OK, the Super Bowl is over and the two cities that sent teams – New York and Boston (New England) have huge lefty constituencies. Funny how they played in a Red State. But I digress, we talk politics here so let’s look at the Clint Eastwood Chyrsler ad that received flak for being pro-Obama. Of course Mr. Eastwood denies this was the purpose – OK, he was creatively used a by team that produced the two-minute minute spot for ad agency Wieden+Kennedy donated their personal time in 2008 to make pro-Obama art and privately supported Barack Obama in the 2008 election. Mr. Eastwood, you were duped.

Now we have two new ads, parodies that demonstrate the possibilities if you wish to promote the truth, the reality of the Chrysler bailout.

First we have Rush Limbaugh mocking the ad with seriousness and hilarity mixed in. At the end Rush ads his own little quip. Here’s the transcript followed by the audio:

“It’s halftime. Both teams are in their locker rooms, getting ready to win the first four years or a second term. It’s halftime in America, too. People are out of work and they’re hurting. And they’re all wondering what Obama’s gonna do to them next and they’re scared because he thinks this is a game.”

The parody goes on to say, “…all’s that matters now is that we come together as one great nation and kick his skinny butt back to Chicago. This country can’t be knocked out by one punk. We’ll get right back up again and, when we do, Obama’s gonna hear the roar of our engines. Yeah, it’s half-time America, are you ready to win?”

Next up Reality.TV added their version of an Eastwood-Chrysler ad:

Clint Eastwood is a Libertarian and registered as a Republican. His ad wouldn’t have caused such a furor if it didn’t come off as pro-Obama sending the false message that Detroit is back, the American auto industry is back.

Here are some facts. Chrysler manufactures many of their automobiles in Mexico and Canada. Chrysler is owned by Fiat, an Italian company. So the whole ad is filled with stench, with lies, and deceives the listener. How could have Eastwood missed all of this?

And let’s not forget that American taxpayers were left on the hook for $1.3 billion and this will never be paid back. Obama and his ilk will tell you their bailouts have been paid back in full. BIG LIE!

Yes America, it’s halftime and we’re at a precipice – freedom and liberty or tyranny? Barack Obama would choose tyranny but it’s time to push the US Constitution across the goal line and run out the clock on Obama and his Marxist ilk in Congress, in regulatory agencies and around the country. Wake up America, you’ve received your two-minute warning.

Liberally Conservative appreciates your comments that abide by our guidelines:

Barack Obama is always talking about fairness, shared responsibility, shared sacrifice and justice for all and then he pit’s the so-called “haves” with the so-called “have-nots.” Life isn’t fair but in America you have the opportunity to make it more fair by working hard and trying to make something of yourself, to support your family and to improve your condition and place in life.

I ask, however, what is fair? Is it fair:

- that the wealthiest American’s pay 40-percent of the total federal income tax while the top 10-percent chip in two-thirds?

- that the wealthiest 10-percent of American’s pay more than any other industrialized country?

- that American companies pay a higher corporate tax rate than in any other industrialized country?

- that Barack Obama and many other politicians who write the laws send their children to private schools but deny free choice to the rest of us, particularly, those in poor districts with failing educational systems?

- that entrepreneurs and all private business owners must pay an estate tax of 35-percent, soon to rise to 55-percent after spending a lifetime working, building, hiring, paying taxes at the federal, state and local level when they pass away instead of leaving their earned wealth to family members?

- that self-proclaimed elitists such as the current Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner, former Democrat Senate Majority Leader, Tom Daschle, former Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel failed to properly file and pay their taxes?

- that Obama policy such as Obamacare and massive regulations are making the poor poorer, inflicting pain on the middle class and well over 5.5 million citizens have lost their jobs?

- that 88-percent of all political contributions from television producers, reporters and others from the mainstream media went to Democrats during the 2008 election cycle?

- that three  counties with families with the highest median income in America are located in the Washington DC area?

- that so-called green energy companies including solar, wind and ethanol products received billions of dollars in federal subsidies without paying taxes while we oil and gas industry companies pay billions in taxes, supply the majority of energy to America and Obama complains they are “subsidized?”

- that working Americans, many who work multiple jobs, must pay taxes that support unemployment benefits for 99 weeks for those not working with many not looking for work at all?

- that people with legitimate mortgages, who responsibly pay them on time have their tax dollars used to subsidize others who want a housing bailout when then took mortgages on homes knowing they weren’t qualified, couldn’t pay, but acted with greed and deceit but now can’t pay?

- that Barack Obama won’t permit the Keystone XL pipeline which would immediately create 20,000 new American jobs and thousands of indirect jobs to appease to his base and the environmentalists?

- that many of Obama’s largest campaign contributors received enormous federal loan guarantees for investments for green renewable energy projects that went bankrupt?

- that federal employees receive as much as 50-percent more in benefits than their counterparts in the private sector, the people who must pay for those public sector jobs?

- that 50-percent of the federal budget will redistribute income from younger workers to the non-working elderly who are some of the wealthiest Americans?

- that in 27 states a person seeking work is compelled to join a union to get a job and pay dues and retain membership to keep their job?

- that 4 in 10 American households pay zero in federal income taxes a number is on the increase with Obama and his ilk in office?

- that private companies like Boeing are threatened by agencies of the federal government when they build a plant and create jobs in a right-to-work-state as opposed to one infiltrated with union thugs?

- that not only our children and grandchildren but children who have yet to be born will be required, without a vote, to pay on a rising $5 trillion debt accumulated during the current administration without ever receiving any benefits?

No, life isn’t fair, but in America a person by birth is entitled to make their own way, to succeed and have the freedom and liberty to pursue their goals.

Under Barack Obama your freedom and liberty will be encroached upon further. Four more years of Barack Obama will indeed be the end of the Constitutional Republic known as America.

Liberally Conservative appreciates your comments that abide by our guidelines:

“Look to the Constitutions of South Africa or Canada, Not to the US Constitution”

Ginsburg didn’t stop there, she let the interview know exactly what she thinks of the United States Constitution, in particular, while visiting a country that denounces us and burns our flag. (Emphasis LCs)

It is a very inspiring time – that you have overthrown a dictator, and that you are striving to achieve a genuine democracy. So I think people in the United States are hoping that this transition will work, and that there will genuinely be a government of, by, and for the people.

I met with the head of the elections commission. I think that the first step has gone well, and that elections have been held for the lower house that everyone has considered to be free and fair. So that’s one milestone, and the next will be the drafting of a constitution.

I can’t speak about what the Egyptian experience should be, because I’m operating under a rather old constitution. The United States, in comparison to Egypt, is a very new nation, and yet we have the oldest written constitution still in force in the world.

Let me say first that a constitution, as important as it is, will mean nothing unless the people are yearning for liberty and freedom. If the people don’t care, then the best constitution in the world won’t make any difference. So the spirit of liberty has to be in the population, and then the constitution – first, it should safeguard basic fundamental human rights, like our First Amendment, the right to speak freely, and to publish freely, without the government as a censor.

You should certainly be aided by all the constitution-writing that has gone one since the end of World War II. I would not look to the US constitution, if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012. I might look at the constitution of South Africa. That was a deliberate attempt to have a fundamental instrument of government that embraced basic human rights, had an independent judiciary… It really is, I think, a great piece of work that was done. Much more recent than the US constitution – Canada has a Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It dates from 1982. You would almost certainly look at the European Convention on Human Rights. Yes, why not take advantage of what there is elsewhere in the world?

Sure, Ginsburg notes some positives about the US Constitution but the parts I highlighted are certainly odd for someone who has taken an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States and has a primary duty to do so as their job. It’s obvious Ginsburg doesn’t think much of our Constitution by referring other nations to look elsewhere as a guide for writing one.

Following is the interview, if you can stomach it, with the highlights of the transcript above. (03:46)

Liberally Conservative appreciates your comments that abide by our guidelines:

In front of the White House an individual is seated upon a park bench within the throes of depression. He’s flanked by all forty three presidents. In the forefront, intentionally disregarding the depressed gentleman is Barack Obama, whose right foot is treading over the Constitution. James Madison is beside Obama, pleading with him to halt. It also appears to the right (Obama’s left) Bill Clinton, FDR or LBJ and Teddy Roosevelt (know your history) are applauding. Where are Woodrow Wilson and Jimmy Carter? Would FDR be standing, surely he would be at the forefront.

This tableau below is called “The Forgotten Man”, a piece of art by Jon McNaughton, an artist recognized with regard to his politically-charged work.

The Forgotten Man

The artwork utilizes objects like disposed of dollar bills as symbols and scraps of paper having individual constitutional amendments scrawled upon them.

Originally released in 2010 it has now resurfaced with the 2012 election cycle beginning and controversy over many un-Constitutional issues by Obama and his administration during his 3 years in office.

“For a long time I didn’t know if I wanted to paint this picture, because I worried it might be too controversial,” McNaughton explains in a voice over. “(T)his man (on the park bench) represents every man, woman, and child who is an American… he hopes to find the American dream of happiness and prosperity.”

“But now because of unconstitutional acts imposed by the American people by our government we stand on the precipice of disasters,” he added.

Obama is anti-American, anti-Constitution and if reelected has huge ambitions to further erode the individual liberties and freedom’s guaranteed by the US Constitution. Obama’s is his “Daddy’s Son” who was a Communist.

Wake up America, stop the destruction of America, stop the trampling of the most precious document in the world – The United States Constitution.

Liberally Conservative appreciates your comments that abide by our guidelines:

Yes, you read the headline correctly. Barack Obama has decided not to run from his pathetic economy but to embrace it. And he want’s you to do the same.

Unfortunately, many of the imbeciles of our society, the fawning drones who gasp at his every word, are buying into this Obama farce. The State of the Union speech was generally received poorly but out on the campaign trail in Colorado, Michigan, Iowa, Nevada and Arizona the “Economy Built to Last” theme is receiving rave reviews.

Nearly 6,000 Intel employees in Arizona – young, well-educated technology sophisticates – applauded and cheered Mr. Obama from start to finish. Even when he ripped into those awful American companies with factories overseas, such as their own employer. “An America where we build stuff and make stuff and sell stuff all over the world.”

You might think the best and the brightest would be beyond Mr. Obama’s crude populist pitch. You of course would be wrong. And the Republican’s better wake up very soon to the fact that Obama’s approach will do better than the data driven, with charts and graphs will bore audiences and their eyes will soon glaze over.

Any citizen barely awake, squinting at the text of Obama’s “An Economy Built to Last” will notice what fails to appear – Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, entitlements and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Obama notice nothing of economics but he does know how to read a prepared text of of his teleprompter to excite crowds allowing him to once again convince people that he does, in fact, know best. In his book, “The Audacity of Hope” the word “empathy” was at the heart of his moral code. He will use empathy throughout his speeches to gain the confidence of the crowds. Audacious, indeed!

Candidates in the GOP have a real problem. Obama can go across the country and slam big business and at the same time claim a close relationship with the jobless. No problem, he simply does it. Republican’s don’t get it and they don’t combat it. Team Obama knows this because the predictable Republicans will endlessly quote economic data. Numbers, numbers, numbers – data, data, data – I can hear the audience snoring.

“An economy built to last also means we’ve got to renew American values: fair play, shared responsibility.”

Get used to hearing this, the audiences love it, standing, cheering, applauding. It’s all populist garbage but you’re going to hear it repeatedly if you dare to listen.

Mitt Romney is currently surging and expected to win the GOP nomination. Mr. Romney is a stiff, horrible public speaker and does not get the crowds going wild with his data driven mantra. Mitt Romney is boring most likely will not go after Barack Obama in the way he has gone after Newt Gingrich. Team Romney will not go after Obama’s jugular and this is a problem.

Rick Santorum, on the other hand, demonstrated in the final Florida how it’s done when he repeatedly took Gingrich and Romney to the wood shed for a good beating. Without sending a tough, heartfelt message to American’s you won’t get them excited. Republicans are expecting Obama and his record to win the election for them. This is false hope.

We have 9 months remaining before the November elections and numbers may implode further in the economy but how much of the real data be seen in papers, on TV or the radio. Who will be listening to economics 101?

Rick Santorum is the only GOP candidate who understands that Obama will attempt to marginalize the Republicans. I don’t see a way up for Mr. Santorum but he’s getting my vote in the primaries. I stick to my principles, I can always hold my nose and vote in November as I did in 2008.

Boring won’t win, a real, tough message going after Barack Obama in it’s entirety will win. The big question is – when will Republicans figure this out? The establishment never will, they don’t mind being in the minority as long as they keep their jobs. This is a leadership problem and it won’t go away anytime soon.

Liberally Conservative appreciates your comments that abide by our guidelines:

No Republican’s in Congress have the intestinal fortitude to start proceedings for impeachment of Barack Obama, or at the very least, begin legal proceedings against VP Joe Biden and Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta. Why you ask? Here is an article printed in the Wall Street Journal by Leif Babin a former Navy SEAL officer who served three tours in Iraq, earning a Silver Star, two Bronze Stars and a Purple Heart. He left active duty six months ago.

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

America’s premier Special Operations force is once again in the headlines after a team of Navy SEALs rescued two hostages from captivity in Somalia last week. Elite U.S. forces have carried out such operations periodically over the past decade, always with skill and bravery. The difference in recent months is that the details of their work haven’t remained secret. On the contrary, government officials have revealed them for political gain—endangering our forces in the process.

The floodgates opened after the raid that killed Osama bin Laden last May, and the Obama administration’s lack of discretion was on display again at last week’s State of the Union address. As President Obama entered the House chamber, in full view of the cameras, he pointed to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and exclaimed: “Good job tonight, good job tonight.” Clearly something had happened that he wanted the world to know about.

After delivering his speech, which included multiple references to the bin Laden raid, the president again thanked Mr. Panetta. “That was a good thing tonight,” he said as if to ensure that the viewing public, if they missed it initially, would get it a second time around.

Sure enough, shortly thereafter, the White House announced the successful rescue of the hostages in Somalia by U.S. Special Operations forces. Vice President Biden appeared on ABC’s “Good Morning America” to highlight the success the next morning, and Mr. Panetta also publicly praised it. Then came the “anonymous U.S. officials” to provide extensive details of who conducted the raid and how. As with the bin Laden operation, the top-secret unit that carried it out was again front-page news, as were its methods and tactics.

Our special operators do not welcome this publicity. In fact, from conversations I’ve had in recent days, it’s clear they are dismayed by it.

Adm. William H. McRaven, America’s top special-operations commander, wrote in his 1996 book “Spec Ops” that there are six key principles of success in special operations. Of paramount importance—especially given the risk and sensitivity of the missions and the small units involved—is what the military calls “operational security,” or maintaining secrecy. If the enemy learns details and can anticipate the manner and timing of an attack, the likelihood of success is significantly reduced and the risk to our forces is significantly increased.

This is why much of what our special-operators do is highly classified, and why military personnel cannot legally divulge it to the public. Yet virtually every detail of the bin Laden raid has appeared in news outlets across the globe—from the name of the highly classified unit to how the U.S. gathered intelligence, how many raiders were involved, how they entered the grounds, what aircraft they used, and how they moved through the compound. Such details were highly contained within the military and not shared even through classified channels. Yet now they are available to anyone with the click of a mouse.

It’s difficult for military leaders to enforce strict standards of operational security on their personnel while the most senior political leadership is flooding the airwaves with secrets. The release of classified information has also opened a Pandora’s box of former and retired SEALs, special operators, and military personnel who have chosen to violate their non-disclosure agreements and discuss intricate details of how such operations are planned and executed.

We’ve already begun seeing specific examples of strategic harm from the post-bin Laden leaks. In June, Pakistan arrested several individuals who allegedly provided information to the CIA in advance of the raid. One of those charged with treason was a Pakistani doctor, Shakil Afridi. This Sunday, Mr. Panetta confirmed to “60 Minutes” that Dr. Afridi had provided “very helpful” intelligence to the CIA. That may have condemned Dr. Afridi to death or life imprisonment.

Such disclosures are catastrophic to U.S. intelligence networks, which often take years to develop. Recklessness not only puts lives at risk but could set U.S. intelligence-collection efforts back decades. Our ability to carry out future operations is significantly degraded—something not lost on Pakistan.

A week after the bin Laden raid, then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates expressed dismay about Washington’s loose lips, telling a town hall meeting of U.S. Marines at Camp Lejeune: “Frankly, a week ago Sunday, in the Situation Room, we all agreed that we would not release any operational details from the effort to take out bin Laden. That all fell apart on Monday—the next day.”

Do the president and his top political advisers understand what’s at stake for the special-operations forces who carry out these dangerous operations, or the long-term strategic consequences of divulging information about our most highly classified military assets and intelligence capabilities? It is infuriating to see political gain put above the safety and security of our brave warriors and our long-term strategic goals. Loose lips sink ships.

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

Thank you for your unwavering service and courage Mr. Babin.

How so many American citizens can applaud Obama, bundle millions in campaign donations, support him and vote for him is hard for me to understand. I can’t get my arms around the fact that so many anti-Military, anti-American’s would like to see our country destroyed yet call themselves patriots and American. It’s unthinkable but we all better understand that Barack Obama needs to be run out of office. Barack Obama is an enemy of the United States of America.

Meaning of “High Crimes and Misdemeanors”

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

“The man of system . . . is apt to be very wise in his own conceit; and is often so enamoured with the supposed beauty of his own ideal plan of government, that he cannot suffer the smallest deviation from any part of it. He goes on to establish it completely and in all its part, without any regard either to the great interests or to the strong prejudices which may oppose it.

He seems to imagine that he can arrange the different members of a great society with as much ease as the hand arranges the different pieces upon a chess-board . . .”

~ Adam Smith ~ The Theory of Moral Sentiments , 1759

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

Liberally Conservative appreciates your comments that abide by our guidelines:

Rep. Allen West (R-FL) had a very specific message for Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi at the Palm Beach County Republican Party Lincoln Day dinner.

“Take your message of equality of achievement, take your message of economic dependency, take your message of enslaving the entrepreneurial will and spirit of the American people somewhere else. You can take it to Europe, you can take it to the bottom of the sea, you can take it to the North Pole, but get the hell out of the United States of America.”

Well Done!

Liberally Conservative appreciates your comments that abide by our guidelines:

5th UPDATE: Pat Buchanan: Reagan White House saw Newt as ‘something of a political opportunist’

4th UPDATE: Sarah Palin Says It Like It Is

3rd UPDATE: Must Read – As all of this unravels Jeffrey Lord at American Spectator provides excellent arguments of why the anti-Newt claims are false.

2nd UPDATE: At the bottom of this post I have a statement from Michael Reagan on this issue.

UPDATE: To be fair and countering my blistering commentary on Newt Gingrich below, friend and fellow blogger Professor William A. Jacobson at Legal Insurrection writes much the opposite with links to other articles defending Gingrich and separating out of context words written recently. Read it here. Make sure you also read what I had to say below, complete with videos. Thanks!

I’ve always been Conservative even growing up in a blue-collar Democrat voting family. Ronald Reagan was merely an extension of by political beliefs, both fiscal and social. Ronald Reagan made me feel good about America, he made America feel optimistic. Ronald Reagan was a leader. I yearn for the day when America has a leader like Ronald Reagan.

Which brings me to Newt Gingrich. I was nearly ready to endorse Gingrich as GOP nominee, while holding my nose. Of course, I’ve been close to endorsing Mitt Romney while also holding my nose. The problem is this – the GOP is not offering a candidate worth my vote. I like Rick Santorum but I don’t like the way he ran his campaign and don’t believe he has the money or organization backing to rise to the top.

I was recently asked – then who? My answer was Stephen Harper, with tongue in cheek, implying the best bet may be to ready the passports and move to Canada before tyranny continues and Barack Obama gets another term or we get more RINOs in Congress and the White House. I don’t believe Mitt Romney when he says he will repeal Obamacare as he changes positions so frequently it’s like the weather in and around Chicago.

Newt Gingrich has supported the individual mandate for healthcare, he sat on a park bench with Nancy Pelosi and supported cap and trade taxes as a cure for global warming that doesn’t exist. He attacked one of my favorites in Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) who really does produce bold plans and can express them better than anyone in Congress or the White House or in the current GOP campaign.

But now it has come to light that Newt Gingrich repeatedly attacked Ronald Reagan during the 1980s while President Reagan was leading the country and the Republican Party. There is no putting his words back in his mouth or spinning this away with charm and intellect. Ugh, ugh – no way, no how.

If you’ve watched the GOP debates than you heard Gingrich constantly wrapping himself around the Ronald Reagan mantle – his close relationship with the President, how he is a “bold Reagan Conservative.” Even telling anyone who will listen how he helped end the Cold War, end the Soviet Union, and create millions of jobs. President Reagan helped create an environment for entrepreneurs to create jobs – no President or Congressman ever creates job. Mr. Reagan would never take that kind of credit but Newt Gingrich is a professional at self praise. My mother always said – “Self praise stinks, have some humility.”

At the Reagan presidential library this fall, Gingrich boasted of how:

“I helped Reagan create millions of jobs while he was president.”

And after modestly acknowledging his own less significant role than Reagan’s, added:

“We helped defeat the Soviet empire.” Unmentioned by Gingrich then, or in any of the 2,414 debates during this campaign, was his 1985 criticism of President Reagan’s historic meeting with Mikhail Gorbachev as “the most dangerous summit for the West since Adolf Hitler met with (British Prime Minister) Chamberlain at Munich in 1938.”

In an interview on CNBC, Gingrich recently emphasized his close identification with the nation’s 40th president:

“I’ve done a movie on Ronald Reagan called ‘Rendezvous With Destiny.’ Callista and I did. We’ve done a book on Ronald Reagan. You know I campaigned with Reagan. I first met Reagan in ’74. I’m very happy to talk about Ronald Reagan.”

Indeed Mr. Gingrich is happy to talk about his “close relationship” with Ronald Reagan. What politician running as a “Bold Conservative” would not?

How about when Gingrich went to the House floor during the Gipper’s second White House term and declared the president’s Soviet policy a “failure.” Here is what Gingrich said:

“Measured against the scale and momentum of the Soviet empire’s challenge, the Reagan administration has failed, is failing and without a dramatic, fundamental change in strategy will continue to fail. … The burden of the failure frankly must be placed first upon President Reagan.”

As reported in the Congressional Record, Gingrich had found Reagan responsible for our national “decay”:

“Beyond the obvious indicators of decay, the fact is that President Reagan has lost control of the national agenda.”

Here is Gingrich in 1986:

“Measured against the scale and momentum of the Soviet empire’s challenge, the Reagan administration has failed, is failing, and without a dramatic change in strategy will continue to fail. . . . President Reagan is clearly failing.”

Why? This was due partly to “his administration’s weak policies, which are inadequate and will ultimately fail”; partly to CIA, State, and Defense, which “have no strategies to defeat the empire.”

But of course “the burden of this failure frankly must be placed first on President Reagan.” Our efforts against the Communists in the Third World were “pathetically incompetent,” so those anti-Communist members of Congress who questioned the $100 million Reagan sought for the Nicaraguan “contra” rebels “are fundamentally right.”

Such was Gingrich’s faith in President Reagan that in 1985, he called Reagan’s meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev “the most dangerous summit for the West since Adolf Hitler met with Neville Chamberlain in 1938 in Munich.”

In 1988 Gingrich said George H.W. Bush Won’t Win If He Runs To Continue Reaganism:

These types of outright contradictions involving exactly what Congressman Gingrich in fact said during the time President Reagan was in office and exactly what Candidate Gingrich now offers as fictitious recollections associated with his unwavering allegiance to President Reagan reminds me of one of the past speaker’s personal broadsides in opposition to Washington DC.

“In this cold and ruthless city,” he once said, “the center of hypocrisy is Capitol Hill.”

Newt Gingrich is quite clearly an authority regarding both topics. Bold hypocrisy, indeed!

Ronald Reagan’s eldest son Mike Reagan has issued a statement lambasting Mitt Romney and his supporters for claims that Romney’s Republican presidential rival Newt Gingrich was a strong critic of President Reagan. Michael says such claims are false.

“I am deeply disturbed that supporters of Mitt Romney are claiming that Newt Gingrich is not a true Reaganite and are even claiming that Newt was a strong critic of my father.

“Recently I endorsed Newt Gingrich for president because I believe that Newt is the only Republican candidate who has both consistently backed the conservative policies that my father championed and the only Republican that will continue to implement his vision.

“It surprises me that Mitt Romney and his supporters would raise this issue — when Mitt by his own admission voted for Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale who opposed my father, and later supported liberal Democrat Paul Tsongas for president.

“As governor of Massachusetts, Romney’s achievement was the most socialistic healthcare plan in the nation up until that time.

“Say what you want about Newt Gingrich but when he was Speaker of the House he surrounded himself with Reagan conservatives and implemented a Ronald Reagan program of low taxes and restrained federal spending.

“Newt’s conservative program created a huge economic boom and balanced the budget for the first time in more than a generation.”

“I would take Newt Gingrich’s record any day over Mitt Romney’s.”

Liberally Conservative appreciates your comments that abide by our guidelines:

If you listen to the news on radio or TV you’re being told the economy is recovering. You’re getting little snippets of information about the unemployment rate going down while leaving out real numbers for underemployed, part-time employment and people who have gone of the unemployment rolls for a variety of reasons.

There are other numbers to look at when considering the state of the economy and when put into the real world of economics you get a different picture – one based on real numbers.

The final, pathetic growth number for 2011 has reported Real GDP increased 1.7 percent in 2011 (that is, from the 2010 annual level to the 2011 annual level), compared with an increase of 3.0 percent in 2010. The increase in real GDP in 2011 primarily reflected positive contributions from personal consumption expenditures (PCE), exports, and nonresidential fixed investment that were partly offset by negative contributions from state and local government spending, private inventory investment, and federal government spending. Imports, which are a subtraction in the calculation of GDP, increased.

If the economy is so wonderful then why, under the administration of Barack Obama, a nation of dependency is being created. Today Obama is out telling anyone who will listen is that he is not the “food stamp president” and is going to his old refrain blaming George W. Bush. Numbers post on this site don’t lie and the factual data displayed in the above graphic provide a real picture discounting one more Obama lie.

“First of all, I don’t put people on food stamps. People become eligible for food stamps. Second of all, the initial expansion of food-stamp eligibility happened under my Republican predecessor, not under me. Number three, when you have a disastrous economic crash that results in 8 million people losing their jobs, more people are going to need more support from government.”

America has been heading off the cliff for many years from bad, big government policies and both parties are too blame, and all administrations. The fact is, Barack Obama and his minions have accelerated the decline.

Direct payments. The amount of money the federal government hands out in direct payments to individuals steadily increased over the past four decades, but shot up under Obama, climbing by almost $600 billion — a 32% increase — in his first three years. And Obama’s last budget called for these payments to climb another $500 billion by 2016, at which point they would account for fully two-thirds of all federal spending.

People getting benefits. According to the Census Bureau 49% now live in homes where at least one person gets a federal benefit — Social Security, workers comp, unemployment, subsidized housing, and the like. That’s up from 44% the year before Obama took office, and way up from 1983, when fewer than a third were government beneficiaries.

Food stamps. This year, more than 46 million (15% of all Americans) will get food stamps. That’s 45% higher than when Obama took office, and twice as high as the average for the previous 40 years. This surge was driven in part by the recession, but also because Obama boosted the benefit amount as part of his stimulus plan.

Disability. The number of people on Social Security disability has steadily climbed since the 1970s, thanks mainly to easier eligibility rules. But their numbers jumped 10% in Obama’s first two years in office, according to the Social Security Administration. That sharp rise was due largely to meager job prospects since the recession ended in 2009. When employment opportunities are scarce, experts note, many who could otherwise work sign up for disability benefits instead.

Keep your ears and eyes wide open America – Democrats and their leader will lie, lie and lie so you better get the facts. Democrats and Republicans have all been guilty of turning the US towards the Left but the Marxists are putting our destruction on a bullet train to hell.

Liberally Conservative appreciates your comments that abide by our guidelines: