Scott R. Sullivan

August 2nd, 2008 by Scott

Once upon a time (back in May), when he was still fighting Clinton and before be became Lord Obama with the media, the Democratic presidential hopeful was asked about debating in town hall meetings across the country with John McCain.

In fact, he said, “That’s a great idea.” And later in May, he said:

“If I have the opportunity to debate substantive issues before the voters with John McCain, that’s something that I am going to welcome.”

But now he has flip-flopped and has reversed his position on this, avoiding debating McCain at all except for the three official network debates in the fall.

So much for welcoming a healthy debate. Is he scared? I think so. He is so used to the media treating him like the Messiah that he has become a brand. He reads these rock star speeches from a teleprompter and wouldn’t be able to debate a real issue if placed into the situation.

Which is why he’s avoiding a town hall style debate. He knows he wouldn’t stand a chance.

I think Obama’s campaign manager, David Plouffe, had the best idea back in June:

In June, Plouffe had suggested Obama-McCain meetings more along the lines of the historic Lincoln-Douglas debates. In 1858, during Abraham Lincoln’s Senate campaign against Stephen Douglas, the candidates met seven times across Illinois. One spoke for an hour, the other for an hour and a half, and the first was allowed a half-hour rebuttal. (Source)

So much for Obama’s promise.

July 21st, 2008 by Scott

So is this the week? Bob Novak is reporting today that Sen. McCain will be revealing his choice for running mate sometime this week.

Two names that keep recurring are Gov. Romney and Gov. Jindal. As I reported back in May:

Gov. Jindal looks very promising. He’s the youngest Governor in the country and has been hailed as the next Ronald Reagan! His voting record backs up these claims. He has voted for gun rights, to lower taxes, and most importantly, understands the global war on terror. This is a man we need in the White House.

If he chooses Jindal or Romney, I’ll be VERY happy.

I’ll find out if my thinking is correct later this week if Novak’s right on the timing.

And this comes at a great time. Obama is still trying to figure out a way to say he is against the troop surge that, obviously, worked. He, like Clinton before him, seems to be asking advice from his 300 advisors on what to say, whether or not to wear a flag pin, and so much more.

In a time when we are being spoon-fed the Hollywood-style packaged marketing of Obama(TM), the Brand, having a running mate like Gov. Jindal or Gov. Romney added to the race is a breath of fresh air.

P.S.
And both are Governors, which I love to keep bringing up. For those not familiar with my focus on Governors and the race for the White House, read my post from last year about the 2008 election about why history favors Governors over Senators for President.

Update:
It was just reported (July 23) that Gov. Jindal has taken himself off the short-list for VP choice for McCain. He says he wants to help Louisiana, which is an honorable decision.

It also gives him several years to prepare for 2012 as a running mate or presidential candidate. He’s a great choice to be the next Reagan and I hope he decides to take this challenge in the next election cycle.

June 19th, 2008 by Scott

Obama. The “candidate of change.”

Just a few months ago (Nov 2007), Obama reiterated that he would “return excess money from donors, and stay within the public financing system for the general election.”

Today, when he realized that the Republicans have been raising more money (Republican National Committee has $40 million on hand, a compared to the $4 million on hand in the Democratic National Committe as of this writing) and he needed to catch up, the candidate of change decided to change his position and said, “We’ve made the decision not to participate in the public financing system for the general election.”

So the candidate of change means HE’s going to CHANGE HIS POSITION. Now I get it.

How are we to trust his comments on the War on Terror when he can’t even keep a promise about funding his own campaign?

May 21st, 2008 by Scott

Three cheers. For what? Three candidates on the short list for McCain’s running mate.

I’ve been clear in the past that McCain wasn’t my first choice for the Republican nomination. There are many attributes that I do like about McCain, but I feel there are many others that represent the conservative base much more than he.

I have always maintained that Romney was more closely aligned with the conservative base than McCain.

In fact, I even posted an article back in March about the very real possibility of Romney being selected as the Vice Presidential running mate.

Well, the names are starting to surface and just as I had predicted, Romney’s in the top three. Not only that, but there are some very interesting things about the top three veep candidates.

First, all three are Governors. Gov. Romney (MA), Gov. Crist (FL), and Gov. Jindal (LA). I wrote a lengthy article in December of 2007 about how Governors have an advantage when running for the White House.

While anything can happen, I think this is very telling on how the 2008 general election will turn out in November. Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama both have history against them against Sen. McCain and GOVERNOR Romney, Jindal or Crist.

I think part of this advantage comes from the fact that a Governor of a state is like a mini-federal government. They preside over a House and Senate of the state. They have state budgets they work with. They have State Departments, Departments of Commerce, Transportation, etc. and are in control of the state militia, the National Guard.

Compare this to a Senator, like Obama and Clinton. They are just one of 100 of a group. They are part of the “problem” of Washington, not the solution. That’s why even though the President has an all-time low approval rating, Congress’ approval rating is even LOWER!

Back to the top three names. I’ll skip Romney for now, since I’ve discussed him in depth before.

Gov. Jindal looks very promising. He’s the youngest Governor in the country and has been hailed as the next Ronald Reagan! His voting record backs up these claims. He has voted for gun rights, to lower taxes, and most importantly, understands the global war on terror. This is a man we need in the White House.

Gov. Crist is right up there as well. He’s a hardliner when it comes to law and order: he’s for the death penalty, and was called “Chain Gang Charlie” because he favored using convicts to be used for roadside labor.

There is much more to both of these Governors. Of these two new names, I personally favor Jindal. He’s likable, young, VERY conservative, and brings some energy and enthusiasm to the table.

If McCain chooses any of these three, I’ll be happy. If he chooses Jindal or Romney, I’ll be VERY happy. Because, in all likelyhood, this Governor turned Veep will run for President in 2012. Its just a hunch, but I just don’t see McCain running for two terms, due to his age.

And… as I’ve said before, my Governor v. Senator race will mean so much more. Can’t wait!

May 16th, 2008 by Scott

I have found the most recent events involving a certain political candidate to be very revealing. Allow me to back up a minute and give some background.

This is Israel’s 60th anniversary as a nation. As part of the celebration, President Bush traveled overseas to Israel to speak. While there, he said the following:

“Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have an obligation to call this what it is - the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.”
(Source: My Way)

First of all, he is one hundred percent correct.

Also, this is something the President has been saying for, oh, maybe seven years, starting back when he stood on the pile of rubble on Ground Zero with a megaphone in his hand telling the world that the men who blew up those buildings will soon hear from the United States.

Since that day, President Bush has maintained a consistent message: we don’t negotiate with terrorists. The Dems have never liked this. Too much of a “cowboy” approach.

So when he made these recent comment in Israel, immediately afterwards, a certain senator felt very vulnerable.

“It is sad that President Bush would use a speech to the Knesset on the 60th anniversary of Israel’s independence to launch a false political attack. George Bush knows that I have never supported engagement with terrorists, and the president’s extraordinary politicization of foreign policy and the politics of fear do nothing to secure the American people or our stalwart ally Israel.”
(Souce: ABC News)

Now, call me silly, but I didn’t hear President Bush mention anyone by name. He was saying the same thing he’s been saying, talking in broader strokes.

But Obama obviously feels vulnerable since he responded so quickly and defensively about this. For him to turn this into a political issue so quickly and defend himself so dramatically just shows how self-conscience he is about his position on national security.

Why would he be self-conscience about his position on this? It might have something to do with a statement he made not too long ago. In fact I published an analysis about this just one month ago.

For example, take Iran (the “most active state sponsor of terrorism” according to the United States State Department, Turkey, and Britain).

In dealing with a state sponsor of terrorism, Iran, Obama has said, “My approach to Iran will be based upon aggressive diplomacy.”

So Obama is weak on national security. He has reason to feel self-conscience. And the funny thing is that I actually AGREE with what Mrs. Bill Clinton has been saying on this issue, since she’s on the same page as the Republicans; don’t negotiate with terrorists.

But it is telling that he felt that President Bush was talking about him. It is very telling.

I find the far-left to be so predictable. They think the world revolves around them. I’ve got a message to you: be a little more humble. Accept that the world doesn’t revolve around you.

UPDATE:
As of 3:00 pm Eastern, the White House has spoken about this eruption that has occurred. As I wrote above, it had nothing to do with Obama, despite his desire to be the center of attention.

Instead, the White House was speaking of former president, Jimmy Carter, and his meeting with terrorist group, Hamas. Here’s their statement:

“We did not anticipate that it would be taken that way, because its kind of hard to take it that way when you look at the actual words. … There was some anticipation that someone might say you know its an expression of rebuke to former President Carter for having met with Hamas. that was something that was anticipated but no one wrote about it or raised it.”

Time for Obama to insert foot into mouth.

May 5th, 2008 by Scott

Glenn Beck has just written a brilliant analysis of Barack Obama’s character.

Sen. Barack Obama is moving away from the Rev. Jeremiah Wright so fast he may claim to be an atheist by next weekend. The ongoing sprint from such a polarizing figure is far from a surprise, it’s just the timing of it that is so odd.

Do I think for a second that Obama believes the government created the AIDS virus to kill African-Americans? No. But at this point it’s rational to wonder whether he is either lying or has an awful sense of judgment. He either knew Wright’s views and didn’t tell the truth about them, or he somehow missed the core beliefs of the man who was spending his Sunday mornings teaching core beliefs.

I’m glad Obama has come to the same conclusion that Wright’s critics came to long ago. I just wonder why it took me two minutes and him two decades.
(Source: CNN)

Brilliant.

May 2nd, 2008 by Scott

I’m a bit late on this one, but wanted to expand just a little on my post on April 16, about Obama being “just another politician.” I wrote on April 16:

He isn’t the new ‘change’ everyone wants. He is just a politician, just like Clinton, twisting words, distracting and blaming others.

Obama’s paster, Jeremiah Wright, continues to stoke the flames. First, it was his quotes, “God Damn America” days after September 11. Now, he is going after Obama. On April 28, just 12 days AFTER MY ANALYSIS, Wright said:

He’s a politician. And he says what he has to say as a politician. He had to distance himself, because he’s a politician, from what the media was saying I had said, which was anti-American. (Source)

Yup. Obama’s just another politician. In fact, according to Rasmussen Reports, 58% Say Obama Denounced Wright for Political Convenience, not Outrage.

In the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination, it’s Clinton 46% Obama 44%. That’s the second straight day that Clinton has held a statistically insignificant two-point edge over Obama. However, that represents a ten-point swing since Wright’s press conference. Before Wright appeared at the National Press Club, Obama led Clinton by eight points. (Source: Rasmussen Reports)

As I’ve said many times, this is a fun election. *grin*

May 2nd, 2008 by Scott

While many in the media and the far Left-winged wait with anticipation for an official word that we are, indeed, in a recession, their faces only turn blue waiting.

You see, as I have mentioned many times over the past several months, there was no such thing as a 2007 or 2008 recession like so many claim.

Yes, many say that we are already in a recession. Some might acknowledge that while we are not, technically, in one yet, it is bound to show up sooner or later, so lets just call it one already.

Some are even saying that because for some, it “feels” like a recession, then it is. By extension, because it feels like leather, it is leather and not plastic.

A little background for those on the left that can’t stand my continual correct observations regarding the state of the United States’ economy.

recession n. - Two consecutive quarters of falling real gross national product (GDP).

According to the BEA:

Real gross domestic product increased at an annual rate of 0.6 percent in the first quarter of 2008, according to advance estimates released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the fourth quarter, real GDP also increased 0.6 percent. Source

So, in Q4 2007, the GDP INCREASED. In Q1 2008, the GDP INCREASED AGAIN.

According to every definition of the word, there was NO recession during this economic slowdown.

I can hear you now, though. Ahah! So we ARE in a slowdown.

Of course we are in a slowdown. No one is denying this. But the slowdown has slowed, and has possibly reversed and is looking very much like stronger growth is in the near future.

After all, the unemployment rate fell to 5% last month (Source). And the job losses (yes, there were some 20,000 job losses) were 55,000 FEWER than expected. Only 25% of the expected job losses materialized. MUCH better than anyone had predicted.

They continued in that article:

In other economic news, the Commerce Department reported that orders to U.S. factories rose a bigger-than-expected 1.4 percent in March.

AND, the dollar isn’t doing to bad either. In fact, in a sign that the American Dollar is showing signs of a recovery and growth:

Futures traders are betting for the first time since December 2005 that the dollar will gain against the euro. (Source: Bloomberg)

With an economy turning around already, by November, we should have an even better economic outlook and the Democratics will have not a leg to stand.

The funny thing is, in order for the Democratic candidates to continue criticizing President Bush and the Republicans, they NEED a poor economy, which is why they have all been PUSHING for a recession for close to a year.

It’s gotta suck to be a Democrat in a position where you are rooting for Americans to suffer.

April 16th, 2008 by Scott

Obama’s been basing his campaign on the fact that he is “change” and isn’t the “typical” politician in Washington.

But listen to the progression of his statements, beginning with Saturday’s blunder when he spoke about small town Americans in Pennsylvania:

Saturday - First spoke the words

“You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And it’s not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.“

Monday - Twist meaning of word (ala what the definition of “is” is?)

“People may be bitter about their leaders and the state of our politics. That’s why they leave their homes…and travel—sometimes for miles, sometimes in the bitter cold—to attend a rally or a town hall meeting held by Senator Clinton, or Senator McCain, or myself.”

Tuesday - Bad word, but not backing down

“Now it may be that I chose my words badly. It wasn’t the first time and it won’t be the last. But when I hear my opponents, both of whom have spent decades in Washington, saying I’m out of touch, it’s time to cut through their rhetoric and look at the reality.”

Wednesday - DISTRACT by claiming your opponent is doing the distracting!

“When we get past the politics of division and distraction and we start actually focusing on what we have in common, there’s nothing we can’t accomplish.

He isn’t the new ‘change’ everyone wants. He is just a politician, just like Clinton, twisting words, distracting and blaming others. Republican and Conservative beliefs are based on personal responsibility. You make a mistake, you admit to it and work to make amends. That is also part of being a Christian.

You acknowledge your sins. You acknowledge that you are imperfect and pray for forgiveness. We don’t try and rewrite the past and pretend it never happened.

This might be why so many people are in love with Obama and Clinton. They don’t worry about taking responsibility for your actions, which seems a trend with many liberals today. Ignore morals and just do what “feels” good at the time.

Doing what is right and what is easy are never the same thing.

You don’t just pretend it didn’t happen, change the facts or blame the world for your mistake.

How very presidential, Obama.

April 16th, 2008 by Scott

Remember late last year before the election got into full swing (dare I say, back in more innocent times?). Back then, all the Democratics were so thrilled about Obama and Mrs. Bill Clinton. They would get either a woman OR an African American. “How Cool” they were saying. Or even better…. a Clinton/Obama ticket.

Fast forward to today. This Democratic battle has become so bitter (to use the media’s word of the day thanks to Obama and Clinton).

In fact, look at the numbers. According to Rasmussen Reports, 22% of Democrats Want Clinton to Drop Out; 22% Say Obama Should Withdraw (source: Rasmussen Reports).

And even more proof of the anger within their party: If McCain vs. Obama, 28% of Clinton Backers Go for McCain (Source: Gallup)

Source: Gallup

So the Dems don’t want to even support another Democratic candidate. They’d rather vote for MCCAIN instead!!! I just don’t see either one selecting the other for Veep because of this bitter anger.

I’m looking forward to seeing these two in tonight’s debate in Philly. They were even funnier trying to prove how they were each the more religious person at Messiah College in Harrisburg the other day.

I’ll more than likely have some analysis of the debate after it airs tonight.

Meanwhile, as the Democrats claw at each other and tell each other how bitter they are, McCain is the only one describing IN DETAIL, specific ideas for our country, like getting rid of the Federal Gas Tax to help with gas prices.

Love it!