WASHINGTON, Feb 18 (Reuters) – Winning The Future. Greater Together. We Don’t Quit.
They may not be official but those are all phrases that could in one form or another be candidates to become President Barack Obama’s re-election slogan.
Advisers say a fresh slogan to replace the winning “Change we can believe in” mantra of 2008, is unlikely to appear before Obama knows who his Republican opponent will be and starts big campaign travel swings, likely in the spring or summer.
His campaign posters now say simply, “Obama 2012.”
But Obama’s surrogates have roadtested some slogans in recent months, including “Winning The Future,” which the White House used to promote its budget, and “Greater Together,” which the campaign has used to brand its youth outreach effort.
I say: let’s help Mr Obama with his new catch-phrase because, after all, “hope and change” seems, now, to be so terribly passe, languid and, frankly, at least 50% inaccurate. That “hope” part. “Change” you got: all the change you had, turned upside down and your pockets emptied.
What’s your suggestion for Mr Obama’s new 2012 election slogan? Think: witty and pithy.
The human being has always pushed the envelope into and beyond the realms of danger. This is the ninth of various weekend postings displaying how restless Man is with the mundane and how he purposely crosses the threshold into danger willingly — and sometimes unwillingly.
For whatever reason, these Santorum quotes are running rampant through the internet and, of course, plastered all over the Leftist blogs and some completely daft Conservative blogs. “How could he say that?” these blogs rail.
The reason you see some sympathy among the American public for them is the grave concern — and it’s a legitimate one — that blue-collar workers, lower-income workers, are having a harder and harder time rising,” the former Pennsylvania senator said at a presidential campaign stop. “They talk about income inequality. I’m for income inequality. I think some people should make more than other people, because some people work harder and have better ideas and take more risk, and they should be rewarded for it. I have no problem with income inequality.
“President Obama is for income equality. That’s socialism. It’s worse yet, it’s Marxism,” Santorum said. “I’m not for income equality. I’m not for equality of result — I’m for equality of opportunity.”
“The key in America is that people can rise, that there are opportunities to move up. In that area, America is falling short now. We are not as income-mobile as even some western European countries, according to a lot of the data. So that is something that as Republicans we should be talking about and be concerned about.”
There is income inequality in America. There always has been and hopefully, and I do say that, there always will be. Why? Because people rise to different levels of success based on what they contribute to society and to the marketplace and that’s as it should be.”
“We shouldn’t have a society that has a President who envies or creates class warfare or envy between one group of people and another.”
“We should celebrate like we do in the small towns all across American — as you do here in Detroit. You celebrate success. You build statues and monuments. Buildings, you name after them. Why? Because in their greatness and innovation, yes, they created wealth, but they created wealth for everybody else. And that’s a good thing, not something to be condemned in America.”
Our nation is founded but upon an attempt for equality of opportunity, but no guarantee whatsoever in terms of outcome. Leftists want — no, demand — equality of outcome.
And that just can’t stand.
I repeat, at risk of revisiting the Department of Redundancy Dept:
Rick Santorum, here, is absolutely correct in his statements.
The House Thursday passed an energy measure to fund highway and transportation projects that also included contentious language to kick-start the Keystone pipeline and open the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to drilling.
The bill seeks to expand offshore drilling for oil and gas and create a shale oil leasing program, and passed mostly along party lines 237-187.
“Instead of more gimmicky stimulus spending or pork-laden bills of the past, this bill would permanently remove government barriers to job creation and support improving America’s roads and bridges,” said House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio).
Rep. Doc Hastings (R-Wash.), chairman of the House Resources Committee, said that in addition to developing energy for the U.S., money paid to the government for leasing the federal property would pay for infrastructure projects without raising taxes or adding to the deficit.
“Sadly, the president’s actions in office have been anything but pro energy,” Hastings said. “In fact, his rhetoric is 180 degrees from his action — since taking office, this administration has repeatedly blocked energy production.”
