FOXNews.com: The many myths of the Obama campaign

FOXNews.com FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com

The many myths of the Obama campaign Nov 2nd 2012, 13:30 The Greeks, the Incas, the Hittites – all created myths to explain life's mysteries. They have nothing on the Obama campaign.  Remember how the Supreme Court decision allowing corporate political spending was going to undermine Democrats, uh, that is, democracy? How Republican super PACs would give Governor Romney an insurmountable spending advantage? As it turns out, the Obama campaign has raised more money than the GOP candidate – almost $1 billion dollars – even while as recently as August Obama was e-mailing supporters, warning that he was going to be outspent. Obama has run 160,000 campaign ads so far, compared to 140,000 for Romney. Another myth central to Obama's campaign is that Mitt Romney wants to go back to the "policies that got us into trouble in the first place."  What are those injurious Republican policies?  Presumably the president refers to the deregulation of financial institutions that liberals blame for the recession. But, it was Bill Clinton who repealed Glass-Steagall. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley bill, which undid that long-standing law, passed the Senate 90-8, with Vice President Biden among the many Democrats supporting the measure. By contrast, George Bush was a regulation nut. It was during his administration that the country adopted the oppressive Sarbanes-Oxley legislation. In any event, the financial crisis did not stem from deregulation. Instead, it was caused by the government encouraging too much money to slosh into real estate and into subprime mortgages backed by Fannie and Freddie, on the misguided notion that home ownership created upward mobility.  The excess investment into property blew prices sky-high and encouraged speculation. The ensuing bubble was fed by the emergence of securitization, which made available unprecedented amounts of money. Many rungs led up this rickety ladder – poor credit analysis, incompetent ratings agencies, undisciplined mortgage brokers – but allowing banks and securities firms to invade each others' turf was not among them. Another Obama myth is that the president "saved" GM while Romney wanted to let the auto companies go bankrupt.  People forget that GM did go bankrupt, and that taxpayers are still on the hook for $42 billion in monies funneled to GM and its financial arm Ally Capital – more than half the TARP funds that are still outstanding.  Obama upended traditional (and legal) bankruptcy proceedings in order to rig the outcome heavily in favor of the UAW – payback for the $400 million in contributions from organized labor that fueled his 2008 campaign.  For the UAW, each one percent ownership interest in GM cost $629 million; taxpayers paid $834 million and secured bondholders, the top of the credit chain, paid $2.7 billion for one percent of the company.  Romney's push was for a legal and legitimate sorting out of the company's debts, a restructuring that would ensure the company's competitiveness going forward, more harmonious labor relations and investment in energy-saving and innovative technology. Does that sound like a prescription for killing the autos? President Obama's newest campaign ad is stuffed with myths, including how he fostered "American-made energy". Even fourth-graders know that Obama's every impulse has been to squash the use of fossil fuels. He stifled investment in oil and gas by slowing lease sales on federal lands, proposed cap and trade regulations (which thankfully went nowhere) that would crimp hydrocarbon development, pushed to eliminate tax breaks for oil and gas producers that are meant to stimulate drilling, and adopted regulations that virtually prohibit construction of new coal-fired power plants. He is convinced that high-cost green energy is the future and that fossil fuels are relics of an unhealthy and permissive past. For a campaign supposedly looking Forward!, energy policy has been remarkably embedded in past (and discredited notions) of how we are running out of oil. Mr. Obama also touts his success in promoting exports. Sales of goods and services overseas have indeed increased, as reliably as the temperature climbs on a sunny day. Global growth is being driven by rising consumption in emerging economies like China and Brazil; we, as the world's second largest exporter, have benefited.  It is interesting to note, however, that while exports increased 72% during George W. Bush's eight years in office, despite a recession early in his term that drove exports slightly lower, the amount of goods and services we ship outside our boundaries has advanced only 20% in the four years Mr. Obama has been president. (We assume that export growth in the final months of this year will hum along at 5%, as it did earlier in 2012; they most recently turned down.) Mr. Obama's tenure began with a slump, to be sure. But he has not moved the needle here. The Obama campaign teeters on many myths and distractions. Unhappily, there is no excuse for Mr. Obama's failure to lead this country, his inability to work across the aisle, his refusal to tackle our fiscal challenges or his disdain for private enterprise. There are no heroes here. Liz Peek is a FoxNews.com contributor. She is a financial columnist who also writes for The Fiscal Times. For more visit LizPeek.com.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Read more »

FOXNews.com: Conservatives, be careful what you wish for with Mitt Romney

FOXNews.com FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com

Conservatives, be careful what you wish for with Mitt Romney Nov 2nd 2012, 12:00 An open letter to my conservative readers: In the last month Mitt Romney, the Republican presidential nominee, has been busy taking back nearly every promise he made to you in the GOP primaries. Why the conservative silence? Remember that for the last two years, true conservatives expressed grave doubts – in public and in private - about Romney as a flip-flopper, a politician lacking an ideological core. Also, remember that, at various times over the last two years, conservatives at the base of the GOP have told pollsters their choice for the nomination was a strong conservative voice – people such as Mike Huckabee, Donald Trump, Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum. Nearly half of GOP primary voters picked someone other than Romney for the nomination. Remember that only a few months ago conservative voices disparaged Romney as a Massachusetts moderate. They said he was being forced upon conservatives by the same GOP establishment that gave you John McCain, Bob Dole, and George H.W. Bush because of Romney's "electability." Remember what my pal Ann Coulter said at the 2011 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) – "If we don't run Chris Christie, Romney will be the nominee and we will lose."  You didn't trust him to be the keeper of the Ronald Reagan flame. In their zeal to make Obama a one-term president, conservatives may just elect someone who ends up implementing policies that are to the left of George W. Bush and Barack Obama. - Face it, the only way a conservative can vote for Romney next week is based upon "HOPE and CHANGE."A true conservative can only 'hope' that if elected, Romney will 'change' back from "Moderate Mitt" to a "severe Conservative." And there is little reason to trust in that. In his political career, Romney has shifted positions on the issues conservatives value most -- from health care to abortion to energy and federal government deficit spending. Consider this. In the final weeks of the campaign, Romney has been touting his record of bipartisanship when he was Governor of Massachusetts by saying he was able to work with a "legislature that was 87 percent Democrat." He worked with them to passed "RomneyCare" - the first state government takeover of the health care with an individual mandate. Without RomneyCare as a model, there would be no nation-wide ObamaCare. Remember the first presidential debate – the one where the hard right was so pleased with Romney's performance? Go back and read the transcript. In that debate, Romney stood by his record on health care and even praised parts of Obamacare. "What we did in Massachusetts is a model for the nation, state by state." Romney declared." First of all, I like the way we did [health reform] in Massachusetts." "Number one pre-existing conditions are covered under my plan. Number two, young people are able to stay on their family plan," he said of the two popular ObamaCare provisions. On energy, Romney was able to work with his Democratic legislature to raise his state's gas tax by 400 percent.  Also, in that first debate, Romney said he "loved" regulation and called them "necessary" for business to succeed. Not surprising coming from the governor, who with the help of his Democratic legislature, passed a bevy of new regulations on Bay state businesses. Remember the regulations that Romney championed on Massachusetts energy companies, especially coal power plants.  Romney started that effort which started with Romney having a press conference in front of the Salem Harbor Coal Power Plant and saying "I will not create jobs or hold jobs that kill people, and that plant -- that plant kills people."  According to a 2008 analysis by the non-partisan Tax Foundation, Romney and his Democratic legislature raised taxes and fees for the average person in Massachusetts by $1,227.  Romney and his Democratic legislature also passed a permanent assault weapons ban for Massachusetts and increased fees for hunting licenses and gun ownership. When you compare Romney's record to that of President Obama's first year in office, you can make the case that Obama has a better record of implementing the policies you say you want as conservatives. The fact remains that Obama has cut taxes for small businesses eighteen times. The stimulus bill he championed was comprised mostly of tax cuts which went to 95 percent of Americans. Taxes on the wealthiest Americans are at their lowest level since the 1950s. The NASDAQ and the Dow Jones Industrial Average have both doubled since Obama has been president. The S&P 500 and the Wilshire 5000 have also increased dramatically since he has been president. Corporate profits under Obama are at their highest levels in American history. And as we go to press, the unemployment rate is at its lowest level since Obama took office inheriting the greatest economic disaster since the Great Depression and the Bush Bailouts of Wall Street and the Auto Industry.   One of the unfair charges that liberals and the mainstream media made against the Tea Party movement was that they were purely racial in their anger at Obama. This was unfair and untrue and I said so at the time. The truth is, the Tea Party anger that boiled over in response to the President Obama's healthcare plan had been brewing for years due to conservative disappointment with George W. Bush's policies. Bush created record-breaking deficits, embraced Congressional earmarks, gained passage of an enormous expansion of Medicare entitlements without funding it, nominated Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, and backed McCain-Kennedy comprehensive immigration reform. Principled conservatives like Coulter, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity spoke out against the direction of the party, to their credit.   Conservatives must be careful not to abandon their principles out of blind hated for President Obama. In their zeal to make Obama a one-term president, they may just elect someone who ends up implementing policies that are to the left of George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it. Juan Williams is a Fox News political analyst. He is the author of several books including "Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It" and "Muzzled: The Assault on Honest Debate."

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Read more »

FOXNews.com: Sandy's come and gone but I'm still living under the crane

FOXNews.com FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com

Sandy's come and gone but I'm still living under the crane Nov 1st 2012, 19:30 That dangling crane shown in the picture that made its way around the world in the hours after Sandy blew through? I live right underneath it. A literal Sword of Damocles hanging over our neighborhood, it's now been four days since the crane partially toppled, forcing the evacuation of my 12-floor building, among others on the block. Police have barricaded off the street. It's still there.  I can't go back. Well, I wasn't supposed to go back.  I managed to sneak around one of police barricades on Thursday and get back into the building. I couldn't stay. I gathered some of my things and left. Now, like many others, I'm a Superstorm Sandy refugee. But I'm not put out of my house because a flood of ocean has taken my home, or left it in shambles. I'm not so much a hurricane refugee as a crane refugee. One who at least has the comfort of a friend's couch, where I'm living until I can go back. I had at least hoped there would be a timeline for my return, some resolution to this crazy crane limbo. To my chagrin, the only announcement thus far is that the crane may be stabilized by next week. A spotty answer, at best. While I'm of course concerned about getting home, I'm more worried about the safety of my neighbors – some of whom have remained inside, despite the order to evacuate. Some city officials have said the crane is stable, and present no imminent threat. But no one seems to have a definite answer. I overheard a supposed crane expert on the news claim a piece of crane shrapnel can fall at any moment.   If that's the case, why allow people to stay in the danger zone? "We can go to the deli and that's about it," said one of my neighbors who remains in the building. "If you try to come back, they won't let you back in. It's like we're on house arrest. They're being very strict," she said. "We're in the frozen zone." The frozen zone indeed. I feel completely paralyzed, not knowing when this will end. The only definite is that it continues to loom, over a neighborhood that has now been nearly cut off from the rest of civilization. Cops patrolling the area said Thursday they were unsure when the crane would be fixed. Until then, the surrounding area would be blocked off, with a strong police presence. "The cops don't know what to tell us. I think I'm going to stay at a friend's tonight," said another neighhor. "If I leave, I may not be able to get back in.  One cop said if it's safe, he may let me in another entrance but that's a big maybe.  We'll see." So as of today, it looks like I may be in for a long stay on the couch.  Of course, that's a lot better than those in this storm ravaged area who are facing rebuilding. After all, the crane must come down at some point.  Perhaps when I release my pent-up frustration for One57 I may consider living in the ultra luxurious complex but with one of the apartments going for $90 million it may take me a couple decades.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Read more »

FOXNews.com: In praise of 'price gouging'

FOXNews.com FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com

In praise of 'price gouging' Nov 1st 2012, 19:47 Desperate New Jersey drivers wait in long lines to buy gasoline. One line was two miles long The media blame "a lack of electricity" and report that "Governor Christie has acted to boost supplies of gasoline…by directing Treasury officials to waive licensing requirements that affect merchants' ability to buy fuel from out-of-state suppliers." That would help, but Christie would help more if he could suspend New Jersey's foolish law forbidding price increases of more than 10% during an "emergency," and if he'd apologize for bragging that the state will crack down on price "gouging!"   Complaining about greedy profiteers is probably politically smart. But if you're one of the people the law "protects," you won't fare as well. What politicians call "gouging" is just the free market. When markets are allowed to work their magic, lines disappear.  The high price is a big flag planted in the ground that says, "Hey, come over here and make money."   Today, some car owners wait in line just to top off their tanks. If gas stations could raise prices, many of those drivers would wait, and drive less.  Drivers who really need gas would be able to get it.    At the same time, entrepreneurs would rush gasoline to gas stations that have the highest prices.   The lines would quickly vanish, and prices would come back down. Remember The 1970s "gas crisis?"  The media claimed it was caused by a lack of gasoline.  It wasn't.  It was caused by President Nixon's price controls.   Remember the lines in the Soviet Union?   Most shortages are caused by politicians interfering with the market. Here's the real question: What is the best way to help people after a disaster? Any number of services -- roofing, for example, carpentry, tree removal, and gasoline -- are in overwhelming demand.   Complaining about greedy profiteers is probably politically smart. But if you're one of the people the New Jersey anti-price gouging law "protects," you won't fare as well. - If this were a totalitarian country, government could just order gasoline tankers roofers, carpenters, etc., to travel to New Jersey. But in a free society, entrepreneurs must be persuaded to leave their homes and families and drive from say, Texas, to the East Coast. If they can't make more money in New Jersey, why make the trip? Some want to be heroic, but we can't expect enough heroes to fill the need.  Most travel for the same reason most Americans work: to make money. Most tradesmen will go to a disaster area only if it wins him higher pay than he would get in his hometown.   Yet if he charges enough to justify his venture, he's likely to be condemned morally or legally by the very people he's trying to help. They just don't understand basic economics. Force prices down, and you keep suppliers out. Let the market work, suppliers come -- and competition brings prices as low as the challenges of the disaster allow. Goods that were in short supply become available. I discuss this in greater detail in my book, "No, They Can't: Why Government Fails-But Individuals Succeed."  After Hurricane Katrina, Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood announced a crackdown on "gougers." John Shepperson was one of the "gougers" arrested. Shepperson and his family live in Kentucky. They watched news reports about Katrina and learned that people desperately needed things. Shepperson thought he could help, so he bought 19 generators. He and his family then rented a U-Haul and drove 600 miles to an area of Mississippi left without power. He offered to sell his generators for twice what he had paid for them, and people were eager to buy.   But police confiscated his generators, and jailed Shepperson for four days. The police kept his generators. Did the public benefit? No. It's price "gougers" who bring the water, ship the gasoline, fix the roof, and rebuild cities. You might not believe me but will you believe Nobel Prize-winning economists Gary Becker, Vernon Smith and Milton Friedman? All three have said " gouging" is good. Milton Friedman said, "price 'gougers' save lives." We benefit when  politicians  don't "protect" us with price controls. The debate over price gouging continues Thursday night on "Stossel" at 9 pm ET. For more on the show, click here. John Stossel is host of "Stossel" on the Fox Business Network. He's the author of  "No, They Can't: Why Government Fails-But Individuals Succeed," "Give Me a Break" and of "Myth, Lies, and Downright Stupidity." To find out more about John Stossel, visit his website at johnstossel.com.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Read more »

FOXNews.com: My prediction -- Mitt Romney will be our next president

FOXNews.com FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com

My prediction -- Mitt Romney will be our next president Nov 1st 2012, 13:44 It comes down to numbers. And in the final days of this presidential race, from polling data to early voting, they favor Mitt Romney. He maintains a small but persistent polling edge. As of yesterday afternoon, there had been 31 national surveys in the previous seven days. Mr. Romney led in 19, President Obama in seven, and five were tied. Mr. Romney averaged 48.4%; Mr. Obama, 47.2%. The GOP challenger was at or above 50% in 10 polls, Mr. Obama in none. [pullquote] The number that may matter the most is Mr. Obama's 47.2% share. As the incumbent, he's likely to find that number going into Election Day is a percentage point or so below what he gets. To continue reading Mr. Rove's column in the Wall Street Journal, click here. Karl Rove is a Fox News political analyst and a former senior adviser and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush. He is the author of "Courage and Consequence: My Life as a Conservative in the Fight" (Threshold Editions, 2010) and helped organize the political action committee American Crossroads.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Read more »

FOXNews.com: Would an Obama second term save America's struggling middle class?

FOXNews.com FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com

Would an Obama second term save America's struggling middle class? Nov 1st 2012, 16:16 Trying to hang on as a member of the middle class has been terrifying for many Americans these past four years—an issue that goes beyond just unemployment.   The facts are grim.  Most Americans make less now than they did four years ago.  Household income adjusted for inflation has dropped back to where it was in the mid-1990s.  Middle class wealth has fallen a whopping 40% in the last decade. The cost of almost everything has gone up.  Gas has more than doubled since Barack Obama took office. This may not matter for people riding the subway in Washington or who bike to work in a hip, progressive neighborhood.  However, for the 95% of us who have progressed beyond public transportation, this has been a kick in the teeth.  It's also beginning to drive up family grocery bills. While politicians and pundits who talk about health care focus on the uninsured, most of the middle class has insurance. But its price continues to rise faster than inflation, jumping 9% last year alone.  Obamacare is already making this worse, and will soon make middle class healthcare even less personalized and more like a trip to the DMV. The price of having kids and eventually sending them to college has escalated, even as having a degree has become more essential to staying in the middle class.  Millions of young Americans now start off with staggering debt and lousy job prospects—both results of federal overreach into every facet of the economy and American life.  The birth rate has dropped in each of the past four years since the recession began as few American can afford families. The facts are grim.  Most Americans make less now than they did four years ago.  Household income adjusted for inflation has dropped back to where it was in the mid-1990s.  Middle class wealth has fallen a whopping 40% in the last decade. - Bureaucrats hassle middle class Americans with increasing frequency.  TSA employees have been empowered by our government to turn routine travel into something resembling prison in-processing.  The number of federal criminal laws and associated federal agents with expensive toys continues to mushroom. Bank bureaucrats have made it much tougher for middle class Americans to get a mortgage to buy a first home—a result of federal actions that punished everyone for the housing downturn except those in the political class who caused the crisis. It's no wonder Vice President Biden said the middle class "has been buried the last four years."  He's right.  Put simply, if you are in the middle class, you are being forced to pay higher bills with less money as more bureaucrats paid handsomely with your money boss you around. Sensing a political problem from this, the Obama White House slapped together a 20-page brochure called a "Plan for Jobs and Middle-Class Security."  It has some good ideas, like borrowing Mitt Romney's plan to simplify corporate taxes.  However, Obama has had four years to do this, including two when his party dominated Congress and could do whatever it wished.  Can we really believe he would undertake reforms in a second term that he has rejected or ignored for the past four years—especially those that go against his anti-free-market orthodoxy? Similarly on energy issues, Obama has now adopted the "all-of-the-above" plan most associated with Sarah Palin in the last presidential election.  Good for Obama, but his plan doesn't even say it will lead to lower gas prices.  It ignores the Obama-Bernanke stimulus spending and dollar-printing that is driving up gas prices by debasing the currency in which oil is traded globally.  It promises new exploration in the US.  But from blocking Keystone XL to a moratorium on Gulf of Mexico drilling permits to slow walking new drilling on federal land, Obama has been an obstacle to the oil and gas revolution underway in North America.  Why should voters expect he'd be any different in a second term just because he says so now? Furthermore, matters are set to get much worse without change. Without alteration, the expiration of the Bush tax levels in January will result it higher taxes not only on the "rich," but on all Americans who pay income tax. Who among the candidates is better suited to turn back this perfect storm facing the middle class?  Voters should recall Einstein's definition of insanity: "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." Christian Whiton was a State Department senior adviser from 2003-09 during the administration George W. Bush administration.  He is principal at DC International Advisory. Follow him on Twitter@ChristianWhiton.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Read more »

FOXNews.com: For once, Obama accepts presidential responsibility

FOXNews.com FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com

For once, Obama accepts presidential responsibility Oct 31st 2012, 19:30 Superstorm Sandy's October surprise has shifted our national discussion away from the state of our economy to the weather's terrible impact on some of our United States. But as Election Day looms and beleaguered east coasters eventually recover their electrical power, they—and the rest of the country—stand ready to reclaim a measure of political power with their votes. If people enter the polling place with only one thought in mind, let it be this: whom do I trust more to take responsibility for the many problems and challenges we face as a nation? A stark difference between President Obama and Governor Romney is that Romney is eager to take responsibility while Obama repeatedly pledges to take responsibility and then fakes it. On federal relief for storm-damaged states, Obama has stepped up, as he should, with presidential leadership. Wednesday's artful blend of optics and intervention in New Jersey also begs the question of where Obama's sense of responsibility has been in all of the previously mentioned disasters, ranging from lives shattered by the consequences of his decisions on the economy to lives lost in Libya. - But what about his other responsibilites as a leader? Switch to the policy disasters facing Americans: the feeble economy, 23 million Americans unemployed or underemployed, the tragic Benghazi attack, broken promises to cut the debt and deficits, scandalous crony capitalism including Solyndra, the Pandora's boxes of ObamaCare and Dodd-Frank, Fast and Furious (and the list goes on) and leadership is missing. In all of the latter instances, Obama has defined himself with actions he has willfully taken and responsibilities he has either assumed or shirked.   Like any leader—particularly a politician—Obama knows that he makes an indelible statement about his priorities and his acts of responsibility by where he chooses to be and what he says when he gets there. Thus, on Wednesday, two days after Sandy hit the Northeast, Obama traveled to New Jersey. There he stood shoulder-to-shoulder with Republican Governor Chris Christie, signaling presidential involvement in a recovery response to the hurricane. Obama's message:: I'm on top of this. I'm a Democrat working with a Republican. This is me and the federal government acting responsibly. But this artful blend of optics and intervention in New Jersey also begs the question of where Obama's sense of responsibility has been in all of the previously mentioned disasters, ranging from lives shattered by the consequences of his decisions on the economy to lives lost in Libya.     As a general principle, President Obama claims, "the buck stops with me," or "I'm ultimately responsible." While criticizing Romney, Obama even told ABC's Scott Thuman that, "…as president of the United States, it's pretty clear to me that I'm responsible for folks who are working in the federal government and you know, Harry Truman said the buck stops with you." But does Obama truly take responsibility or fake responsibility? We've had four years of Obama shooting messengers (including Fox News) and blaming others (before it was Romney it was President Bush, Republicans and the Tea Party). We've had four years of Obama insisting that he knows best and that anywhere there have been "bumps in the road" it is because of potholes and craters made by others—never by him. The president can't have it both ways. With leadership responsibility comes leadership accountability. In his inaugural address, Obama said, "What is required of us now is a new era of responsibility—a recognition, on the part of every American, that we have duties to ourselves, our nation and the world, duties that we do not grudgingly accept but rather seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of our character than giving our all to a difficult task." What is required of us, as voters, is to hold President Obama to account regarding his record of just talking about responsibility rather than seizing it for what we believe is the common good. In the run-up to Election Day, we've had two natural disasters: superstorm Sandy and Barack Obama's buck passing about almost anything other than a hurricane. It is time to clean up after both of them. Jon Kraushar, a communications consultant to corporate and political leaders, is at www.jonkraushar.net.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Read more »