- End of Day Report
- Congressional Information
- About Us
- Media Guide
- Contact Us
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
To: Friends & Supporters
From: Gary L. Bauer
COUNTDOWN TO VICTORY: 251 DAYS TO THE 2012 ELECTIONS
Stand With CWF Today!
Friends, after a brief analysis of the state of the GOP contest, I am reporting on a couple of disturbing issues today. Each one highlights the attack on our values. But, first, I want to encourage you to go to CWFPAC.com right now and help us make the most of our matching gift opportunity.
The response to our morning appeal has been better than yesterday's. But as you will read, the need is urgent. Thank you!
Romney Bounces Back
First, I want to give you a brief summary of yesterday's primaries. Governor Mitt Romney regained his footing last night by easily winning Arizona, and narrowly winning his home state of Michigan (41% to 38%) over Senator Rick Santorum. Here is the delegate count as of now:
- Romney: 167
- Santorum: 48
- Gingrich: 38
- Paul: 27
All four candidates will stay in the race through "Super Tuesday" on March 6th.
In Michigan, Romney did best among voters who said they were looking for a candidate who can beat Obama, and Santorum did best among strong conservatives and those who said moral character was their most important issue. For the record, both Santorum and Romney are in dead heats when matched against Obama.
Why Hasn't Romney "Closed The Deal"?
In every primary, Governor Romney has far outspent his competition, but he is still having trouble convincing conservatives to rally to his banner. History teaches us that no matter how electable a candidate appears, if he doesn't excite the base, he won't ultimately win (Bush's reelection in 1992, Dole, McCain). So why have so many strong conservatives supported Santorum and Gingrich, and before that Bachmann, Cain or Perry?
Romney said something yesterday that I think highlights the problem. Asked why conservatives have looked at so many alternatives, he replied:
"It's very easy to excite the base with incendiary comments. We've seen throughout the campaign that if you're willing to say really outrageous things that are accusatory and attacking President Obama, that you're going to jump up in the polls. You know, I'm not willing to light my hair on fire to try and get support."
Bingo! The governor wants to avoid saying "outrageous things." He doesn't want to be "accusatory" and engage in "attacking" the president. And that is the problem. Romney is worried about "outrageous" rhetoric, but the problem with Obama is his outrageous policies. Those policies are destroying our economic health, undercutting our standing around the world and pushing radical attacks on family, religious liberty and the sanctity of life. Conservatives are desperately looking for a fighter who will unapologetically champion faith, family and freedom!
I begged John McCain to aggressively take on Obama's radical agenda, including his decades-long relationship with Jeremiah Wright, in the 2008 campaign. He refused because he did not want to sound "outrageous." It may have cost him the election.
Whoever gets the GOP nomination will be savaged by Obama and the Axelrod political kill machine. Our eventual nominee may want to "play nice." But if he does, he will be yet another failed GOP presidential candidate, and our country will suffer the consequences of four more years of Obama's extreme agenda.
This week Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) convened her own "hearing" on Obama's contraception mandate. Unlike the official hearing held by House Republicans, Pelosi's hearing was not about religious liberty, but about why taxpayer's should be forced to pick up the tab for promiscuous college students.
Sandra Fluke, a "reproductive rights activist" and a student at Georgetown Law School (a Catholic institution) was there to explain the burden students are enduring paying for their own contraception. It's Leap Day, not April Fool's Day. I am not making this up, folks. Here is part of Fluke's testimony:
"Forty percent of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they struggled financially as a result of this policy (Georgetown's insurance does not cover contraception). Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during [three years of] law school. … Just last week, a married female student told me that she had to stop using contraception because she and her husband just couldn't fit it into their budget anymore."
So now she is claiming a "right" to free contraception paid for by you, churches and insurance companies. One conservative columnist checked with a local drug store and discovered that it sells condoms for a dollar. He writes: "That $3,000 would buy her 3,000 condoms -- or, 1,000 a year. …Assuming it's not a leap year, that's 1,000 divided by 365 -- or having sex 2.74 times a day, every day, for three straight years."
The Weekly Standard reports that a Washington, D.C., Target pharmacy sells generic birth control pills for $9.00 a month. That would be $324 over three years. According to a Target employee, "That's the price without insurance." And yet another conservative journalist noted, "There are three federally funded Planned Parenthood clinics in Washington, D.C., -- none being more than 3.2 miles from the Georgetown Law School," where contraceptives are often free.
If this is the best case Obama and Pelosi can make for forcing religious institutions to violate their core values, I think we can win that debate -- IF we are willing to fight it. And what does it say about our culture today when a young female student at a Catholic institution can without any shame whatsoever suggest that she is entitled to contraception at taxpayer expense?
My friends, this is a perfect example of Pelosi's priorities, why Barack Obama must be defeated and why ObamaCare must be repealed by a conservative Congress.
Go to CWFPAC.com right now. Help us bring the Obama nightmare to an end!
Periodically, we are going to provide you with short, pithy one-liners to use as talking points with friends or family members who may be on the fence about the election. Given Pelosi's hearing and Obama's plans to cut healthcare benefits for our active duty and retired military personnel, here is our first talking point:
"Barack Obama is trying to cut healthcare benefits for our soldiers while he is trying to force the Catholic Church and other religious institutions to provide free contraceptives to college students."
Hillary Clinton was addressing a town hall meeting with students in Tunisia last weekend. During the question and answer session, she was confronted by the anti-Semitism that is so prevalent in much of the Middle East. Sadly, she failed to repudiate it. Here is a transcript of the session provided by the State Department:
"QUESTION: My name is Ivan. After the electoral campaign starts in the United States … we noticed here in Tunisia that most of the candidates from the both sides run towards the Zionist lobbies to get their support in the States. And afterwards, once they are elected, they come to show their support for countries like Tunisia and Egypt for a common Tunisian or a common Arab citizen. How would you reassure and gain his trust once again given the fact that you are supporting his enemy as well at the same time?"
Clinton had a golden opportunity to, first, denounce the obvious anti-Semitism in the question, second, reiterate America's strong support for Israel and, third, reassure Ivan that Israel is not automatically the enemy of the "common Arab citizen." She did no such thing. Unbelievably, she reinforced his bigotry! Here is her stunning response:
"SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, first, let me say … that a lot of things are said in political campaigns that should not bear a lot of attention. There are comments made that certainly don't reflect the United States, don't reflect our foreign policy… I mean, if you go to the United States, you see mosques everywhere, you see Muslim Americans everywhere. That's the fact. So I would not pay attention to the rhetoric.
"Secondly, I would say watch what President Obama says and does. He's our President. He represents all of the United States, and he will be reelected President, so I think that that will be a very clear signal to the entire world as to what our values are and what our President believes. So I think it's a fair question because I know that -- I sometimes am a little surprised that people around the world pay more attention to what is said in our political campaigns than most Americans... So I think you have to shut out some of the rhetoric and just focus on what we're doing and what we stand for, and particularly what our President represents."
Excuse me? Is Clinton implying that mosques and Muslims "everywhere" in America somehow represents our foreign policy? Is she suggesting that the strong pro-Israel comments regularly made by Republicans and even on occasion by Barack Obama are just "rhetoric" that should be "shut out"? It would seem so. Hillary Clinton should step down immediately as Secretary of State.
But, while I vehemently disagree with Clinton that Obama will be reelected, I do agree that we should pay more attention to what he actually does. I think Obama's has repeatedly sent "a very clear signal" that he is in fact the most anti-Israel president to ever sit in the Oval Office!