By Phil Kenny
No one should not promote or settle on the idea that Mitt Romney's losses in the south had anything to do with anti-Mormon sentiment. Such suggestion or idea could only produce a negative result for Mitt in the remainder of this election and 2012.
Imagine if we talk about how Mitt lost the south because of religious bigotry. If that argument sticks and Mitt runs in 2012, people will say that Mitt has no chance because we already saw that southerners won't vote for a Mormon.
So if it wasn't his Mormonism, why did Mitt lose much of the south in 2008? First off, he did great there and was narrowly beaten in almost every state.
Who beat him? The "Southern" Baptist preacher. If you go county by county, Huckabee won the rural areas. Those are the areas where being a southern Baptist minister is going to rally numbers around you. And Mitt's loss in the tight race in Florida gave McCain a boost and discouraged Mitt-leaning voters.
And why didn't Huckabee do well in Nevada or Utah? It's not anti-evangelicalism.
In addition to many other demographics, Mitt happens to do well among Mormons, Obama happens to do well among African-Americans, Hillary among women, Huckabee among southern evangelicals, McCain with seniors.
Keep in mind the future of our party and the possibility that this may be Mitt's down payment on a run in 2012, where HE will be next in line.
If that's the case, we need to highlight that evangelicals DID vote for him (yes, they did!); that he was able to unite conservatives behind him (even if they came late -- which is better than never); that he does represent the conservative coalition that Reagan built, and which we, the conservative base, must keep strong.
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
The Faith to Try, and the Willingness to Serve
By JEBEE Kenji SOLIS
A few days ago, Governor Romney made this comment regarding running for President:
"This is not something I'm doing because I need or I want it desperately for myself. I believe the country could benefit from the experience I've had, but that is not what motivates me."
So, what is it that motivates Mitt Romney?
People now in their 60s -- with lots of money, who worked hard and saved what they earned -- would rather be well in comfort, vacationing, running a charity, living a quiet life.
But Mitt Romney has been more than willing to get out of his own comfort zone, as well as his wife Ann who has MS, and theirs sons, all of whom have happy lives of their own because they have faith in the American people. They have the courage to try even though the prospects may not be as bright at the end, and because they have the willing heart and mind to serve.
Mitt said the following in Michigan back in September. The whole speech is worth reading, but here's a part of that speech:
"I don't have to tell you that my Dad made a mark on Michigan. And he made a mark on me. And I guess that is at the heart of things; he's a big part of why I'm running for President today. In 1957, when he was the President of American Motors, he gave a speech in which he reported the following conversation:"
'My nine year old son' – that would be me – 'came home from school and said "Mom, we really build the best cars, don't we?"' "She said, 'Why Mitt, of course we do. Why do you ask?'"
'Well, if we build the best cars, why is it that less than three percent of the people agree with us?'
"After my Dad heard of this conversation, he took me aside and said, 'Look, Mitt, size doesn't always indicate strength and popularity doesn't always indicate truth, and sales volume doesn't always indicate value.' "
And then he added: 'Right always prevails.'"
What has happened in the last few state primaries has confirmed my fear, that instead of moving forward we are moving backwards. Instead of choosing the right candidate for us, the true conservatives, the choice might be someone who has trampled our belief and ideals, and will continue to do just that, and who has and will abandon our dreams and aspirations.
Mitt Romney has demonstrated in his leadership that he is a servant of the people, because he rightly believes that service to his countrymen and service to the world is a selfless act. Sometimes, when you are truly blessed, you have a burning desire to serve, and to bless and lift the lives of others.
Mitt Romney not in it for the money; he already said he would donate his salary to the charity once elected president. He doesn't need fame, for he is already well known. He doesn't need honor or glory. All he wants is to make sure his grandchildren and the generations that will come after them will have a better, safer, and more secure world in which to live. The kind of country people look up too for goodness, justice and freedom – the America that reaches out to people around the world, and has served, and will continue to serve, as a beacon of hope and success.
Mark Steyn over at The Corner said: "This was conservatives' last chance... The only chance was for a really good conservative leader to be elected and make a Reaganesque impression on the country that would delay the liberal fate. If Romney is defeated tomorrow, that will not happen, and tomorrow will live in infamy as a monumental defeat for conservatism."
We will find out today if Americans stand for something. I can only wait and see. The choice is ours.
The choice is exclusively ours.
A few days ago, Governor Romney made this comment regarding running for President:
"This is not something I'm doing because I need or I want it desperately for myself. I believe the country could benefit from the experience I've had, but that is not what motivates me."
So, what is it that motivates Mitt Romney?
People now in their 60s -- with lots of money, who worked hard and saved what they earned -- would rather be well in comfort, vacationing, running a charity, living a quiet life.
But Mitt Romney has been more than willing to get out of his own comfort zone, as well as his wife Ann who has MS, and theirs sons, all of whom have happy lives of their own because they have faith in the American people. They have the courage to try even though the prospects may not be as bright at the end, and because they have the willing heart and mind to serve.
Mitt said the following in Michigan back in September. The whole speech is worth reading, but here's a part of that speech:
"I don't have to tell you that my Dad made a mark on Michigan. And he made a mark on me. And I guess that is at the heart of things; he's a big part of why I'm running for President today. In 1957, when he was the President of American Motors, he gave a speech in which he reported the following conversation:"
'My nine year old son' – that would be me – 'came home from school and said "Mom, we really build the best cars, don't we?"' "She said, 'Why Mitt, of course we do. Why do you ask?'"
'Well, if we build the best cars, why is it that less than three percent of the people agree with us?'
"After my Dad heard of this conversation, he took me aside and said, 'Look, Mitt, size doesn't always indicate strength and popularity doesn't always indicate truth, and sales volume doesn't always indicate value.' "
And then he added: 'Right always prevails.'"
What has happened in the last few state primaries has confirmed my fear, that instead of moving forward we are moving backwards. Instead of choosing the right candidate for us, the true conservatives, the choice might be someone who has trampled our belief and ideals, and will continue to do just that, and who has and will abandon our dreams and aspirations.
Mitt Romney has demonstrated in his leadership that he is a servant of the people, because he rightly believes that service to his countrymen and service to the world is a selfless act. Sometimes, when you are truly blessed, you have a burning desire to serve, and to bless and lift the lives of others.
Mitt Romney not in it for the money; he already said he would donate his salary to the charity once elected president. He doesn't need fame, for he is already well known. He doesn't need honor or glory. All he wants is to make sure his grandchildren and the generations that will come after them will have a better, safer, and more secure world in which to live. The kind of country people look up too for goodness, justice and freedom – the America that reaches out to people around the world, and has served, and will continue to serve, as a beacon of hope and success.
Mark Steyn over at The Corner said: "This was conservatives' last chance... The only chance was for a really good conservative leader to be elected and make a Reaganesque impression on the country that would delay the liberal fate. If Romney is defeated tomorrow, that will not happen, and tomorrow will live in infamy as a monumental defeat for conservatism."
We will find out today if Americans stand for something. I can only wait and see. The choice is ours.
The choice is exclusively ours.
Sunday, February 3, 2008
McCain? Are You Sure?
By Lance Thompson
Super Tuesday will likely decide who the GOP nominee is for 2008. John McCain has a good chance of being that nominee. Conservatives are understandably agitated about this possibility.
If you like McCain because you agree with his positions, then none of the following will change your mind.
However, if you favor McCain because of the many endorsements he has received from the media, then consider this: The mainstream media serve the liberal political agenda. They do not want the GOP to field a conservative candidate, in case our side wins. They do not want the GOP to have a strong candidate, because they don’t want us to win. When it comes to the general election, none of the media outlets that have endorsed McCain in the primary will remain in support of him. They will all be endorsing the Democrat–Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. The media endorsements bestowed upon John McCain have been awarded because he is the least conservative Republican. Those endorsements will migrate during the general election to the least conservative Democrat.
If you favor John McCain because he seems able to "reach across the aisle," consider this: In 2005, John McCain "reached across the aisle" to Russ Feingold to limit free political speech with McCain-Feinglod-Cochran. The same year, McCain reached across the aisle to Ted Kennedy to offer citizenship to illegal aliens. John McCain said he would "consider" being John Kerry’s running mate in 2004. John McCain has said that Hillary Clinton would make a good President. John McCain’s maverick status is based on his diversion from conservative principles and his embrace of liberal ideas. Instead of reaching across the aisle, John McCain should walk across the aisle and sit on the Democrat side where he belongs.
If you favor John McCain because he’s not a hard right, ideological conservative, consider this: Conservatism is the spine of the Republican party. Yes, there are Republicans who are more and less conservative, but at the heart of the GOP is a belief in conservative principles–small government, lower taxes, strong defense, secure borders, traditional values. Every election, we are urged to stray from those principles to appeal to "moderate"or "undecided" voters. When the GOP chose moderate Gerald Ford over conservative Ronald Reagan in 1976, we lost.
Those who are "undecided" about their principles are not conservatives. John McCain falls into this category. He sponsored the McCain-Feingold legislation, created to limit the effect of campaign contributors on candidates. But during the 1980's he gladly accepted cash contributions as well as other favors, such as use of a private plane, from Charles Keating, who was later convicted of fraud in the Lincoln Savings and Loan scandal that stuck taxpayers with a multi-billion dollar bailout.
Once we begin to trade principle for votes, our candidates have no basis upon which to ask for votes. The conservative principles we stand for are the very reason we can ask voters to support us, believe in us, and sustain us. Without them, we are indistinguishable from the opposition.
Just like John McCain.
*********
Lance Thompson lives in Idaho and supports Mitt Romney for President.
Lance Thompson
208-898-1451
lancet@q.com
Super Tuesday will likely decide who the GOP nominee is for 2008. John McCain has a good chance of being that nominee. Conservatives are understandably agitated about this possibility.
If you like McCain because you agree with his positions, then none of the following will change your mind.
However, if you favor McCain because of the many endorsements he has received from the media, then consider this: The mainstream media serve the liberal political agenda. They do not want the GOP to field a conservative candidate, in case our side wins. They do not want the GOP to have a strong candidate, because they don’t want us to win. When it comes to the general election, none of the media outlets that have endorsed McCain in the primary will remain in support of him. They will all be endorsing the Democrat–Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. The media endorsements bestowed upon John McCain have been awarded because he is the least conservative Republican. Those endorsements will migrate during the general election to the least conservative Democrat.
If you favor John McCain because he seems able to "reach across the aisle," consider this: In 2005, John McCain "reached across the aisle" to Russ Feingold to limit free political speech with McCain-Feinglod-Cochran. The same year, McCain reached across the aisle to Ted Kennedy to offer citizenship to illegal aliens. John McCain said he would "consider" being John Kerry’s running mate in 2004. John McCain has said that Hillary Clinton would make a good President. John McCain’s maverick status is based on his diversion from conservative principles and his embrace of liberal ideas. Instead of reaching across the aisle, John McCain should walk across the aisle and sit on the Democrat side where he belongs.
If you favor John McCain because he’s not a hard right, ideological conservative, consider this: Conservatism is the spine of the Republican party. Yes, there are Republicans who are more and less conservative, but at the heart of the GOP is a belief in conservative principles–small government, lower taxes, strong defense, secure borders, traditional values. Every election, we are urged to stray from those principles to appeal to "moderate"or "undecided" voters. When the GOP chose moderate Gerald Ford over conservative Ronald Reagan in 1976, we lost.
Those who are "undecided" about their principles are not conservatives. John McCain falls into this category. He sponsored the McCain-Feingold legislation, created to limit the effect of campaign contributors on candidates. But during the 1980's he gladly accepted cash contributions as well as other favors, such as use of a private plane, from Charles Keating, who was later convicted of fraud in the Lincoln Savings and Loan scandal that stuck taxpayers with a multi-billion dollar bailout.
Once we begin to trade principle for votes, our candidates have no basis upon which to ask for votes. The conservative principles we stand for are the very reason we can ask voters to support us, believe in us, and sustain us. Without them, we are indistinguishable from the opposition.
Just like John McCain.
*********
Lance Thompson lives in Idaho and supports Mitt Romney for President.
Lance Thompson
208-898-1451
lancet@q.com
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Romney's Ideal Victory
By Chris Suellentrop
Tags: Florida, John McCain, Mitt Romney
Does Mitt Romney have a victory to cling to in Florida? Joshua Trevino, vice president for public policy at San Francisco’s Pacific Research Institute (and one of the founders of the conservative blog RedState), breaks down the numbers on his personal blog.
“Mitt Romney is in a bad way,” Trevino writes. “He blew through $10 million in Iowa and lost; and outspent McCain eight to one in Florida, and lost that too. But for all this, Mitt Romney is not done yet and the reason lies in the breakdown of this evening’s Florida vote.” He continues:
CNN has the exit-poll numbers, and they reveal some surprising things:
The question before Florida was whether McCain could win a closed Republican race, and now we know he can.
The question now is whether he can win conservatives and in Florida, he did not.
Tags: Florida, John McCain, Mitt Romney
Does Mitt Romney have a victory to cling to in Florida? Joshua Trevino, vice president for public policy at San Francisco’s Pacific Research Institute (and one of the founders of the conservative blog RedState), breaks down the numbers on his personal blog.
“Mitt Romney is in a bad way,” Trevino writes. “He blew through $10 million in Iowa and lost; and outspent McCain eight to one in Florida, and lost that too. But for all this, Mitt Romney is not done yet and the reason lies in the breakdown of this evening’s Florida vote.” He continues:
CNN has the exit-poll numbers, and they reveal some surprising things:
- Romney won pro-lifers.
- Romney won the mainstream religious. (Huckabee won the very religious less than one-fifth of the pool.)
- Romney won the Protestants.
- Romney tied Huckabee with Evangelicals.
- Romney won the pro-GWB voters.
- Romney is the primary second choice of Giuliani voters, Thompson voters …. and McCain voters.
- Romney won the immigration hard-liners.
- Romney won the upper-middle class, earning between $100,000 and $200,000 annually.
- Romney won the terrorism-oriented voters.
- Romney won the self-identified conservatives and the self-identified very conservative.
- Romney won the values-oriented voters.
- Romney won the white voters.
- Romney won the tax-cutting voters.
The question before Florida was whether McCain could win a closed Republican race, and now we know he can.
The question now is whether he can win conservatives and in Florida, he did not.
Can the American People Beat John McCain?
By JEBEE Kenji SOLIS
Who can beat endorsements by the New York Times, the Washington Post, and all the other liberal mainstream media?
Who can beat someone like John McCain, who is endorsed by “America’s Mayor” Rudy Giuliani, endorsed by Arnold “Terminator” Schwarzenegger, Joe Lieberman, Crist and Martinez, and almost all of the Democrat or liberal-leaning people in America?
Who can beat him, when Huckabee -- a nuisance candidate who will take votes from Mitt Romney -- refuses to quit the race to ensure a win for McCain?
In the words of Michael Gramm of National Review’s “The Corner”:
“So it is over. Finished. In November, we'll be sending out our most liberal, least trustworthy candidate vs. to take on Hillary Clinton—perhaps not more liberal than Barack Obama, but certainly far less trustworthy.”
“The worst part for the Right is that McCain will have won the nomination while ignoring, insulting and, as of this weekend, shamelessly lying about conservatives and conservatism.
“You think he supported amnesty six months ago? You think he was squishy on tax cuts and judicial nominees before? Wait until he has the power to anger every conservative in America, and feel good about it.
“Every day, he dreams of a world filled with happy Democrats and insulted Republicans. And he is, thanks to Florida, the presidential nominee of the Republican Party.”
I have heard from and received emails from several people -- some Republican, some conservatives -- young and mature people, some adept in politics and some just read the news or watched it. But I am surprised, when they admitted, if McCain will win the nomination, they will vote for Obama. Even my wife is considering voting for Obama if McCain gets nominated.
When the National Review endorsed Governor Romney, they were correct when they declared ""[Giuliani] and Mike Huckabee would pull apart the coalition from opposite ends: Giuliani alienating the social conservatives, and Huckabee the economic (and foreign-policy) conservatives" and McCain, all of the conservatives.
Who can stop him? Who can beat him? Hillary Clinton will and, most importantly and most decisively, Obama will -- on first account because of McCain's age; he is too old to be President. Second are McCain's principles.
I still and hope and believe he can be stopped -- not for Mitt Romney. The Governor is too kind and too decent to engage McCain, or anyone like McCain, in dirty games.
In the long run, it is “We, the People” who can beat McCain. They can stop him from being President, who will take America down the path of recession, war, division and degeneration.
I am not making prophecy here. I am telling the truth. Mitt Romney is the instrument for Americans as their alternative choice: not perfect but a teachable man, a person who worked hard and gained riches (the American Dream!), yet humble enough to consider those who are unfortunate; a leader who leads by words and examples; a father who loves his sons as a loving American father should; a husband devoted to and who loves his wife just like every husband in America should. Mitt Romney is an ordinary American who lives an extraordinary life, and who dreams to share that extraordinary life with his fellow Americans.
Americans are the freest people on Earth. And if you want to see, feel and hear the difference, spend time in Saudi Arabia -- and you’ll wish you’d never left the United States of America.
Use your freedom wisely. Vote for freedom. Vote for Mitt Romney.
Who can beat endorsements by the New York Times, the Washington Post, and all the other liberal mainstream media?
Who can beat someone like John McCain, who is endorsed by “America’s Mayor” Rudy Giuliani, endorsed by Arnold “Terminator” Schwarzenegger, Joe Lieberman, Crist and Martinez, and almost all of the Democrat or liberal-leaning people in America?
Who can beat him, when Huckabee -- a nuisance candidate who will take votes from Mitt Romney -- refuses to quit the race to ensure a win for McCain?
In the words of Michael Gramm of National Review’s “The Corner”:
“So it is over. Finished. In November, we'll be sending out our most liberal, least trustworthy candidate vs. to take on Hillary Clinton—perhaps not more liberal than Barack Obama, but certainly far less trustworthy.”
“The worst part for the Right is that McCain will have won the nomination while ignoring, insulting and, as of this weekend, shamelessly lying about conservatives and conservatism.
“You think he supported amnesty six months ago? You think he was squishy on tax cuts and judicial nominees before? Wait until he has the power to anger every conservative in America, and feel good about it.
“Every day, he dreams of a world filled with happy Democrats and insulted Republicans. And he is, thanks to Florida, the presidential nominee of the Republican Party.”
I have heard from and received emails from several people -- some Republican, some conservatives -- young and mature people, some adept in politics and some just read the news or watched it. But I am surprised, when they admitted, if McCain will win the nomination, they will vote for Obama. Even my wife is considering voting for Obama if McCain gets nominated.
When the National Review endorsed Governor Romney, they were correct when they declared ""[Giuliani] and Mike Huckabee would pull apart the coalition from opposite ends: Giuliani alienating the social conservatives, and Huckabee the economic (and foreign-policy) conservatives" and McCain, all of the conservatives.
Who can stop him? Who can beat him? Hillary Clinton will and, most importantly and most decisively, Obama will -- on first account because of McCain's age; he is too old to be President. Second are McCain's principles.
I still and hope and believe he can be stopped -- not for Mitt Romney. The Governor is too kind and too decent to engage McCain, or anyone like McCain, in dirty games.
In the long run, it is “We, the People” who can beat McCain. They can stop him from being President, who will take America down the path of recession, war, division and degeneration.
I am not making prophecy here. I am telling the truth. Mitt Romney is the instrument for Americans as their alternative choice: not perfect but a teachable man, a person who worked hard and gained riches (the American Dream!), yet humble enough to consider those who are unfortunate; a leader who leads by words and examples; a father who loves his sons as a loving American father should; a husband devoted to and who loves his wife just like every husband in America should. Mitt Romney is an ordinary American who lives an extraordinary life, and who dreams to share that extraordinary life with his fellow Americans.
Americans are the freest people on Earth. And if you want to see, feel and hear the difference, spend time in Saudi Arabia -- and you’ll wish you’d never left the United States of America.
Use your freedom wisely. Vote for freedom. Vote for Mitt Romney.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Facts Are Stubborn Things
By Shane Hopkins
The game of politics centers around "campaigning." This is just how it is. It's how it's always been. Some take issue with the process of touting your pluses and minimizing your minuses, but it's within the expected rules of the game. However, occasionally someone says something untrue. This can be anything from a genuine mistake to a boldfaced lie, but I suspect that it's usually less diabolical than people tend to play it.
Let me give you a list of some of the issues where Romney has gotten a lot of bad press. Most recently there was a tiff with an AP reporter in which Romney is said to have lied about having lobbyists in his campaign. There is the time Romney said he saw his father march with Martin Luther King Jr. There is the time Romney bragged about the NRA endorsing him (and don't forget his self-characterization as a "lifelong hunter"!). All of these have something in common: Romney was right to bring up his record, a record that supports his candidacy and his positions, but lost the chance to receive his due credit on the issues as the chattering focused more and more on a literal dissection of what he said rather than the substance of why he was saying it.
I could go down a laundry list of the times Romney's been blasted for misspeaking (often being labeled a liar rather than merely having made a mistake), but bickering about the actual words he used and their literal versus figurative definitions, the proper versus common use of words like endorse, and the like, will never arrive at the truth.
The truth is much simpler.
No matter how many lobbyists rub shoulders with Romney, his campaign is simply not dependent on them for cash or expertise in the way the other campaigns are (although both are accepted). Romney's family has long supported the civil rights movement. Romney had demonstrable approval from the NRA (whether officially or not) during his Massachusetts campaign and supports the importance of protecting the second amendment.
Is he guilty of exaggeration? Is he guilty of misstatements? Is he guilty of carelessness? Perhaps yes. But is he guilty of lying? Of outright deception? Of claiming to hold one position when he effectively holds another? No, despite that the media would much rather malign a candidate for his errors than honestly acknowledge that his record and positions have consistently supported the message he was trying to deliver.
This is not spin. This is not apologetics. This is just an assessment of the actual positions Romney holds, and his fallibility as a candidate who makes honest mistakes. The mistakes are honest because they have never changed his message one hundred and eighty degrees.
There is one more layer to this communication thing that demands mention. Romney has been criticized over the last few days by McCain for supposedly supporting a timetable of withdrawal from Iraq. McCain has also attacked him for supposedly supporting amnesty before he opposed it, as well as a big Michigan "bailout". Romney's positions on these issues differ from McCain's not just in substance but in style.
Romney's message is always sophisticated and nuanced, as our Commander in Chief's understanding must be. McCain's message plays to the media with dogmatic oversimplification. It fits him well, because that's how he thinks. So, when Romney has had the courage to make careful distinctions, he has sometimes been attacked for "reversals" or for spinning things.
Again, Romney's message has consistently been for responsible action by the U.S. in Iraq and in regard to illegal immigration, and no out-of-context testimonial by McCain can change that. The economic stimulus in Michigan is not a "bailout", but rather shows McCain's inability to understand the concept of research investment. Romney hardly needs a testimonial to his investment understanding.
At the end of the character assassination and name calling, Romney's key rebuttal to Huckabee's charges of dishonesty in a recent debate ring true: "Facts are stubborn things."
The truth is that in every case Romney has been accused of lying, the message he was intending to convey was based on the bedrock of record and fact.
The game of politics centers around "campaigning." This is just how it is. It's how it's always been. Some take issue with the process of touting your pluses and minimizing your minuses, but it's within the expected rules of the game. However, occasionally someone says something untrue. This can be anything from a genuine mistake to a boldfaced lie, but I suspect that it's usually less diabolical than people tend to play it.
Let me give you a list of some of the issues where Romney has gotten a lot of bad press. Most recently there was a tiff with an AP reporter in which Romney is said to have lied about having lobbyists in his campaign. There is the time Romney said he saw his father march with Martin Luther King Jr. There is the time Romney bragged about the NRA endorsing him (and don't forget his self-characterization as a "lifelong hunter"!). All of these have something in common: Romney was right to bring up his record, a record that supports his candidacy and his positions, but lost the chance to receive his due credit on the issues as the chattering focused more and more on a literal dissection of what he said rather than the substance of why he was saying it.
I could go down a laundry list of the times Romney's been blasted for misspeaking (often being labeled a liar rather than merely having made a mistake), but bickering about the actual words he used and their literal versus figurative definitions, the proper versus common use of words like endorse, and the like, will never arrive at the truth.
The truth is much simpler.
No matter how many lobbyists rub shoulders with Romney, his campaign is simply not dependent on them for cash or expertise in the way the other campaigns are (although both are accepted). Romney's family has long supported the civil rights movement. Romney had demonstrable approval from the NRA (whether officially or not) during his Massachusetts campaign and supports the importance of protecting the second amendment.
Is he guilty of exaggeration? Is he guilty of misstatements? Is he guilty of carelessness? Perhaps yes. But is he guilty of lying? Of outright deception? Of claiming to hold one position when he effectively holds another? No, despite that the media would much rather malign a candidate for his errors than honestly acknowledge that his record and positions have consistently supported the message he was trying to deliver.
This is not spin. This is not apologetics. This is just an assessment of the actual positions Romney holds, and his fallibility as a candidate who makes honest mistakes. The mistakes are honest because they have never changed his message one hundred and eighty degrees.
There is one more layer to this communication thing that demands mention. Romney has been criticized over the last few days by McCain for supposedly supporting a timetable of withdrawal from Iraq. McCain has also attacked him for supposedly supporting amnesty before he opposed it, as well as a big Michigan "bailout". Romney's positions on these issues differ from McCain's not just in substance but in style.
Romney's message is always sophisticated and nuanced, as our Commander in Chief's understanding must be. McCain's message plays to the media with dogmatic oversimplification. It fits him well, because that's how he thinks. So, when Romney has had the courage to make careful distinctions, he has sometimes been attacked for "reversals" or for spinning things.
Again, Romney's message has consistently been for responsible action by the U.S. in Iraq and in regard to illegal immigration, and no out-of-context testimonial by McCain can change that. The economic stimulus in Michigan is not a "bailout", but rather shows McCain's inability to understand the concept of research investment. Romney hardly needs a testimonial to his investment understanding.
At the end of the character assassination and name calling, Romney's key rebuttal to Huckabee's charges of dishonesty in a recent debate ring true: "Facts are stubborn things."
The truth is that in every case Romney has been accused of lying, the message he was intending to convey was based on the bedrock of record and fact.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Why they hate Mitt Romney, by Amy D. Goldstein
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/why_they_hate_mitt_romney.html
January 23, 2008
Why they hate Mitt Romney
By Amy D. Goldstein
Have you noticed how all of the Republican candidates can barely conceal their contempt for Governor Mitt Romney? It goes way beyond the typical good-natured competition that usually is the hallmark of Republican contests. Senator McCain has snarled at Governor Romney in debates and Gov. Huckabee has tried to paint Romney as cold and uncaring, while Sen. Fred Thompson attacked Governor Romney right out of the box. This display of hatred usually is the hallmark of the Democrats.
So, why do the other candidates hate Mitt Romney? Several reasons:
1. He can win. Governor Romney appeals to economic conservatives and could appeal to foreign policy conservatives based upon his understanding of the issues. Most non-partisan foreign policy wonks who have briefed the major candidates tell me that Romney "gets it" better than any other candidate -- even better than those who have held high profile office for decades. Moreover, he is the candidate that the Democrats most fear.
2. Jealousy -- from his hair to his appearance to his family to his money - these are all reasons for deep-seated, if unseemly, jealousy. This green-eyed monster makes its appearance in almost every speech or presentation, in the form of a joke, a jab or a veiled reference.
3. He isn't beholden to interest groups. Governor Romney's wealth frees him from any influence that interest groups could apply to others - especially those who lack funds or who are Washington insiders. He doesn't need them, and that scares the interest groups and their allies. He is not of the game and wants to change it - and his personal wealth allows him to do so. He really can change Washington.
4. His brains - not only is he one of the smartest people ever to seek the presidency (having earned a Harvard MBA and JD simultaneously), but he understands the complexities of the issues that America faces and is able to devise workable solutions. Just look at his proposal for an economic stimulus and compare it to what the other candidates are proposing. Romney clearly can lead this country through economic challenges.
5. His wealth -- again. While he has raised more than any other candidate, Governor Romney doesn't need to raise the money in order to continue. Nevertheless, he understands that successful candidates must have people invested in their candidacy in order to succeed. He has learned the lessons of past wealthy businessmen who make vanity runs for the White House. The other candidates have to constantly raise money in order to continue their campaigns.
6. His experience. The rest of the Republican field has been in politics in one form or another for most of their adult lives. Governor Romney came to public service after having a successful career in which he directly created jobs, saved jobs, invested in new companies and turned around failed businesses. He even fixed both the Olympics and the failing state of Massachusetts. More than any other candidate, Governor Romney's experience is most directly applicable to the average American's situation.
7. He believes that America's best days are ahead of it, and not a memory. Governor Romney is a man of the future, not of the past. He sees America as a beacon of freedom for the entire world, and not a country limping toward its last days. His infectious optimism is informed by his business experience, his love of country and his family values. His can-do spirit is the antidote to defeatism masked as "straight talk" or "reality."
8. His beliefs. When all else fails, Governor Romney's opponents attack his religion in the hopes of sowing fear and loathing. Not only is this unseemly, but it is dangerous. We have seen this type of rhetoric before - in the 1920's and 1930's - from the likes of Henry Ford and Father Caughlin and others who sought to disenfranchise whole segments of the American population. Governor Romney believes in the common American faith of democracy and religious freedom, as he so eloquently stated in his speech "Faith in America." These are the values our Founding Fathers codified in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
Why do the Republican candidates hate him? Because they don't have any answers to his
challenges. They seek to undermine him by using personal attacks more worthy of a middle school playground than a presidential contest. This is politics and Washington as usual, and choosing any candidate that employs these tactics will only get us more of the same.
One would hope that Americans could see beyond these base attacks and choose the candidate who is best for the country - Governor Mitt Romney.
January 23, 2008
Why they hate Mitt Romney
By Amy D. Goldstein
Have you noticed how all of the Republican candidates can barely conceal their contempt for Governor Mitt Romney? It goes way beyond the typical good-natured competition that usually is the hallmark of Republican contests. Senator McCain has snarled at Governor Romney in debates and Gov. Huckabee has tried to paint Romney as cold and uncaring, while Sen. Fred Thompson attacked Governor Romney right out of the box. This display of hatred usually is the hallmark of the Democrats.
So, why do the other candidates hate Mitt Romney? Several reasons:
1. He can win. Governor Romney appeals to economic conservatives and could appeal to foreign policy conservatives based upon his understanding of the issues. Most non-partisan foreign policy wonks who have briefed the major candidates tell me that Romney "gets it" better than any other candidate -- even better than those who have held high profile office for decades. Moreover, he is the candidate that the Democrats most fear.
2. Jealousy -- from his hair to his appearance to his family to his money - these are all reasons for deep-seated, if unseemly, jealousy. This green-eyed monster makes its appearance in almost every speech or presentation, in the form of a joke, a jab or a veiled reference.
3. He isn't beholden to interest groups. Governor Romney's wealth frees him from any influence that interest groups could apply to others - especially those who lack funds or who are Washington insiders. He doesn't need them, and that scares the interest groups and their allies. He is not of the game and wants to change it - and his personal wealth allows him to do so. He really can change Washington.
4. His brains - not only is he one of the smartest people ever to seek the presidency (having earned a Harvard MBA and JD simultaneously), but he understands the complexities of the issues that America faces and is able to devise workable solutions. Just look at his proposal for an economic stimulus and compare it to what the other candidates are proposing. Romney clearly can lead this country through economic challenges.
5. His wealth -- again. While he has raised more than any other candidate, Governor Romney doesn't need to raise the money in order to continue. Nevertheless, he understands that successful candidates must have people invested in their candidacy in order to succeed. He has learned the lessons of past wealthy businessmen who make vanity runs for the White House. The other candidates have to constantly raise money in order to continue their campaigns.
6. His experience. The rest of the Republican field has been in politics in one form or another for most of their adult lives. Governor Romney came to public service after having a successful career in which he directly created jobs, saved jobs, invested in new companies and turned around failed businesses. He even fixed both the Olympics and the failing state of Massachusetts. More than any other candidate, Governor Romney's experience is most directly applicable to the average American's situation.
7. He believes that America's best days are ahead of it, and not a memory. Governor Romney is a man of the future, not of the past. He sees America as a beacon of freedom for the entire world, and not a country limping toward its last days. His infectious optimism is informed by his business experience, his love of country and his family values. His can-do spirit is the antidote to defeatism masked as "straight talk" or "reality."
8. His beliefs. When all else fails, Governor Romney's opponents attack his religion in the hopes of sowing fear and loathing. Not only is this unseemly, but it is dangerous. We have seen this type of rhetoric before - in the 1920's and 1930's - from the likes of Henry Ford and Father Caughlin and others who sought to disenfranchise whole segments of the American population. Governor Romney believes in the common American faith of democracy and religious freedom, as he so eloquently stated in his speech "Faith in America." These are the values our Founding Fathers codified in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
Why do the Republican candidates hate him? Because they don't have any answers to his
challenges. They seek to undermine him by using personal attacks more worthy of a middle school playground than a presidential contest. This is politics and Washington as usual, and choosing any candidate that employs these tactics will only get us more of the same.
One would hope that Americans could see beyond these base attacks and choose the candidate who is best for the country - Governor Mitt Romney.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Romney vs. Associated Press Reporter
Romney, AP Reporter Spar Over Lobbyists' Role in Campaign
Mitt Romney and AP Reporter Glen Johnson got into a verbal tussle in Columbia, S.C. on Thursday after the reporter began drilling the Republican presidential candidate over his claims that lobbyists do not steer his campaign.
Here's the heated back and forth:
Romney: I don't have lobbyists running my campaign. I don't have lobbyists that are tied to my...
Johnson: That's not true, governor. That is not true. Ron Kaufman is a lobbyist.
Romney: Did you hear what I said? Did you hear what I said, Glen? I said I don't have lobbyists running my campaign, and he's not running my campaign.
Johnson: He's a senior advisor.
Romney: He's an advisor. And the person who runs my campaign is Beth Myers, and I have a whole staff of deputy campaign managers.
Johnson: Is Beth Meyers on the plane with you?
Romney: Beth Myers has been on the plane with me, and Beth Myers is running my campaign, absolutely. Do I know--
Johnson: So Ron's just ... window dressing. He's just a potted plant?
Romney: Ron is a wonderful friend -- an advisor. He's not paid. He's an advisor like many others. But I do not have lobbyists running my campaign. Glen, I appreciate that you think that's funny, but Ron Kaufman is not even in on the senior strategy meetings of our campaign.
Johnson: (inaudible)
Romney: Excuse me, Glen. He is not in on the senior strategy meetings of our campaign.
Johnson: Is he in the debate sessions at all? Any time --
Romney: At any time? Has he ever been at a debate session? Sure. Is that a senior strategy meeting? Is that a senior strategy meeting of our campaign? No. Let me go back and complete the point I was making. My campaign is not based on Washington lobbyists. I haven't been in Washington. I don't have lobbyists at my elbows that are arguing for one industry or another industry. And I do not have favors I have to repay to people who have been in Washington for years nor scores I have to settle. And I'm going to Washington to make things happen. And somebody doesn't put the kind of financial resources that I've put into this campaign and the personal resources I've put into this campaign in order to do favors for lobbyists. I'm going to Washington to help the American people, and that's what this campaign is all about.
Romney spokesman Eric Fehnstrom later scolded Johnson for being argumentative with the candidate and "out of line," and told him to "act professionally."
-- Dispatch from FOX News' Shushannah Walshe.
Mitt Romney and AP Reporter Glen Johnson got into a verbal tussle in Columbia, S.C. on Thursday after the reporter began drilling the Republican presidential candidate over his claims that lobbyists do not steer his campaign.
Here's the heated back and forth:
Romney: I don't have lobbyists running my campaign. I don't have lobbyists that are tied to my...
Johnson: That's not true, governor. That is not true. Ron Kaufman is a lobbyist.
Romney: Did you hear what I said? Did you hear what I said, Glen? I said I don't have lobbyists running my campaign, and he's not running my campaign.
Johnson: He's a senior advisor.
Romney: He's an advisor. And the person who runs my campaign is Beth Myers, and I have a whole staff of deputy campaign managers.
Johnson: Is Beth Meyers on the plane with you?
Romney: Beth Myers has been on the plane with me, and Beth Myers is running my campaign, absolutely. Do I know--
Johnson: So Ron's just ... window dressing. He's just a potted plant?
Romney: Ron is a wonderful friend -- an advisor. He's not paid. He's an advisor like many others. But I do not have lobbyists running my campaign. Glen, I appreciate that you think that's funny, but Ron Kaufman is not even in on the senior strategy meetings of our campaign.
Johnson: (inaudible)
Romney: Excuse me, Glen. He is not in on the senior strategy meetings of our campaign.
Johnson: Is he in the debate sessions at all? Any time --
Romney: At any time? Has he ever been at a debate session? Sure. Is that a senior strategy meeting? Is that a senior strategy meeting of our campaign? No. Let me go back and complete the point I was making. My campaign is not based on Washington lobbyists. I haven't been in Washington. I don't have lobbyists at my elbows that are arguing for one industry or another industry. And I do not have favors I have to repay to people who have been in Washington for years nor scores I have to settle. And I'm going to Washington to make things happen. And somebody doesn't put the kind of financial resources that I've put into this campaign and the personal resources I've put into this campaign in order to do favors for lobbyists. I'm going to Washington to help the American people, and that's what this campaign is all about.
Romney spokesman Eric Fehnstrom later scolded Johnson for being argumentative with the candidate and "out of line," and told him to "act professionally."
-- Dispatch from FOX News' Shushannah Walshe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
