Michigan has become the 24th right-to-work state in this great nation.
Unions have taken to the streets to protest what seems to be common sense legislation. The legislation in question would make it illegal to require employees to financially support labor unions as a condition of employment. This seems like it's more "for the people" than forcing workers to pay dues, right?
Our Campaigner-in-Chief weighed in on the issue at a rally (Hey, isn't the election over?) in Detroit, "What we shouldn't be doing is try to take away your rights to bargain for better wages or working conditions."
Who exactly are they bargaining with, Mr. President? That's right: the taxpayers, municipalities and states, all of which are flat broke!
This makes Wisconsin's union battle earlier this year look like the first of many dominoes to fall. As states approach their own fiscal cliffs, a simple question is being asked, "What can we afford and what can't we afford?"
If you are a teacher, assembly line worker, police officer or firefighter you have what 17 percent of this country lacks: a good-paying job! So, put down the picket signs, stop complaining and enjoy the benefits of having a good job.
Let us be the first ones to say it, "Unions are driving us straight off of the fiscal cliff."
You may argue that it's due to government spending. Try this on for size: since Obama took office in 2009, the government has hired over 100 employees per day! How are these new public sector union members paid? You guessed it, with our tax dollars.
We are tired of hearing about jobs going overseas. If Mike & Winey were in manufacturing, not radio, we would be manufacturing our products overseas as well. It's not because we are greedy or unpatriotic, it's because unions have driven up the price of manufacturing so greatly that it is completely cost-prohibitive to manufacture anything in the U.S.!
It's time to wake up America. The only people who support unions are those in unions and those who depend on union members to get elected. Let's get back to hard work equaling good pay, jobs for those who earn them and good ol fashioned meritocracy!
This nation is so full of attention-starved people looking for adoration and affirmation from society that their confusion and lack of engagement in reality is the new accepted norm.
Nothing can prove this point further than the undecided voter.
If you haven't been able to pick a presidential candidate to vote for at this time in the race, do us all a favor and stay home on Election Day.
It's similar to annual movie awards. Each year, after learning which movie won top honors, we are left thinking, "I never heard of this movie" or "How the hell did this movie ever win? I don't know anyone that saw it."
Movie award voters are people with low self-esteems screaming, "Look at me, look at me. I'm different and I need to prove to you that I'm important by having a so-called independent thought."
The undecided voter is no different. So much media attention is given to the undecided voter. Many people find their only purpose in life being lopped into a category of people who can't form an opinion. Seriously, President Obama and Gov. Romney couldn't be any more different on every issue in the book. If you haven't been able to determine who you should vote for by now, then something is seriously wrong. Perhaps you are hung up on small and trivial matters, because these two candidates contradict each year on every major issue.
Some say it's never too late to become engaged. However, we have to draw the line within one week before Election Day. Most experts contend that this is one of the most important presidential elections in history. Do you want your neurologist cramming four years of knowledge into one week prior to operating on your brain? We should hope not.
If you are undecided at this point, we understand that this blog might cause you to be offended. That's okay. Just stay home on Nov. 6. The thought that your vote could cancel ours is disturbing, especially coming from two guys who take these issues serious enough to devote more than two weeks every four years to formulate an opinion.
It seems the media's number one responsibility following a presidential debate is to proclaim a victor.
Rather than determining who won, we should point out who lost: all of us.
Did anyone feel invigorated about the election and the direction our country following that snooze fest? In actuality, we feel more uninformed about foreign policy than when we started the evening. With that being said, and if we had to pick a winner, it would go to former Gov. Mitt Romney.
Barack Obama came out looking to score "cute" points. The president brought his share of pre-scripted and well-rehearsed "cute" one-liners, as the pundits and blowholes in the media like to refer to as "zingers," and they were delivered on time with the hope that the audience would be caught up in his charm and not concerned with the actual truth. As we look at the majority of the post-debate snap poles, the president achieved his objective: kill them with cuteness rather than with the facts. There's something we haven't seen before (insert sarcasm font).
Then there was Romney's performance. Romney's showing was boring, reserved, patient, intelligent, concise and, well, presidential. How dare he keep from getting caught up in the name calling and childish nature of the Obama attack plan! Romney never fell for the traps set by Obama. Romney simply allowed Obama to fall on his own sword, or bayonet if you will, which, by the way, along with horses, are still used by our Marines.
Romney's team reported that this was his strategy. Apparently, the objective was to pass the Commander-in-Chief threshold and simply come off as presidential. Most of us were left with a low impression of Romney's performance.
Perhaps we have all fallen into the trappings of the "Rockstar President" mentality and have forgotten that a Commander-in-Chief is not someone to high five, but someone to respect and that is earned, not shoved down the throats of Americans by endless TV appearances, Hollywood endorsements and celerity parties at the White House, paid with your tax dollars of course.
Yet, that might be the only take away from last night's debate. The two candidates, with nearly identical foreign policies, bored us to tears for 90 minutes. One of the candidates looked petty while the other, well, looked presidential.
By the way, did anyone catch Bob Scheiffer saying, "Obama Bin Laden?" Oops!
Tuesday night's debate played out exactly as planned.
While Romney stayed the course and delivered an identical performance to the previous debate, Obama, as expected, showed up and came out swinging and looking like he had a point to prove. The moderator, Candy Crowley, had to paint herself as an unbiased referee. In our estimation, both the president and Romney accomplished their individual missions. Let's also hand it to Crowley. She accomplished her mission...through nearly 45 minutes. That is when her true colors started to shine.
Each side will claim victory for this battle. Each side will claim that the other side lied. They are both right on both accounts. Each side had their moments of victory.Let's call it truth-bending or tactfully avoiding the truth.
One truth-bending moment that evolved into a blatant lie was, of course, Benghazi. This is where things started to unravel for the president. Crowley joined in to bail the president out by attempting to lend journalistic credibility to the president's claim that he announced that Benghazi was a terror attack from the Rose Garden the day after the Sept. 11th attack:
ROMNEY: I - I think it's interesting the president just said something which... which is that on the day after the attack he went into the Rose Garden and said that this was an act of terror. OBAMA: That's what I said. ROMNEY: You said in the Rose Garden the day after the attack, it was an act of terror? It was not a spontaneous demonstration, is that what you're saying? OBAMA: Please proceed, governor. ROMNEY: I want to make sure we get that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror. OBAMA: Get the transcript. CROWLEY: It it it he did in fact, sir! So let me let me call it an act of terror. OBAMA: Can you say that a little louder, Candy? CROWLEY: He...he did call it an act of terror. It did as well take, it did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea of there being a riot out there about this tape to come out. You are correct about that.
Ok, Mr. President. We got the transcript. Here is the transcript of the statements made by the president on Sept. 12th.
Notice that the words "terror," "terrorist" and "terrorist act" are NEVER used in describing the fatal events in Benghazi.
Romney tried to seize the moment by spelling out the fact that Obama sent U.S. Ambassador Rice out on five morning talk shows the following Sunday morning citing protests as the cause of the Benghazi attacks. In addition, the president cited the same thing while delivering his United Nations speech while on Letterman and the Joy Behar Show. Of course, he was cut off by Crowley as he was beginning to make this point.
We understand that truth bending is a part of politics, for example Fast and Furious. However, when a seasoned journalist/debate moderator doubles down, when all the chips are on the table, on a bold-faced lie, we've crossed a line. Romney was ready to capitalize on the moment, but the president was saved by Crowley. Keep in mind that Crowley later admitted that Romney was correct and that she made a mistake. Unfortunately, the damage was done.
This morning, Crowley solidified her support for the president while defending her actions.
"I was trying to move this along," she said. "There is no question the administration is quite vulnerable on this topic."
She might as well have screamed, "FORWARD!"
No matter what side of the aisle you are one, we hope that you will do your homework before you vote next month. Please do not let the headlines dictate your opinion. Search for the truth.
Let records and facts be your guide, not talking blowholes.
Vice presidential debates are about one thing and one thing only: helping Americans determine if they can imagine that candidate as president if something awful should happen to the president.
Thursday night, we witnessed two very different men. First, the seasoned career D.C. insider with a, well, creepy smile. The other man was young and polished -- a math geek.
Jo Biden is Paul Ryan's senior by, let's say, 156 years. It was apparent that Biden viewed his junior like we would a 12-year-old at the grown-ups table at Thanksgiving.
It was obvious from the onset that Biden was well-coached and prepared to follow his marching orders of "steamroll everyone in the room!" Biden came with guns blazing. This is what he had to do. The problem is that Biden's guns were laughter, sarcasm, immaturity and a "Cheshire Cat" grin.
His laughter through topics like dead soldiers and the slaughter of Syrian citizens was not only disgraceful, but also embarrassing. Biden seemed to have both Ryan and the moderator against the ropes all night. The problem is that he never seemed to deliver a seemingly open knockout blow.
America, Paul Ryan. Paul Ryan, America. Where has this guy been?
The Romney campaign should be ashamed of themselves for not plastering this good-looking, articulate and polished professional all over the daytime shows. Having said that, Ryan got stomped on Thursday.
We know, we know. Biden was rude. Who cares? Man up, Paul Ryan. This was your one shot to take it to the opposition.
Ryan failed to bring specifics and facts when pressed by the moderator. He was on his heals all night until the closing comments. Those that actually stayed tuned in for the closing statements were treated to two minutes of uninterrupted Paul Ryan. He brought his case to America while glaring into the camera -- with no teleprompters.
The clear winner on Thursday? The Congressional Dental Plan. Seriously, are we the only ones that are having nightmares about Biden's teeth? Creepy.
For starters, we never expected to see an exciting debate. Mitt Romney is known for being as interesting as a dead cactus, while President Barack Obama, without a teleprompter, generally appears as lost as one of our kids when they lose their sippy cup.
We actually found this debate spirited, informative and, at times, captivating. This is one of the first debates we've seen in a long time that had some semblance of an actual debate among grownups. We got to see two men look into each other's eyes and voice their views and differences. So, let's look at how the players did.
Leher is taking a lot of heat for his inability to control the debate and the candidates, though this couldn't be further from the truth. Leher turned the standard boring question and answer session into an actual discussion between the candidate's about their perception of themselves and each other.
Leher let the teams play without calling ticky-tack fouls. As parents, we sometimes let our kid's scuffles work themselves out without smothering them and getting too involved. That's when the best solutions are usually reached.
Highlight: Though Romney said he would cut funding to PBS if elected, he acted like a big boy and didn't press the governor.
Lowlight: He looked like he just walked off the set to the remake of the "Thriller" video. He may have died two years ago, but no one bothered to tell him.
President Barack Obama
It seemed that Obama came to Denver riding a wave of confidence knowing he was up in the polls. Unfortunately, Romney's confidence and knowledge of the issues brought that wave crashing down on the president.
It also appeared that Obama was pining to the "Uninformed Voter." He operates under the assumption, which may be true, that if you keep repeating the same point over and over, regardless of the facts, uninformed voters will buy what he's selling.
Highlight: Though most pundits believed he would lose his signature cool when confronted, he never did.
Lowlight: He may have just realized that talking points never stand up to facts. He said that Social Security is structurally sound. Really? By who's math?
Gov. Mitt Romney
Romney exceeded his own supporter's expectations. He came prepared about the issues and ready to play on offense. It was like watching Ward Cleaver showing up to the dinner table to talk to his ideological son (Wally or Beaver) and prepare him for his first year at a liberal college.
Romney showed that he wouldn't back down when challenged and showed America that he isn't the evil man seen in campaign attack ads.
Highlight: He continued to look Obama straight in the eyes and came after him with supporting facts and figures. He displayed his knowledge and understating of business and how they help America grow and balance the budget.
Lowlight: Though he used facts and figures to go on the offensive, he failed to use them to outline and detail his plans for America if elected.
Lastly, let's not forget the crowd. They showed restraint by staying out of the picture and letting TV viewers form their own opinions without their audience distractions.
Though the president didn't hurt himself, the clear winner was Romney.