comMITTed to Romney!

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/74283a7e-1b97-11dd-9e58-0000779fd2ac,
Authorised=false.html?_i_location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms
%2Fs%2F0%2F74283a7e-1b97-11dd-9e58-0000779fd2ac.html%3Fnclick_check%3D1&_i_
referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.drudgereport.com%2F&nclick_check=1

If we can hold McCain’s feet to the fire on SCOTUS nominations, we will have won half the battle.

~~John Cronin~~

By Andrew Ward in Washington

Published: May 6 2008 20:53 | Last updated: May 6 2008 20:53

John McCain promised on Tuesday to nominate conservative judges to the Supreme Court and for other judicial vacancies, seeking to quash doubts among some Republicans about his conservative credentials.

The Republican presidential candidate said he would use John Roberts and Samuel Alito, who were appointed to the Supreme Court by President George W. Bush, as his “model” when choosing nominees.

Share on Facebook

Share This

As we headed into election day on the morning of Jan.29, 2008 the RCP (Real Clear Politics) Average of the polls they follow showed McCain at 29.9 in Florida vs. Romney at 29.1. Obviously, the election didn’t break our candidate’s way.

So, what’s next? I can only speak for myself. I will continue to work to “get out the vote” on behalf of Mitt Romney, I will deliver yard signs to the people who have called me to request them and I will call from home to remind voters to be sure to get to the polls on Feb.5.

The reason I will do these things is that I believe in the conservative movement and movements transcend elections. Of course I am saddened by the final vote totals in the Florida primary election. But mostly I am saddened by the realization that the candidates who came in first in the election will change America profoundly and, in my opinion, for the worst. I am not conceding anything to McCain or to Clinton. Both of these politicians are the wrong choices for this country and I will continue to say so and to do everything within my power to stop them from taking our country to the left.

The Left of Jimmy Carter and hostages in Iran and “malaise” and 20% interest rates. The Left of Bill Clinton and Monica-gate and perjury and impeachment. The Left of Al Gore and global warming and melting polar ice caps and “reducing our carbon footprints.” The Left of John Kerry and “Swift Boats” and “voting for the war before I voted against it.” The Left of Hillary Clinton and $5,000 bonds for every baby born in America and huge new bureaucracies and the tax increases to support them. The Left of John McCain and Open Borders and limiting free speech and huge new energy taxes.

I will not do any of these things because it is fashionable. If we do not win this nominating election, whether in the primaries are in a smoke filled back room at the Convention, I can easily envision myself and others like me, very much out of fashion. I will do these things because they are right.

I don’t know how the Super Tuesday votes will tally. If the Republican Party bestows it’s nomination on John McCain, the damage done to the GOP will be immense. I hope the party realizes what they may be doing before it is too late and come to the realization that this man will nominate the kind of Supreme Court judges that will continue to chip away at our freedoms and to further weaken the Constitutional underpinnings of our country. It will be just a matter of time before the “No Illegal Alien Left Behind” bill is re-introduced into Congress. The damage from that alone would cause me to oppose this man and the designs he has on this country.

And so I intend to work from within the party structure. I will not leave the GOP if McCain wins the nomination. I will work to recapture the party from a man who once considered switching his registration to the Democratic Party. If McCain becomes the GOP standard bearer, he will have to form an unholy alliance with the Left, because the Reagan Coalition will never allow this country to slide back into the fever swamps of Big government, big taxes, big, but empty promises, foreign policy retreat, gutting the military and every other self-defeating policy that can be conjured up by the liberal mind.

I would like to remind our younger readers that Ronald Reagan was denied the nomination after a bitter convention battle in 1976, but went on to win the first of his landslide victories four years later. I am not suggesting that the battle is lost for now. What I am saying is that this party and the principles it stands for is worth fighting for. Hopefully, we will win enough delegates on Super Tuesday to carry the fight to the convention if need be. But in the event we don’t, I strongly suggest that we continue to work within the party to return it to the principles that made it great and to position Mitt Romney for the Presidency in 2012.

Below I have highlighted some thoughts from Michael Graham at THE CORNER, NRO. I don’t fully agree with his conclusions, but he is thinking what a lot of us are thinking as we observe the John McCain train wreck of a campaign.

~~John Cronin~~

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.

And 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.

Share on Facebook

Share This

Welcome to me, the latest addition to the ElectRomneyIn2008.com blogger staff. My name is Paul Johnson and this is my first posting. I have some good tidbits for you live from Urbandale, IA, one of Mitt Romney’s volunteer campaign sites.

First a bit about me: I’m a corporate lawyer by trade, trained at BYU both undergrad (dual major in English and Business) and grad school (JD/MBA). I started my career in the internet boom in Palo Alto, CA in ‘96, transferred with my then-current firm to San Diego in ‘99, and have stayed in San Diego since. I specialize in corporate financings and in mergers and acquisitions.

My intro to Mitt Romney was, like many, through hearing about the debacle that was unfolding at the 2002 Salt Lake Winter Olympics. As someone who spent a lot of time in Utah, I didn’t want the state or our country to be embarrassed by the event. I heard someone named Mitt Romney, a very successful business person with Bain, was being put in charge, and not long after was hearing things were turning around. Of course September 11 intervened and the Olympics staff had to respond to an entirely unforeseen security threat in just a few months’ time. I myself was going to be attending the event with my 3 sons, so security was a concern for me. When I arrived, security was tight and the event unbelievably well-organized.

Next I heard about the Miracle in Massachusetts, how the same Mitt Romney, a republican, had somehow been elected to be governor of a deep blue state. Another good impression. I knew this person must have cross-party appeal. More good news followed as Mitt was able to balance MA’s budget, then actually adopt a healthcare plan tailored for the state. Then I hear about the MA Supreme Court’s decision (described here by CNN). CNN said at the time: “Massachusetts’ governor immediately denounced Tuesday’s decision and said he would work for a constitutional amendment to overturn it,” and I was glad to know we had a resourceful man of integrity at the forefront of this issue.

More good impressions followed. A few years ago Matt Romney, Mitt’s son, moved into my neighborhood (see Matt’s musings at the Five Brothers Blog). Matt and I ended up on some volunteer assignments together. I’d told Matt I was a baseball fan, so he invited me at one point to a game with him, his brother, Tagg and a few other friends. I came to find out as well that another friend, Jim Davies, was Ann Romney’s brother. When it began to be rumored Mitt might run for president, I told Matt if his dad ran, I’d be interested in pitching in. Soon I was attending events in San Diego and contributing to the campaign, a first for me. A couple weeks ago I began responding to some bitter and biased posts about Mitt, his family and his religion, some things I knew a little about first-hand, by some readers of The Politico (a site I otherwise enjoy) and other political websites. Now I find myself in Urbandale doing my first blog post!

I’ll get to where I agree with Mitt on policy issues in future posts, but for now here are some snapshots from one of the command centers.

A visit from Ann Romney

The troops got encouragement from Ann Romney just before lunch. She met with volunteers and gave her pitch for her husband as a man capable of addressing our country’s complex issues.

Here’s the view from the cheap seats!

Here’s Ann with grandson Parker:

Visits from the Press

Yesterday we had a visit from CNN. Today the folks from Salt Lake’s KSL TV and Salt Lake’s CBS affiliate were here, as was RAI from Italy. Jim Davies gave an interview in fluent Italian. It’s been great to be at ground zero at such an influential time in American politics. Channel 24 from Argentina is just going through now. Wish you were here, where we hope to be a part of electing the next president of the U.S. More to come…

Share on Facebook

Share This

SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT

The Right Romney Record

BOSTON – Last week, local radio talk show host Gregg Jackson penned an op-ed on the “real Mitt Romney.” Unfortunately, it failed to note the many conservative accomplishments Mitt Romney had as Governor of Massachusetts. Here is Governor Romney’s real record of leadership in Massachusetts:

THE RECORD #1: Gov. Romney Provided Strong, Pro-Life Leadership In Massachusetts And Massachusetts Pro-Life Organizations Agree.

• Gov. Romney Vetoed Legislation That Would Have Provided For The “Morning After Pill” Without A Prescription. (Gov. Mitt Romney, The Boston Globe, 7/26/05)
• Gov. Romney Promoted Abstinence Education In The Classroom. (Office Of Gov. Mitt Romney, “Romney Announces Award Of Abstinence Education Contract,” Press Release, 4/20/06)
• Gov. Romney Vetoed Legislation That Would Have Changed The Longstanding Definition Of The Beginning Of Human Life From Fertilization To Implantation. (Gov. Mitt Romney, Letter To The Massachusetts State Senate And House Of Representatives, 5/12/05)
• Gov. Romney Supports Parental Notification Laws And Opposed Efforts To Weaken Parental Involvement. (John McElhenny, The Associated Press, 10/29/02)
• Gov. Romney Supports Adult Stem Cell Research But Has Opposed Efforts To Advance Embryo-Destructive Research In Massachusetts. (Theo Emery, The Associated Press, 5/27/05)
• Massachusetts Citizens For Life Executive Director Marie Sturgis: “Having Governor Romney in the corner office for the last four years has been one of the strongest assets the pro-life movement has had in Massachusetts.” (Kathryn Jean Lopez, National Review, 1/10/07)

THE RECORD #2: Gov. Romney Championed Traditional Marriage In Massachusetts.

• Gov. Romney Called For A Massachusetts Constitutional Amendment Defining Marriage As Between A Man And A Woman. “I disagree with the Supreme Judicial Court. Marriage is an institution between a man and a woman. I will support an amendment to the Massachusetts Constitution to make that expressly clear.” (Office Of Gov. Mitt Romney, “Statement By Governor Mitt Romney On SJC Decision On Same Sex Marriage,” Press Release, 11/18/03)
• When The Legislature Would Not Vote On The Amendment, Gov. Romney Filed Suit To Force A Vote. “Governor Mitt Romney and a group of Massachusetts residents asked the state’s highest court yesterday to override the Legislature and let voters decide whether to ban same-sex marriage, accusing legislative leaders of violating the state constitution by refusing to act on the proposal.” (Jonathan Saltzman, The Boston Globe, 11/25/06)
• Gov. Romney Enforced A 1913 Law Preventing Out-Of-State Same-Sex Couples From Marrying In Massachusetts. “Same-sex couples who live outside Massachusetts will not be able to marry in Massachusetts when gay marriage becomes legal here next month, Gov. Mitt Romney said.” (Pam Belluck, The New York Times, 4/25/04)
• Massachusetts Family Institute Kris Mineau: “He’s been rock solid on the issue of marriage.” (Steve LeBlanc, The Associated Press, 1/12/07)

THE RECORD #3: Gov. Romney Put Conservative Principles To Work In Health Care.

• The Club For Growth: “Governor Romney Deserves Credit For Proposing A Plan That Encourages Individually-Owned Health Insurance…” “Given these limitations, Governor Romney deserves credit for proposing (and to a lesser extent, enacting) a plan that encourages individually-owned health insurance and circumvents some of the inequities carved into the federal tax code.” (The Club For Growth, 8/21/07)
• Health Care Reform “Has Cut The Number Of Uninsured In The State By Nearly A Third.” (Steve LeBlanc, The Associated Press, 4/11/07)
• The New York Times: “Observers of the state’s progress since the health care law was passed in April 2006 say they are impressed that the varied constituencies – including health insurers, businesses, advocates, medical providers and taxpayers – largely continue to support the law and have worked to resolve differences.” (Pam Belluck, The New York Times, 7/1/07)
• Uninsured Massachusetts Residents Can Obtain Health Care Insurance For As Little As $175 A Month. Steve LeBlanc, The Associated Press, 3/3/07)

THE RECORD #4: Gov. Romney Appoint Judges Who Would Be Tough On Crime And Would Not Legislate From The Bench.

• For The State’s Highest Courts, Governor Romney Said He Would Appoint Judges With “Strict Construction, Judicial Philosophy.” (Raphael Lewis, The Boston Globe, 7/25/05)
• For The State’s Lowest Courts, Governor Romney Focused On Legal Experience And Whether The Nominee Would Be Tough On Crime. “He said he has focused on two factors: their legal experience and whether the nominees would be tough on crime. He said most of the nominees have prosecutorial experience. ‘People on both sides of the aisle want to put the bad guys away,’ Romney said.” (Raphael Lewis, The Boston Globe, 7/25/05)
• The Boston Globe: “Some of Romney’s nominees do have stellar Republican or conservative bona fides. For example, Romney’s pick for Peabody clerk magistrate, Kevin L. Finnegan, is a former two-term Republican state representative. Another choice was Bruce R. Henry, the son-in-law of former SJC Justice Joseph Nolan whom Romney wanted to represent his administration in seeking a stay of the court’s gay marriage ruling.” (Raphael Lewis, The Boston Globe, 7/25/05)

THE RECORD #5: Gov. Romney Took Action When Problems Were Found With The Big Dig. He Removed The Head Of The Turnpike Authority And His Quick Response Was Widely Praised.

Share on Facebook

Share This

Woah Sally, don’t pull any punches. What a well written piece, and well researched and documented too. I’m so glad that Mr. Kmiec has brought this out in the open for all to see. It shows that Governor Romney is beyond measure the better person to be our next President.

From Governor Romney’s Press Release from today:

“Rudy Awakening –
Giuliani’s The-Constitution-Made-Me-Do-It Excuse Just Doesn’t Wash.”
By Douglas W. Kmiec
National Review Online
October 10, 2007

“Tuesday night’s Michigan debate was very revealing. The debate revealed the significant executive-leadership differences between Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney. When it gets down to specific cases, Mayor Giuliani is dependent upon others for direction and guidance and is just as likely to fall into mistaken ideas as not. At the same time, the debate revealed how, despite his protestations to the contrary, Giuliani is not really a supporter of conservative legal thinking.
“The facts on who supports spending restraint and tax reduction are plain. Romney does. Giuliani doesn’t. Giuliani’s lame excuse that ‘the-Constitution-made-him-spend’ just doesn’t cut it. Yes, Giuliani is right that the Supreme Court invalidated President Clinton’s use of the statutory line-item veto. But this is nothing Giuliani, who brought the case, should be proud of. Quite the contrary, it is the handiwork of the liberal Justice John Paul Stevens.
“The central issue in the case was whether Congress can authorize the president, after he signed legislation, to not spend all the money authorized. Mitt Romney’s answer is an unequivocal: ‘You bet!’ Giuliani’s answer seems to be: ‘No, and give me the money, so I can spend it.’
“The notion that the Constitution made him bring the case in order to spend the money is ludicrous on its own terms. Even worse, is Giuliani’s failure to see what the result of his dubious litigation was: to deprive the nation as a whole of an important mechanism of bipartisan spending restraint; a spending restraint mechanism that exists in 43 of the states and that was pleaded for by President Reagan on multiple occasions.”

…
“Moreover, as Justice Scalia explained at length, presidents throughout history had been authorized by Congress on a piecemeal basis to, upon certain findings, decline to spend. The line-item veto act merely gave that a more permanent and sound legal footing – until Giuliani came onto the scene with his liberal-leaning litigation.
“But don’t take my word for it. Listen to Justice Scalia directly, who wrote:
‘Had the Line Item Veto Act authorized the President to ‘decline to spend’ any item of spending contained in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, there is not the slightest doubt that authorization would have been constitutional. . . .The title of the Line Item Veto Act, which was perhaps designed to simplify for public comprehension, or perhaps merely to comply with the terms of a campaign pledge, has succeeded in faking out the Supreme Court. The President’s action it authorizes . . .does not offend Art. I, § 7; and insofar as the substance of that action is concerned, it is no different from what Congress has permitted the President to do since the formation of the Union.’
“Mitt Romney is pledged to name to the Supreme Court individuals with the intellectual qualities and philosophy of judicial restraint of Justice Scalia, Alito, and Roberts. That is a meaningful pledge coming from Mitt Romney because he understands the practical consequences of a proper interpretation of the Constitution for the American taxpayer. Unlike Giuliani, he knows that the Constitution does not stand in the way of a bipartisan effort to limit runaway federal spending. Giuliani also says he likes these justices, but it’s not clear he understands why. Like Justice Stevens, the most liberal member of the Supreme Court, Giuliani was simply ‘faked out’ from taking a responsible fiscal action that the Constitution most certainly did not preclude.”…
Douglas W. Kmiec is chair and professor of constitutional law at Pepperdine University and co-chair of the advisory committee on the Constitution and the courts for Romney for President.
To read the full op-ed, please see: The National Review

Share on Facebook

Share This