The Horse Sense Blog compares the nonsense in today's news with good ol' fashioned horse sense

“…I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve.… It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.” - Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775

"The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it." - George Orwell

(c) copyright 2011-2016 Doug Johnson All Rights Reserved. All site content is copyright protected and subject to penalties for infringement of copyright laws.

Sunday, January 29, 2012

What We’re Supposed To Believe

Here’s the Nonsense:  Mitt Romney is the true conservative in the GOP Primary Race.

Here’s the Horse Sense (with apologies to James Whitcomb Riley):  If ducks are liberal, then when I see a bird that walks like a duck and swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, I call that bird Mitt Romney.

Let’s see if I understand this.  We’re supposed to believe that Mitt Romney is a conservative and the candidate with the best chance to beat Obama in the general election. 

We’re supposed to believe that he’s got some sort of conservative record. 

We’re supposed to believe that he’ll be the great conservative savior of the nation. 

We’re supposed to believe that he was only governing the way he did with moderate and liberal policies in Massachusetts because he had to work with Democrats in a blue state, but in reality he’s purported to be a true conservative. 

We’re supposed to believe that even though he uses Saul Alinsky’s left-wing methods to attack his competitors that he’s the true conservative.

We’re supposed to believe that he’s the victim of unfair and merciless attacks because he’s a conservative. 

We’re supposed to believe the left when they tell us Romney would be the “toughest to beat” for Obama in the general election, even though the last thing the left is known for is telling the truth.

What part of stupid are we supposed to be?

Are we really supposed to believe that a man whose track record is so clearly liberal is actually a conservative?  (click here to see last week's post for a clearer understanding of Romney’s record)  And let’s just assume for a minute that he’s abandoned all of those liberal leanings to become a true conservative.  (Well, all except his liberal leaning on healthcare because he still embraces the mess known as Romneycare in Massachusetts.)  Even if he has abandoned his liberal history and positions, shouldn’t he have to live as a conservative and prove his conservative positions through his actions over an extended period of time before we can truly believe he’s changed?  

Oh, wait a minute, I guess that can’t work because when Newt Gingrich has admitted his failures and made changes to his life, sought forgiveness, and lived a good life as a faithful husband and father for over a decade it’s still not good enough to prove he’s changed.  And we certainly can’t hold a different standard for Newt than we do for Mitt, can we?

This entire fiasco that the establishment Republicans want us to believe that Mitt Romney is a conservative is ridiculous.  They employ the politics of personal destruction from Saul Alinksy’s teachings that became the method of campaigning perfected by the Clintons in the 1990s.  And then when Romney’s side starts using it in Iowa against Gingrich no one holds them accountable, even though the vast majority of money spent on negative ads in Iowa (studies show up to 90% of them) were spent on ads against Gingrich. 

Yes, Gingrich made the mistake of trying to respond in kind against Romney in Iowa and was attacked viciously for doing it.  He stopped, returned to message-based campaigning and campaigning that that compares records.  But the criticism against him stood. 

Gingrich’s momentum picked up again and gave him a decisive win in South Carolina throwing Romney’s campaign a curve.  And Romney, typical of a liberal cry-baby politician, went right back to the Alinsky model of personal attacks instead of campaigning on the facts of his record.  (Oh, that's right, Romney's record isn't a conservative one so he can't stand on that.  And doesn't that sound a lot like another politician by the name of Barack Obama?  Maybe that's why George Soros, when interviewed in Davos Switzerland said that there really was no difference between Obama and Romney.)  

Ads were run by Romney's supporters that questioned Newt’s connection to the Reagan Revolution.  The establishment, once again in an effort to push Romney on all of us, brought out the old moderate losers like Dole and McCain to support him and attack Newt.  And with all the millions being spent to drive the attacks home before the primary vote this Tuesday, even Michael Reagan endorsing Gingrich and bringing forward confirmation from both he and Nancy Reagan that Ronald Reagan had passed the torch to Newt Gingrich might have been too little too late.  Although I have to say that it seems pretty stupid that any voter would think that the Reagan’s wouldn’t know better than anyone who carries the true Reagan conservative message.

Tuesday is a day that should be crystal clear to voters.  Choose Mitt Romney, a liberal Republican who will bring us the history of success of Bob Dole and John McCain or choose Newt Gingrich, the man who Ronald Reagan passed the torch to and begin the process of taking America back for freedom, liberty, and justice.

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Why the Republican Establishment, Democrats, And The Media All Want Romney As The GOP Nominee

Here’s the Nonsense:  The Democrats and the media fear Romney as the toughest candidate to beat in 2012.

Here’s the Horse Sense:  Along with the Democrats and the media, the establishment Republicans want Romney as the GOP candidate.  And it’s not because he’d be the toughest to beat.

It makes no logical sense that Republicans would want the same person for GOP nominee as the Democrats and media want, but they do.  They all want Mitt Romney and the logic is simple and clear.

No thinking person who wants to win a contest wants to make it harder to win.  So the best thing to happen is to have a weaker opponent.  Mitt Romney is that opponent for Barack Obama.  The Democrats would love to have Romney be the GOP nominee for just that reason.  The best way to assure an Obama re-election victory is to work to get the weakest candidate nominated by the GOP. 

And since the mainstream media are simply an extension of the Democrat Party, they want the same thing, too.  After all, the media are the ones who fought so hard to get Obama elected in 2008 by shielding him from the tough questions, scrutiny, and accountability that a free press is supposed to provide to protect a free society.  They want Romney so they can protect their candidate, Barack Obama.

The establishment Republicans are commonly known as country club Republicans or Rockefeller Republicans.  They are ones who are known for going along to get along in Washington.  They really aren’t conservative and often they are more desirous of a long term career in politics than of risking it all and taking a stand for principle.  They don’t want to cut spending, they just want to be in control of it.  They love pork so they can stay in the good graces of their constituents.  And, of course, with all this they don’t want to do anything to bring on the fury of those two giants of Democrat support, the Washington Post and the New York Times.  To the establishment Republicans anyone who wants to be a true conservative and stand for principle is nothing but trouble. 

The establishment Republicans want a candidate that is one of them, which makes Romney a perfect choice.  They don’t really believe they can beat Obama, but if they do they certainly want a candidate who is in their camp.  Their main concern is retaining the power they’ve got in Washington and continuing their pork-based careers.

So why does Mitt fit the mold as candidate of choice for all these people? 

Romney’s historical success as a candidate is very poor.  In 25 races he’s competed in, he’s only won 9 (those races include primary races that he’s competed in, but exclude caucuses). 
In an article entitled Overestimating Romney, Jonathan V. Last reported in The Weekly Standard on December 19, 2011 that:

  • Romney lost to Ted Kennedy in a 1994 Senate race by 17 points, even though 1994 was the best year for Republicans since the early 1950s.
  • His supporters claim a great victory of a Republican in the blue state of Massachusetts when he ran for governor.  But they don’t mention that he was the fourth Republican in a row that Massachusetts elected as governor.  And his victory was shallow receiving less than half the total votes cast. 
  • His approval was so low in Massachusetts that he could not mount a successful campaign to get re-elected.  His dismal performance gave the Democrats the governorship back for the first time in two decades. 
According to the Center for Small Government, Romney was not the cost cutter he claims to have been.  During his one term as governor he increased the state budget from $22.7 billion to $25.7 billion.  And there was additional spending of $2.2 billion that the legislature took off budget.

They go on to say that “the actual impact of Romney’s tenure as governor was a huge increase in state spending.”  And then they say that in Massachusetts under Romney “for every one government job created, two private sector jobs are lost.”

Romney’s record is to the left of many liberals.  He doesn’t connect well with the electorate which is proven by his inability to get much past his 30% poll numbers. His personality comes across as mannequin-like making many feel he’s either cold or aloof with no real understanding of what average Americans feel.

Those aren’t the characteristics of a candidate that one would select as the best choice to beat President Obama. 

But this isn’t the entire issue at hand.  Romney’s chances are threatened by Gingrich.  Why?  Because Gingrich represents something that neither the Democrats, the establishment Republicans, or the media understand. 

Newt Gingrich entered Congress in the late 1970’s and was considered a back-bencher at the time.  No one thought he’d ever be much more than that.  But in the 1980’s he was instrumental in Democrat House Speaker Jim Wright’s leaving office disgraced.  Eventually Gingrich became Speaker of the House. 

According to Gingrich v. Leftism, an article by Bruce Walker published on January 23, 2012 by American Thinker, Gingrich was responsible for the Contract With America that was highly successful and put the Democrats in a very bad position.  He tells readers:  
  • The Contract With America promised to bring 10 important bills to a House vote and changed 8 major House procedures in the first 100 days they were in session. 
  • Gingrich’s promise that these would happen in the first 100 days of the new House session was kept, and he did it sooner than promised. 
  • The Contract generated so much support for Republicans running for state or federal office in 1994 that they won the House, Senate, most governor’s races, and many state legislative elections, breaking the iron grip that Democrats had held on America since FDR. 

Walker states, “There was a reason why union goons entered Gingrich's offices and why House Democrats filed 84 ethics charges (one of which stuck, and most of which were absurd) against Gingrich when he was speaker and why Nancy Pelosi threatened to raise these ancient charges yet again.  Not only was Gingrich liberals' enemy, but he defeated them.” 

On his January 23, 2012 radio program, Neal Boortz cleared up and clarified what happened with the ethics charges against Gingrich by sharing this information: 

All but one of the charges against him were thrown out by the Ethics Committee as not having any merit.  The one charge that stuck was that Gingrich was teaching a course at Kennesaw College in Atlanta called Renewing American Civilization.  He was soliciting donations from corporations and others to fund the research and the course.  The charge from Democrat David Bonior was that Newt may have violated the tax law by using tax deductible contributions from non-profit organizations to teach a politically partisan course in college.  If the course wasn’t politically partisan it would be okay, but David Bonior questioned whether it was politically partisan.  So the charge was that Newt Gingrich may have violated tax law by using tax deductible contributions to teach a partisan college course.  They also said that Newt Gingrich may have provided false information about some of the contributions to the committee.  One paper filed with the committee erroneously stated that one of the groups did not make the contribution.  And Newt had not reviewed that paper that had been submitted by somebody else.  And it was for that that he agreed to pay the $300,000 cost of the committee’s investigation.  He could have paid it out of other funds, but chose to pay it out of personal funds. 

The accusation that he may have violated tax law was proven false when in 1999 the IRS said there are no improprieties in the tax filings of Gingrich and the people who were sponsoring this course.  The IRS said the principles taught in the course were not only for use in political campaigns but “the course taught principles from American civilization that could be used by each American in everyday life whether the person is a welfare recipient, the head of a large corporation, or a politician.”  So the IRS says there was no ethics violation and that the papers that were filed were properly filed.  That’s what you won’t hear from the Obama media.   

The establishment Republican candidates have not been successful in the past (anybody remember candidates like Bob Dole and John McCain?).  They are trying to get Gingrich out of the way because he can win.  He doesn’t care if he ruffles feathers.  He will fight for America.  He understands the financial crisis America faces.  He understands the ideological war America faces and that it is already taking away the freedoms of the American people.  He can clearly and completely articulate the problems and solutions.  He will stand and fight and hasn’t let the scars from the past stop him from continuing to fight. 

That’s why Newt’s a threat to Democrats, the media, and the establishment Republicans.  They fear his candidacy.  They know he can and will change Washington and bring the power back to the people.  They are the same people trying to get Mitt Romney the nomination.  If Gingrich were as big a threat as Romney, why aren’t they making such a stink about his candidacy?

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

NBC Fixing GOP Debate Won't Bolster Romney Or Keep Gingrich Down

Here’s the Nonsense:  Newt Gingrich was off his game last night and fell flat in the debate in Tampa.  Looks like he’s on a downturn.

Here’s the Horse Sense:  In spite of NBC trying to fix the debate to hurt Gingrich and help Romney, Gingrich outperformed Romney in the Tampa debate by remaining calm, cool, and collected while Romney appeared as a failing candidate grasping at straws to survive through guttural attacks.  They don't understand why this won't deter Gingrich.  

Florida is a big state in this campaign and Newt is up against the establishment Republicans, the Democrats, and the media to win it.  None of them want Newt to win. They want Romney to win the nomination and the media decided to help him in the process.

I’ve been preaching for some time that the establishment Republicans, the Democrats and the media all want Romney as the GOP nominee.  They all realize that Gingrich has a much better chance at winning against Obama than Romney.

On the Quinn & Rose Show this morning (see for more info about their show), Rose reported from Tampa that she’d been at the GOP debate last night.  She said that the audience was told off air before debate that there would be no outbursts, applause or standing ovations allowed.  When NBC went to commercial the audience was yelling that they wanted a fair debate with all the candidates participating, not just a fight between Romney and Gingrich.  The environment was quite different if you were at the debate versus what was broadcast to the nation by the Obama-loving NBC.

This morning most media are reporting that the debate was boring and subdued, that Gingrich had lost his punch, that Romney was on the offensive.  But according to people attending the debate it was quite different during the commercial breaks.  NBC kept the debate boring and subdued so that Newt couldn’t get audience support and score his big impact that he’s scored at other debates in the past.  They wanted Romney to look like he’s in control and Newt was on the defensive.

But even though things were kept subdued, Gingrich didn’t fail.  Sure, he lost the audience input while on-camera, but he still did well.  He was calm, collected, and not rattled.  He tried to take a high road early on by stating that the debate should be about issues affecting the nation and what the candidates ideas were to help this country.  But Brian Williams, the moderator, ignored him and Mitt Romney remained on a very low level ignoring what was best for the voters and kept slinging his mud at Newt… even though much of it was twisted disinformation designed to try to make Newt look bad.  In my experience, conservatives are intelligent people and react negatively towards the mudslinger and often have empathy for the target of the slinging.  The desperate attempt by Romney to take control was nothing but the act of a man struggling to keep his head above water as he is drowning in his own moderate/liberal record.  The voters are beginning to see who he is and he is his own worst enemy.

Gingrich is succeeding with voters for reasons that are actually quite easy to understand.  Those who are attacking him believe that if they pummel him with enough bad things from the distant past, ignore the changes he has made in his life in the past decade, and keep adding rumor and innuendo to the message against him, then they’ll be sure to knock Newt out of the presidential race.  That is really faulty thinking.

Newt Gingrich doesn’t let situations get him down. He doesn’t stop but keeps pressing towards his goal.  And, as he said long ago, he sees himself as the tortoise while everyone else is looking for the hare in the race.  Don’t count him out just because he is attacked or has a setback.

Newt isn’t just a good speaker.  Newt isn’t just a good debater.  Newt is a superb communicator.  He articulates his points well and has a better grasp on conservatism than Romney even understands.  When Newt speaks of conservative principles people relate to what he is saying.  When Newt gets irritated at the media, his opponents, or anyone else he not only articulates his response clearer than anyone, he makes statements that speak to the heart of what most Americans believe and feel deep inside.  They are tired of their nation being torn down.  They are tired of their nation not being recognized for its exceptional nature.  They are tired of people apologizing for America.

Remember, the largest demographic group are the baby boomers (I’m one of them).  And we remember clearly when our own generation split and a segment protested the Viet Nam war, abandoned traditional morals and values, tore America down and began the move to the political correctness that today is one of the core issues destroying our nation.  We now have children and grandchildren and we realize that they will be here long after we are gone.  We realize that the mess that our very own generation has made of this nation has to be righted.  It has to be turned around or there will be no chance that our children and grandchildren will enjoy the freedoms that were once enjoyed in this country.

The core demographic that changed this nation for the worse now has to be the generation that turns it back to where it should be.  That same generation experimented with drugs, abandoned traditional values, and turned against the “establishment” thinking that freedom from the “rules” that our society had been built upon was a positive thing.  That same generation allowed themselves to get further and further into debt with credit that would allow them to think they could buy now and pay never.  And with all that they allowed they also tuned out and allowed Washington politicians to take us down a path of destruction that is about to push our nation over a cliff from which there will be no return. 

That same generation looks at Newt Gingrich, who is one of us.  They look at the mistakes and bad decisions they’ve made in their lives.  They look at the changes they’ve realized they needed to make in their own lives and know that even with their mistakes of the past that they can turn around and be part of the force for good that will have to take America back to where it needs to be.  And when they look in the mirror they see the same kind of person that Newt Gingrich is… a flawed individual who has learned lessons and has great skills and abilities that can lead a turnaround in America.

In Newt Gingrich they see a man who, with all his failures and faults, has gotten up, brushed himself off, and come back to fight again.  They see an underdog who may be knocked down at times but is not knocked out.  They see something of themselves in Newt and are drawn to support him because of it.  Newt’s redemption and success is also their redemption and success.

Newt came back last year to run in this presidential race but early on his campaign stumbled as many of his key staffers left and said he had no money and no chance.  But he bounced back and kept going.  Then he was attacked mercilessly in Iowa and the campaign stumbled again. Everyone thought it was over for him.  But he bounced back and won the South Carolina primaries.  Maybe it’s time to realize that Newt Gingrich might be a cross between the Energizer Bunny and a Timex watch.  That’s because like the Energizer Bunny he keeps on going and going and going.  And just like a Timex watch he takes a licking and keeps on ticking.

Newt surprises a lot of people.  Once again last night he was attacked, but he handled it with a calm, cool, and collected demeanor.  In reality he won last night’s debate.  Maybe it’s time we all quit trying to predict what Newt will do and just watch him as he gets back up every time he’s knocked down and keeps on fighting for what he believes in.  It’s that characteristic that is winning over many American voters.  They see in Newt a man who won’t apologize for America, but will stand for America.  Many American voters see a man who they feel will fight for America no matter what the odds.  That’s why they vote for him.

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Romney May Not Have the Nomination As Wrapped Up As Some Think

Here’s the Nonsense: Mitt Romney has the nomination in the bag.  The other candidates should pack up and go home.
Here’s the Horse Sense: This is politics and anything can happen. At this moment Romney has the best chance at the nomination because the establishment Republican Party want him to be the nominee.  But Rasmussen has just released a new South Carolina poll showing Gingrich at 33% and Romney at 31% and they also have a new national poll showing Romney at 30% and Gingrich at 27% which means Romney’s essentially in a dead heat to win.  In addition, voters are waking up to his inconsistent answers and those won’t sit well with many undecided and even some “already decideds” that are currently supporting him.
Voters who are paying attention should be starting to see the inconsistencies of Mitt Romney.  His flip-flopping history is beginning to show up with flip-flops in debates and on the campaign trail.  Those won’t settle well with people concerned about consistency and integrity from their candidates unless they can get some good answers.  After all, politicians have become known for constant lies and conservative voters are tired of it and want leaders with character, not ones who tickle their ears telling them what they think they want to hear.
A perfect example occurred in Monday night’s debate in South Carolina.  While making his claim to job creation, Mitt Romney changed the story he’s been telling about his time at Bain Capital.  In past debates he’s claimed responsibility for leading Bain to create 100,000 jobs and as recently as January 3rd on Fox and Friends he said, “We helped create over 100,000 new jobs.”  But in the South Carolina debate he talked about the fact that he didn’t create the jobs, he just was head of Bain and Bain invested in companies that created the jobs.  There’s a nuance of difference in the answer, but it’s a very significant difference.

Back in 1994 when Romney was running for Senate against Ted Kennedy in Massachusetts he ran ads that claimed that while at Bain he’d helped build more than 20 businesses and create more than 10,000 jobs.  The Boston newspapers confirmed his claim while Romney’s actual role in the job creation did raise some questions.  But since Bain is a privately held company information about them is private and limited compared to a publicly held company. 

Romney now says that Bain had invested in about 100 companies and the companies they invested in have created 100,000 jobs.  Granted he does claim he was at Bain an additional 5 years after his 1994 Senate run, but once again, there is no knowledge of what his role was in that job creation activity.  It also appears that the jobs he is counting today include those created in the decade after he left Bain.   

This isn’t to say that he is not a very successful businessman.  Bain thrived under his leadership and has an excellent reputation in their industry.  But that doesn’t mean he’s the job creation expert that people are claiming.  Those questions make one wonder what he really did do to create jobs. 

And there is another inconsistency when it comes to Bain.  A Super PAC that supports Newt Gingrich has run some tough ads against Romney.  Romney claims they are not accurate and some who have looked into it agree that there are problems with the claims they make.  Even Newt Gingrich has said he’d like the Super PAC to correct the ads.  However, the Super PAC has said they will not change anything until Romney answers some questions about his inconsistent message.  One of those questions is about when he actually did leave Bain.  They say that Romney has claimed he left in 1999, but SEC filings show he was in charge there into 2001.  They want to know why there’s a discrepancy.

If that’s not enough, there are other inconsistencies, too.  At a prior debate in New Hampshire the weekend of January 7-8, he and Newt Gingrich were going at it about the ads his Super PAC had run attacking Gingrich.  When confronted Romney immediately said he’d never seen the ads.  But just a few sentences later he mentioned having seen some of them.  Another inconsistency.
Where’s the truth?  He either created jobs or he didn’t.   During what time period did those companies that Bain held ownership in actually create the jobs?  What are the numbers of jobs created and lost?  When did he leave Bain?  Did he see the attack ads against Gingrich or didn’t he?  Why does the story change every time we turn around? 
Romney might end up being the nominee.  But if he is, he will definitely face these questions from the Obama campaign.  And if voters on the right want a man of character does it show integrity to change your story over and over again? 
People have said Romney is the best choice and rejected other candidates.  But we should think carefully about our choice.  Romney has shown himself to be moderate at best.  Do we want a person who can’t be consistent in their answers and won’t even admit failure with decisions like Romneycare?  
Voters need to realize that the GOP nominee will face the most vicious campaign in history.  A billion dollar campaign will be waged on behalf of Obama with the media pouring in everything they have to support him.  Voters on the right better be sure they have the best candidate because they only have one chance to win the general election.  This is bigger than David versus Goliath.  This is more like a gnat versus King Kong.  

Tuesday, January 17, 2012

Gingrich Was Down And Counted Out By Many, But It’s Not Over Yet

Here’s the Nonsense:  Mitt Romney is so far in the lead that no one can catch him now.  He’s defeated Gingrich and now there’s no serious competition for him so the others should just quit and go home.
Here’s the Horse Sense:  The path to the GOP nomination is much longer than many want you to believe.  Gingrich may have been dealt a devastating blow in Iowa and responded poorly, but last night's debate in South Carolina shows it may not be anywhere near over.
Newt Gingrich has been reeling since Mitt Romney’s Super PAC mercilessly attacked him in Iowa.  Clearly Newt took it personally and was hurt by the attacks, which caused him to make a serious mistake by letting his emotions drive his response.  Yet it’s interesting that even though it’s said that up to 90% of the monies spent on attack ads in Iowa were for attack ads against Gingrich, the right wing media and the establishment Republican Party were virtually silent about Romney’s Super PAC attacking Gingrich.  But the minute Gingrich responded everyone was all over him for doing so.  The walls of protection for Romney went up so fast and so high that it left us in a daze. 

The establishment Republican Party has made it clear that Romney is their choice and they will not put up with him being questioned, let alone attacked.  They are determined to have Mitt “McCain” Romney as the nominee thereby fielding yet another weak moderate candidate to give the Democrats the best chance to win in November.  This may be partly due to the fact that the establishment Republicans are moderates themselves and partly due to what I’ve heard is an attitude among them that Obama can’t be beat so why bother trying.  (The establishment Republicans are very good at being defeatists.)

But what they don’t understand is that the conservatives voting for GOP candidates aren’t the same as they were even as recently as 2008.  They’re tired of moderates and the same old types of candidates.  They are looking for an alternative and while it may seem that Gingrich was out of the picture after Romney’s Super PAC attacked him in Iowa, Newt’s performance at last night’s debate mopped the floor with his competition.   
Newt Gingrich may have made a mistake in his angry response to Romney’s Super PAC’s attack ads against him, but clearly got back on his game at last night’s debate and bowled over his competitors, especially Romney, very powerfully as only Gingrich can do.  This won him great admiration from the audience who, at one point, gave him a standing ovation in the middle of the debate.  Republican strategist and pollster Frank Luntz said that in his 16 years experience with debates that that was unheard of.  The standing ovation carried on so long that it went into the network’s commercial break.
That is the Newt that advanced so dramatically in the polls last fall and may just make a comeback, especially if he can score more debate victories that are just as strong.  Americans like winners and when he debates, Newt wins like no one else. 
American voters are forgiving people.  They understand that people make mistakes and they have empathy for unfair and unreasonable attacks like Newt has been subjected to.  If Newt can stay away from going back to the same types of attacks against Romney and have more strong debate performances, then he has a very good chance at reconsideration by the voters.

There is still a long way to go and many, many primaries to win or lose before the nomination at the GOP convention this summer.  The delegates are being awarded differently this year, too, which could drag the decision process all the way to the convention floor.  Contrary to what many commentators, pundits, and those in the media may want you to believe, the fight for the nomination may be far from over.

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Ron Paul’s 2nd Place Finish In Iowa And New Hampsire Should Be A Warning To Voters

Here’s the Nonsense:  Ron Paul came in a strong second place in both Iowa and New Hampshire.  He is waking up more and more voters and there’s a good chance he can win against Obama.

Here’s the Horse Sense:  There’s a scary similarity to the support Ron Paul is getting and the support Barack Obama got in the 2008 election.  These people who chose Obama in 2008 have shown their inability to make a good decision, so why would we follow them in our decision for president in 2012?

Recent polling shows that 48% of the supporters of Ron Paul are between ages 17-29.  In the 2008 election Barack Obama had a similar support level from young people. 
While I will probably alienate young people with this post, I have to say that maturity does not come very quickly in life.  Good judgment, good decision-making ability comes with time and experience.  And yet the large numbers of these young people who voted in 2008 were one of the main forces that thrust Obama into office.  Now we have a similar age demographic of people choosing Ron Paul that chose Barack Obama.  Do we really think they have the maturity to make the good decisions that people who’ve got more life experience can make?  The fact is that they probably don’t.  And yet people are saying that the wave of support for Ron Paul is a sign that Americans are beginning to embrace his positions. 

Instead of being impressed by the support he’s getting, maybe we need to examine his positions on the issues and seriously examine both whether they really are the answers for America and also examine whether his positions will really be ones that will beat Obama in the general election.

I certainly support young people being involved in the political process.  But when I am looking for advice or wisdom I want to find people who’ve faced those types of situations many times in life and have learned lessons from it.  In my latest book, Many Are Called But Few Can Manage, I talked about a lesson my father preached at me from the time I was young and have learned over the years is very true.  He said that a smart man learns from his mistakes but a wise man learns from the mistakes of others.  We need to do more learning from the mistakes of others so we don’t repeat those mistakes in the future.  Young people made a terrible mistake in their 2008 choice.  We should learn from that and not follow that same immature logic in 2012.