comMITTed to Romney!

One of the best writers in the business, Charles Krauthammer, delivers a hammer blow to hypocrisy in his Washington Post article. When I saw Gibson peering haughtily over his reading glasses at Sarah Palin, as he wearily asked her a question about the “Bush Doctrine” I thought that this moment defines the MSM. No wonder we hold them in contempt. Charlie Gibson, the wanna-be professor who condescendingly instructed Gov. Palin on the fine points of foreign affairs, turns out to be a twit who would be well advised to sit down in front of Charles Krauthammer and receive a lecture from the master on what is really going on in the world of foreign policy.

~~John Cronin~~

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457_pf.html

September 13, 2008

“At times visibly nervous . . . Ms. Palin most visibly stumbled when she was asked by Mr. Gibson if she agreed with the Bush doctrine. Ms. Palin did not seem to know what he was talking about. Mr. Gibson, sounding like an impatient teacher, informed her that it meant the right of ‘anticipatory self-defense.’ ”
– New York Times, Sept. 12

Informed her? Rubbish.

The New York Times got it wrong. And Charlie Gibson got it wrong.

There is no single meaning of the Bush doctrine. In fact, there have been four distinct meanings, each one succeeding another over the eight years of this administration — and the one Charlie Gibson cited is not the one in common usage today. It is utterly different.

He asked Palin, “Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?”

She responded, quite sensibly to a question that is ambiguous, “In what respect, Charlie?”

Sensing his “gotcha” moment, Gibson refused to tell her. After making her fish for the answer, Gibson grudgingly explained to the moose-hunting rube that the Bush doctrine “is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense.”

Wrong.

I know something about the subject because, as the Wikipedia entry on the Bush doctrine notes, I was the first to use the term. In the cover essay of the June 4, 2001, issue of the Weekly Standard entitled, “The Bush Doctrine: ABM, Kyoto, and the New American Unilateralism,” I suggested that the Bush administration policies of unilaterally withdrawing from the ABM treaty and rejecting the Kyoto protocol, together with others, amounted to a radical change in foreign policy that should be called the Bush doctrine.

Then came 9/11, and that notion was immediately superseded by the advent of the war on terror. In his address to the joint session of Congress nine days after 9/11, President Bush declared: “Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.” This “with us or against us” policy regarding terror — first deployed against Pakistan when Secretary of State Colin Powell gave President Musharraf that seven-point ultimatum to end support for the Taliban and support our attack on Afghanistan — became the essence of the Bush doctrine.

Until Iraq. A year later, when the Iraq war was looming, Bush offered his major justification by enunciating a doctrine of preemptive war. This is the one Charlie Gibson thinks is the Bush doctrine.

It’s not. It’s the third in a series and was superseded by the fourth and current definition of the Bush doctrine, the most sweeping formulation of the Bush approach to foreign policy and the one that most clearly and distinctively defines the Bush years: the idea that the fundamental mission of American foreign policy is to spread democracy throughout the world. It was most dramatically enunciated in Bush’s second inaugural address: “The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world.”

This declaration of a sweeping, universal American freedom agenda was consciously meant to echo John Kennedy’s pledge in his inaugural address that the United States “shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.” It draws also from the Truman doctrine of March 1947 and from Wilson’s 14 points.

If I were in any public foreign policy debate today, and my adversary were to raise the Bush doctrine, both I and the audience would assume — unless my interlocutor annotated the reference otherwise — that he was speaking about the grandly proclaimed (and widely attacked) freedom agenda of the Bush administration.

Not the Gibson doctrine of preemption.

Not the “with us or against us” no-neutrality-is-permitted policy of the immediate post-9/11 days.

Not the unilateralism that characterized the pre-9/11 first year of the Bush administration.

Presidential doctrines are inherently malleable and difficult to define. The only fixed “doctrines” in American history are the Monroe and the Truman doctrines which come out of single presidential statements during administrations where there were few other contradictory or conflicting foreign policy crosscurrents.

Such is not the case with the Bush doctrine.

Yes, Sarah Palin didn’t know what it is. But neither does Charlie Gibson. [Editor's Note: Emphasis mine] And at least she didn’t pretend to know — while he looked down his nose and over his glasses with weary disdain, sighing and “sounding like an impatient teacher,” as the Times noted. In doing so, he captured perfectly the establishment snobbery and intellectual condescension that has characterized the chattering classes’ reaction to the mother of five who presumes to play on their stage.

letters@charleskrauthammer.com

Share on Facebook

Share This

I am currently reading a very interesting and informative book written by the LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS, published by THE LYONS PRESS, “CHOOSING THE PRESIDENT 2004″.

They have a study they refer to in the book that was done by the PEW RESEARCH CENTER FOR THE PEOPLE AND THE PRESS; “2002 MEDIA CONSUMPTION SURVEY.”

Here’s a look at what they found.

“As recently as 1990, the major television networks—ABC,CBS and NBC—had a dominant role in delivering news to the American people. In 1992, the nightly network news shows with Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw and Peter Jennings regularly reached 60 percent of the adult population. By 2002, that number had declined to 32 percent—almost cut in half.

Newspapers, the most traditional of the major media, faced the same trend. While 58% of people polled in 1994 said that they had read a newspaper in the last day, by 2002 that figure was down to 41%. In addition, older Americans are much more likely to be newspaper readers than people in their twenties—a trend that has the newspapers very worried.

Local TV news and radio also reach lots of people, and both of these news media have also lost viewers or listeners in the past ten years. Cable TV news, the most influential of the new media, has held steady in recent years. In 2002, it was regularly watched by 33% of Americans.

When you take into account all their news programing, including the morning shows and news magazines, the major networks still receive some attention from a majority of Americans. As a result, their coverage of the issues and the candidates can have considerable influence on the course of a presidential campaign. But campaign planners are very much aware that the way America gets it’s news is changing fast, and new strategies are needed.”

For most of our readers, the above is probably old news. I quote it to point out the need for utilizing a very basic, but very effective grassroots organizing technique, neighborhood canvassing. My experience with door-to-door canvassing earlier this year was very positive. It reinforced my belief that one way to help overcome the MSM’s effect on the campaigns of conservatives is to get in front of voters and deliver a message to them that they haven’t heard before. My experience both in Des Moines and in St. Louis was that most people still rely on the newspapers and broadcast TV for their impressions of the candidates, and everyone on this site knows from bitter experience what the Huckabee network of churches and pastors and the MSM propaganda machine did to Gov. Romney’s run for the nomination.

If you have not tried it before, I’d like to encourage you to team up with a friend and to start to organize your own neighborhoods for a conservative Republican Congressional candidate or incumbent. Make sure you are up to speed on your candidate’s positions and very importantly, keep good records of your contacts. Get them on an emailing list where possible and hand out literature for those voters who don’t have internet access. Ask for permission to place a sign in their yards and be sure to recontact everyone you talked to the weekend before the election in order to “get out the vote.”

It’s hard work and time consuming. It’s also very effective. Here’s a look at how Gov. Romney did in the areas that had the highest concentrations of grassroots volunteers. To a great degree, the results were influenced by these area’s favorable demographics, having a higher percentage of college educated and upscale voters (patterns we saw very plainly in Des Moines as well), but, according to the national campaign office in Boston, the results were also influenced by the volunteer organization’s co-ordinated efforts.

ST. LOUIS COUNTY

McCAIN………………..41.06%

ROMNEY……………….36.49%

HUCKABEE…………….16.98%

ST. CHARLES COUNTY

ROMNEY………………37.72%

HUCKABEE…………….21.83%

JACKSON COUNTY (KANSAS CITY)

ROMNEY……………..34.68%

McCAIN………………34.13%

HUCKABEE……………23.16%

~~John Cronin~~

Share on Facebook

Share This

You have got to love this, it’s absolutely awesome to see the Democrats battling it out while our party has already decided. No bloody fists for us.

From ABC News

Democrats are increasingly concerned that neither Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton will finish the primary season with enough delegates to become the nominee. So, today, Democrats publicly pondered a nightmare scenario — a brokered convention.

I like it I tell ya, I like it.

Photo Credit: ABC News

Share on Facebook

Share This

I am in wonderment as to why the MSM pays any attention to the Head to Head polls when we have not even finished the primaries. I know that it is fun for them to speculate and it makes news, but polls on this national level mean nothing. If I was to look at this logically why would we, as the republican party, want to send McCain up against Hillary. Politically it would be like a Brother and Sister running against each other for President of the U.S. Are we so blind that we cannot see that rotating chairs in Washington with people that have been their for so many years is not a good idea. Why do you think that the most successful coporations higher their CEO from outside unless they were groomed specicially for the role. This process would not take 30 years. OOOOOOOOh I forgot this is washington, not the real world…

Brent

Share on Facebook

Share This

As we approach the primary voting season, there are more and more new folks finding their way to our humble blog. The information I found on this blog was extremely helpful to me as I assessed the various candidates in search of “the One.” As such, I thought it would be fitting for me to share why I am a staunch supporter of Governor Mitt Romney in his run for the White House.

In a nutshell, Mitt Romney is the only “full-spectrum” Conservative who can rally the support of all three wings of the Reagan coalition, namely, Social, Economic, and Foreign Policy Conservatives.

For a full treatment of Mitt Romney’s positions, I would refer you to his comprehensive policy book “Vision for a Strong America.” Let me summarize here, however, the highlights across the major issues:

• Foreign Policy
o War against Islamic Fascism: We are engaged in a multi-front war which will require using all of our military, economic, and diplomatic might to win; we must defeat the terrorists and those who aid and abet them as well as help the Muslim people enter the 21st century (click here and here)
o Iraq and Afghanistan: The surge is working and we must do what it takes to help Iraq and Afghanistan become stable democratic allies in the war on Islamic Fascism and support our troops (click here and here)
o Iran: Iran must not be allowed to become a nuclear state; diplomacy and economic sanctions are critical, but may not be enough; the military option must remain on the table (click here)
o Military: Need to increase defense spending to a minimum of 4% of GDP to make sure our armed forces have the equipment they need in the field and the support the need back home; the best ally of peace is a strong America (click here and here)

• Economic Policy
o Taxes: We need to keep the Bush tax cuts permanent, eliminate the Death Tax, and cut taxes on capital gains, dividends, and interest to zero for the Middle Class (click here, and here)
o Spending: We need to restrain Federal spending and close the deficit; will veto any budget where non-defense discretionary spending growth exceeds inflation minus 1%; Need to give the President a line-item veto; Strong track record of financial management from Massachusetts where he closed a $3B deficit and turned it into a $1B surplus without raising taxes; carry out a comprehensive review of government spending to increase efficiency and effectiveness (click here and here)
o Entitlements reform: Maintain benefits for current Seniors, but institute fundamental reforms combining slowing the rate of increase for benefits based on income, extending the retirement age, individual retirement accounts, and no tax increases (click here)
o Healthcare: Mitt Romney is the only candidate on either side of the aisle who implemented a universal health care plan; He covered all of the citizens of Massachusetts using market-based insurance without raising taxes; Governor Romney advocates a Federalist state-by-state approach to make health insurance more affordable for everyone (click here)
o Globalization: Continue to trade around the world but make sure we negotiate level playing fields in foreign markets and upgrade American competitiveness through investments in education and innovation (click here and here)

• Culture and Values
o Illegal immigration: Control the border first and turn of the “magnets” that attract illegal immigrants by implementing an employment verification system, no special path for illegal immigrants to become citizens (i.e. no amnesty), no sanctuary cities, increased enforcement by local police agencies (click here, here, and here)
o Traditional marriage: In favor of amending the constitution to keep marriage defined as between a man and a woman; fought the Massachusetts Supreme Court to prevent the state from becoming a destination for same-sex couples looking for marriage licenses (click here and here and here)
o Life: Much has been made of Governor Romney’s switch from being Pro-Abortion to Pro-Life; This is a critical issue for me; I have heard many times why he made this change, and I believe him; I believe that Mitt Romney will fight for the rights of the unborn and be a great leader in supporting Life (click here, here, and here)

The choice of a nominee and President, however, is not strictly a “right-brained” decision based on policy statements and positions. There needs to be something inspirational about a candidate whether it’s the way that they speak to a crowd, interact one on one, or something about their personal story that sets them apart.

Experiencing Mitt through articles and videos really helped seal the deal for me. Below, I have listed some of what I would consider the best of the best articles and videos that helped me come to the decision to support Mitt actively. I’m sure I’m missing some great material, but there is a lot down below. I would encourage you to click through as much of this as you can, and if you have a favorite that wasn’t listed, please leave a link in the comments!

Key videos, speeches, appearances, and articles:
• Articles
o Romney to the Rescue (Newsmax) – Great overview of Mitt Romney
o National Review’s endorsement of Mitt Romney
o The House that Mitt Built (Private Equity International) – Behind the scenes view of how Mitt ran Bain Capital and his leadership style
o The Making of Mitt Romney (Boston Globe) – Reasonably balanced biography of each of the major phases of Mitt’s life starting from his youth through today
o Consultant in Chief (Wall Street Journal) – Interview of Mitt where he talks about how he would fix the Federal Government
o For Romney & Company, Campaign is all Business (NY Times) – How Mitt runs his campaign and what it would mean for his Presidency
o Evangelicals for Mitt statement of support
o Mark DeMoss on why Evangelicals should support Mitt
o Ann Romney Opens Up (People Magazine) – Great interview with Ann; she would be a fantastic First Lady!

• Speeches
o “Faith in America” – Seminal address on the role of religious faith and liberty in our nation
o Address to the Value Voters Summit – Seminal address on culture and value issues
o Iowa Straw Poll victory speech
o Highlights from the Republican debates (click 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th)
o Speech at CPAC 2007 – One of Mitt’s first major addresses to the leading grassroots gathering of Conservatives; one of his best speeches in my opinion
o Presidential Campaign Announcement – Mitt announcing that he’s running and why he’s running

• Campaign videos
o Biographical overview video of Mitt Romney (click part I, II, III, IV, V, VI, and VII)
o “Path to Victory” webcast – Mitt and Meg Whitman (CEO of eBay) discussing the 2007 campaign and discussing the plan for 2008
o Retrospective of Governor Romney’s campaign in 2007
o Online “Ask Mitt Anything” – For those of us who don’t live in an early primary state, Mitt held an online town hall meeting which provides a really good overview of his key positions
o Christmas 2006 – Behind the scenes look at the Romney family and how they made the decision together that Mitt should run for President; cynics have criticized this video as contrived, but I love the fact that he has held his family together while achieving such exceptional success; you can’t fake this stuff

• Media appearances
o Mitt on Jim Cramer of CNBC’s Mad Money – Great interview by Jim Cramer where he calls Mitt the “Best businessman in America”
o Mitt on ABC News talking about Ann – Great interview of Mitt where he discusses what he loves so much about Ann
o Mitt on Meet the Press – Tim Russert throws everything he’s got plus the kitchen sink at Mitt who proceeds to address each point in a clear, classy, and compelling way

• My favorite TV spots
o “Searched” – Compelling true story of how Mitt Romney shut down Bain Capital and moved all the employees to NYC to search for and find the daughter of one of his partners
o “Choice: Judgment” – Striking contrast ad highlighting Mike Huckabee’s 1,033 pardons and clemencies (more than 2x his three predecessors) vs. zero from Mitt Romney
o “Choice: The Record” – Ad contrasting Mitt’s record on illegal immigration vs. Mike Huckabee’s record of supporting tax payer funded scholarships and in-state tuition for illegal immigrants
o “Not Politically Correct” – Mitt’s record supporting life, English immersion education, and traditional marriage
o “Experience Matters” – Ad highlighting the lack of real world, executive experience on the part of Hillary Clinton (and equally applicable to the other Democrats)
o “Ready for Action” – Summary of Governor Romney’s stump speech in 60 seconds; user-generated ad based on a contest that was run back in September
o “Our Home” – Some precious footage of Mitt playing with his children and grandchildren; focuses on the importance of strengthening our families
o “Leadership” and “Energy” – I just love the images of Mitt jogging through the backwoods and the focus on his track record in business; I think he’s the only politician I’ve seen jogging where it looked like he was actually in shape…not just a photo op
o “Ocean” – Ad lamenting the degradation of our culture and Mitt’s thoughts on how he would like to address it; as a parent this one really resonated with me
o “Tested, Proven” – One of his early ads highlighting his track record in Massachusetts
o “I Like Vetoes” – Ad highlights his track record of vetoing excessive spending; no doubt in my mind that he’ll control spending after seeing this ad and other times when he has addressed this topic

Finally, it is one thing to support Mitt with your vote, but I’d like to ask you to consider supporting Mitt in a more active way. Like many of you, I had always followed politics, but never became active in politics (other than voting) until this year in support of Governor Romney.

This year is different. First, this is arguably the most consequential election in over twenty years. The challenges and issues that will be faced by our next President will have far reaching ramifications for our children and grandchildren.

Additionally, we face a set of candidates on the Republican side who represent vastly different positions and perspectives, some of whom threaten to tear asunder the Reagan coalition that has served us so well. Whether it is the socially liberal and sanctuary city defending Rudy Giuliani, the divisive, theocratic, soft on crime and illegal immigration, and fiscally populist Mike Huckabee, or the McCain Feingold, “Gang of 14”, and pro-Amnesty John McCain, there are clear differences in the way that each of these individuals would take the Republican Party.

If you’ve found this persuasive, please do whatever you can to support Mitt Romney’s candidacy. If you’re from Iowa, please caucus for Mitt (get more information here). Winning Iowa is job one between now and January 3.

If you are not from Iowa, please stay informed by checking in here at Elect Romney in 2008 every day. Make a donation to help Mitt win the media air war. Put on a bumper sticker or put up a yard sign (get them here). And most importantly, talk with your friends, family, co-workers, and neighbors about why you’re supporting Mitt Romney! Personal testimonials from trusted individuals are by far the most effective ways to gain more supporters for Mitt!

If you still have questions or remain unconvinced, leave a comment and we’ll do our best to answer your question. Or better yet, if you are also a Mitt supporter, leave a comment telling us why! Thank you for reading!

Share on Facebook

Share This

—–>From ABC News’s The Blotter

Quote:

Well before it was publicly known he was seeing her, then-married New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani provided a police driver and city car for his mistress Judith Nathan, former senior city officials tell the Blotter on ABCNews.com.

“She used the PD as her personal taxi service,” said one former city official who worked for Giuliani.

New York papers reported in 2000 that the city had provided a security detail for Nathan, who became Giuliani’s third wife after his divorce from Donna Hanover, who also had her own police security detail at the same time.

Click —–>Here For The Rest of the Story.

Doesn’t it just make more sense to go with the man with the Experience, Leadership, Family Values, and Character that will serve our country above reproach?

Share on Facebook

Share This

Go to —–>ABC News, and play Match-O-Matic.

Here’s my results:

Share on Facebook

Share This

Remembering that a vote for Mike, Fred, John, or Rudy…is a vote for Rudy, here is a glimpse of what we are setting ourselves up for with a Rudy candidacy (and ultimately Presidency).

First, here is a sobering story of Giuliani’s history of cronyism, elevating corrupt and incompetent loyalists to positions of power over his time as NYC mayor.

Second, here is an eye opening account of how Giuliani exploited the court system and activist judges to attack the 2nd amendment, defend sanctuary cities, keep taxes in place, and fight the line item veto.

Finally, here is the link to a couple videos which detail the sordid story of Alan Placa. Alan is a former priest and known child molester who also happens to be one of Giuliani’s best friends. Giuliani has protected Alan along the way and has even employed him at his firm Giuliani Partners.

If you are a Romney supporter, now is the time to act! there are only about two weeks before the first absentee ballots are potentially cast in New Hampshire, and the Iowa Caucuses will be upon us in less than six weeks! Donate, volunteer, talk with your family, friends, and co-workers. If we all get involved and work toward Mitt’s election it will definitely happen! (If you would like to help out but don’t know how to get involved, leave a comment and we’ll try to point you in the right direction).

If you are supporting anyone beside Romney, recognize that is de-facto support for Rudy. This primary is going to be won by either Rudy or Romney. If you have problems with Rudy’s liberal views on abortion, marriage, immigration, 2nd amendment, and taxation, please take another look at Mitt Romney and consider giving him your support. Any questions? Leave a comment and we’ll do our best to address it!

Articles and videos after the jump.

More »

Share on Facebook

Share This

The Politico’s Jonathan Martin: “Gregg – whose father was governor and whose last name retains considerable cache – is the prize get in New Hampshire for any GOP presidential hopeful.” (Jonathan Martin, “Gregg To Endorse Romney,” The Politico, 10/29/07)

The New York Times’ Michael Luo: “Mitt Romney has landed a big endorsement in the Granite State. … So this was a big ‘get’ for Mr. Romney, who is leading in the polls in this early primary state.” (Michael Luo, “Gregg To Endorse Romney In N.H.,” The New York Times’ “The Caucus,” 10/29/07)

The Hill’s Klaus Marre: “Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) scored a major win Monday with the endorsement of Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.). The backing of New Hampshire’s senior senator should provide a boost to Romney, who already leads in the key early primary state.” (Klaus Marre, “Romney Scores Big Win With Gregg Endorsement,” The Hill, 10/29/07)

The Boston Globe’s Foon Rhee: “Mitt Romney will have a big name by his side today at a rally before he officially files for the New Hampshire primary. US Senator Judd Gregg, who is in his third term representing the Granite State, is endorsing Romney, his campaign announced this morning.” (Foon Rhee, “Gregg Backs Romney,” The Boston Globe’s “Political Intelligence,” 10/29/07)

ABC News’ Matt Stuart: “The endorsement is a boost for Romney’s New Hampshire chances, as the state’s junior senator, Republican John Sununu, has said he will remain neutral through the primary season.” (Matt Stuart, “Romney Wins Key N.H. Endorsement,” ABC News, 10/29/07)

MSNBC’s Erin McPike: “On the morning of his filing in New Hampshire, Romney got a nice boost to his Granite State campaign. Senior Sen. Judd Gregg (R) endorsed Romney and will join him in Concord for his presidential filing.” (Erin McPike, “NH Senator Endorses Romney,” MSNBC’s First Read, 10/29/07)

Wall Street Journal’s Susan Davis: “This is good news for Romney and comes on the heels of the latest University of Iowa Hawkeye poll released this morning that shows Romney as the clear favorite in Iowa, with nearly three times as much support as any other Republican candidate in the field in the state among likely caucus goers.” (Susan Davis, “Judd To Endorse Romney,” Wall Street Journal’s “Washington Wire,” 10/29/07)

Townhall’s Hugh Hewitt: “This is a very big deal for the Romney campaign. … Senator Gregg’s endorsement is the most sought-after in the Granite State, and it adds to the sense of momentum that Romney has built there.” (Hugh Hewitt, “New Hampshire Senator Judd Gregg Endorses Romney,” Townhall, 10/29/07)

CNN’s Mark Preston: “Gregg’s decision to back Romney is a major boost for the Massachusetts governor…” (Mark Preston, “Senior New Hampshire Senator To Back Romney,” CNN, 10/29/07)

The Washington Post’s Michael Shear: “Do endorsements matter? Mitt Romney is about to pick up a key vote of support that could help answer that question. Later today, Romney will receive the endorsement of New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg in Concord, according to the campaign.” (Michael Shear, “N.H.’s Gregg For Romney,” The Washington Post’s “The Trail,” 10/29/07)

The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder: “It’s tough to say that any endorsement carries votes these days, but Gregg’s ability to validate Romney’s competence and economic message, as well as his freedom to act as a surrogate for Romney at events should not be underrated.” (Marc Ambinder, “Breaking: Sen. Judd Gregg To Endorse Romney,” The Atlantic, 10/29/07)

Real Clear Politics’ Reid Wilson: “Sen. Judd Gregg, dean of the New Hampshire congressional delegation, will endorse Mitt Romney today at the state capitol, the Union Leader reports this morning.” (Reid Wilson, “Gregg Endorses,” Real Clear Politics, 10/29/07)

Arizona Republic’s Dan Nowicki: “Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney today announced the endorsement of one of New Hampshire’s Republican senators, Judd Gregg. As far as Granite State endorsements go, this one is pretty big.” (Dan Nowicki, “Romney Wins Key New Hampshire Endorsement,” Arizona Republic’s “McCain Central,” 10/29/07)

Share on Facebook

Share This

Share on Facebook

Share This