Did Mitch Daniels Give the Most Important Speech at CPAC?
- Posted on February 12, 2011 at 1:59pm by
Scott Baker
- Print »
- Email »
WASHINGTON (AP) — Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels says the United States is facing a new “red menace” — debt, not Communism — and conservatives must be realistic in cuts.
Daniels, a potential 2012 presidential candidate, said Friday that the United States must get its finances in order or avoid slipping into a shadow of its former self. Daniels, who served as President George W. Bush’s White House budget director and was an aide in the Reagan administration, says U.S. “fiscal ruin” would only benefit other nations.
Daniels says groups such as the Conservative Political Action Committee must unify behind a realistic plan to address the nation’s debt. He says ending earmarks alone won’t solve the problems and saying that cutting “waste, fraud and abuse” only trivializes the challenges.
The Corner’s Kathryn Jean Lopez:
The Indiana governor’s speech tonight was serious, focused, important. A cut above anything heard at CPAC yet.
In his introduction of Daniels, George Will said Daniels has the “charisma of competence.” He nailed it. Both of them.
K-Lo has the full text of the speech, rhetoric both bracing and beautiful, here. Maybe read it while you watch it. Watch the full speech here.
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 685 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 533 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 440 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 373 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 331 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 286 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 293 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 181 Comments- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 148 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 301 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 286 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (192)
May Clark
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:13pmHow about the most boring speech? The Right to Work Committee has identified Daniels as being in league with Brian Bosma (Indiana Speaker?) to make sure The Right to Work bill does not have a chance of passing in Indiana even though corporations have told IN they’d relocate if IN was a Right to Work state. Why doesn’t someone ask Daniels about that? Why doesn’t someone ask him about his big plans with the Chinese? Daniels is NOT popular in IN – there are lots of Ditch Mitch bumper stickers. This guy is a total RINO. A power grabber. Not to be trusted for a second. We need somebody with no connections to Bush.
Report Post »IndyDallas
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:42pmIndiana IS a Right To Work state. I’ve worked both union and non-union jobs here.
And Daniels is very popular in Indiana, except in the Union/Dem strongholds of the big cities with car plants and union shops.
I think you’re a poseur…
Report Post »nickbo
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 7:05pmMay Clark, I don’t know anything about you, but how dare you to say that Mitch Daniels is not popular in Indiana, I live in Indiana, has he made some folks angry, Yes he has, a lot of those that he has made angry are lazy no accounts that are afraid that he is going to cut back on their welfare payments. govenor Daniels has made a BIG impact on Indiana, made some people mad, made most people happy. As President he would make a whole lot of people MAD, but would make life a whole lot easier for the working class..
Report Post »wodiej
Posted on February 13, 2011 at 5:16amDaniels is popular enough here that he won a second term. He does not favor unions because no one should be FORCED to join a union so they can steal our money via union dues to support political candidates and a liberal agenda.
Report Post »wodiej
Posted on February 13, 2011 at 5:35amI was not done posting my comment.
Daniels made a good speech. He knows how to get the job done. I don’t know if he wants to run for President or would be a good one. I would have to know more about his plans on a national scale.
As for Ron Paul, please…..I don’t want a Grandpa for President. No offense, he’s probably a nice guy. But he is TOO OLD.
Report Post »Sinista Mace
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:09pmRand Paul is trying to cut 500 billion, and they’re even fighting him on that!
Report Post »RogueAmeritarian
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 5:33pmI also have to agree with Sinista Mace, bye, bye, FED. Rand Paul is not that bad either, there are way worse out there!
Report Post »saviorammo
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 7:13pmYep, almost all of them!
The truth shall always set you free!
While we are at it, we can take out almost every Dept. in the Fed Gov. as well. Form militias for home security. And maybe even let privated industry do things such as build infrastructure, creat power plants, and even go to space.
All endeavors would go smoother, quicker, and have increased quality and effectiveness @ zero cost to the taxpayer.
Even cut back on Military spending and let all those ***** contracting companies, Raytheon, Lockeed, Northrop, SAIC, Bectel, Haliburton do some of the heavy lifting and take some of the expense. After all we the taxpayer have given them trillions over the years for R&D. What for, so folks in New Mexico can swear they have seen little green guys, and Figi islanders have spotted Godzilla swimming underwater.
Stop the Grift before it’s too too late. Sorry to say, it already may be. Just being honest, Glen. Completely honest!
Report Post »taebaggranny
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 8:23pm@ SINISTA MACE Yes they are fighting against Rand Paul..Old Mitch Mc didn’t want Paul to be elected but the TEA PARTY in Kentucky did so there he is !! I’m a proud member of that very Tea Party…You may not like tea Partiers but We did a lot of good in the last election…
Report Post »TeaPartyPatriot
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:04pmCertainly, no rational person disputes the fact that “The WORST PRESIDENT of Modern America” must be defeated in the Nov. 2012 election. Based on the horrific candidate the “Republicans” nominated in 2008, every effort must be made this time to avoid a person with such massive character flaws and get a candidate that reflects real American conservative values. Unfortunately, there are a lot of presidential wanna-be’s that are every bit as bad as AMNESTY-JOHN, and they MUST NOT be the nominee if we want to further take back our country in 2012.
The flawed characters: (speaks like jimmy “the peanut” carter) barbour, (who dat?) huntsman, (the mustache) bolton, (a bush!!!!) jeb bush, (mr. ethanol) gingrich, (do nothing senator) thune, (dumber than even babs boxer) santorum, (the hair) trump, (“I pardon rapists and murderers so they can rape and murder again”) huckabee, (romneycare) romney, (ignore social issues) daniels, (not again!) ron paul…..
This is the bunch of “to be” losers who have less chance of winning the presidency than my pet hamster, “little obozo”. Each of these clowns is unlikely to get more votes for president than the candidate from the “Rent is too **** high” party. Of course, that doesn‘t mean one of them won’t be nominated by the “Republicans” – if they can nominate a RINO TRAITOR like NO-CHARACTER AMNESTY-JOHN mccain there is clearly NOTHING or NOBODY that they wouldn’t nominate. My “little obozo” has a chance, but let’s hope that none of those in this flawed bunch does.
Report Post »Sinista Mace
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:08pmRon Paul, AGAIN!
FOR THE SAKE OF AMERICA, AGAIN!
Report Post »BECKISNUTS_IS NUTS
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 4:27pmRon Paul is a tin foil hat wearing loon!!!
Report Post »Sinista Mace
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 4:32pmAll I hear is namecalling and crickets.
Report Post »BECKISNUTS_IS NUTS
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 4:42pmLet’s see now, who is the bigger loon, the tin foil hat wearing loon or the guy who thinks the tin foil hat wearing loon makes sense?
Report Post »Sinista Mace
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 5:03pmMore irrelevant namecalling. Thanks for exposing yourself as an individual of little substance.
Report Post »tower7femacamp
Posted on February 13, 2011 at 10:19amSINSTA you are scaring these Becksterites with the TRUTH ! Shame on you
Report Post »you are a bad bad man and I want my mommy to tell me it’s
ok and the Banks are there to keep me safe and warm…..
beckaneer
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:03pmMitch is a good ole boy. Good head, solid background, except… …March, 2006, he signed the bill into law selling rights to the tolls on the big road up yonder. Indiana was in the grips of hard times and the ‘Pub’s found this as the utopian way to stave off bankruptcy, and also save political futures, including his. The scheme has worked well, however for the next seventy years the consortium in Europe will reap the billions rather than the taxpayers in Indiana. It all could have been averted through a bond issue. Mitch is a hero, and I wish him well. This writer senses he could have worked on the project a bit harder and given Hoosiers their due. Is this the wave of the future?
Report Post »IndyDallas
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:35pmThat’s absolutely a fabrication of the deal.
It is a LEASE, nothing was “sold”. He got BILLIONS up front to bank, AND the right to rescind the lease if the company didn’t hold up their end, KEEPING the billions. the consortium also pays Indiana for road maintenance, and police coverage. AND, they can’t jack the tolls up too much for covering all of this. Thus, the 75 yr lease length.
Bond issue= borrowed money for something Indiana has never broke even on,
or
Billions in the bank.
You’re a Pat Bauer (Dem with a mangy possum skin on his head) fan, aren’t you?
Report Post »emertz8413
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:41pmMy family in Indiana are luke-warm about him. They all live in the northern part of the state and say Daniels has forsaken the north to shore up the southern half of the state. My father’s property taxes went up 130%, being on a fixed income, he could no longer afford to live in the house, it‘s been on the market for 2 years and he’s had to rent it out. I’ll have to do some more digging on him, before I decide if he’s presidential material.
Report Post »C. Schwehr
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:53pmNote to INDYDALLAS: Thank you for clearing up that little bit of mud throwing by a very subtle troll.
Report Post »Sinista Mace
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 4:23pmWhat IndyDallas just said, is that Mitch Daniels got paid off by foreigners to take over OUR ROADS, and he also got a guarantee from the foreigners to pay money into Indiana’s coffers for looting by politicians and payoffs to the police union.
But don’t worry, they can’t tax you on YOUR OWN ROADS “too much” for the NEXT 75 YEARS.
Report Post »Logic77
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:00pmI have trouble trusting anybody connected to W Bush. They all seem to be closeted RINO’s, so I don’t trust this guy either.
Report Post »C. Schwehr
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:48pmThen you aren’t thinking logically…LOOK AT HIS RECORD AT GOVENOR OF INDIANA! Do your homework, and THEN speak!
Report Post »Sinista Mace
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 4:35pmAHAHAHA!
Yea, don’t believe your lying eyes, you aren’t thinking logically. Bush was GREAT for our country.
AHHAHAHA
Report Post »Redistributor
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:59pm“Daniels, who served as President George W. Bush’s White House budget director…” Did Bush kept his budget balanced and spending in check?
Report Post »Psychosis
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:29pmhe only served 3 yrs at the beginning of gw first term
spending was at a min. and the small depression after 911 was short at managed well
this mans track record is good
interesting, im sure you also blame bush for the record spending that predominately started in 2007
but neglect to admit that 2007 was when the democrats gained majority control of both the house and the senate
remind me………………………who controls the purse strings??????? the house, and the democrats controlled that from 2007 to 2010…………..the yrs with the highest spending EVER
Report Post »scout n ambush
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 5:51pmWe should not forget who writes the check that a president cashes, the congress .
Report Post »Marine4ever
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:58pmI guess Gov. Daniels hasn’t been watching Beck. We have 2 Red Menaces. The Debt and the Communists working together with the Unions to bring down Capitalism. Both have to be dealt with.
Report Post »jose wasabi
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:53pmWhat we need are cuts and we need them to be big and we need them now!
Enough of the rhetoric, let’s see the specifics and the timeline.
Rand Paul is the only conservative so far to lay out a plan that makes any sense.
Report Post »Cutting 100 Billion ain’t gonna cut it, that’s just too little. We have to get serious.
BECKISNUTS_IS NUTS
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 4:24pmRon Paul is NOT A CONSERVATIVE!!!! He is tin foil hat wearing loon. Libertarians are not conservative. Conservatives believe in family values and moral responsibility as well as smaller government and lower taxes. There is nothing moral about libertarians.
Report Post »Sinista Mace
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 7:04pmLibertarians believe in those things too, we simply expous them as personal, religious, and ginacial freedom, we don’t believe in fighting endless undeclared wars with no clear enemy, based on false pretense, and wasting trillions of dollars rebuilding countries destroyed by these false wars.
All that has happened is the “war on terror” has been internalized and now the American people are the terrorists and Janet Napolitano wants to give everybody warrantless cavity searches on the side of the road and look inside your house and car with an x-ray scanner, while perpetrating false-flag terror attacks to seize more power and control.
You do know that the Tea Party is considered Domestic Terrorists by the Department of Homeland Security..right?
Report Post »Stopit
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 8:02pm@Jose
Report Post »I agree. Problem is the Repubs gave the voters a written contract to cut at least 100 billion and now want to “ProRate” it. The Repugnant leaders who have been in office since being in control in the Bush years and before just don’t get the national security threat the debt is. Or maybe they do and that’s the plan (NWO). McConnell just makes me sick…didn’t stand with Jim Bunning on “pay as you go”…made a deal with the devil on the Bush tax cuts and now his ratings went up and the one area we shouldn’t have cut taxes, SSI because the benefits are fixed, has now caused that deficit to be increased. We need to balance the budget right now…primarily because as conservatives we are supposed to believe in small limited gov, and most of the goverment is unnecessary. It should be axed big time. So BHO proposes 40 billion off of 1500 billion deficit and the repunants shoot for what 50? disgusting! We may need a third party if its not already too late.
B4tm4n
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:53pmActions speak louder than words, but I give the benefit of the doubt to those speaking those word. There are some on the left who don‘t think we’ve spent enough and will continue to push for more. They are addicted to spending. However actions must accompany words.Cutting waste is a small start…but far too small. President Obama has called for cutting with a scalpel. I say we need an ax and a chainsaw. Departments must be cut…Education, Labor, etc. The tax code must be re-written to ease restrictions on entrepreneurs big and small to spur growth. Restrictions on domestic oil exploration and refining must be eased or removed to relax our dependence foreign sources. Economic growth will help, but even that isn’t enough. Until we recognize that Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are the monsters that must be defeated, we will not win this fight. But that’s the third rail of politics. Is anyone willing, at the bare minimum, to consider means testing these programs, and at best phasing them out as Federal programs and moving them to the States where they constitutionally belong. Where they can be evaluated and funded, or defunded, on a state by state basis with decisions in the hands of local voters. I’ve heard people say, “Make cuts, but don’t cut mine.” I say CUT MINE. I don’t need a government hand out. Just get out of my way and I’ll take care of myself. If I make bad choices, that‘s my problem not a federal bureaucrat’s.
Report Post »taebaggranny
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 7:08pm@ B4TM4N Now kiddo that’s real easy for you to say about Social Security and Medicare..I have to agree with you about Medicaid though since there are so many Illegals on that program and then too, it pays for a lot of the abortions that are done.. I really liked the photo-op that Obama did with the kid from Wash state whose Mom died from cancer and then it was found out that she was on welfare and received medicaid. However I digress..I paid into Social Security all the years that I worked and It’s not my fault nor the other senior citizens faults that the congress choose to ROB the fund so they could spend the money on their pet projects..Thank the Dems and the RHINOS for the state that that program is in..You may have or are making enough money that you can forgo your Social Security but there are a lot of us that can’t..AND then If you are really worried about the Social Security deal perhaps you should question your reps about the deals that have been made with 20 countries to give them a lot of our Social Security money..Canada is one of them..Google “The Social Security Totalization Agreements” see what you come up with..It’s also under SSA.gov
Report Post »B4tm4n
Posted on February 13, 2011 at 12:53amGRANNY, I realize how many people rely on SSI for retirement. That is an attitude that has been developed over the decades since the system started. Originally people were never supposed to collect. The age was set at 65 because most people weren’t expected to live that long. It was also sold primarily as a safety net for the truly needy. It has become the primary retirement plan for this country. Well I say enough. I’m not wealthy. I live paycheck to paycheck and sometimes wonder if I’ll have enough to pay all my bills. I’ve also wasted a lot money that could have been invested for the future. I‘m not asking anything I’m not willing to give up myself.
Report Post »Here’s the basic plan. I think I heard this somewhere, but I don’t remember where.
1. Means testing based on net worth. I have no opinion on what the cutoff value should be or if it should be a sliding scale. SSI should be for the truly needy or a supplement for those on the edge. It should be a safety net, not a hammock.
2. If you’re 60 years old or currently receiving benefits there should be no change other than step 1. You would get what you were promised.
3. If you are 55-60 you would work until age 68 to receive full promised benefits.
4. If you are 50-55 you would work until age 70 to receive full promised benefits.
5. If you are under 50 you would receive no benefits from the Fed and would stop paying in. I am in this category… I’m 48. I would think that with 20+ years left to work, depending on my health it could longer, and deductions no longer being withheld, I should be able to build enough of a retirement account to be comfortable in my old age, but probably not wealthy. Younger people will do much better. The main difference is that this would really be MY money in MY name that I could use as I see fit and pass on to my family when I’m gone.
From there each state would need to decide what degree of safety net to provide and how to pay for it.
It can be scary to be asked to be responsible and take care of yourself and your family, but that’s what grown-ups do. And if I screw up and waste the time I have left, you shouldn’t be forced to pay for me.
Sinista Mace
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:52pmMitch Daniels is NOT serious about tackling the debt.
He failed to mention the Non-Federal Reserve a single time.
Ron Paul for the win against the Elite Bankers.
Report Post »ADMIRAL747
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:17pmWhat exactly is Ron Paul’s plan for the debt if he were to abolish the reserve?
Report Post »Sinista Mace
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:33pmThe debt is as fake as the Federal Reserve is.
When the Fed is abolished, the Debt is abolished also.
Seize the Fed, return the power to print money to the Congress and Treasury, and back the money with silver or gold.
Let the banks worry about paying the “debt” off.
Its their “debt”, not ours.
If they try to pin it on us, then CANCEL the debt.
The money isn‘t worth the paper it’s printed on. Its backed by nothing, therefor its debt is also just as non-existent.
Just give all Fed Reserve notes back to the Fed Reserve, then abolish it. Start a new currency backed by gold or silver, not “the full faith and confidence of the US Treasury”, which really means “We, the Treasury, through the IRS, will guarantee the debt will be paid because we will tax the people relentlessly.”
Report Post »Currahee
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:33pmSimply abolishing the Federal Reserve is not going to fix our nations debt. Debt is a complex issue and requires complex solutions. Yes, there is a reason the bankers were behind getting the Federal Reserve created in the first place, because you can rule a country through finance and they get a huge profit from anyone who wishes to start a bank in this country. We need to allow Americans to keep more of their money which ultimately puts more Americans to work, get off the backs of companies and businesses so they don‘t send all their jobs over seas where it’s more economically free to do business, and stop spending money on stuff the Constitution never gave the federal government the authority to be involved with in the first place.
Report Post »C. Schwehr
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:57pmYou’re turning into a Ron Paul Troll!
Report Post »C. Schwehr
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:59pmYou ARE a troll. Your radical comments about the Fed and the debt are completely irrational and verge on fantasy.
Report Post »Sinista Mace
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 4:17pmC. Schwehr
You call my opinions fantasy but fail to actually address one of my comments and debunk it. You’re simply following me around hurling insults and looking like a troll.
The fact that you keep following me around making comments about my opinion on the Fed after you already know how I feel shows that you, my friend, are the troll.
Too bad, I don’t have any food to feed you. And I’m not answering your riddles.
Have a nice day!
Report Post »BBReggie
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:51pmGood post and lots of good comments. For me, I will vote for anybody but Obama in 2012. The homeless guy under the bridge would do less harm to our country than Obama is doing.
Report Post »JD Matthew
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 6:15pmI have to agree with you there. LOL
Report Post »starboardlady
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:50pmMitch is the antithesis of what we have right now. This is why he may be the right candidate.
Report Post »Cog
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:38pmGov. Daniels gave the best conservative speech I have ever heard in terms of its straight-to-the-heart message and his own dedicated committment to America and her values. This man commands the attention of the American people so that the problems and the solutions may be understood. How wonderful to see this “can-do” spirit surface again!
Report Post »GingerC
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:38pmDefine “down on your luck”… Why should taxpayers pay for somebody’s healthcare, housing, food or anything else when that person has the money to go out and buy a thousand dollar 50 inch flat screen tv, or a $300 cell phone, or $200 sneakers, or XBox 360, etc, etc, etc… sorry, that just don’t cut it for me.
Report Post »shakenblake5432
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:37pmGotta say I don‘t really care about his speech UNLESS things turn around after next year’s election. What I mean by that is the politicians need to really cut spending and taxes dramatically, but obviously it needs to be more than just that, and that process won’t be easy. It’ll hurt us economically at first, but in the end, as history shows, things will get better. But not if we keep spending. Hopefully this guy’s words will translate into action. Hopefully
Report Post »C. Schwehr
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:46pmYou didn‘t pay attention to the list of accomplishments while he’s been the Govenor of Indiana did you?
Report Post »Anitabreak
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:35pmI haven’t been given one credible reason to consider this man … read his own explanation of over-spending in the Bush years
Report Post »GingerC
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:51pmBingo! GW certainly didn’t display “fiscal conservative” colors while in office and if Daniels was his budget director neither did he.
Report Post »C. Schwehr
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:42pmYou didn’t read the comments from others here who explained he was there for only the first few years. It was after he left that Bush started spending wildly….
Report Post »Opiesrants
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:30pmDaniels made a good speech but I will have to do more homework on him before I give him my vote. I don’t trust politicians. Any of them. That’s why I want to see Herman Cain step up. He‘s an outsider and of what I’ve seen and heard he has what I’m looking for.
Report Post »ADMIRAL747
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:07pmI‘ve heard of bits of pieces on Hannity’s radio show. Has he made any speeches lately?
Report Post »Clive
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:25pm“Daniels, who served as President George W. Bush’s White House budget director”.
well, that says a lot. GWB wasn’t exactly fiscally conservative.
Report Post »Islesfordian
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:00pmBe fair. Daniels served under Bush in Bush’s first term. It’s when he left to be elected Governor of Indiana in 2004 that Bush went off the rails fiscally.
Maybe that says something.
Report Post »ADMIRAL747
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:05pmHe was only there from January 2001 through June 2003. There was a small recession after 9/11 and there was the Bush tax cuts which he had to contend with. Those first two years were the best of the 8 in that department. He did better in Indiana.
Report Post »Sinista Mace
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 4:01pmI don’t want to vote for anybody within smelling disatance of GW Bush, and that’s quite a perimeter the way his legacy reeks.
Report Post »NickDeringer
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:23pmI like this guy. He is the real deal.
Report Post »rgephart
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:23pmMitch Daniels has done great things for the state of Indiana and would do great things as the leader of this country. Maybe I am a little biased as I am a fellow hoosier, but America needs a person like Mitch Daniels to lead us out of the debt the last two Presidents have put us in. Proud supporter of Mitch Daniels in Indiana and for this Nation.
Report Post »Rhubarb Pie
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:22pmOnly one flaw here. I resent him telling people to quit listening to Rush, Beck, Laura, Hannity. If it wasn’t for them, especially Rush, we wouldn‘t know a lot about what’s really happening. Dictators tell people who they should listen to on their radio IMO.
They don’t tell me what I should think. They play the left’s records for all to listen to and I judge for myself.
Report Post »Islesfordian
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:54pmWhere did he say people shouldn’t listen to Rush or Glenn? Not in that speech. What he said was, “We will need people who never tune in to Rush or Glenn or Laura or Sean.” He’s talking about the uninformed. If we could convince them to listen to conservative radio we wouldn’t have as big a battle on our hands.
Report Post »ADMIRAL747
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:01pmI believe he was aiming to gather support among those who don’t listen to them.
Report Post »C. Schwehr
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:16pmYou misheard him. He said that we need to go seek out the people who DON’T LISTEN TO Rush, Glenn, etc….In other words, go out and talk to those people who are unaware of the message and the intent of the party to do changes which will fundamentally IMPROVE their lives. In order to gain the number needed to bring about this change, people who aren’t paying attention, NEED to pay attention! It will be necessary to bring those people into the fold and gain their support. That is what he said!
Report Post »weezygirl
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:17pmThat is not what he said Rhubarb…He said get in touch with those who don’t watch them, and give them the truths about what is going on in our Nation. You need to listen again…I am totally impressed with this man. I think he is a good Contender, I for one truly loved everything he said and am proud of the things he has done for his State…We need a leader with his values and who is not afraid to say what he thinks and stand by it.
Report Post »Islesfordian
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:27pmtumblebumble, the article you linked to states that Daniels sees the environment as one of his top priorities, yet I can see no evidence for that even in their own reporting linked to within the first report. Environmentalist orgs don’t seem to think he is on their side.
If he was infected with Goreism I would have to reconsider my approval of him.
His putting social issues on the back burner I see as purely tactical for the campaign. If I thought they reflected his actual philosophy, that would be another matter. But given the general conservative critique that these issues should be usually resolved locally rather on the federal level I am content to let a candidate run only on issues that the President is supposed to deal with.
Report Post »TumbleBumble
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:51pmISLESFORDAN ~ Although that may work for you, it is not good enough for me. I am simply tired of ‘settling’. If he cannot regard our unborn as a top priority, I have no respect for him.
Another quote of his – “As long as it [pro-life legislation] doesn’t interfere with one of the largest opportunities –the ones I keep talking about: the big reform categories, the budget. And it needn’t. But that would be my only concern. If it threatened to crowd out or stop business in a way that meant we couldn’t leap forward for our school kids and all these other issues, then I’d have a problem with it,”
I see… so he’ll have a problem with IT. Those are not the Christian values that I hold tight to. He will not, under any circumstances, get my vote.
Report Post »Sinista Mace
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:58pmThat’s funny, because if he isn’t about to say anything about the foreign owned Federal Reserve bank, then what is the point of seeking these people who don’t listen to Beck and Hannity and all these OPINION sources?
Perhaps to lead you astray from the real enemy, the Federal Reserve bank, and indoctrinate you with neoconservative ideas that never address the real source of our monetary problems? Extending the life of this 12-headed hydra that is sucking our country dry with debt, and lending us into slavery, while making exhorbotant loans to foreign entities who they won’t even disclose their identities under FOIA ORDERS?
Who destroys the value of our dollar and only tells Congress what it wants to tell Congress 5 years AFTER the damage is done?
Who on its own website claims it is independent while WITHIN the United STates government, technically identifying itself as a PARASITE?
Come on people.
Use your BRAIN.
Report Post »Islesfordian
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 5:03pmI don’t LIKE the idea of a truce on abortion or gay marruage. I will never cease fighting on these issues. BUT..I also know that, especially with abortion, that issue will not be won on the federal level. The culture must be changed, and that is a bottom up process. But averting economic collapse is something that MUST be done on the federal level.
If Daniels were to use a truce to hamper pro-life forces in congress while the pro-death forces continue to advance I would oppose him with all my might. If he sees the truce as surrendering to the abortionists to get them on board then he loses my support and can’t win the nomination anyway.
I do think he is going to have to clarify what his idea of truce will mean in practicality. Will he veto pro-life bills? Will he speak against them, giving verbal aid to the abortionists? Will he avoid nominating Justices that disagree with Roe v Wade? Will he actively discourage the pro-life movement by saying it is a personal issue or not the business of the state? If this is what he means he is a loser.
But if he means by truce a temporary cease fire, and temporary is the key, I can get on board with that. I agree with Churchill making common cause with the soviets to fight Hitler. After Hitler was gone he went right back to pounding against the Communists and Stalin was furious that Truman followed Churchill’s lead, as he thought Roosevelt was more on his side.
Report Post »TumbleBumble
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 5:29pmISLESFORDIAN ~
Thank you for taking the time to explain your position. It does make sense in a logical way.
“BUT..I also know that, especially with abortion, that issue will not be won on the federal level. The culture must be changed, and that is a bottom up process.” We are in 100% agreement. I know the heart must be changed. But in the mean time, I have no problem deeming abortion as illegal in order to save those babies until people come around.
“I do think he is going to have to clarify what his idea of truce will mean in practicality.” Yes, I hope he will do that. Because I do not understand how a pro-life issue would have to take a back seat to another issue on, say, the environment because there isn’t room on the table for both. I cannot imagine any clash. For crying out loud, look all that got passed during this past lame duck session!
It just scares me into thinking that it is a disclaimer for him. I need to hear a firm stand. Until then, I cannot back him.
Report Post »Islesfordian
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 6:20pmTumble, I would love to make abortion illegal. And if I were President I might do just that, invoking my authority to defend the Constitution and my Constitutional right to interpret its application. But I’m the kind of guy who gets stubborn and tunnel visioned in battle, and a little righteously apocalyptic. I know that I am tempted to want to destroy everything and everyone that tolerates the slaughter of the innocent. But then I calm down and remember that in this world we can’t fight every evil equally at the same time. As Ecclesiastes says, for everything there is a season. Even though it may not be my strong suit I can appreciate Prudence in others.
Report Post »TumbleBumble
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 10:56pmIsles, I see that you do have a passion for fighting for the unborn. Excellent. There is nothing wrong with having an overwhelming feeling of responsibility for those who cannot defend themselves. Women‘s role is to be the care takers and it is that of the man’s to provide, which includes security.
The feminist movement bullied men into silence and tricked them into thinking that they have less of a voice on this matter, which is cruel. I commend you for seeing through their deception. :)
Report Post »katzenbacker73
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:20pmIt all makes sense now. His name kept popping up for 2012, but never heard from him till now. Now I know why he is talked about seriously.
Report Post »C. Schwehr
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:20pmHe may very well be the visionary need to bring us back from the edge of the abyss….I’ll be watching him very carefully from now on.
Report Post »But I have to say that considering his history, and the solutions given in that speech, he may be the one!
Barry has alread started his run for 2012. There’s nothing wrong with a capable candidate getting the ball rolling now…I see this as Daniel’s “hat in the ring” speech. And it is a welcome bit of fresh air!
cykonas
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 4:26pm@TumbleBumble
Report Post »I am pro-life in my personal beliefs. The position on that issue, with any President, while symbolically important will not change that fact that the SCOTUS has ruled that abortion is legal in the US. The President cannot change the law of the land.
TumbleBumble
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 4:51pmHi CYKONAS,
Report Post »That’s true what you say, but it is the job of the president to replace the justices once one leaves. I don’t want a wishy-washy president to decide when it comes to the most important issue to my heart.
I am a Christian and must, in all good conscience, vote in a way that is pleasing to God. And on a personal side, I need to vote for a man who stands strong in defending the family and our weakest among us. This is a part of me that is labeled ‘No Compromise’. As soon as I see a man cave on that issue, I start to search for another.
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 8:53pmTumblebumble, Mitch Daniels is a man you can vote for, as a Christian, in good conscience. He is a Believer and has an excellent pro-life record. I urge you to look him up in a google search and learn more.
Report Post »TumbleBumble
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 11:03pmThank you, Mr. Smith. I will do just that. With so many having such favorable things to say about him, he must have positive qualities. Thanks again and good night.
Report Post »HillBillySam1
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:07pmGov. Daniels would be a powerful contender in the GOP primaries. He has Executive experience and he seems to be a principled Conservative. I would support his running in the primaries……in spite of the fact that he is a Hoosier.
Report Post »taebaggranny
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 6:38pm@ HILLBILLYSAM1 Perhaps He and Cain would make a good running team..I don‘t know much about this guy but I’m willing to listen with my BS meter on high alert…
Report Post »UNITEDWESTAND
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 11:46pmWhat do you have against Hoosiers? Mitch Daniels has been a wonderful governor for our state, I will miss him a lot. With the new majority in the indiana house he is now even taking on teachers. Daniels is a serious contender and he has my vote. Best of luck to him!
Report Post »Islesfordian
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:04pmIn his speech he seemed like an elder statesman and a leader, not like a politician trying to win the crowd.
Report Post »JohnLocke
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 4:34pmMuch agreed. The mature speak and lack of run-of-the-mill party rhetoric was refreshing. I liked what he had to say.
Report Post »Sinista Mace
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 4:43pmHe said everything you wanted to hear.
Report Post »Islesfordian
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 5:58pmYou don’t know what you are talking about, sinista. I liked what he said because it clearly WASN’T what I wanted to hear, unless what I really wanted to hear was honesty. His speech was the antithesis of Romney’s who clearly meant to play to the crowd. I enjoy those speeches, especially if I know they mean it. There was no red meat in Daniel’s speech. He appealed to the mind rather than the emotions.
Report Post »bullcrapbuster
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 6:31pmbla bla bla
Report Post »Sinista Mace
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 6:59pmWhat part of your mind did he appeal to by totally ignoring the Federal Reserve?
Report Post »Islesfordian
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 7:11pmThe part of my mind that isn’t obsessed with the question of the Federal Reserve.
Obviously you lack that part of the brain.
Report Post »Sinista Mace
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 9:51pmAll you just told me is that you lack any brain matter whatsoever, and that you‘re a braindead sheep that can’t even entertain the idea that your country is being sucked dry by an illegal 4th branch of government.
Maybe there’s a dishrag up there.
Report Post »Laus Deo
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:04pmActions speak louder than words.
Report Post »Clive
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:24pmagreed… the Dems and the GOP, are both afraid to make real cuts to entitlement or defense. without cutting those, its all lip service. Cutting NPR and PBS is chump change, lets get real.
Report Post »jjoy
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:25pmYep… Talk comes easy… The repubs are master’s at talking tough and then “kissing up” to the dims… Let’s see some meaningful budget cuts NOW! Then we can decide if we want a repub for President.
Report Post »Sinista Mace
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:47pmIf Mitch Daniels isn’t talking about Auditing and Abolishing the Federal Reserve, the source of all debts, then he isn’t talking about ANYTHING.
Ron Paul is the man.
Only he has introduced legislation in every session of congress to audit and abolish the Fed.
Report Post »Stuck_in_CA
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:49pmThis guy may well be a great guy, dunno. I tend to be a bit skeptical when the movers and shakers start pushing candidates early in the cycle. They’ve done it with Daniels, Jeb, Pawlenty.
Report Post »There’s a documentary about the Builder-boogers I remember watching. The meeting was in Canada. Among the attendees were Rick Perry and George Pataki.
My early bet for the establishment’s favored candidate is Perry.
ADMIRAL747
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 2:59pm@JJoy-Look at his record as Governor
Report Post »C. Schwehr
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:22pmDaniels has already proven by his actions as Govenor of Indiana that he is much more than just words. Your trollspeach is without merit.
Report Post »C. Schwehr
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:28pmNote to “SINISTA MACE”: No candidate wins as a “one trick pony”. The Fed is not the only item on the table, and if you wish to be a single item voter that’s fine…But as good a man as Dr. Paul is he’s not the best candidate for the current job. By the time 2012 rolls around, Dr. Paul will be nearly as old as Reagan was at the END of his second term. Lose the “Kill the Fed or ELSE” attitude and help get someone elected who can get the whole job done. I’d love to see Dr. Paul in a Daniels administration…he would be a great asset. But Dr. Pauls chance has passed…
Report Post »home_of_the_brave
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:39pmHe also said “we will need people who never tune into Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Hanity or Laura.”
Makes me wonder why he said that and why they left that out here.
Sinista Mace
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:45pmC. Schwehr
I don‘t know why it’s so hard for you to allow me to have my opinion and leave it at that.
Ron Paul is NOT a “one trick pony”, but when talking about FINANCES and JOBS and the DEBT and DEFICIT, if Daniels isn’t mentioning the foreign owned Federal Reserve bank, then he is whistling LOUDLY past the graveyard.
Ron Paul IS the best candidate, his age DOESN’T matter, he ISN’T on his last leg, or over the hill, and is vibrant, exuberant, and coherent.
Reagan had ALZHEIMER’S. His own son admitted it.
Don’t tell me what to do.
I‘ll keep on railing against the FED right along with Ron Paul until I see it fall or America falls inevitably from it’s parasitic annihilation.
I don’t even know who the hell Mitch Daniels is, but I know he isn‘t serious about monetary issues if he doesn’t mention the Federal Reserve, and Ron Paul has always been at the forefront of these issues, and ignored by neocons to the detriment of the United States.
Report Post »Sinista Mace
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 3:51pmHome of the Brave,
That’s quite disturbing. That’s enough for me not to vote for the man right there. He doesn’t support free speech and thinks we as Americans are stupid for having the audacity of drawing our own conclusions based on the information presented from any source WE CHOOSE.
Not whatever mainstream source promotes THEM.
Report Post »ADMIRAL747
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 4:32pm@ home of brave & sinista
Report Post »It’s quite simple, we need more independents or those who do not listen to anything but the nightly news. We can’t win without those votes.
JayDick
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 4:47pmI just watched his speech to CPAC; it totally blew me away. I have heard he has no personality, but that would not be discernible in a prepared speech. The speech and its delivery were great.
About Daniels‘ comment that we need people who haven’t listened to Rush, Sean, etc., he didn’t say we need only such people. What he was saying is we need as many people as possible and we must also appeal to those who are not much interested in politics at all. Several comments here have mischaracterized those remarks.
He‘s by far the most promising candidate I’ve seen so far. He has no baggage, is serious and thoughtful, a great track record, all the right ideas, and doesn’t seem prone to gaffs. What a pleasant contrast to Obama.
Report Post »taebaggranny
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 6:31pm@ LAUS DEO I wonder if he has heard about Rand Paul’s bill that will cut $500,000 out of the budget this year? I have already e-mailed my other Senator and told him I want him to get behind this and get serious about cutting the non-essential gov bureaus, not just their funding but to abolish them entirely..There are a lot of them that do dup or quad the same things as others do..All wasted money that could be put to better use..
Report Post »Twinspeedr
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 6:40pmI like Ron Paul, but right now he is a non-starter. Not that I’m happy about this, but the time is just not right in 2012. Too many clueless, key people stand in the way.
The great thing about a candidate like Mitch Daniels is that HE HAS PROVEN THAT HE CAN ADVANCE HIS AGENDA at least at the state level, and it looks like a good agenda. He talked about a Flat Tax, he might actually sign a bill that abolished the Fed if he were President. But having Ron Paul as president will never guarantee anything, the Bill has to make it through the corrupt, useless Congress first. We need to take baby steps, and get a few wins before we try to make the case to go after the Federal Reserve.
Daniels can easily play as a moderate with a great track record. Assuming he is proven honest and forthright during the election cycle, I would consider voting for him, for sure.
Report Post »Sinista Mace
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 6:57pmIt’s funny that anybody can call Ron Paul a non-starter but people entertain Palin as a candidate and Paul has a better chance of beating Obama then she does.
Report Post »Gerrymanderer
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 8:51pmRON PAUL 2012 Do it! Make it easier for Obama.
Report Post »Enuff Zenuff
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 8:53pm.
@home_of_the_brave
Could it be that when he said, “we will need people who never tune into Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Hannity or Laura” – that he meant we need to reach out to a broader audience & be able to appeal to those who never listen to these brilliant radio hosts? I think he was assuming we already have the Rush/Beck/Sean/Laura audience sewn up and need to be sure we aren’t just speaking to the choir.
If that is what he meant, then I have to agree with him that we need to stand for our principles in such a way that our stand is a stand for ALL mankind being able to experience freedom, justice, fair play, and opportunity. Too often we mean well, but we come off sounding “positional” – meaning that we sound like we’re only standing for “our” people (Conservatives, Republicans, whatever) but not those people over there.
In truth, the things that we conservatives believe in (FREEDOM from the tyranny of a central government trying to run our lives) appeals to ALL mankind! We need to pay more attention in our messages to make that clearer.
For example: When the founding fathers declared their independence from England, they were saying that NO MAN (not even men in England) should have to endure what the colonists were enduring. They were not being positional about Colonists versus Englanders.
We are all in this together and will all enjoy opportunity or misery together as we express our principles to include everyone having the same OPPORTUNITY (though not the guarantee) for making a great life for him or herself. I’m clear that no one can guarantee equal outcomes and that any attempt to do so is doomed to failure… but there are many miscommunications where we are not making it clear that our stands for Conservative values are really a stand for ALL MEN treating each other with honesty and fairness.
Report Post »Enuff Zenuff
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 9:29pm.
@ SINISTA MACE
The sad thing isn‘t that Ron Paul’s time might have passed – but that WE – the American people have already missed so many opportunities to elect him when he could have done so much to prevent the damage that the FED is doing in support of corrupt politicians.
It‘s not that Ron Paul isn’t ready to be President…
It‘s not that Ron Paul wouldn’t make the best candidate…
It may just be that we-the-people haven’t been ready for, or even worthy of, a man with the brilliance and honesty of Ron Paul. We’re still so easily swayed by entitlement bribes (paid for with our own money), and we easily fall for promises that politicians will protect us from the consequences of our poor choices… and we’re so easily swayed by the good looks of younger candidates like Obama and Clinton and Kennedy.
Thank God for visionaries like Ron Paul – believe me he has made a HUGE difference in the conversation – HUUUUGE!!! I never dreamed we’d see a movement like the TEA Party in my lifetime, but here we are and Ron Paul was like John-the-Baptist, spreading the message and preparing the way.
If Ron Paul gets elected, I’ll be doing backflips, same for Palin, Bachman, Cain and a few others… but we gotta look at the whole picture of electability and make sure that our message is broad enough to appeal to at least 51% of the voters… and dumping on the Federal Reserve as a one-issue message isn’t going to get the job done – no matter how important that message is!
I love hearing from you. You keep doing what you’re doing – supporting Ron Paul and putting out the message of getting rid of the FED… I’m just concerned that you’ll be crushed if that isn’t enough to get him elected. Perhaps if you had a back-up plan… Ask ALL the candidates to sign a pledge to audit the FED (or explain why not). Your message will succeed beyond your wildest dreams if you’re willing to give up that Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate who can possibly make the difference you seek.
Instead of just saying “Dump the Fed” – try going into more details about why… educate us to the point where everyone can see that if we don’t elect someone who promises to dump the Fed then they cannot get our votes. Convince everyone of that and maybe by process of elimination Ron Paul will be revealed as the only candidate to vote for… or else we will have a plethora of candidates – all of whom promise to end the Federal Reserve. BTW – If we end the FED, what is the alternative? Would every state print it’s own currency? Would Ron Paul put us back on the Gold standard? – I haven’t heard much about his alternatives – Could you fill us in?
Report Post »Sinista Mace
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 10:03pmI’ll never be crushed. I have a backup plan.
Ron Paul wants to abolish the Fed, the IRS, return to a gold or silver standard, stop all foreign aid, institute a fair tax across the board, return all gun rights, end welfare, decriminalize drugs, stop giving money to the IMF and World Bank, and a number of other things.
You should research and educate yourself on what he stands for.
The Federal Reserve is an unconstitutional 4th branch of government in control of our money supply.
Report Post »They describe themselves on their own website as independent while within the US government. You cannot discern what branch of government they fall under, because they fall under none. There is virtually no real oversight of its activities. Its shareholders are private. They claim independence without our government and claim they are exempt from poltical influence, which mean that you are not represented and cannot have any say on what it does with the money supply, because your representatives have no control over the Fed except to audit it and abolish it, and without access directly to the books, which they will not open, there is no way to know what it is doing with the money supply other than what they feel is relevant to tell Congress, which is required by law, 5 years after they have already done their damage.
Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 11:50pm@Sinista Mace
Report Post »Some days I disagree with you other days, you are spot on. Today, you are spot on.
My Sacred Honor
Posted on February 12, 2011 at 11:59pmyes, SINISTA MACE , I agree that Ron Paul would be a great addition under the new President, Herman Cain as SecTres, and his vast knowlege and insite would would definately put the pinch on the Vanderburgs that run our banks. It would be epic. BUT, ever since Reagan, we hacve had a power struggle in this ciountry that anyone rarely sees, but can only guess at. I believe our Presidential elections have been rigged, and rigged with force, to install the President that “they” want to be in place. Obama is just the most blatent installment because he is the most ineffectual leader our country has ever seen. Name one real decision that man has made in the two years he has been in office, other than to suggest trillion dollar bills to “fix” an economy ruined by Barney Frank etc, et al, in the housing idustry?
Report Post »Look at the CPAC speaches given by Herman Cain, and by Lt. Col. Allen West and listen to their suggestions. They are a sound fix to what ails us as Americans.
Incidentally, they are both black. Imagine that.
Sinista Mace
Posted on February 13, 2011 at 9:27amBut Herman Cain worked for the Kansas City Federal Reserve and didn’t jump on the bandwagon to audit it until Ron Paul gained traction and got the chairman seat on the monetary policy subcommittee. Before that, Herman Cain was saying how and why the Fed doesn’t need to be audited and abolished, basically because we as Americans are too stupid to understand what the Fed does.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caeNXivEGEg
Report Post »