearly, it was Barack Obama.

That is what I heard. And if you replay the debate in your mind’s memory banks, that is what you will hear, too. That is, if you’re being Truthful to yourself.

UPDATE: I said other sites would be chronicling the massive number of Obama lies in last night’s debate, and JE Dyer did just that. I also said people on the right would be dinging Romney, and she did that, too.

Posted in Elections, Obama, Philosophy, politics, truth | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Uh Oh! Obama Loses Twelve Points To Romney In Latest Polling

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/10/08

Pew has released its October poll and Obama received terrible news. He lost 12 points to Romney in a single month. Perhaps it’s time for Obama’s corrupt Department of Injustice to sue Pew. The Socialist Perry Hood of Lewes, Delaware was crowing about the September Pew poll despite being shown very clearly that the poll was heavily skewed Democrat, far afield of the actual voting populace. So what will the Left (whom Perry Hood parrots) say about the same polling firm now that the numbers show Obama losing by 4? Will they, and consequently the parrot, accept the numbers? I highly doubt it. They’re very inconsistent like that.

Pew’s September poll, and many other polling outfits’ September polls, were heavily skewed to the Democrat side of the RDI. Far afield of the actual voting makeup of the US population. And people went through the effort to unskew the polls. This effort showed Romney with a strong lead over Obama instead of the strong Obama lead that Pew and others were showing. Of course, the Left scoffed at the idea of unskewing their skewed polls. Well, Pew did just that. They unskewed their own September poll with their October poll, showing a far more realistic RDI sample. And the result is Romney leads Obama by 4 in October.

Now there’s a reason polling outfits would skew in September but not in October (or not so badly in October). It’s actually a very simple reason. While there are those who don’t see anything nefarious about the shenanigans, I do. And here’s why:

  • Polling outfits want Liberals to win, so they provide propaganda showing Democrats in unrealistic leads. It helps bring low-information voters into the fold and discourages Conservative voters. It pushes the actual polling numbers more to the polling firms’ liking, thus when it’s time to unskew the polls, the damage has been done.
  • Polling outfits like to tout their accuracy, pointing back to previous voting outcomes compared to their polls; thus, they have to have final unskewed polls to show to unsuspecting readers. Their earlier polls, since they are far enough away from the election, can be ignored. Or they can be said to show the gradual shift toward Conservatives as the cycle goes on (for other insidious anti-First Amendment activities by lawmakers and Leftist activists alike).

In order for the polling outfits to push their two-fold propaganda, they have to push a Left bias in their polls to start and then shift their polls to far more reasonable breakdowns as the election approaches. And this is what Pew has done. It is what other polling firms will be doing, as the election approaches. They have no choice if they want to be believed in later years.

In other bad news, that polling firm the corrupt Obama Department of Injustice sued is showing a 47/47 tie among registered voters, a 5-point Obama loss from its previous poll. What’s worse, this is a poll of registered voters, which consistantly swings two or three points further Left than the actual vote results will show. So, when adjusted for likely voters, Obama is trailing here, too.

In still other news, Obama went from +10 in Michigan in September to +3 now, with a margin of error of +/-4. That means it’s a statistical dead heat in Michigan. And in Pennsylvania, Obama only leads by 2 with a D+6 poll. That makes Pennsylvania a very clear toss-up, unlike what the loony Left were saying.

Mark Davis, who broadcasts on 660 am “The Answer”, declared there are only 4 possible outcomes to the Presidential election:

  • Obama wins by a landslide.
  • Obama wins a squeaker.
  • Romney wins a squeaker.
  • Romney wins by a landslide.

And he declared the first one, where Obama wins by a landslide, ain’t never gonna happen. I agree. The other three possibilities could happen, although he believes the middle two are the most likely. But as time goes on toward the election and the polls start unskewing, it’s looking more and more like the last two are the most likely with Obama’s squeaker least likely of the three and Obama’s landslide still ain’t never gonna happen.

Posted in Elections, Gender Issues, Liberal, media, Obama, politics, society | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 4 Comments »

Neck And Neck In Ohio?

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/09/25

Ohio is a true bellwether state, with a very long trend of voting for the guy that eventually is declared the winner in Presidential elections. You will likely never see a D+5 or R+5 D/R/I electorate in Ohio, as the state trends a much narrower +/-2 with a strong Independent voice generally speaking. If you see a poll that declares Obama leads by 8 in Ohio, for instance, you can throw that poll in the garbage bin. That sort of outcome will never happen in Ohio. So, there’s this new poll that Nice Deb found, showing a neck-and-neck race with Obama ahead 45.2 to 44.3 (and always remember when an incumbent cannot reach 50 percent, especially this late in the season, that incumbent is in trouble). Sounds about right for bellwether Ohio in a tight election year, no?

But there’s more to that poll. Nice Deb points out the heavy skewing of the poll itself. The D/R/I gives Democrats a +10.3 advantage in bellwether Ohio to arrive at a +0.9 for Obama. Nice Deb asks why the completely out of touch with reality Democrat skew for the poll. That’s a very good question. But I have a different observation. In order for the poll to give Obama a +0.9, it had to skew in favor of Democrats by +10.3. The polling firm had to give a huge, unrealistic Leftward advantage just to get Obama up to a tie with Romney/Ryan in bellwether Ohio. That means, Romney/Ryan pretty much have Ohio in the bag. And, as I pointed out, Ohio has a very long track record of voting for the winner, thus, Romney/Ryan will win in November.

Oh, as an aside, after the media-spun “very bad week” for Romney, Gallup moved him from -5 to even. Another “very bad week” for Romney and he might be +5.

Posted in Elections, media, Obama, politics | Tagged: , , , , , | Comments Off on Neck And Neck In Ohio?

Obama Needs To Grow A “Big Stick”

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/09/12

During the moment of silence to remember 9/11, NBC decided to interview a Kardashian instead.

Muslim Brotherhood terrorists attacked the US Embassy in Egypt. And that embassy apologized to the Muslim Brotherhood terrorists for our First Amendment!

Muslim Brotherhood terrorists attacked the US Consulate in Libya, killing our ambassador.

MSNBC went out of its way to loudly declare its desire to have a Christian pastor charged with accessory to murder due to his non-violent exercising of his First Amendment rights, which MSNBC declared responsible for Muslim Brotherhood terrorists behaving like terrorists.

Of course, Obama has decided to get tough with … Israel! By refusing to meet with the Israeli Prime Minister.

While the media has very clearly coordinated their Left-wing agenda questioning of Romney over Egypt and Libya, Barack Obama refused to take any questions after reading a statement someone else prepared for him to read, as is very typical and very habitual of Obama.

Of course, two people spoke out very clearly in defense of the US and our Constitution.

As Erika Johnsen reports:


I think it’s an absolutely horrible thing, because what you have to understand — here we are on 9/11, remembering the attacks… and now we have had another attack on sovereign American soil, which is what a consulate and an embassy is. Our flag was torn down, it was burned, the radical Islamists’ flag was raised, and we have an American official that lost their life. And the first thing that comes out is that we’re going to apologize for something that a Christian, Coptic individual posted in a video on his Facebook site. So now, if we’re going to start eschewing our freedom of speech rights to apologize to people for these type of attacks, Greta, you’re only get even more of this. This is rewarding bad behavior, and I think you’re going to see this dovetail into other countries. … I think it’s a horrific response that we’re apologizing. We’re accepting the blame for this which means you’re going to feel more of this response. …

Spot-on. It is insane — insane – that we should feel the need to tiptoe around the tender feelings of violent, overzealous radical Islamists (or, as some in the MSM now seem to be oh-so-subtly calling them, “ultraconservative” Islamists — really, guys?). Freedom of religion and freedom of speech are human rights, and I don’t mean that like ‘universal healthcare’ is supposed to be a human right (which, by the way, it isn’t). They are undeniable, inalienable, universal rights — absolutely no if’s, and’s, or but’s about it — and for representatives of the United States to get all sheepish and showcase their willingness to be bullied on that point makes me extremely nervous, to say the least.

Here’s what that Great American Sarah Palin had to say:

Apparently President Obama can’t see Egypt and Libya from his house. On the anniversary of the worst terrorist attacks ever perpetrated on America, our embassy in Cairo and our consulate in Benghazi were attacked by violent Islamic mobs. In Cairo, they scaled the walls of our embassy, destroyed our flag, and replaced it with a black Islamic banner. In Benghazi, the armed gunmen set fire to our consulate and killed an American staff member. The Islamic radicals claim that these attacks are in protest to some film criticizing Islam. In response to this, the U.S. embassy in Cairo issued a statement that was so outrageous many of us thought it must be a satire. The embassy actually apologized to the violent mob attacking us, and it even went so far as to chastise those who use free speech to “hurt the religious feelings of Muslims.” (Funny, the current administration has no problem hurting the “religious feelings” of Catholics.)

But where is the president’s statement about this? These countries represent his much touted “Arab Spring.” How’s that Arab Spring working out for us now? Have we received an apology yet from our “friends” in the Muslim Brotherhood for the assault on our embassy?

It’s about time our president stood up for America and condemned these Islamic extremists. I realize there must be a lot on his mind these days – what with our economy’s abysmal jobless numbers and Moody’s new warning about yet another downgrade to our nation’s credit rating due to the current administration’s failure to come up with a credible deficit reduction plan. And, of course, he has a busy schedule – with all those rounds of golf, softball interviews with the “Pimp with the Limp,” and fundraising dinners with his corporate cronies. But our nation’s security should be of utmost importance to our Commander-in-chief. America can’t afford any more “leading from behind” in such a dangerous world. We already know that President Obama likes to “speak softly” to our enemies. If he doesn’t have a “big stick” to carry, maybe it’s time for him to grow one.

– Sarah Palin

Is there any question, any question at all, why I endorsed a Palin/West Presidential ticket last year?

The Obama administration is absolutely an international disgrace to our nation. NBC is disgraceful. The mainstream media with its Left-Wing agenda — not bias but agenda — is a disgrace to our nation. MSNBC, with its anti-Constitutional, Socialist agenda, is an absolute disgrace to America, to journalism, to anything representing honorable values.

And if anyone holds any value whatsoever for the opinions or “journalism” coming out of MSNBC, that person is both a fool and an idiot, and cannot be considered to be a valuable contributing member to society.

Posted in Character, Constitution, Constitution Shredded, crime, Islam, Liberal, media, Obama, Palin, Personal Responsibility, Philosophy, politics, Religion, Socialists, society, truth, war | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Paul Ryan, Our Next Vice President

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/08/11

Just an hour ago, Mitt Romney announced Representative Paul Ryan as his running-mate. It was one of the wisest decisions Mitt Romney could make, as Paul Ryan is a bona fide TEA Party Commonsense Constitutional Conservative and already has a Budget blueprint that can turn this Titanic around and away from the iceberg known as Obama’s Democrat-enabled Cloward-Piven strategy. A great many Conservatives were understandably disgusted by the Romney-squish pick, and many — myself included — declared a resoluteness not to vote for Romney due to the garbage Romney brings to the table. Ryan does not bring any of that garbage to the table, at all. In fact, Ryan has a long history of fighting to throw that garbage in the garbage heap, where it belongs.

The Ryan selection will energize many of the demoralized TEA Party Commonsense Constitutional Conservatives, who will now be willing to “crawl a mile through broken glass” to vote for Ryan and will man the phones and pound the pavement to GOTV (get out the vote) for the Real Conservative and Real Patriot, Paul Ryan for Vice President. Yes, today, Romney’s chances of winning the Presidency and throwing the Socialist Constitution and Federal Law violator out of the White House has improved greatly.

Also, Romney again vowed to repeal ObamaCare, which is a good thing, considering his campaign’s foul-up earlier in the week. And Romney declared “we will once again return Work to Welfare” (my recollection of what I heard on my drive home from work), a very direct attack against Obama’s Constitution-violating and Federal Law-violating waivers of work requirements for people (very clearly and up-front including illegal aliens) to suck on the government teet.

Romney mentioned Obama’s lowest of low-brow campaign tactics (the tactics which Washington Post, CNN, and other Leftist media outlets have been shredding, giving Obama and his Super PAC multiple “four pinnochios” and “pants on fire” awards for flat-out lying) and declared his campaign would, instead, be aspirational and his administration would return America to its former greatness after 3.5 years of decline.

All in all, with his speech and his selection of Ryan, Romney’s appearance at the USS Wisconsin in Virginia was a major success for America and a major heartache for the Socialist Obama, the Democrat National leadership, Democrats in Congress, and Democrats down-ticket. We won’t see the 700-seat flip from Democrat to Republican we saw in 2010, but we will see a much larger than normal coat-tail flip. Perhaps 300 seats in toto going from Democrat to Republican on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of this year. More seats following shortly thereafter, as Democrats flip to Republican after yet another TEAnami.

I said I would not vote for Romney and gave my very specific reasons. Now, I gave evidence for some of my reasons on Patterico’s Pontifications previously (I completely forget which thread) and Daleyrocks provided information that counters my information, causing doubt in my position on that issue. Let me give a couple general reasons for my position (which Daleyrocks helped to waver):

1) If you cannot get the baby-murdering issue right, what morally imperative issue can you get right?
2) If you cannot even counterfeit a Bell Curve Tenther position well enough to hoodwink Tenthers — greater amperage of fail with his very recent arm-twisting of Republicans to vote to give the President authority to appoint without Senate approval nearly 200 more Government positions which were previously “nominate and Senate advise and consent” positions — why should any Constitutionalist vote for you?

Paul Ryan could be a reason. There isn’t much better than Paul Ryan. Of my 5 endorsements, 2 are clearly better (Palin and West), 1 is possibly better (Cruz) and the other two are likely equal (Love and Radtke). But a Paul Ryan is a rare find. The 50-karat blue diamond.

If I vote Republican and not Third Party this cycle, it will be just like last time. I will vote for Paul Ryan just like I voted for Sarah Palin. I will not vote for Mitt Romney, just like I did not vote for John McShame.

Posted in Character, Conservative, Constitution, economics, Elections, Law, Obama, Philosophy, politics, Tax, TEA Party | Tagged: , , , | 4 Comments »

Especially for Foxfier!

Posted by Dana Pico on 2012/05/22

And it might take someone as ruthless as a Cardassian to solve the mess Barack Obama is leaving us!

Posted in Elections, Humor - For Some, Palin | Tagged: | 1 Comment »

Racist Race-Traitor’s Racism Revealed

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/05/13

HT Smitty

Listen to the video and you’ll hear all manner of dog-whistles as this man shamelessly attacks the black man in the white house on Pennsylvania Avenue.

Or, if you have an honest bone in your body, you’ll see a man speaking a lot of truth, and absolutely incensed at the Mainstream Media’s dishonest in-the-bag for Democrat tactics. Liberals are not going to like what they see, because it destroys their lies.

Go take a gander at his site Whatever Happen To COMMON SENSE as well. I’ll be adding his site to my list of Race Traitor blogs.

Posted in Character, Elections, Liberal, media, Obama, Philosophy, politically correct, Politically Incorrect, politics, race, truth | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

I Was A Naughty High-School Kid

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/05/11

I graduated High School in 1984, well after Mitt Romney graduated High School. But since an incident involving Romney’s High School days is apparently important enough to be published in a supposedly reputable newspaper (it is to laugh), and since I value Truth Before Dishonor, I believe I should tell everyone how naughty I was in High School, oh so many years ago. In fact, I’m including my Middle School (grades 6 through 8) days, just to be on the up-and-up.

When I was in Middle School, I was intentionally involved in 3 fights, 2 of which I very clearly won. The fight I lost, I expected to lose. More on that in a minute. But the two fights I won, I expected to win. And both of them were against people who were extraordinarily mouthy and I was tired of everyone picking on me all the time, and they were just the unfortunate wimps who were picking on me (because it was a kewl thing to pick on me throughout my school days K-12).

The first of the two fights I won occurred after I had had an especially bad day at school. He was walking home from school and I was riding my bike home from school. He was approaching the bottom of a hill and I was still at the top of the hill. He was with friends and, as I was one of the few people it was socially expected to mock, ridicule, scorn, he decided to mock, ridicule, scorn me in front of his friends. As I said, I had had an exceptionally bad day at school so I was in no mood to just allow it.

I rode my bike the longer way around that very oversized block to meet him head-on. I dismounted my bike and proceeded to beat on the stupid kid who had been mocking me. His friends were cheering him on as I plowed ahead with left-hook after left-hook after left-hook to his temple. The “splat, splat, splat” sound of my fist meeting his temple was sickening for me to hear. He through punches that always missed as I was proficient at getting out of the way of punches.

One of my punches to his temple knocked him down onto his back in the gravel parking spot for the house in front of which we were fighting. I stepped back so he could get up so we could continue to fight. One of my left-hooks to his temple caused me to slip in the gravel and fall down. I had to jump up quickly as he tried, unsuccessfully, to take advantage of the situation.

He punched far faster than I did, but he never made contact, while I was going “splat, splat, splat” to his temple. Some guy came out of his home across the street and told us to quit or he’d call the cops, so I quit and started to ride away. He and his friends tried to get me to continue the fight elsewhere, but I had already won and made my point (to his temple) clear. So I didn’t fight him anymore that day or any other day. He learned to shut up and not mock, ridicule, scorn me.

The second fight I won was on my street. Again, it was against a kid who thought it was kewl to mock, ridicule, scorn me, knowing that it was extremely rare and nearly completely unheard of for me to actually get into fights. Again, I threw left-hook after left-hook after left-hook. But this time, my hooks weren’t aimed at his head. They were aimed at his stomach. And the guy was stupidly turned in such a way as to directly face my hooks instead of directly facing me. One of my left-hooks finally hit its target as he finally missed blocking it. I knocked the wind out of him and he made it very clear that he wanted me to stop and wait for him to catch his breath after a very successful hook to his belly. I walked away, satisfied that I clearly won that fight.

He caught his breath and came walking to the part of the street that was directly in front of my front yard. And he called on me to “continue” the fight. My male progenitor was on the front porch and had seen the whole fight as it took place, and was very supportive of whatever decision I took, including some more fighting. I very clearly told the kid I had won that previous fight and if he wanted to fight some more, he needed to throw the first punch. I was back out in the street, facing him. He demanded I throw the first punch. I refused. And that ended that, but only after several minutes of “you throw the first punch. No, you. No, you. No, you.”

The fight I willfully entered, knowing I would lose and did lose? It was between myself and my best (and pretty much only) friend of 7 years while I was in 6th grade. It pretty much ended our life-long friendship. Why did I willingly decide to fight him? There’s a saying that I’ve used before in an online game where I created areas and quests: The best way to force a man to willingly leave his barricaded home is to throw a hornets nest through the window. And that’s what occurred. My best friend was in 7th grade and I was in 6th. He had two friends over who were in 8th grade. They were each easily capable of beating the snot out of him. They declared if I didn’t fight my best friend (who absolutely wanted to fight me), I would have to face both of them instead.

Three punches by my former best friend and it was over. I was dizzied, seeing stars, and on my back, in pain.

In High School, it was different. I didn’t get into fights. People tried to fight me but I didn’t go along. There was a 200-lb enforcer-type person with his posse who felt the urge to beat me up inside the school. The enforcer was used to beating people up, and the posse was used to the enforcer beating people up.

(Side note: When I entered High School, I weighed 103 lbs. When I graduated, I was either 123 or 129, depending on which day it was. I was a star trackster, so I had access to a doctor-style scale and height piece of equipment that I used every day. On Monday, I would weigh 123, on Tuesdasy 129, and on Wednesday 123 again.)

When a 200-lb High School enforcer throws a punch, it is absolutely devastating. Think George Foreman. But when a 200-lb High School enforcer throws a punch, it is extremely slow in arriving. Again, think George Foreman. When a light-weight High School sophomore of my weight-class gets hit by such a punch, the war is over. Think Israel. So I had to depend on my agility to dodge every such punch, as if my life depended on it. Again, think Israel. And that’s just what I did.

Remember, enforcers are not the posse leaders. They’re just the muscle behind the posse leaders. Well, this muscle was very powerful but very slow. And his posse was used to the muscle doing what muscle does, so they were not very capable in keeping the cornered prey cornered. The guy threw multiple punches, severely denting the lockers behind which my head used to be. And I escaped being cornered by that posse, without ever making a single defensive attack.

Again while I was in High School, while attending an outside “teens only” dance, I found an empty booth in which to sit (as I often did while attending dances). Some kid, full of alcohol, decided I was sitting in his seat. Waving the alcohol breath out of my face, I got up and moved to sit elsewhere out of the way. He and his friends came over to me, where I ignored them completely. He wanted to fight me. He wanted me to go outside and fight him. His friends wanted me to do so. I ignored him. Six punches to my jaw and a chipped molar later, they finally gave up on the person who continued to ignore them completely.

Several people came up to me later to tell me it was a good thing I decided not to go outside to fight him. (As if I would ever consider such a thing.) I found out that he had even more friends outside, waiting to waylay me.

But it wasn’t fighting that made me naughty in High School. It was my choice of girlfriends. They were substandard and had bad reputations. Coach told me that many teachers looked up to me and my choice in girlfriends very much disappointed them. (Another side note: Coach was my track and cross country coach. He was so powerfully respected that he lost his name to us. He was Coach. There were several other coaches who were Coach (name) but he was Coach. It’s the highest praise possible for a coach, to lose your last name to your duties as a coach.) I was a straight-arrow, he explained, and my choices of girls to tie myself to were wholly unsatisfactory to the teaching staff of my High School.

Someone on The First Street Journal who either is or was a teacher previously stated that teachers gossip about their students. The thought had never entered my mind, even after the experience I had with Coach being disappointed in my choices for girlfriends. But it makes total logical sense. People gossip about the people around them. Workers talk about the job. Both, combined, mean teachers necessarily gossip about their students. So, the teachers gossiped about me and about my poor selection standards for girls.

Why did I pick those less-than-acceptable girls? Two reasons:
1)I had a terrible self-image and I knew they were low enough quality they wouldn’t say no to the likes of me.

2)And I was a straight-arrow, just like Coach said. I was a strident Christian and a strong-minded Conservative, even in my High School days. And that meant I was absolutely a pariah, an outcast, someone the “in” crowd refused to be on speaking terms with.

Oh, there’s a third reason as well. While all the “in” crowd were wearing their Izod shirts, Guess jeans, and high-dollar docker shoes, I was wearing my K-Mart t-shirts, K-Mart jeans, and ten dollar K-Mart tennis shoes.

I was never rich enough to be part of the “in” crowd. I was always far too Christian in my beliefs to be part of the “in” crowd. And I was so severely brow-beaten by my male progenitor that I always had an inferiority complex. So I always knew never to ask the acceptable girls to be my girlfriend, but only to ask the unacceptable girls.

Why do I bring up my history of being naughty as a minor? Because Barack Hussein Obama, who criminally violated law to published sealed Divorce Court records to make one of his political opponents go away, has now employed his Washington Post arm to attack Mitt Romney for what he may have done when he was in High School. Nevermind the fact the family is incensed by the WaPo actions. Nevermind the fact Obama has issued an executive order sealing all of his past, including all school records, all Illinois Senate records, and other material. They’re going after a guy who is older than me (I graduated High School in 1984) for what he may or may not have done while he was a kid in High School. And he wasn’t even acting criminally.

Barack Obama is an evil, hateful, Chicago-corrupt, Alinsky-corrupt, Socialist-corrupt blight on American Society who will use every means possible, including illegal means, to insure his re-election.

Posted in Character, Christianity, crime, education, Elections, history, Liberal, media, Obama, politics, society | Tagged: , , | 2 Comments »

What Does It Take To Break A Court-Sealed Divorce Record?

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/04/27

When neither the former husband, who was running for office, nor the former wife, who wasn’t, agreed to break the sealed divorce documents, and there was no court injunction to break that court-decreed seal, what did it take to break that seal? Ask Barack Obama.

There are no laws permitting that sort of Contempt of Court. But Obama and his henchmen did just that in Illinois, home of the most corrupt political machine in the 21st Century. But since then, Obama has found himself in Contempt of Court in fact, in a Federal Court, while he was the sitting President.

Obama is above the Law and above the Constitution. Or at least he thinks he is. And his lemmings follow right behind him in Law violations, Constitution violations, Court Order violations, violations, violations, violations.

And he lies constantly. And he uses straw men, red herrings, poisoned wells, false dichotomies, all manner of fallacies to pull the wool over the ignorant people’s eyes.

But here’s my predicament. Mitt Romney lies, flip-flops seemingly hourly so nobody knows what he really believes (but I guarantee it is arsenic-laced), and has instituted the Father of ObamaCare, while to this day proudly declaring RomneyCare is Conservative. (Did you know RomneyCare depends on huge payouts by the Federal Government? And RomneyCare has caused Massachusetts health care expenses to increase faster tha the US? Yup, you Californians are paying for people in Massachusetts to get abortions.)

If Obama serves 4 more years as President, the US is dead and buried. If Romney serves 8 years as President, the US is dead and buried. If Romney wins the Presidency, the Conservative grass-roots movement is critically wounded. If Romney only serves 4 years after ousting the Socialist Barack Hussein Obama and is replaced by another Democrat, the US is dead and buried.

As far as I’m concerned, the only chance for the us is to vote Obama’s satanic Socialist ass out of there and replace him with Romney’s Socialist-lite ass, and then Primary Romney’s Socialist ass out of there in 2016. But I guarantee I will never vote for that pro-abort, pro-mandated health insurance, pro-“progressive” income tax, anti-Reagan, 3 sides to every issue, absolute squish Romney.

We absolutely need to vote in Constitutional Conservatives in both the House and the Senate (most importantly the Senate this time around (Vote Cruz! Vote Mourdock! Vote against Hatch!) in order to stop the Socialist agenda of which ever Socialist wins. And then we need to find someone to rally the grass roots against the Big Government Socialism of whichever wins. And when she steps up to the plate in 2016, I’ll vote for her in a heart-beat.

she hasn’t left my side-bar.

Posted in Character, Conservative, Constitution, Constitution Shredded, crime, Elections, Law, Liberal, Obama, Over-regulation, Personal Responsibility, Philosophy, politics, Socialists, society | Tagged: , , | 3 Comments »

“Throw The Mormon Out”

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/02/09

I have seen multiple cases of Mitt Romney supporters acting very Alinskyite (read Democrat) in their attempts to demonize the strong opposition to Romney. It’s because Romney is a Mormon, they say, (examples can be found in Hot Air comment threads) completely ignoring Romney’s history and actual actions. Members of a Christian Church stand up and say if Romney is the candidate, they’ll stay home and not vote, and immediately the Romney supporters vilify the people, using straw-man ad hominem charges. They also use false dichotomy attacks, but that is tangential here.

Many people are shocked that so many evangelical Christians reject Mormonism as part of the Christian faith. I briefly touched on why Mormonism is decidedly not Christian in an earlier article. And while Mormonism is decidedly not Christian, that does not mean Christians will reject a Mormon for political office due to his or her faith. This site, which is decidedly Christian Conservative, has endorsed Mia Love, who I believe is a Mormon, for Congress due to her political positions. She’s prominent in the side-bar. I have a lot of respect for Glenn Beck, who is very up front with his Mormonism and his Libertarianism (which is not exactly Conservative), because he actually ferrets out the truth regarding the Democrat leadership’s strong ties to Socialists (such as billionaire convicted criminal and NAZI aiding George Soros) and the truth regarding the worldwide efforts to rebuild a Mohammedan caliphate.

When I was in high school, I house-sat for a Mormon family, and for very good reason: the father was a licensed gun dealer. I counted over 200 rifles and shotguns on one wall of their living room. And that was not the entirety of their gun collection. They had various pistols and fully automatic, high rounds-per-minute, large magazine weapons strewn about the house. It was important, even in the low-crime region of the low-crime town, for them to always have someone inside the house as a preventative measure. They were Mormons, and not Christian, although they thought themselves Christian. They were good people, nonetheless. (I expect they still are Mormons and good people, but I have not seen any of them in over 25 years.) The fact they were Mormon did not affect how I treated them. The daughter was my age and a very good friend of mine. Her Mormonism did not affect my decision-making in the least.

It is the same with Mitt Romney. The fact he is Mormon, while meaning he is decidedly not Christian, is not weighed in the balance when I look at him. In fact, modern-day mainstream Mormon beliefs would suggest a morality and value structure which is very much in line with Christian Conservative morality and value structures. It is, rather, Romney’s three positions for each issue and his record as Governor which disqualifies him.

I even highlight a Mormon Senator from Utah for special praise every year during my “Lights Of The Season” series.

As Governor of Massachusetts, Romney

  • Pushed Cap and Tax, feeding off the Glowball Warming alarmism.
  • Pushed Romneycare, the evil father of the evil Obamacare, both of which have the individual mandate, requiring the subjects (not citizens for a reason) purchase a product on pain of legal fines. To this day, Romney — in mock-worthy fashion — declares the individual mandate and Romneycare to be Conservative.
  • Pushed an anti-Catholic (who are we kidding? It’s anti-Christian!) mandate within Romneycare, the same that we have found out is in Obamacare, thanks to Sebelius.
  • Dramatically increased taxes on Massachusetts residents by raising various fees and creating new fees, such as fees on home-owners.
  • Increased anti-Second Amendment actions by Massachusetts, in part by dramatically increasing fees and regulations on gun buyers and owners.

As Republican candidate for President over the past four to six years, Romney has also advocated a VAT tax on top of all the other taxes we are already paying. He (and more importantly his wrecking crew) has viciously and falsely attacked all his Republican adversaries in ways only Alinskyites would love, by use of intentional lies, intentional hiding of the truth, and other methods. Romney is anti-Second, anti-Christian, anti-Life, anti-Liberty, anti-Constitution, anti-Conservative.

Romney cloaks his actions in the Tenth Amendment, which you can read in its entirety in my side-bar or find by following my link to the US Constitution, also in my side-bar. Romney is no Tenther. In any way. Unlike Rick Perry, who is a Bell Curve Tenther (not a real Tenther), Romney is only borrowing the mantle for his own political expediency.

And this is only scratching the surface of the great many ills the self-described “Progressive” (read Socialist) Mitt Romney has.

Mitt Romney seems to be experiencing a death-by-a-thousand cuts, many of them made possible by the copious video/documentary record of his 1994 challenge to Ted Kennedy. It’s Romney’s misfortune that outlets like C-SPAN are digitizing and making available to the public the footage from back then — because back then Romney was running to the left, not to the right. Today’s wince-inducing video clip (if you’re a Romney staffer, that is) is this NECN report from 2002 in which Romney brags, “I’m not a partisan Republican. I’m someone that is moderate, and my views are progressive”:

So, no, the Christian Conservative rejection of Romney has absolutely nothing to do with his Mormonism. In fact, much of what Romney pushed while Governor of Massachusetts was in direct violation of his Mormonism. The Christian Conservative rejection of Romney has everything to do with his anti-Constitutional anti-Christian Liberalism. The Christian Conservative position of the above-mentioned Church members who declared they’d stay home and not vote for Romney is partially supported here. I will not vote for a pro-abort, anti-second, anti-tenther “Progressive” such as Romney, ever. But I will vote down-ticket. What saved McCain in 2008, as far as I’m concerned is Palin. I voted for Palin and not for McCain. Romney will get no such saving grace. Period.

And it has nothing to do with his Mormon faith, which he has already rejected as Governor.

Also see: Presidential Candidates

Posted in abortion, Christianity, Conservative, Constitution, Elections, Global Warming, Health Care, history, Law, Liberal, Obama, Over-regulation, Palin, Philosophy, politics, Religion, Tax | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 12 Comments »

%d bloggers like this: