I’ve been taking a break from my regular entries this week since I’m in Tampa volunteering my time for the Republican National Convention.
It’s been an amazing experience. Getting to meet and work with office holders as well as media personalities has provided some fun and memorable stories. And the energy from the guests at the convention has been fun to be a part of as well as contagious. I recommend you attend a convention at least once in your life. It’s like the Comic-Con of politics.
It’s also been a lot of hard work, long hours, and very little sleep. I finally had some down time today and I spent some of it checking out the media coverage of the first day of the convention.
I couldn’t believe the reaction Ann Romney’s speech got from the left.
Amanda Marcotte of Salon claimed that she “she offered up a description of what feminists call ‘systemic sexism,’ a list of the very injustices feminists have worked, with some success, to eliminate” yet “instead of demanding equality, she encouraged her female audience instead to take their payment in martyrdom.”
Peter Fenn of U.S. News & World Report ranted, “But for me, a bit too much of the cheerleader type, the woman who had it all in high school and beyond. The basement apartment and eating tuna fish didn’t quite work — come on, they were rich from the get-go and got richer. Why do the humble beginning bit when you always knew you were upper crust?”
And Juan Williams complained on Fox News (a media outlet that liberals love to keep claiming is a “Republican mouthpiece” despite the following evidence) that, “Mitt Romney’s wife, Ann Romney, on the other hand looked to me like a corporate wife. And you know the stories she told about struggle, eh, it’s hard for me to believe. She’s a very rich woman and I know that and America knows that.”
Really? I mean, really!?
First of all, I and many others were eagerly anticipating New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s keynote address at the convention all day. You know which speech everyone leaving the Tampa Bay Forum came away talking about all night? Ann Romney’s.
Some women (which there are plenty of in attendance by the way) were moved to tears. They were genuinely touched by her story. They spoke of how real her story sounded – from watching and supporting her husband’s efforts to build a business from scratch to her struggles with breast cancer and multiple sclerosis to raising a family of five children. They told me she personifies everything that is American and will set a beautiful example of what a First Lady should be.
In fact, I didn’t hear one political criticism throughout that speech, nor did she even mention Obama’s name at all.
And all the left can say is she’s full of crap?
Which brings me to my second point: if the left is even tearing apart a very passive and quite emotional speech that was simply meant to tell a story of the struggles of being a hard-working mother who’s battled health problems, quite honestly, I’ve lost all interest in anything they have to say about the politically-themed speeches. To me, it has no credibility or substance. Haters will hate, period.
How many pundits and media personalities will criticize Michelle Obama’s speech to support her husband next week? I’ll give you a hint: zero.
Between this and MSNBC cutting every minority speech from RNC coverage, is it any wonder why 58% of registered voters believe the media wants Obama to win, while only 21% think the media wants Romney to win? These people just can’t help themselves, they’re so scared Obama is going to lose this election that they will do anything and everything to reinforce the disingenuous attack that Republicans are a “sexist, racist, protect the rich” party.
You mean sexists like Kelly Ayotte, Nikki Haley, Condoleezza Rice, Susana Martinez and Pam Bondi? You mean racists like Mia Love, Luis Fortuño, Brian Sandoval, Artur Davis and Marco Rubio?
How come the left won’t address the fact that average household income has fallen more during the Obama recovery than during the recession, according to an analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data by Sentier Research LLC? How come the left won’t acknowledge that the middle class were the biggest beneficiaries of the Bush tax cuts and that it is the middle class who will suffer most by allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire?
I’m supposed to believe that “providing women access to birth control” that they already had and flushing our money down the toilet on bankrupt energy companies does more for the middle class than allowing us to keep more of our own money instead?
Tell us the truth: it’s all about more government control. More government control in the hands of a bureaucratic elite to pick winners and losers, to take from others and redistribute to special interests and donors, to leverage favors for subsidies, and to keep as many people dependent on you to keep your position of power.
And dividing women against men, minorities against Caucasians, and middle class against upper class just to convince each one of these groups you separated that they need to be dependent on you “for their own protection” is the biggest farce of them all.
Every person I’ve talked with this week believes in equal opportunity for all, believes in free market principles and private sector solutions, and believes in a system where failure and misconduct is actually disciplined and put out of business instead of rewarded with votes for cash and subsidies.
They’ve seen the results of this administration’s policies: record deficit spending, a credit rating downgrade, and rising inflation – all for what? A 42 month stretch of unemployment north of 8% while more people give up all together? Having to work harder just to see more of your paycheck being taken away by government?
Distractions, distortions, and divisions won’t substitute for results.