Who Was The First Black Female VP Candidate?

Charlotta Bass (right) Progressive Party VP candidate, and Progressive Party Presidential candidate Vincent Hallinan, 1952

You’ve come a long way, baby.

Kudos to Kamala Harris on being selected by former Vice President Joe Biden to be his, and the Democratic Party’s Vice Presidential candidate. Truly, it’s a momentous moment in time.

But Senator Harris isn’t the first Black woman to have ever been a Vice Presidential pick.

Los Angeles newspaper owner and political activist Charlotta Bass (1874-1969) was.

She began her career as a conservative Republican, but by the 1940s, however, she had made a singificant political transition.

And in 1948 she supported Progressive Party candidate Henry Wallace in his unsuccessful bid for the Presidency.

Four years later, she was nominated to be the Vice Presidential nominee on the Progressive Party ticket.

She was the first African American woman to carry a political party’s nomination for the second highest office in the land.

Her acceptance speech to be the Progressive Party’s VP candidate was given at the Chicago convention of the Progressive Party on Sunday, March 30, 1952, and appears below.

---

I stand before you with great pride.

This is a historic moment in American political life.

Historic for myself, for my people, for all women.

For the first time in the history of this nation a political party has chosen a Negro woman for the second highest office in the land.

It is a great honor to be chosen as a pioneer. And a great responsibility. But I am strengthened by thousands on thousands of pioneers who stand by my side and look over my shoulder—those who have led the fight for freedom—those who led the fight for women’s rights—those who have been in the front line fighting for peace and justice and equality everywhere. How they must rejoice in this great understanding which here joins the cause of peace and freedom.

These pioneers, the living and the dead, men and women, black and white, give me strength and a new sense of dedication.

I shall tell you how I come to stand here. I am a Negro woman. My people came before the Mayflower. I am more concerned with what is happening to my people in my country than in pouring out money to rebuild a decadent Europe for a new war. We have lived through two wars and seen their promises turn to bitter ashes. Two Negroes were the first Americans to be decorated for bravery in France in World War I, that war that was fought to make the world safe for democracy. But when it ended, we discovered we were making Africa safe for exploitation by the very European powers whose freedom and soil we had defended. And that war was barely over when a Negro soldier, returning to his home in Georgia, was lynched almost before he could take off his uniform. That war was scarcely over before my people were stoned and shot and beaten in a dozen northern cities. The guns were hardly silenced before a reign of terror was unloosed against every minority that fought for a better life.

And then we fought another war. You know Dorie Miller, the spud peeler who came out of his galley to fight while white officers slept at Pearl Harbor. And I think of Robert Brooks, another “first Negro”, and of my own nephew. We fought a war to end fascism whose germ is German race superiority and the oppression of other peoples. A Negro soldier returned from that war—he was not even allowed to take off his uniform before he was lynched for daring to exercise his constitutional right to vote in a Democratic primary.

Yes, we fought to end Hitlerism. But less than 7 years after the end of that war, I find men who lead my government paying out my money and your money to support the rebirth of Hitlerism in Germany to make it a willing partner in another war. We thought to destroy Hitlerism—but its germ took root right here. I look about me, at my own people—at all colored peoples all over the world. I see the men who lead my government supporting oppression of the colored peoples of the earth who today reach out for the independence this nation achieved in 1776.

Yes, it is my government that supports the segregation by violence practiced by a Malan in South Africa, sends guns to maintain a bloody French rule in Indo-China, gives money to help the Dutch repress Indonesia, props up Churchill’s rule in the Middle East and over the colored peoples of Africa and Malaya. This week Churchill’s general in Malaya terrorized a whole village for refusing to act as spies for the British, charging these Malyan and Chinese villagers who enjoyed no rights and no privileges—and I quote him literally—“for failing to shoulder the responsibility of citizenship.” But neither the Malayan people—nor the African people who demonstrate on April 6—will take this terror lying down. They are fighting back.

Shall my people support a new war to create new oppressions? We want peace and we shall have freedom. We support the movement for freedom of all peoples everywhere—in Africa, in Asia, in the Middle East, and above all, here in our own country. And we will not be silenced by the rope, the gun, the lynch mob or the lynch judge. We will not be stopped by the reign of terror let loose against all who speak for peace and freedom and share of the world’s goods, a reign of terror the like of which this nation has never seen.

Postcard with a photograph of a young Charlotta Bass, c.1901-1910. The photograph may have been taken in Providence, Rhode Island, where Bass (then Charlotta Spears) lived with an older brother and worked at the Providence Watchman, an African-American newspaper. From the Charlotta Bass / California Eagle Photograph Collection, 1880-1986, Southern California Library for Social Studies and Research, Los Angeles, CA.

For 40 years I have been a working editor and publisher of the oldest Negro newspaper in the least. During those 40 years I stood

Herman Cain Died Today from COVID-19

Herman Cain, former Godfather’s Pizza CEO & GOP presidential candidate, has died from COVID-19.

So in memory of him, let’s pause from our pizzas for a moment to remember and reflect upon what he said shortly before he died — “famous last words,” if you will.

Democratic Debate 11 Goes Out With A Whimper

If, like me, you were hoping for more with the 11th Democratic debate which was to feature a 1 on 1 with Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders, you were abysmally disappointed.

This Sunday’s 11th Democratic Candidate Debate featured only Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders in a 1 on 1, after every other candidate dropped out, and was nothing more than an opportunity for each candidate to rehash what they’d already said seemingly countless times earlier – on the stump, and on “debate” stages.

Previously scheduled to be held at Arizona Federal Theatre, 400 W Washington Street in Phoenix, AZ 85003, the debate was relocated and held at CNN’s Washington D.C. studios, before moderators only, with no live audience members, in order to limit possible exposure to COVID-19 coronavirus, which is now sweeping the country and world. Only 3 Moderators – Dana Bash, and Jake Tapper of CNN, and Ilia Calderon from Univision, who replaced Jorge Ramos, who had self-quarantined following possible COVID-19 exposure – were present.

The debate started out slowly, and even though there were only 2 candidates, the “rules” were just as before, that each candidate was allotted 90 seconds to respond to a question. I had hoped that there would be more interaction between the 2 candidates, and was only briefly satisfied with by their more free-wheeling interactions which Jake Tapper allowed, while

Bernie Sanders Addressed Georgetown University On Democratic Socialism

Try as they might, pundit and naysayers of most all stripe continue to castigate, demonize, and mischaracterize Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders as a “socialist” in the “classical” sense.

The “classical” sense, or definition of “socialism” is when a government controls the means -and- the method of production. Period. End of conversation.

In the United States, there has NEVER been, nor will there ever be, any “government factory.”

So, there’s that to consider.

But, think about the coins and currency (money) in your pocket.

You might have an argument for calling it “socialist,” because it’s
• made by the government,
• on government-owned machines,
• using government-owned paper, ink, and metals,
• by government employees, and is effectively
• owned by the government (on temporary “loan” to you, though it is in actuality, a promissory note, itself – but monetary theory is a topic for discussion another day).

BUT… the reason it’s NOT socialist is that EVERYTHING – the inks, the metals, the papers, the stamping and printing machines… EVERYTHING – was obtained by Publicly Bid Open Contracts FROM THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

Yeah.

So, there’s also that to consider.

And then, there’s our military… which issues official government-owned uniforms to government employees, who work using government-owned equipment, and their healthcare – which is given at NO COST TO THEM -and- TO THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS – using government-owned equipment, in government-owned healthcare facilities and hospitals, with government-owned-and-provided medicines.

And, in that scenario, the government employees control the means –and– the method of production, per se. It’s a “socialist” system if ever there was one!

But,, once again, ALL of those materials, and all the manpower to perform ALL those functions COMES FROM THE PRIVATE SECTOR via Publicly Bid Open Contracts.

Yeah.

So, there’s that to consider, as well.

Guess it must not be “socialism,” eh?

At least since 1931 (and likely at least 20 years or so earlier), the great “demon” of socialism has been a source of name-calling and fear-baiting in government.

The word “socialism” has been tossed around more than a Caesar’s Salad with oil and vinegar dressing. And, it’s only done for political hay-making purposes. In other words, it’s much like “The Boy Who Cried ‘WOLF!'”

Here are two examples from the Congressional Record of 1931:

Congressional Record–Senate, 28Feb1931, p6448

You see, in October 1917, something happened in Russia, and that country changed its name, which included the word “socialist” in it. Thereafter, it was easy to demonize the word, simply because of association with what happened in Russia.

The “something” that happened in Russia was the “October Revolution,” (i.e., the Russian Revolution) in which Vladimir Lenin (1870-1924) and his merry band of men (mostly) known as the Bolsheviks, overthrew the Russian government, which at the time had been long ruled by Czars from the Romanov family, the royal family of Russia – which was a 300-year long imperial dynasty (the 2nd in Russian history), and one of ineptitude, nepotism, incompetence, excess, corruption, and hubris – which in all fairness, also included a few successes, but exceedingly few.

Congressional Record – House 2March31 p6850

It was actually the 2nd (or 3rd, depending upon what source you read) that year, with the first being in March (or February, again, depending upon what source you read). An earlier revolution in 1905 had also happened, and the situation and circumstances of the that revolution was culminated in the 1917 revolutions. Riots, work stoppages, strikes, food shortages, economic upheaval, lack of industrialization, were almost commonplace, and social upheaval was in the air, and in the hearts and minds of Russian civilians.

In the early 1900’s, Russia was one of the most impoverished nations in the world, and most European countries, and did much of the world, viewed Russia as being a backwards, and undeveloped nation, which was also plagued with high poverty, among other social ills. It was only a relatively few years earlier, in 1861, that serfdom had been made illegal in Russia, though it had been illegal in Europe for much longer.

“Serfdom” is a practice of the landed gentry (wealthy real estate/properly owners) in which indentured servitude of the lowest social class members, called “serfs,” occurred, though which the impoverished serfs were in some way indebted to the land owner, typically in exchange for the privilege of working a plot of land for their own purposes, which in more modern times in America is called share-cropping. After serfdom was outlawed, the former serfs had freedom to organize, and they did.

Industrialization, which occurred much later in Russia than in other nations, was the harbinger of significant social change. Between 1890 and 1910, the populations of the well-known cities St. Petersburg, and Moscow, doubled in size. Such overcrowding brought along other social ills such as destitute living conditions for industrial workers, and with it, disease.

Decisions to grow agricultural products in the harsh northern Russian climes were similarly fraught with difficulty, and production was stymied, which in turn brought about food shortages, and their accompanying ills. In conjunction with the Crimean War (1854-56) arising from Russian pressure on Turkey which directly threatened British commercial and strategic interests in the Middle East and India, combined with Russian involvement in other armed conflicts (notably with Japan), their economy was brought to a practical stand-still.

The “Bloody Sunday Massacre” of unarmed peaceful protestors by government troops in St. Petersburg on January 22, 1905, set the stage for even greater civil unrest shortly thereafter.

THE POINT BEING…

History is full of events of people revolting when food and housing – 2 of the 3 most fundamental human needs of food, clothing, and shelter – cannot be obtained.

The same thing happened in the United States, albeit with less violence, during the Great Depression.

President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, aka “FDR”, and his administration, sought to do everything humanly possible to PREVENT another occurrence of a “Great Depression” by correcting laws that led to the problem.

In the years since, Republicans (mostly), have done their damndest to tear down, and destroy everything FDR accomplished – including their wet-dream of privatizing Social Security – in order to hand it over to Wall Street speculators, who are salivating like hungry dogs to get their greedy hands on The People’s money.

As evidence of mostly Republican effort (though in all fairness, some Democrats have been involved, as well – aka “establishment Democrats,” or Wall Street Democrats In Name Only, or DINOs) to tear down the laws and rules protecting the people, look at the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act (repeal and replaced by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act – 145 pages, and signed into law by President CLINTON in 1999, the Glass-Steagall Act passed in 1933, signed by FDR, was 37 pages in length, and forbade the commingling of money from Insurance companies, Stock Brokerage houses, and Banks, i.e., each industry could not perform the roles which the others did), which led DIRECTLY to the “Great Recession” during the George W. Bush administration, in which numerous “too-big-to-fail” banks collapsed, insurance companies went under, people lost jobs, and automobile manufacturers requested a bail-out… while the people got no bail-out.

Following, are the transcribed remarks made by Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders at Georgetown University November 19, 2015 about what he means when he mentions “democratic socialism.”

––––––––––––––••••––––––––––––––

––––––––––––––••••––––––––––––––

––––––––––––––••••––––––––––––––

In his inaugural remarks in January 1937, in the midst of the Great Depression, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt looked out at the nation and this is what he saw.

He saw tens of millions of its citizens denied the basic necessities of life.

He saw millions of families trying to live on incomes so meager that the pall of family disaster hung over them day by day.

He saw millions denied education, recreation, and the opportunity to better their lot and the lot of their children.

He saw millions lacking the means to buy the products they needed and by their poverty and lack of disposable income denying employment to many other millions.

He saw one-third of a nation ill-housed, ill-clad, ill-nourished.

And he acted. Against the ferocious opposition of the ruling class of his day, people he called economic royalists, Roosevelt implemented a series of programs that put millions of people back to work, took them out of poverty and restored their faith in government. He redefined the relationship of the federal government to the people of our country. He combatted cynicism, fear and despair. He reinvigorated democracy. He transformed the country.

Bernie Sanders delivers his long-awaited speech on Democratic Socialism at Georgetown University. He also speaks about his vision for bringing American foreign policy into the 21st century.

And that is what we have to do today.

And, by the way, almost everything he proposed was called “socialist.” Social Security, which transformed life for the elderly in this country was “socialist.” The concept of the “minimum wage” was seen as a radical intrusion into the marketplace and was described as “socialist.” Unemployment insurance, abolishing child labor, the 40-hour work week, collective bargaining, strong banking regulations, deposit insurance, and job programs that put millions of people to work were all described, in one way or another, as “socialist.” Yet, these programs have become the fabric of our nation and the foundation of the middle class.

Thirty years later, in

So Far, It’s Liz’s To Lose

Biden Struggles To Reverse Fall

By Amie Parnes – 10/18/19 04:39 PM EDT

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/466515-biden-struggles-to-reverse-fall

“Biden has consistently cast himself as the candidate best positioned to defeat Trump in 2020, and electability has always been at the center of his message.”

—//—

It’s helpful to recall that Biden was the creator of the “electability” argument.

Think about it: Why would ANYONE make such an inane argument?

Such a matter or concern has never before been made.

Candidates and POTUSes have always been (and will continue to be) elected based upon their appeals to voters who think they’ll do the best job.

Vice President Joe Biden, Official Portrait 2013

To express concern for “electability” (defined as “who can beat candidate _X_?”) is to

Warren Shines At Third Debate

Warren Acts Like Frontrunner Though Polling 2nd or 3rd

At last night’s Democratic candidate debate at HBCU Texas Southern University in Houston – the 3rd in a field winnowed nearly in half – Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren continued to demonstrate how and why she will be the Democratic Party’s nominee for President.

Texas Republican Senator Ted Cruz is also clearly indicating that Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren will likely become the Democratic Party’s Presidential Nominee.

“If Republicans abandon the Second Amendment and demoralize millions of Americans who care deeply about Second Amendment rights, that could go a long way to electing a President Elizabeth Warren.”
– Ted Cruz, at a Christian Science Monitor-sponsored breakfast

“We’re going to see record-shattering Democratic turnout. The only element missing to ensure Democratic victory is demoralizing conservatives so they stay home. I hope we don’t do that.”
– Ted Cruz, in response to

Reading Democratic Tea Leaves

The Democratic candidates’ field is as great for the upcoming 2020 General Election as the Republicans’ 2016 was – and, that may, or may not be a good sign.

The 2016 GOP clown car was populated by, among others, Donald Trump, Texas Senator Ted Cruz, Ohio Governor John Kasich, Florida Senator Marco Rubio, retired pediatric neurosurgeon Ben Carson, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, former Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina, former Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore, former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee.

Aside from them, there were 10 others who withdrew before the primaries, so say it was a crowded field, was a gross understatement.

Now, it’s the Democrats’ turn.

The 20-candidate field has not yet been winnowed, per se – at least not by prospective primary voters.

Among them, is one of the last candidates to join that field was former Vice President Joe Biden, who had the advantage of name recognition among all voters, and potential voters.

Because of his name recognition advantage, Biden’s “popularity” within the massive field has led the next closest competitors – which are Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, and Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren – sometimes by double digits.

A notable game-changing exception was made following the first Democratic debate at The Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts in Miami, Florida, with NBC Moderators Savannah Guthrie, Lester Holt, Chuck Todd, Rachel Maddow and José Diaz-Balart on Night 2 (June 27) when California Senator Kamala Harris took former Vice President Joe Biden to task for his opposition as then-Senator from Delaware to busing to remedy and resolve the problem of segregation in California pubic schools.

Up until that time, Harris was polling 7.0%, while Biden was at 32.0%. After that night, support for Harris doubled to 15.2%, while Biden experienced a corresponding 6-point drop to 26.0%.

Since that high, Harris has continued to fall, and as of August 7 was polling at 8.3%.

Up until then, Sanders, the next-closest competitor, had fluctuated from 16.5% to 24.0% (his highest), to 14.0% (his lowest), and as of August 7, was polling at 15.8%.

Biden’s polling has been as high as

Biden: When I started in the Senate, I got along with racist White Supremacists.

Vice President Joe Biden, Official Portrait 2013

Former Vice President Joe Biden, a Democratic candidate – among the 20-plus wanna’ be’s – campaigning to be the party’s 2020 Presidential nominee, has recently taken flack for his waffling, wavering, moving-target positions on women, abortion, and civil rights.

Once, he supported the Hyde Amendment.

Now, he opposes it.

Once, he got along with racist bigots.

Now… he apparently still does.

Biden’s wishy-washy, ever-changing positions are nothing new.

In an appearance Tuesday, December 6, 2016, on “The Late Show” with host Stephen Colbert, Mr. Biden said in part, that “I’m a great respecter of fate. I don’t plan on running again. But to say you know what’s going to happen in four years, I just think is – is not rational. I can’t see the circumstance in which I’d run, but what I’ve learned a long, long, long time ago, Stephen, is to never say never. You don’t know what’s going to happen. Hell, Donald Trump is going to be 74. I’ll be 77 and in better shape. Who knows?”

Now, he’s announced his candidacy to be the Democratic Party’s nominee for President.

And in 1968, then a newly-minted lawyer, having earned the Juris Doctorate from Syracuse University College of Law, for six months, Mr. Biden clerked for a Wilmington, Delaware law firm led by William Pickett, who was a prominent local Republican, and said that he “thought of myself as a Republican.”

That same year, Mr. Biden also staunchly opposed forced school busing to combat segregation, and called it “a phony issue which allows the White liberals to sit in suburbia, confident that they are not going to have to live next to Blacks.”

Most recently, Mr. Biden has come under fire for his remarks made at

Presidential Indictment

“The people… My people are so smart. And you know what else? They say about my people – the polls? They say I have the most loyal people. Did you ever see that? Where I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody! And I wouldn’t lose any voters. Okay? It’s like incredible! No… they say ‘Trump’ – we love you too, man – ‘Trump’s voters are by far’… You know the ah… I’m at 68, 69%. I’m at 90% – total. Like, ‘will you say “absolutely”?’ I think it’s 68 or 69%. Will you most likely say… That gets into the 90’s. Other guys are at like 10. A guy like Jeb Bush? He has nobody! But he’s like…at… at… I mean, like… they don’t have people! They have nothing! Ahh… Rubio? Soft. They’re all… all soft. All soft. My people? Stay. Ah, by the way, Cruz? Soft!”

Trump: Who Voted For, And Supports Him?

Formerly titled, “With Trump WYSIWYG: Who Voted For, And Supports Him?”

African leopard, Panthera pardus pardus, near Lake Panic, Kruger National Park, South Africa, 31 December 2013
Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0), Derek Keats, https://www.flickr.com/photos/93242958@N00/19448654130M

One either loves, or loathes, Donald Trump.

One does not simply “tolerate” him.

He is a divisive political figure.

He is starkly contrasted to former POTUS George W. Bush, who in a May 6, 1999 interview with David Horowitz of Salon magazine, famously said, “I’m a uniter, not a divider.”

Trump is a divider, not a uniter.

For Trump, e pluribus unum means nothing, even though we are the United States of America.

And for those who voted for him thinking he’d change, that he was merely spouting hollow campaign rhetoric, they might as well have asked a leopard to change it’s spots.

With Trump, WYSIWYG.

Specifically, I mean to refer to him in his executive Presidential capacity.

And yet, strangely enough, he has coalesced support from diverse, divergent sub-groups within, and without the GOP. The importance of that feat cannot, and should not be underestimated, glossed over, or minimized, because understanding it is key to political success, especially for

Hillary & Trump: Two Deeply Flawed Candidates

By many accounts, the 2016 Presidential Election year is a complete campaign in the ass. Two deeply flawed candidates manipulated and exposed deeply flawed processes in both major political parties, not the least of which is for the GOP, how to vet their candidates more thoroughly, and have the ability to remove them from official party candidacy, and for the Democrats, how to maintain candidate neutrality, and prevent party officials from influencing candidates of the top officials’ choosing toward nomination. I predict many much-needed changes on the horizon for both parties… following the November General Election.

—/—

by Gary Cosby, Jr.
Used with permission

WARNING:  This is a long post. It is also my final political post before the election.

I am not an editorial writer but today I am going to play one on Facebook. First, let me say, everyone is welcome to comment; however, if your comment uses foul language or is abusive to anyone else, your comment will be deleted. One of the great problems we have today is our lack of ability to disagree and still have civil discourse; therefore, we will practice it or be censured. Keep in mind, this is my opinion and you do not have to agree with it. Thank your First Amendment rights for that.

By now, we all know this presidential election cycle has presented us with the two poorest candidates in memory, perhaps in all of American history. Certainly there have been poor candidates running for one party or the other throughout our history but not facing one another in the same election.

They have turned the presidential debates into bad Saturday Night Live skits. In fact, I doubt the writers of SNL would have been able to dream up anything this hideous. The American political scene will never be the same and

Known vs Unknown: A Voting Rationale

Someone opined that they hoped the 2016 GOP Presidential nominee would be elected.

I couldn’t disagree more.

Here’s why:
As we have suffered, never before has there been a more grotesque figure campaigning for the noble office of the President.

The candidate has never served in an office of Public Trust, nor ever served in any Elected Office. There is literally no shred of evidence of governing competency, much less experience, in any Public Office, and though our Constitution states that the minimum eligibility requirements for the office are to be “a citizen of the United States… the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States,” we have never elected an individual as President whom has never served in any capacity of Public Trust, nor Elected Office.

And so, in that regard, the candidate is a significantly Unknown Quantity. That can be, and often is, fraught with enormous peril.

We expect

Hillary Haunts @GOP In Staten Island Visit @HillaryClinton #P2 #TCOT #Politics

“I Will Not Raise Taxes on the Middle Class,” Says Clinton Sunday At Staten Island Campaign Stop.

Says she’s the only presidential candidate making such a promise.

Little know facts that give understanding to the news report:
• Staten Island is the least populated of NYC’s 5 boroughs w 470,000+/- population

• Is predominately White/Caucasian (64%+)

• Roman Catholic

• College educated (27.3% have Bachelor’s degree or higher)

• Median family income is $64,333

• Is New York’s self-proclaimed “forgotten borough,” because it is a hidden bastion of Republicanism in one of the nation’s most liberal cities, and

• Because it is separated from the rest of New York City geographically and politically.

  
Staten Island is frequently the butt of jokes about NYC, and the borough’s voters once considered seceding from the city in 1993.

Donald Trump recently campaigned there and

Reasons Why Ohio Governor John Kasich Will Be Our Next President

There are numerous reasons, actually.

Here are a few:

He has an excellent political background/pedigree/experience.
• In 1978, aged 26 he was elected to the Ohio State Senate’s 15th Senatorial District, and remains OH’s youngest ever elected state senator
• In 1982, he was elected to the US House of Representatives 12th Ohio District, where he served from ’83-2001 (was re-elected 8 times) by at least 64% each time
• In 2010, he was elected governor, and in 2014 re-elected in a landslide, carrying all but 2 counties (86/88) – including the traditionally Democratic-leaning Hamilton county, where Cincinnati is located

Ohio Governor John Kasich (2010 & 2014)

He has done quite well by Ohio voters.
• His approval rating (always fluctuating for any elected figure) among Ohioans, has been as much as 77%.
• He expanded Medicaid in Ohio (which reduces uncompensated care & increases hospitals’ solvency)
• He saved $3Billion in the Medicaid budget, and slowed growth in the plan from 9%-3%, the lowest rate nationally
• He used cost-saving reforms & turned a $6-8 Billion Ohio budget shortfall into a balanced budget without raising taxes
• During his first term as governor, he grew the “Rainy Day Fund” (surplus) from $890M-1.5B
• In his first budget, he implemented a Personal Income Tax cut
• In his second budget, he implemented a 10% Personal Income Tax cut, and a 50% Small Business Income Tax cut
• During his first term as governor, he created 316,800 new jobs, and the state Unemployment Rate fell from 9.4% to 5.1%
• Education funding is at the highest level it’s ever been
• Because of Criminal Justice reforms, Ohio’s recidivism rate (reoffending) of prisoners is the lowest in the nation
• He has vigorously worked

Canadian Born Texas Senator Ted Cruz: Eligible, Or Not For U.S. President? Experts: SCOTUS Ruling Required.

Born in Canada to a Cuban father & American mother, Republican Presidential hopeful Senator Ted Cruz renounced his Canadian citizenship only last year (2014).

ref: http://www.scribd.com/doc/229039536/Canadian-Renunciation-Letter

To be certain, as a graduate of Princeton undergrad & Harvard Law, Ted Cruz is no dummy. So for him to assert he didn’t know he was a Canadian citizen is not merely disingenuous, it’s fallacious on its face. Plainly put, it’s a blatant lie.

ref: http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/11/politics/ted-cruz-canada-citizenship/
ref: http://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/headlines/20130818-ted-cruz-born-a-citizen-of-canada-under-the-countrys-immigration-rules.ece

U.S. Department of State circular on United States citizenship

The U.S. Department of State specifically writes that citizenship via “jus sanguinis,” i.e., by bloodline, “is not

Scrutinizing the Mitt Romney jobs claim record

Mitt Romney, former  governor of Massachusetts, and GOP wannabe presidential nominee, has made many assertions claiming a record of creating private sector jobs before he became governor.

However, Marc B. Walpow, a former managing partner at Bain Capital who worked closely with Mitt Romney during his time there had this to say:

“I never thought of what I do for a living as job creation. The primary goal of private equity is to create wealth for your investors.“

Let’s examine Mr. Romney’s job creations claims more closely.

—

A closer look at Mitt Romney’s job creation record

The Republican presidential contender says he learned about expanding employment during his time heading a private equity firm. But under his leadership, Bain Capital often maximized profits in part by firing workers.

By Tom Hamburger, Melanie Mason and Matea Gold, Washington Bureau December 3, 2011, 7:23 p.m.

Reporting from Washington—

Shortly after Mitt Romney resigned from Bain Capital in 1999 to run the Olympics in Salt Lake City, potential investors received a prospectus touting the extraordinary profits earned by the private equity firm that Romney controlled for 15 years.

During that time, Boston-based Bain acquired more than 115 companies, according to the prospectus. Bain’s estimated annual returns were more than five times that of the Dow Jones Industrial Average in the same period.

Now a front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination, Romney says his Bain experience shows he knows how to create jobs. He often cites Bain’s investment in a little-known office supply store called Staples, which now employs more than 90,000 worldwide.

DOCUMENT: Read the Bain Capital prospectus

But a closer examination of the prospectus paints a different picture of Bain’s operation. Under Romney’s leadership,