I went for manipulation of my recent knee replacement leg and now must undergo extensive additional therapy so doubt will be doing memos for a while.
This is the first testimonial from a dear friend and booklet buyer: "Dick, I read your book this weekend. I hardly know where to start. You did an excellent job of putting into one short book a compendium of the virtues which only a relatively short time ago all Americans believed. It’s a measure of how far we have fallen that many Americans, perhaps a majority of Americans, no longer believe in what we once considered truisms. I think your father would have agreed with every word, but the party he supported no longer has such beliefs.
I’m going to recommend your book to friends. Is it available only on e readers? I’m afraid that some of my friends don’t use e readers. During the early 1980s, I bought fifty copies of Norman Podhoretz’s The Present Danger to give to friends as holiday gifts. I would like to buy multiple copies of your book and do the same.
In any event, you did a great job. I know your parents would have been proud and that your family today is proud."
---
"A Conservative Capitalist Offers: Eleven Lessons and a Bonus Lesson for Raising America's Youth Born and Yet To Be Born"
By Dick Berkowitz - Non Expert
I wrote this booklet because I believe a strong country must rest on a solid family unit.Brokaw's "Greatest Generation" has morphed into "A Confused, Dependent and Compromised Generation."
I hope this booklet will provide a guide to alter this trend.
Please Buy My Booklet - Half The Proceeds Go To "The Wounded Warrior Project!"
You can now order a .pdf version from www.brokerberko.com/book that you can download and read on your computer, or even print out if you want.
The booklet only costs $5.99.
Also feel free to forward this to anyone on your own e mail list and encourage others to order a copy.
---
Like zombies they are all running and unthinkingly jumping into Obama pit!
---
Romney and his thoughts on the Middle East. The words sound good but what do you do to turn things around? (See 1 below.)
---
Promising abroad what you are losing domestically. How ironic! (See 2 below.)
---
My friend is a brilliant lawyer but he also understands economics better than even Bernanke. QE3 is a program to get Obama past the finish line and in the end will finish us. (See 3 below.)
---
Obama is lying even when he is lying down.
How long will voters allow the press and media to disregard and ignore this compulsive liar? (See 4 below.)
---
Rasmussen, along with Caddell, is one of the more reliable and honest pollsters. (See 5 below)
---
Dick
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--1) Mitt Romney: A New Course for the Middle East
Restore the three sinews of American influence: our economic strength, our military strength and the strength of our values.
Disturbing developments are sweeping across the greater Middle East. In Syria, tens of thousands of innocent people have been slaughtered. In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood has come to power, and the country's peace treaty with Israel hangs in the balance. In Libya, our ambassador was murdered in a terrorist attack. U.S. embassies throughout the region have been stormed in violent protests. And in Iran, the ayatollahs continue to move full tilt toward nuclear-weapons capability, all the while promising to annihilate Israel.
These developments are not, as President Obama says, mere "bumps in the road." They are major issues that put our security at risk.
Yet amid this upheaval, our country seems to be at the mercy of events rather than shaping them. We're not moving them in a direction that protects our people or our allies.
And that's dangerous. If the Middle East descends into chaos, if Iran moves toward nuclear breakout, or if Israel's security is compromised, America could be pulled into the maelstrom.
We still have time to address these threats, but it will require a new strategy toward the Middle East.
The first step is to understand how we got here. Since World War II, America has been the leader of the Free World. We're unique in having earned that role not through conquest but through promoting human rights, free markets and the rule of law. We ally ourselves with like-minded countries, expand prosperity through trade and keep the peace by maintaining a military second to none.
But in recent years, President Obama has allowed our leadership to atrophy. Our economy is stuck in a "recovery" that barely deserves the name. Our national debt has risen to record levels. Our military, tested by a decade of war, is facing devastating cuts thanks to the budgetary games played by the White House. Finally, our values have been misapplied—and misunderstood—by a president who thinks that weakness will win favor with our adversaries
By failing to maintain the elements of our influence and by stepping away from our allies, President Obama has heightened the prospect of conflict and instability. He does not understand that an American policy that lacks resolve can provoke aggression and encourage disorder.The Middle East is a case in point. The Arab Spring presented an opportunity to help move millions of people from oppression to freedom. But it also presented grave risks. We needed a strategy for success, but the president offered none. And now he seeks to downplay the significance of the calamities of the past few weeks.
The same incomprehension afflicts the president's policy toward Israel. The president began his term with the explicit policy of creating "daylight" between our two countries. He recently downgraded Israel from being our "closest ally" in the Middle East to being only "one of our closest allies." It's a diplomatic message that will be received clearly by Israel and its adversaries alike. He dismissed Israel's concerns about Iran as mere "noise" that he prefers to "block out." And at a time when Israel needs America to stand with it, he declined to meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
In this period of uncertainty, we need to apply a coherent strategy of supporting our partners in the Middle East—that is, both governments and individuals who share our values.
This means restoring our credibility with Iran. When we say an Iranian nuclear-weapons capability—and the regional instability that comes with it—is unacceptable, the ayatollahs must be made to believe us.
It means placing no daylight between the United States and Israel. And it means using the full spectrum of our soft power to encourage liberty and opportunity for those who have for too long known only corruption and oppression. The dignity of work and the ability to steer the course of their lives are the best alternatives to extremism.
But this Middle East policy will be undermined unless we restore the three sinews of our influence: our economic strength, our military strength and the strength of our values. That will require a very different set of policies from those President Obama is pursuing.
The 20th century became an American Century because we were steadfast in defense of freedom. We made the painful sacrifices necessary to defeat totalitarianism in all of its guises. To defend ourselves and our allies, we paid the price in treasure and in soldiers who never came home.
Our challenges are different now, but if the 21st century is to be another American Century, we need leaders who understand that keeping the peace requires American strength in all of its dimensions.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2) Can’t Promote Freedom Abroad as it Disappears at Home
Baseball player Yogi Berra once said “you can see a lot just by looking.”
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3)I am not an economist, but I have seen a lot of things in my career, and I don't understand why quantitative easing is seen as a market panacea.
QE is assumed to work because it provides liquidity; it is claimed that this QE boosts the valuation of the stock market. And it clearly does -- this is the kind of market that it is easy to make money in.
All these "stock market guys"are getting rich and the Dems are crowing that they are responsible for the stock market increase because "Obama's policies are working."
But QE actually boosts the price of commodities, hurts the poor, and cannot create "trickle down" investment when there is so much uncertainty about future tax rates. It's great for the markets now, but it is interesting that Obama is claiming credit for success based on a trickle down theory.
But the worse problem with QE is not that it is a cheap political hat trick. QE makes the dollar cheaper and acts to prevent trade. UPS notes in its analyst calls that domestic shipping is stable, but international shipping is down. Cargo shipping is down, and cargo owners are increasing rates to cover the overhead for the number of empty vessels. Why? Could it be that decreasing trade is the unavoidable consequence of QE in the US, QE in Europe, QE in Japan and a cheap-yuan policy from China?
QE is a form of protectionism. The last time it was tried on this scale -- in the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 and international reaction to it -- each country raised tariff barriers to make imports more expensive and consequently shut down trade. Of course, the disastrous results are well known. One result will be fewer jobs as a result in decreased trade. Increasing trade has been the engine of growth since World War II -- accounting for more than 2/3rds of the growth in the Third World during that period. Things will start to get bad in a lot of places pretty soon.
Things will be even worse if BO has a second shot at appointing a Fed Chairman and we get Janet Yellin -- who will flood the markets with dollars, making everyone's dollar worth less at the same time.
Happy days are here again.
My response: "You understand economics better than Bernanke. As the dollar sinks, inflation will rise and thus we will pay more for what we import, which is just about everything. The middle class, which Obama professes he is in love with, will get crushed. America's middle class is doomed along with their once improving standard of living."
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/10/is_barack_obama_a_compulsive_liar.html#ixzz282wXEwsJ
He also says poll numbers have historically shifted against the incumbent in the weeks leading up to Election Day — and predicts that this week’s debate could have a “big impact” on the election.
Rasmussen is founder and president of Rasmussen Reports and co-founder of the sports network ESPN. He has been an independent public opinion pollster for more than a decade, and most major news organizations cite his reports.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4)Is Barack Obama a Compulsive Liar?
By Steve McCannRead more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/10/is_barack_obama_a_compulsive_liar.html#ixzz282wXEwsJ
Barack Obama has lied about the terrorist attack on the American Consulate in Libya for over 15 days, even going so far as to overtly imply that this attack was prompted by an obscure internet movie trailer in his speech at the United Nations two weeks after it was confirmed the White House knew it was an Al Qaeda sponsored attack. Additionally, during the current campaign the lies and obfuscations about Mitt Romney and the Republicans have been so fast and furious that it is nearly impossible to keep up with them.
The administration's reaction to what went on in Libya is not a surprise, as reliance on prevarications and the attendant dishonesty is part and parcel of Obama's normal behavior. There rarely has been a speech or an off the cuff comment since he entered the national stage that does not contain some deliberate or insinuated falsehood. This tendency is exemplified in his recent interview with Univision wherein Obama lied about why he never introduced immigration reform and when the ill-fated Fast and Furious program was raised, he began blaming the Republicans and George Bush respectively.
There is now a near universal mistrust of Obama among world leaders as well as many members of Congress who candidly admit they cannot deal with Barack Obama, as he has proven himself to be untrustworthy and unbelievable -- particularly as he refuses to accept any responsibility for the outcome of his actions and policies. The diminished status of the United States around the globe and the greatly eroded standard of living for the vast majority of Americans are testament to these character flaws.
At times even the most diehard of his sycophants in the mainstream media are forced to report on this disturbing trait in their hero. This past spring the Washington Post ran a lengthy front page article on Obama's machinations during the debt ceiling debate. The highlight of the piece: Barack Obama deliberately lied to the American people concerning the intransigence of the Republicans in the House of Representatives. It was an amazing admission for a pillar of the sycophantic mainstream media to write a story claiming that their hero lied. A further example of the media's awakening to the deceit and fabrications of the Obama administration is the recent reporting on the Libyan scandal which is actively pursuing the lies and cover-up.
However, there has been five years of outright lies and narcissism that have been largely ignored by the media, including some in the conservative press and political class who are loath to call Mr. Obama what he is in the bluntest of terms: a liar and a fraud. That he relies on his skin color to intimidate, either outright or by insinuation, those who oppose his agenda only adds to his audacity. It is apparent that he has gotten away with his character flaws his entire life, aided and abetted by the sycophants around him; thus he is who he is and cannot change.
A Sociopath:
A sociopath is typically defined as someone who lies incessantly to get their way and does so with little concern for others. A sociopath is often goal-oriented (i.e., lying is focused--it is done to get one's way). Sociopaths have little regard or respect for the rights and feelings of others. Sociopaths are often charming and charismatic, but they use their talented social skills in manipulative and self-centered ways.
A compulsive liar:
A compulsive liar is defined as someone who lies out of habit. Lying is their normal and reflexive way of responding to questions. Compulsive liars bend the truth about everything, large and small. For a compulsive liar, telling the truth is very awkward and uncomfortable while lying feels right. Compulsive lying is usually developed in early childhood, due to being placed in an environment where lying was necessary.
While Barack Obama exhibits traits from both categories, it is becoming increasingly clear that he is primarily a compulsive liar. How else to explain the lies and obfuscations that so easily come forth regardless of whom he may be talking to or the subject matter. His sociopathic skills come to the fore in his ability to manipulate others to join him in his these prevarications, or to exploit the celebrity culture that has overwhelmed a deliberately ill-educated American society.
In the United States there is great deference paid to the occupant of the White House. Justifiably so, as that person is the chief operating officer of the country, but more importantly he or she is the head of state representing the nation around the globe. The President's actions and demeanor set the tone for not only the political class but the country as a whole. Over the centuries there have been many exceptional but also a few inept men to hold the office of President.
Today so much power is vested in the Office of President that honor and integrity must be a hallmark of a president's character. It is not with Barack Obama; he is perhaps the most dishonest and disingenuous occupant of the oval office in history, and has the potential to do more long-term damage to the United States than all his predecessor combined.
His failings can no longer be excused by this historical deference or timidity fostered by race with the euphemisms of spin or politics as usual being used to avoid the truth. It is extraordinarily difficult to run against someone such as Barack Obama -- a stranger to truth and integrity willing to do anything to win -- but Mitt Romney must do so by candidly admitting who he is dealing with.
While the future of the country depends on dramatically altering the economic and governing landscape, it cannot do so unless the opposition politicians and average citizens recognize and forcefully challenge the lies and machinations of Barack Obama and his allies without fear of what may be said about them or to them by either the Obama machine or their sycophants in the media.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5)
Rasmussen: Race Still Close, 'Could Go Either Way'
Pollster and political analyst Scott Rasmussen tells Newsmax that despite new polls showing President Obama pulling ahead of Mitt Romney, the race is still close and “could go either way.”
He also says poll numbers have historically shifted against the incumbent in the weeks leading up to Election Day — and predicts that this week’s debate could have a “big impact” on the election.
Rasmussen is founder and president of Rasmussen Reports and co-founder of the sports network ESPN. He has been an independent public opinion pollster for more than a decade, and most major news organizations cite his reports.
The Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking poll for Sunday has Mitt Romney leading Barack Obama 50 percent to 47 percent. But a new Washington Times/Zogby survey has Obama ahead by 8 points, and a Washington Post/ABC News poll shows the president pulling ahead in swing states.
In an exclusive interview with Newsmax.TV, Rasmussen observes: “What we do know is in the last couple of elections, between the first of October and Election Day, the numbers have shifted about three points. And they generally tend to shift against the party that currently has the White House.
“But there are a lot of events that will shake this up. There’s three presidential debates, a vice-presidential debate, two jobs reports, and there are events in the Middle East. Those will determine where the numbers move from here.”
Rasmussen describes 15 percent of voters as “persuadables.”
Asked how it is that some voters are still undecided this late in the campaign, Rasmussen responds: “Persuadables include a group of people who say, ‘Yeah, I’m going to vote for Romney but I could change my mind,’ or ‘I’ll vote for Obama but I’m not certain,’ as well as people who are totally uncommitted.
“One of the things we find, and it shocks everybody in the political world, is that among uncommitted voters, only one out of four thinks it makes much difference who wins. And the reason they believe that is they’re so pessimistic. They don’t think the economy will get better if Barack Obama wins, but they don’t know that Mitt Romney would be any better. So these are people who are really distrusting of all politicians and don’t expect good things from either candidate.”
Rasmussen does not agree with some pundits who say the Romney campaign is in serious trouble.
“The Romney campaign was perceived to be in trouble because some people said it was way behind,” he says.
“The race is close in the polls. It could go either way. There is a slight advantage for President Obama right now. Mitt Romney has not convinced people that he would be an improvement so there’s some work to be done. But at this point in time as we’re looking toward the first debate, it’s fair to say that either guy could win.”
Discussing the importance of Wednesday night’s presidential poll for Mitt Romney, Rasmussen says: “Debates rarely have much of an impact on a campaign. Four years ago, the night before the first debate, John McCain was trailing 50-45. When the debate was over he was trailing 51-45.
“So I’m not looking for this debate to create much of a change. But even a small shift could have a big impact in a close race.
“In terms of what Mitt Romney needs to do, the best potential for his campaign would be a gaffe coming from President Obama, something that confirms some of the storylines against the president that he really does favor the public sector over the private sector, or something like that. You can’t count on those things but the reality is both of these candidates are at risk of turning voters off more than they have a way to positively reach them.”
In recent weeks, a number of Republicans have come out alleging a media bias in the polls. They say polls favoring Obama are skewed.
But Rasmussen tells Newsmax: “There is not a pollster in the country, not a public pollster, not a legitimate pollster anywhere, who was deliberately skewing the polls.
“We do know sometimes reporters overstate the numbers or take things out of context to make it seem different than the polls themselves. But it’s also worth remembering that in late September, we often get some polls that seem out of whack. If you went back to 2004, there were polls showing George Bush up by eight or 10 points in Ohio and he barely hung on to win that state.”
The pollster offers his take on the presidential race in several key states:
“Iowa is very close right now, and it’s too close to call.
“In Florida, we show President Obama up by just two points. We’ll be polling there again after the debates. It’s definitely in play. This is a state Mitt Romney has to win.
“Colorado looks like it could be a good state for Mitt Romney if he makes some progress in the national polls.
“North Carolina is a state Romney should win. Obama pulled it out four years ago.
“New Hampshire is a state where polls have bounced around a little bit. I don’t think the voters there are convinced that either guy is really right for the state.
“Nevada looks like it’s still leaning towards President Obama.
“Virginia is one of the three key states and it will go to whoever wins the national numbers. It’s way too close to call.
“Wisconsin is surprisingly competitive” and appears to favor Obama.
“Ohio could once again be the decisive state. Obama is outperforming his national numbers there. He’s doing better than expected in Ohio. I will expect to see both Obama and Romney spending an awful lot of time there, and they’re spending an awful lot of money.
“In fact, I did a radio show in Ohio earlier today and I told them I could watch an entire football game [in New Jersey] without seeing a [political] commercial, and they wanted to move to New Jersey just because of that. They are being flooded, so we have no way of knowing what will happen in the Buckeye State.”
In an exclusive interview with Newsmax.TV, Rasmussen observes: “What we do know is in the last couple of elections, between the first of October and Election Day, the numbers have shifted about three points. And they generally tend to shift against the party that currently has the White House.
“But there are a lot of events that will shake this up. There’s three presidential debates, a vice-presidential debate, two jobs reports, and there are events in the Middle East. Those will determine where the numbers move from here.”
Rasmussen describes 15 percent of voters as “persuadables.”
Asked how it is that some voters are still undecided this late in the campaign, Rasmussen responds: “Persuadables include a group of people who say, ‘Yeah, I’m going to vote for Romney but I could change my mind,’ or ‘I’ll vote for Obama but I’m not certain,’ as well as people who are totally uncommitted.
“One of the things we find, and it shocks everybody in the political world, is that among uncommitted voters, only one out of four thinks it makes much difference who wins. And the reason they believe that is they’re so pessimistic. They don’t think the economy will get better if Barack Obama wins, but they don’t know that Mitt Romney would be any better. So these are people who are really distrusting of all politicians and don’t expect good things from either candidate.”
Rasmussen does not agree with some pundits who say the Romney campaign is in serious trouble.
“The Romney campaign was perceived to be in trouble because some people said it was way behind,” he says.
“The race is close in the polls. It could go either way. There is a slight advantage for President Obama right now. Mitt Romney has not convinced people that he would be an improvement so there’s some work to be done. But at this point in time as we’re looking toward the first debate, it’s fair to say that either guy could win.”
Discussing the importance of Wednesday night’s presidential poll for Mitt Romney, Rasmussen says: “Debates rarely have much of an impact on a campaign. Four years ago, the night before the first debate, John McCain was trailing 50-45. When the debate was over he was trailing 51-45.
“So I’m not looking for this debate to create much of a change. But even a small shift could have a big impact in a close race.
“In terms of what Mitt Romney needs to do, the best potential for his campaign would be a gaffe coming from President Obama, something that confirms some of the storylines against the president that he really does favor the public sector over the private sector, or something like that. You can’t count on those things but the reality is both of these candidates are at risk of turning voters off more than they have a way to positively reach them.”
In recent weeks, a number of Republicans have come out alleging a media bias in the polls. They say polls favoring Obama are skewed.
But Rasmussen tells Newsmax: “There is not a pollster in the country, not a public pollster, not a legitimate pollster anywhere, who was deliberately skewing the polls.
“We do know sometimes reporters overstate the numbers or take things out of context to make it seem different than the polls themselves. But it’s also worth remembering that in late September, we often get some polls that seem out of whack. If you went back to 2004, there were polls showing George Bush up by eight or 10 points in Ohio and he barely hung on to win that state.”
The pollster offers his take on the presidential race in several key states:
“Iowa is very close right now, and it’s too close to call.
“In Florida, we show President Obama up by just two points. We’ll be polling there again after the debates. It’s definitely in play. This is a state Mitt Romney has to win.
“Colorado looks like it could be a good state for Mitt Romney if he makes some progress in the national polls.
“North Carolina is a state Romney should win. Obama pulled it out four years ago.
“New Hampshire is a state where polls have bounced around a little bit. I don’t think the voters there are convinced that either guy is really right for the state.
“Nevada looks like it’s still leaning towards President Obama.
“Virginia is one of the three key states and it will go to whoever wins the national numbers. It’s way too close to call.
“Wisconsin is surprisingly competitive” and appears to favor Obama.
“Ohio could once again be the decisive state. Obama is outperforming his national numbers there. He’s doing better than expected in Ohio. I will expect to see both Obama and Romney spending an awful lot of time there, and they’re spending an awful lot of money.
“In fact, I did a radio show in Ohio earlier today and I told them I could watch an entire football game [in New Jersey] without seeing a [political] commercial, and they wanted to move to New Jersey just because of that. They are being flooded, so we have no way of knowing what will happen in the Buckeye State.”
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment