Will Romney Enter the Ring Again?

Will Romney Enter the Ring Again?


Last year, in Salt Lake City, Mitt Romney and Evander Holyfield engaged in a charity boxing match to raise funds for CharityVision, an organization providing vision care and eye surgeries in developing nations.

While Romney’s mitts pounded and pummeled Holyfield, it was just a staged event for a very worthy cause.

Former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney will speak Thursday on "the state of the 2016 presidential race," he said in a press release. File-Former Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney talks with CNN's Wolf Blitzer Wednesday, February 5, 2014.

Today, again in Salt Lake City, Mitt Romney will put his gloves on once more.  At 11:30 a.m. ET Romney will address the “state of the 2016 presidential race” and is expected to take some punches at GOP front runner Donald Trump.  

To be clear, it is being reported that today’s speech will not contain any endorsement or surprise announcement, but one cannot wonder if it is a first step toward a return to the political ring for the 2012 GOP nominee.

What will Romney say?  It is expected he will be very hard-hitting and direct in his opposition to Trump, while encouraging support of other GOP candidates.  How will Trump respond?  Certainly with the condescending, loud invective we have become accustomed to hear on the campaign trail.

In fact, the war of words has already begun.  Romney is publicly claiming that Trump is “a phony, a fraud” whose unreleased tax returns may contain a “bombshell” while Trump has returned fire via Twitter, calling Romney a “failed candidate” who should have easily beat Barack Obama.


It sounds as though Romney will pull no punches and is preparing to lead the Republican establishment fight against the man who is shaking the GOP to its core.  This does not appear to be the staged event the Holyfield fight was – this battle may get bloody.

Following Romney’s speech, we will provide a summary and analysis of what to expect.

Stay tuned.  In the meantime, what do you think Romney will say today?


Blast from the Past – RIP GOP

Blast from the Past – RIP GOP


It’s not Throwback Thursday, but we’re going back a few years today.  On the day after the 2012 election, I wrote the following.  I thought it would be fun to go back and read it, and have decided to post it here.  Note that in this, I mentioned a future website.  This is it, although it took a little longer than planned to get it up and running!

Read it.  Was I right?  Is Abraham Lincoln’s GOP dead?  Is Ronald Reagan rolling over in his grave?  Is there any hope for a future without at least one political party protecting the Constitution of the United States?  What are your thoughts?  What is the answer?  Where do we go from here?


The election is over.  My guy didn’t win.  That’s okay, I’m not bitter.  We’ll survive; I’ll be fine; my family will be fine.  Life in general will cost a little more, but that’s okay.  I’ll just work a little harder.  As I’ve said from the start, I did not support Romney because he is Republican, I supported him because I thought he was the best hope on the ballot we had to stop a downward decline into very difficult times.  Those times are coming.  It won’t be long now.  But there is still hope . . .


The Republican Party has failed to do its job and stop this decline.  Republicans everywhere have failed.  Those in Congress have failed; those who used to run the White House (and this is not a new opinion, I’ve said it for a long time now) have failed; those appointed by Republicans who preside over our Court system have failed; those in state capitals have failed; those in local governments have failed.  The likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, Ann Coulter, Hugh Hewitt, Michael Savage, Mark Levin have all failed.  These people, and many more, have presided over the gradual, managed decline of conservatism.  If some of these people haven’t contributed directly, their silence has spoken more loudly than others’ noise.  Speaking of noise, all of the so-called conservative commentators, talkers, writers, pundits who have attempted for years to convince the good people of the United States they know how to win elections, how to prevail over liberal ideas and ideals and how to move this nation forward have done nothing but create noise.  Noise!  That’s all.  These people use name-calling, division, fancy words, repetitive talking point, slick guests, long books, etc., to try and convince people their way is right.  It’s all noise.  Noise does nothing but hide truth.  The underlying message of conservatism is drowned out by all the noise.  While many are creating noise, others work tirelessly and quietly to spread the gospel of liberalism and socialism to those who are open and susceptible to indoctrination.  Because of all this noise, we have not seen what the left is doing in our schools, in our universities, in our churches, in our media – or we have disregarded it as minor because the noise of others tells us that politics is the only way to fight it.

Slowly, little by little, progressivism, liberalism and socialism have encroached into our lives, to the point that more than half the voters in this nation believe that $20 trillion debt is beneficial, that increased taxation is needed, that deficit spending solves the problems of society, that decreased military spending and readiness will keep us safe.  On state and local levels, this has caused more than half of the voters in various states and localities to believe that legalized drugs will help raise government revenue and will not further contribute to the ills of society, that legal recognition of non-traditional marriage and families will build a moral society, that the only way to teach our children is to dump more money into their failing schools.  More than half the voters in this nation believe that increased government control of our lives will provide the safety and security we all seek. 

THIS IS WRONG.  Government interference in our lives is immoral, illegal, unjust and down right unconstitutional. 

All the people mentioned above have been wrong for far too long.  Their ways are not working.  Perhaps they attempt a righteous endeavor, but have failed in their attempts.  One definition of insanity is to do the same thing over and over and expect a different result.  It’s time to move on.  No more noise.  They’ve made their money, now it’s time to retire them.

Where, then, are the answers found?  They are not found with the Republicans or the Democrats.  They are not found in the halls of Congress, nor in the White House, nor within the hallowed walls of the Supreme Court.  Television, radio and other media do not provide the answers (although sometimes they can be useful tools in directing messages).  

It’s much simpler that all of this.  Today’s post is not about Obama or Romney or taxes or marijuana, or schools, but about you and your family.  Families come in all shapes and sizes – two parents, one parent, grandparents, no children, tons of children, foster children, disabled children, sick/older parents.  It doesn’t matter what political party we belong to, what church we attend or do not attend, where we study.  The smallest, yet most important, of all government institutions is the family.  What’s a city but a collection of families; what’s a state but a collection of cities; what a nation but a collection of states?  We’ve been looking at it backwards for far too long.  We created the federal government, the states, the cities, not the other way around.  Families are fundamentally the foundation of this great nation. 

The answers to our nation’s problems are found inside the walls of your homes, with whatever size and type of family you have.  Home is where change must occur.  Start with yourself, move to your family, extend to your neighbors and communities.  This is how we can effect change. 

The adversary works night and day to convince our children their families are not necessary, that dads are not needed, that mom’s are nice but not to be heeded, that education can only be obtained in schools or in the streets.  I’s just wrong.  If we do not teach, love, nurture our families at home, our children will only learn the morals and messages that are outside lingering in the dark corners of society. 

I believe there will soon be a website up and running that will address many of the issues faced by individuals and families and provide instruction and insight into how to face the foes and fears we encounter daily, as well as provide a forum for discussion and sometimes debate.  Can’t wait.  As soon as I know more, I will pass the information along.

In the meantime, hug your children.  Remind them how blessed they are to live in the United States of America.  Remind them also, how blessed they are to belong to a family.

What is Bernie Sanders’ Democratic Socialism?

What is Bernie Sanders’ Democratic Socialism?

Socialism.  It’s such a scary word, isn’t it.  Did you think the word and the ideal died with the fall of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics?  It didn’t; we just stopped talking about it as often.

Many in the media, and perhaps even some of your friends, have become very vocal about Bernie Sanders and a different political movement he claims to subscribe to, called democratic socialism.  They seek to contrast it with that evil form of socialism, called, coincidentally, socialism.  You’ll hear over and over that they are two thoroughly different political ideologies.  They’ll even try and scare you by saying that you are thinking about “Marxist socialism.” Any political “ism” forced upon the world by a guy with a K and an X in his name must be terrible.

But, toned down, and called democratic, it sounds so much less threatening, doesn’t it?

So, what is the difference between the two ideologies?  Why does one provoke fear of tyrannical, dictatorial governments while the other is invoked as the answer to all of our nation’s woes by the winner of last night’s Democrat primary, possibly the next President of the United States?

A quick Google search provides the following basic definition:

Socialism: a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

This definition conforms with Karl Marx’s definition of socialism as set forth in The Communist Manifesto.

For the sake of clarity, let’s define the relevant terms contained in the definition above:

Means:  an action or system by which a result is brought about; a method.

Production:  the action of making or manufacturing from components or raw materials, or the process of being so manufactured.

Distribution:  the action of sharing something out among a number of recipients; the way in which something is shared out among a group or spread over an area; the action or process of supplying goods to stores and other businesses that sell to consumers.

Exchange:  an act of giving one thing and receiving another (especially of the same type or value) in return.

Ownership:  the act, state, or right of possessing something.

Regulation:  a rule or directive made and maintained by an authority.

Community:  a group of people living in the same place or having a particular characteristic in common.

Community as a whole:  a government.

In short, socialism is government ownership and/or regulation of the method of production, distribution and exchange within a community.  Socialism doesn’t sound so bad, does it?  What can be so terrifying about owning a little piece of the pie?

Why then are politicians like Bernie Sanders doing all they can to convince us they are not actual socialists?  Why do they find it necessary to clarify that they are not advocating that the “government” own everything?  So, what are they then, if not socialist?

They are democratic socialists, of course.  Don’t you feel better now?  Anything based in democratic principles must be safe.

What, then, is democratic socialism?  Bernie Sanders, speaking at Georgetown University last year, outlined his democratic socialist beliefs.   He stated unapologetically the following:That the government should provide Medicare for everyone in the nation;

  • That a college and university education should be free to everyone in the nation;
  • That the federal government should mandate a minimum wage of at least $15 per hour for everyone in the nation;
  • That the federal government should guarantee employment to everyone in the nation;
  • That everyone in the nation, by way of a significant estate tax, should benefit financially from the death of billionaires and millionaires;
  • That today’s political system is unfair to nearly everyone in the nation; and
  • That oil and energy companies are heating the earth to extremes that will be harmful to everyone in the nation.

Sounds a lot like Bernie Sanders is advocating that the “community as a whole” seek to own or regulate nearly the entire U.S. economy.  But, in spite of his actual words, we continue to hear and read that because we have nothing to fear, and that no one is advocating that the government take control of the means of production, distribution and exchange.

But his is just political doublespeak, isn’t it?  Bernie Sanders is just saying what is necessary to differentiate himself from Hillary Clinton, right?

Since Sanders is a politician, shouldn’t we be careful with what he says and fact-check his statements about his political beliefs?  Where can we find the accurate definition we seek?  Let’s go directly to what may be best source we can find – the Democratic Socialists of America (“DSA”).

The DSA website states the following:

“We are socialists because we reject an economic order based on private profit, alienated   labor, gross inequalities of wealth and power, discrimination based on race and sex, and brutality and violence in defense of the status quo. We are socialists because we share a vision of a humane social order based on popular control of resources and production, economic planning, equitable distribution, feminism, racial equality and non-oppressive relationships. We are socialists because we are developing a concrete strategy for achieving that vision, for building a majority movement that will make democratic socialism a reality in America.”

DSA further states that:

At the root of our socialism is a profound commitment to democracy, as means [to    an] end” and that since “[w]e are unlikely to see an immediate end to capitalism, DSA           fights for reforms today that will weaken the power of corporations and increase the power of working people.”

“We are activists committed to democracy as not simply one of our political values but      our means of restructuring society. Our vision is of a society in which people have a real voice in the choices and relationships that affect the entirety of our lives. We call this   vision democratic socialism – a vision of a more free, democratic and humane society.”

There you have it – the DSA itself defines democratic socialism as the means to end capitalism and ultimately reach a state of actual socialism. 

Democratic socialism, then, is nothing more than using elections and votes to secure government control (through ownership and regulation) of nearly the entire economic system of the United States – energy, healthcare, education, telecommunications and media, manufacturing and even the service sector.

The goal of democratic socialism is socialism, plain and simple.  Perhaps not through the violent coups and conflicts of yesteryear, but by convincing voters that they are deserving of and have rights to control of the means of production, distribution and exchange.

So, when your friends tell you that Bernie Sanders and others should not be feared, now you know that democratic socialists and socialists are one and the same.  If you fear socialism, you should fear democratic socialists.


Once your friends realize they cannot win the socialist/democratic socialist argument, they will immediately begin to rationalize socialist policies by naming programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid as successful implementations of socialism.  They will further state erroneously that the Constitution actually condones socialism by authorizing expenditures of government funds for military and defense, police and fire departments.

When they realize they cannot win their argument that a democratic socialist is not a socialist, they will instead begin to rationalize socialism.  Do not fall for these lies either.

Our next essay will address these claims and help you better understand what socialism is, what it isn’t and how it affects the economics of a nation.



HTML Snippets Powered By : XYZScripts.com