comMITTed to Romney!

I stumbled across a snippet of an article from our friends over at Salon.Com who are the polar opposite of everything we stand for here at CTR. The denizens of Salon are nothing if not tedious in their attempts to shame those of us who live in fly over country, you know, bitter, clinging to our faith and our guns, over our general unhipness, mind-numbed allegiance to Luddite conservatism and above all, our tiresome affection for Mitt Romney.

There are, generally speaking, only two denominations that can be attacked with glee and abandon and with no retribution and those two are Catholicism and Mormonism. The hack that produced this little article, where he enthusiastically recommends another post by one his condescending buddies, drops the bucket down into the same well that was used by the Left throughout the primaries and lo and behold he comes up with the same stuff……Romney’s hair, did we mention he’s a Mormon, he’s a rich guy….sigh.

This kind of stereotypical thinking and school boy level taunting is why we will eventually take back the Congress and hopefully keep the White House. The Left does not have a clue about what makes us tick. This kind of pandering to their base where they use a candidate’s religion to frame the debate, rather than have an intelligent debate over real issues, is roughly the equivalent of waving a red cape at a bull. All it accomplishes is to further enrage the bull. But unlike the bull, we are not going to let our anger at our treatment lure us into doing something self-defeating. We are going to use that energy to continue to push hard for victory at the polls this November.

I am tired of the LDS bashing. I am tired of the Catholic bashing. You know, there is just something about being pro life and patriotic that really rubs the Left the wrong way. So, let Salon be Salon and we will continue to be anachronistic throw backs to another age and, unless I miss my bet, I can’t help but think that a majority of Americans feel more comfortable with our values.

~~John Cronin~~

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/snarky

snarky
One entry found.
snarky

Main Entry:
snarky
Pronunciation:
\ˈsnär-kē\
Function:
adjective
Etymology:
dialect snark to annoy, perhaps alteration of nark to irritate
Date:
1906
1 : crotchety, snappish 2 : sarcastic, impertinent, or irreverent in tone or manner
— snark•i•ly \-kə-lē\ adverb

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/07/28/mitt_moneymachine/index.html?source=rss&aim=/politics/war_room

Mitt Romney: Republican ATM machine

Take a look at this great post from data-mensch Nate Silver of fivethirtyeight.com.

It tracks the potential fundraising windfall that John McCain stands to benefit from should he tap Mitt Romney as his running mate. Given the obvious distaste McCain showed for Romney during the Republican primaries — in Iowa, McCain’s campaign ran a tough but sarcastic push poll about Romney’s shifting social issue positions in order to help Mike Huckabee defeat Romney — there are two and only two reasons McCain would put him on the ticket, neither of which has to do with Romney’s gorgeous hair.

The first is that Mormon-based ATM cash card for which Romney holds the four-digit pass code. And the other is Michigan.

― Thomas Schaller

Share on Facebook

Share This

Brief article over at HOT AIR touts Mitt Romney for the vice presidential slot.
The article talks about the strength that Romney would bring to the ticket because of his mastery of business and economics. If Mitt is not picked for VP, I think this is what needs to happen.

The McCain campaign needs to send a message to conservatives, IMHO, in two areas of vital importance, or they will not be pleased with the results they get at at the ballot box in November.

1. We need an iron-clad promise to secure our borders and to enforce the existing laws on immigration.

2. We need a comprehensive economic policy that includes making the Bush tax cuts permanent, killing the death tax, balancing the budget and moving to reform the bloated entitlement spending that threatens to bankrupt this country.

Failing to accomplish this, the feckless leadership we have been getting from the Republican Party at the national level, will usher in eight bleak years of Democratic rule.

I know I am repeating myself, but I will say it again. Unless grassroots Republicans rise up and retake this party in order to guide it back toward the conservative principles that made the Party and the country great, we are going to lose this election. If there isn’t two cents worth of difference between the Democrat’s platform and the Republican’s platform, who cares which party wins? Obviously the career politicians do, but I am talking about the voters who have to pay for all of this.

We are not getting our money’s worth!

~~John Cronin~~

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/05/01/pew-mccain-gaining-at-the-center/

The economy will present a critical test for McCain. He has worked on building economic chops, and his campaign has notable assistance in this area from Steve Forbes and even Mitt Romney. Obama’s stumble on capital-gains tax increases could help narrow this gap, but thus far the McCain campaign hasn’t offered any focus on that gaffe from the April 16th debate.
McCain could use a well-recognized hand on economics as a running mate. I’ve suggested that Romney could fill that role, although Allahpundit has been less enthusiastic. Romney did a great job with fundraising in 2007 and could help fill a critical gap there as well. Now that Jeremiah Wright has managed to splatter himself all over Obama, not too many people would worry about Mormons in the general election. Mormons aren’t known for asking that God damn America or promulgating weird conspiracy theories about HIV and government-sponsored genocides. Wright’s demagoguery has taken the Mormon issue off the table, if Obama wins the nomination.

Share on Facebook

Share This

Though I provide analysis below, I do not suggest I have answers to the questions I raise. But I do raise questions that I think are of critical importance and consideration; not just to this current presidential contest, but more importantly to America. These are questions I think nobody wants to discuss (see photo below).

Tonight (1/29), I have heard the term “lick their wounds” several times. That is not at all how I feel about the loss in Florida. It is fair to say, I believe, that America as a nation, has matured in its history to a point in which a woman or a black man can be elected President by a majority of both sexes and a majority of those of the white or black races. I believe that America has come of age to the point that the bigotry we call sexism and racism, though still engrained in some people, has been marginalized.

What about the bigotry of religious intolerance? In an enlightened age, it is known by all that bigotry of any kind is not acceptable. In this modern day, we don’t generally hear statements of bigotry in common language in ways that were pervasive as recent as the 1950s and 1960s. Religious bigotry was even out in the open at that time as evidenced by evangelical ministers that routinely and publicly denounced the idea that Americans might vote for a Catholic. Today, bigotry of any kind, as a matter of common discussion in mixed company, is simply unacceptable in today’s diverse age. As a result, we do not hear public discussion about religious bigotry. Does that mean that this form of bigotry has also been marginalized to the point America can elect a Mormon? I do not believe it has. In fact, I think it is still pervasive, if now private.

In the states in which GMR won the Silver, by how much did he miss the Gold? Usually around 5%, maybe 10%. Today, he missed the Gold by 6% in a very large state. Since I began to seriously pay attention to presidential politics for 2008 back in 2006, I have seen poll results showing that a fair number of Americans are unwilling to ever vote for a Mormon; anywhere from about 20% of those surveyed to 40% recently. Since I have always concluded that America has matured to the point at which religious intolerance has been effectively marginalized, I more or less dismissed those poll numbers as based on simple ignorance, not bigotry.

Then, as the early state caucuses and primaries became history, I started to see a trend that I saw repeated today in Florida. It is fair to say that a majority of Americans do not find McCain acceptable as President as evidenced by his votes of 35% compared to 65% to all others. But to understand whether bigotry is at work against MR specifically, we need to drill down into the numbers. Is it not also fair to say that the most conservative voters of all would not be generally attracted to McCain, who is a well-known liberal Republican, or at least a Republican that cannot be trusted?

[In order to keep this commentary from becoming longer than it is, I use only the initials of candidates’ first and last names and any time there is a number, it represents a percentage]

In Florida, among evangelicals, the votes were JM(30), MR(29), MH(29). We can conclude that the 29 who voted for MR are not bigots. My presumption is that the reason MH’s 29 did not go to JM is because they consider him way too liberal to represent their values and principles. But if MH were not in the race, would all 29 go to MR? As you think about that answer, if they would not all go to MR, why would any significant portion of them go to JM? Incidentally, as MH keeps smiling and telling the world he can be the nominee, he knows he cannot. He won exactly 4 of all non-evangelical votes; that is par for the course for him. Since day one in Iowa, there has never been broad support for MH. Why does he stay in the race?

White evangelicals voted this way: MH(31), MR(31), JM(28). I think it is fair to say that those who voted for JM would be the more moderate or less orthodox evangelicals, simply because they could have chosen an orthodox evangelical in MH, and they did not. If true, and MH were not in the race, would MH’s 31 go to JM or MR and why? Why would an orthodox evangelical vote for the more liberal, twice married, untrustworthy Republican when they have MR, whose values and principles are much closer to theirs by comparison?

Of voters who think abortion should be illegal, the votes were MR(35), JM(29), MH (21). These are very conservative voters. We know 35 are not bigots and since MR won the majority here, we know that a very high percentage of voters know him to be strong pro-life. If MH were not in the race, would most of his 21 go to MR or JM and why? Of voters who think abortion should always be illegal, the votes were MH(32), MR(30), and JM(26). These voters are even more conservative overall. If MH were not in the race, would most of his 32 go to the more conservative candidate MR? If they would not, why not? Why would more than a handful go to JM instead of MR? Could bigotry influence their decision to go to JM?

Voters that identified themselves as very conservative were MR(44), JM(21), MH(20). It is well known by now that MR is the most conservative of both JM and MH. That being the case, if MH were not in the race, would his ‘very conservative’ voters go to the known, more conservative MR or to the less conservative, more liberal JM? And why? Could bigotry influence their decision to go to JM?

Over at Evangelicals for Mitt, both Steven Muscatello and Nancy French think MH should do “the honorable thing” and drop out. Read their excellent arguments here and here. But think of the context of my rhetorical questions above and consider this. If RG could so easily see the vanity of continuing the race, knowing he could never win, why can MH not see it? Or is it that he sees it and has ulterior motives? Think of the irony. RG, the person many have derided as ethically challenged, drops out seeing the reality; there are no ulterior motives really. MH, whose supporters consider the most ethical and upstanding man in the race, who would consider himself the most humble among them all, plans to “win the nomination” to quote him. Right. And pigs will fly for the first time in February. We now have resounding proof that MH cannot garner more than 10% of all non-evangelical votes and he has only nearly received 40% of all evangelical votes in one state. Clearly, he has no broad support, unlike GWB did as an evangelical. So, his decision to stay in the race is based on what? Ego? Vanity? Love of the sport? Is he lying to us when he says he is not running for Pastor in Chief? Or does he want to influence his voters away from MR and if so, why?

As many at this site have shown, MH revealed his stripes when he let slip his rhetorical Jesus/brother question in an interview. He also ardently campaigned in Salt Lake City to save the Mormons there from hell at the evangelical convention.

My opinion is that the frequent citing of 20 to 40 percent of all Americans unwilling to vote for a Mormon for President, the bigots are at the low end of the range. I may be naïve, but I do not believe that 40% of all Americans are religious bigots. Now, we know that when MR loses the Gold, the margin of loss is only 5% to 10%. That margin of difference is well below the 20% conservative estimate. Where are those 20% or so aligned? Are they divided among RG, MH, and JM? Are they mostly with MH or JM?

My conclusion is that the margin of victory that JM has enjoyed in any state, is a direct correlation to the reported bigotry still pervasive in America. If so, how does MR overcome this obvious bigotry, to win? These less than 20% “unwilling voters” are currently aligned with RG, JM, and MH, in some unknown mix. But knowing this does not help, does it? By definition, if they are bigots, MR will never be their choice. It cannot be argued that all 20% of these “unwilling” voters are in JM’s camp. Yet, it is he that is the beneficiary of their unwillingness to ever vote for MR. And clearly not all of the supporters left in RG’s and MH’s camp are bigots; but some are. So it is fair to say that if both RG and MH were not in the race, a fair number of their non-bigoted supporters would back the most conservative candidate in the race — MR. And why are the voters not following Rush Limbaugh’s advice to not vote for JM and MH?

So again, what is the motivation of MH to remain in a race he knows he cannot and will not win? Is his primary motivation to steer as many evangelicals to the Protestant JM, away from MR? If so, is that reason enough to not drop out of the race?

I think this issue is the 900-pound gorilla in the room with which nobody wants to make eye contact.

~ Vic

[Source of exit poll information above: CNN Politics]
.
.
.
NOTE: Any comment left at this post that is primarily religious based or which contains vitriol, is antagonistic, or generally obnoxious, will be deleted without notice. Please set a standard of discussion that is productive and illuminating. If you have religious opinions, please leave them out of the discussion at this post.

.

Share on Facebook

Share This

Looks like McCain’s McCain/Feingold reform has come in handy for him.  The Maverick Conservative has a great post on McCain’s attacks over the weekend.

As Andrew McCarthy pointed out, look how McCain is taking advantage of his attack on the Frist Amendment here (McCain/Feingold).  McCain’s “reforem” prevents organizations from pointing out LIES of a candidate (or organization supporting a candidate)  within 30 days of a primary.  That means that NO GROUP could point out McCain’s LIE about Romney in Florida.  Now ROMNEY himself can talk about it.  But otherwise you have to rely on the MEDIA (that is why McCain/Feingold was really a MEDIA POWER GRAB, as well as being an attack on the First Amendment)…

I can assure you:  McCain is full of it:  a suck up to the media rather than a true “straight talker”.  He got the REPUTATION for straight talk by SUCKING UP TO THE MEDIA.  He has always said what he thinks will endear him to the press atany particular time–whether it is consistent with what he said yesterday or not.  McCain has NEVER been intellectually consistent, or interested in FACTS.  It is no accident that the McCain/Kennedy immigration (amnesty) bill is all about DECEPTION (see the more than fifty entires in this blog under the general heading of “illegal immigration deception”).

Here’s what Andrew McCarthy had to say:

I’m starting to think Sen. McCain should not be allowed to mention the other candidates’ names within 30 days before a primary. I mean, he levels an allegation about Romney that’s just flat not true, and if some organization wanted to run an add calling him on it, they would be in violation of his “reform” of campaign finance regulations. What a racket!

Also, I believe there may be some Latter-Day Saint readers of this blog.  Mitt made a statement today on yesterday’s passing of the President of the Mormon Church.

“I was saddened to learn of the death of Gordon B. Hinckley. Ann and I respect him as a man of great faith and character. Like all people who knew him, we were deeply touched by his humility, his sense of humor and by the way he inspired so many people around the world. We will miss his leadership.”

Here is a more in-depth article on Mitt’s reaction.

Any predictions on the outcome of tomorrow’s Primary?

Share on Facebook

Share This

Interesting article focusing on the voters being able to cut through the media fog.

~~John Cronin~~

http://www.webcommentary.com/asp/ShowArticle.asp?id=gaynorm&date=080126

WEBCOMMENTARY.COM

BY: MICHAEL GAYNOR

The Republicans’ Florida debate demonstrated that the strong winner, Mitt Romney, has developed Mittmentum and is on course to election in November, despite the Clintons and some religious bigotry.

The United States of America’s next president won’t be its first president of Italian ancestry (as Rudy Giuliani hopes), because the Republicans won’t nominate a person who does not share the Republicans’ traditional pro-life, pro-personal morality values; or the first former prisoner-of-war (as John McCain still yearns), because now he’s too old for the grueling job and previously he was too inclined to break with most Republicans and join with Democrats (McCain-Feingold, Kennedy-McCain, Gang of Fourteen); or the first Baptist minister (as Mike Huckabee prays), because he’s not up to the job, he’s not the best choice and one president born in Hope, Arkansas was one too many.

But there WILL be big change.

The next president will be the first female president, or the first half-black president (Barack’s mother was white and ignoring that is…not right), or the first Mormon president.

Much of the media really would prefer Obama versus McCain, and have been broadcasting, reporting and editorializing accordingly, but the politically adept Clintons will do whatever it takes to win the Democrat nomination.

Nevertheless, in the end, enough Republicans will refuse to succumb to religious bigotry and reject a monagamous Mormon who shares their basic values for a man who divorced his first wife and married a rich, much younger divorcee whose family could support his political ambitions.

Share on Facebook

Share This

Hugh Hewitt is the Executive Producer of a new documentary, the trailer of which you may have seen a few weeks ago. The first time I saw the trailer was December 6th. Well, it is finally premiering nationwide (see other locations by clicking CONTINUE READING at the bottom of this post)

Want to attend the premiere? For free? This post is intended promote the film in the Los Angeles, San Diego, and Riverside metropolitan areas. See details and RSVP information below the poster of the film.

The date of the California premiere is Monday, January 14, 2008 — Newport Beach, CA

Check-in Begins at 6:00 p.m. — Show Time is 7:00 p.m.

— See trailer and RSVP details below —

Hugh Hewitt will be at this showing next Monday. I plan to attend with my wife (she knows I like a cheap date!). This afternoon (1/10), I was told the theater hold about 500 people and they have received 200 RSVPs.

Southern California Premiere:

Regency Lido Theatre
3459 Via Lido
Newport Beach, CA 92651

RSVP Required by telephone (M-F, 8-5): 949-296-1520 or via email: rsvpoc@outsideeyes.com

Information: Click here —–> ABOUT THE MOVIE

Watch the Trailer: Click here ——-> TRAILER

This one time viewing in California, next Monday, is free of charge (in fact, all premiere locations are free).

OTHER PREMIERE LOCATIONS: The film is also being shown in these cities on various dates: New York, Atlanta, Washington, DC, Shreveport, and Salt Lake City. For more information for these cities, click CONTINUE READING just below.

~ Vic

More »

Share on Facebook

Share This

TOWNHALL.COM here http://www.townhall.com/blog

Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 6:59 PM

I know Ann Marie has a previous post on Mr. Monaghan’s endorsement of Mitt Romney, but I thought what Hugh Hewitt had to say was so important that it bore repeating.

One of the most important points Mr. Hewitt makes is that conservatives are not going to surrender their party without a fight. Their have been numerous calls for Mitt Romney to withdraw from the race. Interesting advise to the candidate who is leading in the delegate count!

I have some unsolicited advise for the ink-stained wretches who are calling for us to hand over the GOP to them on a silver platter……we will see you at the polls in November!

Domino’s Pizza founder Tom Monaghan endorsed Mitt Romney today. As one of Michigan’s highest profile business successes this would be news in itself, but it is far more important than just another keen observer of the economy recognizing Romney’s qualifications to serve as president.

Monaghan is a Catholic’s Catholic, the founder of Ave Maria University and Law School, and one of the forces behind Legatus, an organization of senior Catholic business leaders. He is an ardent pro-lifer, and a man deeply concerned with rescuing the culture.

Monaghan’s decision to announce today is a clear signal to social conservatives that it is time to chose and get in the game, first in Michigan and then South Carolina, Nevada and Florida in an effort to save the GOP from capture by the anti-conservative John McCain and the neopopulist Mike Huckabee.

Many leaders of the value voters have stayed on the sidelines, buffeted by conflicting pressures and a sometimes noisy anti-Mormon fringe. They may stay there, but if they do and the presidency is lost and with it the Surpreme Court, their inactivity in January 2008 will be a heavy burden to bear. Monaghan apparently knows this and is leading the way that social conservatives should follow.

There is no way Romney should retire from this race before Super Tuesday no matter how many Beltway-Manhattan pundits want him out. The conservatives are not going to surrender their party, and they want a chance to say so at the ballot box. As the upheaval on the Democratic side showed yesterday, there are many surprises in store for pollsters and pundits in the new media age of politics. By February 5, a thoroughly disgusted core of Republican activists from the center-right will be mobilized across the country to keep their party on the path established by the Reagan-Bush coalitions.

~~John Cronin~~

Share on Facebook

Share This

This morning, U.S. Senator Jim Talent sat down with me to express why he is such an ardent supporter of Governor Romney. A couple of things caught my attention as we began and I started asking questions related to Mike Huckabee. Senator Talent is a Evangelical Christian and is one of the strongest national leaders in promoting pro-life issues. His official title is Chairman, Domestic Policy Task Force – Mitt Romney for President, Inc. The interview was at the Romney Iowa Caucuses Headquarters in Des, Moines.

Press Release at the time Senator Talent joined Mitt Romney’s team

Senator Talent’s Wikipedia Description

The interview was conducted in a large, open space in what is effectively an office building among several tables and dozens of people making calls to get the vote out. After five minutes, about six volunteers joined us and actually helped me conduct the interview. How you ask? Well, I do not know short-hand, so first, their brief interruptions served to allow me time to better write my notes, and second, they had a couple of great questions that added to the interview!

Q: Why Romney and not other candidates such as Huckabee?

“Governor Romney is the only candidate with the whole package necessary to defeat the Democrats in the general election. The others do not have what it takes including Giuliani, Huckabee, McCain, or Thompson.

None of the other candidates are as effectively pro-life as Governor Romney. All you have to do is look at what he did as governor of Massachusetts. Nobody fought harder in the protection of traditional marriage than Governor Romney and nobody was more effective in fighting for life at the early stages than Governor Romney. Regardless of any of the candidates’ positions in the pro-life agenda, Governor Romney is the only one that will be the strong, effective pro-life leader. He is the only one who will serve the pro-life agenda in a truly effective way.

Governor Romney is the only Republican candidate who can accomplish all of three of the following:
• Unify and mobilize the entire the Republican Party.
• Articulate an incredibly powerful message around 1) strong national defense, 2) strong families, and 3) a strong economy.
• Reach out to and connect with the center of America.

Governor Romney is the only true, comprehensive conservative among all the Republican candidates.

Q: Why Governor Romney over Huckabee?

I like to ask the simple question, “What would happen if Mike Huckabee were to be the Republican nominee?”

Think about Hillary Clinton deciding to run to the right of Huckabee on crime and taxes. Clinton could easily challenge Huckabee on any number of issues and run to the right on his past. Crime for example: Huckabee pardoned or commuted the sentences of 1,033 felons. On taxes, Huckabee raised taxes on the middle class.

As a person who has run several campaigns myself and who has run a couple of very tough campaigns, I know how important it is to have adequate resources. Mitt Romney is the only Republican candidate who has the resources to wage a long, tough, national campaign against the Democrats; all the other Republican candidates are underfunded and do not have the necessary resources.

Governor Romney has the executive management skill of all candidates and his campaign is the best run campaign of all.

Anybody who has ever met Mitt Romney knows him as a very open and genuine person. It is very touching when he is with his family.

Governor Romney is the only Republican who will make many good things happen and prevent bad things from happening.

Neither McCain nor Huckabee can mobilize all conservatives of our nation. Neither has a strong record on tax cuts. Republicans will not be able to win the general election without a strong stand on illegal immigration and Mitt Romney is the only candidate who is strong in this critical issue.

I have been a strong pro-life advocate my whole life. Certainly, we should scrutinize the pro-life position of any leader that has converted from a pro-choice position. Those of us who are national leaders (James Bopp, Jr. and Jay Seculow) in the pro-life movement have performed that scrutiny of Governor Romney and know him to be absolutely committed to the pro-life agenda in every way. He is the strongest pro-life candidate running today.

This is important. The Massachusetts Citizens for Life do not give out their highest award to just anybody and they gave theirs to Governor Romney for his tireless work in Massachusetts for life issues!

Stayed tuned for more news from Iowa. I have been working all day, but based on the buzz around me and what I have seen here today, there is a lot going on FOR Governor Romney. There are lots of really cheerful, enthusiastic volunteers all around, coming and going. I have been around very organized projects my entire career. Nothing compares to this though.

Ann Romney stopped in and went around and met many volunteers along with Mary Romney (Craig’s wife I think) and her son. Scott Romney, Mitt’s brother also stopped in and gave a little update along with Senator Talent accompanied by cheers. Apparently tonight there is a rally for supporters. When you get a chance, look for updates from Jason Bonham over at My Man Mitt who is embedded with Governor Romney’s press corp as they fly around Iowa. I had dinner with Jason last night and he was pretty excited about today.

~ Vic

Share on Facebook

Share This

I never properly introduced myself on this site. My name is Rebecca. I am married and have two small children. My current employment is as a wife and mother. I have always liked politics and I have always loved to write. When a friend offered me the chance to blog on this site, it seemed like a good way to get involved without taking too much time from my family.

I first heard the name of Mitt Romney sometime in 2003 or 2004. I was talking with my Dad. The conversation had drifted to abuses of power by government agencies who were not accountable to anyone. He expressed the desire for a strong president that would take power from the bureaucrats and return it to the people, where it belonged. He thought that Governor Romeny could be that man–if only he would run.

Now, I respect my father and I have a high regard for his opinion. That said, he would be the first to tell you that I very seldom rely soley on his advice to make important decisions. I waited to see who was running and then I did a little research. What I found convinced me that Mitt Romney is the best candidate to lead the United States at this time.

In the first place, he is running. Say what you will, it is very difficult–perhaps impossible–to elect a man to office who is not willing to campaign. George Washington is the only man who was ever able to do it.

In the second place, he is running as a Republican and a Conservative. I have no use for the modern Democratic party. I cannot see that they have accomplished anything useful in my lifetime and they are actively advocating the downfall of my country and my species.

Thirdly, Mitt Romney is a good man. There has been a lot of debate over the past couple of decades about the division of public office and private affairs. I do not think there is a division. In a time when we must trust our President with our safety, trust him to make important decisions about life or death, we need someone who is, well, trustworthy. Opponents may like to paint Romney’s squeaky clean personal life as “too perfect” but to me it simply means he has integrity. And I refuse to believe that integrity can go out of fashion.

And then there is Romney’s experience. Romney’s business career consisted of turning around organizations founded on good ideas but with fiscal problems. He was immensley successful at doing this and gained a tremendous amount of trust and respect from his peers. He then used his experience and skills, as well as political saavy and diplomacy, to turn around the 2002 Olympic Games and the budget for the State of Massachusetts. Who better to take the helm of a nation founded on the principle “that all men… are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” but also finds itself in ever increasing financial turmoil?

I was, of course, concerned over the charges of “flip-flopping” on social issues, as well as Romney’s tendency to be rather more liberal on fiscal issues than many true-blue (or should I say true-red?) conservatives would like. As to the former, Romney did switch his position. Once. He has since said he was wrong. His story attests to the fact that Romney is ultimately ruled by his own morality than by any philisophical argument. In response to the latter, I have found that he is overall more conservative than other candidates. I also have great faith in the separation of powers. The President does not have the power to pass laws, Congress must do that. Should the President introduce any bill that is not favored by the people of this nation, it can be efficiently stopped by an appeal to individual legislators from their districts. See the graveyard of amnesty bills killed by grassroots efforts during the current Bush administration.

Romney is also a Mormon. I had no problem with this since I also belong to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Romney does not speak for the LDS Church. Those seeking clarification of Church doctrines should turn to other sources. I recommend www.mormon.org for a comprehensive outline of the tenets of this faith.

I have been in the same room with Governor Romney twice. Both times were at the George H.W. Bush Presidential Library in my home town of College Station, Texas. I never got close enough to shake his hand. Nor did he answer any of my questions. However, there is a feeling of quiet confidence, determination and willingness to work hard that surround this man. His wife was with him on both occassions as were several of his sons. It is impressive to me that his sons take such an active role in his campaign.

Mitt Romney is a man that I feel I can trust. The President of the United States is the leader of his or her party. They are responsible for the security of the nation. It is more important to be able to trust their judgement and morality than to agree with all of their so-called plans or positions. As it happens, in my case, Romney is the candidate whose positions I agree with most often and in whom I have the most confidence. I believe that as you search for information beyond the TV ads and radio spots that you will discover that he is someone to whom you may safely trust the future of our nation.

Share on Facebook

Share This

Click here to explore the results yourself.

Mike Huckabee for President - Blogs - Sarah Huckabee Blogging from …

Mike Huckabee for President - Blogs - The Evening Recap

Mike Huckabee for President - Blogs - LA Times: Here Comes Huck!

Mike Huckabee for President - Blogs - Huckabee turns the other cheek

Mike Huckabee for President - Blogs - Video Update From NH

Mike Huckabee for President - Blogs - Blogger Spotlight: Prezcast.com

Mike Huckabee for President - Blogs - Iowa Debate, 1 PM CT

Mike Huckabee for President - Blogs - Video: A Little Push From …

Mike Huckabee for President - Blogs - HUCKABOOM! Newsweek Poll

Mike Huckabee for President - Blogs - Mike Huckabee on Meet the Press

Click below for much more! 

More »

Share on Facebook

Share This

Share on Facebook

Share This

By: Mary Jacoby

WALL STREET JOURNAL December 26, 2007

I am obviously playing catch-up with my print edition of the WSJ, but this story is very much relevant even though it’s a few days old.

The results are clear. In the battle of “significant” campaign speeches, Mitt Romney’s Dec.6 “Faith In America” address has crushed Rudy Giuliani’s Dec. 15 “closing argument” campaign speech in one key barometer of buzz: YouTube.

As of Monday, a clip of Mr. Romney’s much anticipated address, in which he defended his Mormonism and explained the need for expressions of faith in public life, garnered 46,437 views and some 1,500 comments on the popular video-sharing website.

Mr. Giuliani, speaking to about 200 supporters in Tampa, stressed his leadership qualities and unveiled his new slogan: “Tested. Ready. Now.” His campaign had billed it as the former prosecutor’s “closing argument” for the Republican presidential nomination. The jury appears unconvinced, however. As of Monday, a clip of the speech had been viewed only 1,106 times and it drew no comments.

To me, it is very ironic, that Mike Huckabee’s shameless playing of the religion card, which had the effect of re-introducing an issue that many felt had been taken out of American presidential politics by John F. Kennedy’s speech in Houston, Texas back in 1960, has produced one of the best moments of the campaign thus far and has generated the “buzz” that all politicians hope for, but few attain. It is also ironic that the Romney campaign was at first reluctant to give the speech, understandably and justifiably so. Gov. Romney has run his campaign on the theme of the “three legged stool” of a strong economy, a strong military and strong families. He did not intend to run a campaign based on religion or he would have incorporated it into the original theme.

However, former Gov. Huckabee had a different idea and chose to emphasize religion as a major plank in his platform. I wonder if Mr. Huckabee is having any second thoughts about opening the door on an issue that has now turned into a major gift in disguise.

~~John Cronin~~

Share on Facebook

Share This

Much has been made of the feud between Huck and Rush. Pundits wondered if Rush was going to have an impact since he’s on vacation between now and the Iowa Caucuses on 1/3.

Read into it what you will, but the entire left column of his homepage today features the following stories:

- Rush responds to Gov. Huckabee
- Huckabee campaign chairman Ed Rollins trashes Rush instead of debating conservatism
- Governor Huckabee forces attack El Rushbo
- Callers reacto to Huckabee attacks on Rush
- Democrats want Mike Huckabee
- Identity politics and the Hucksters
- Gov. Huckabee sounds like Perot

Quoting the ancient general and warfare theorist, Sun Tzu, “Ouch…that’s going to leave a mark.” (just kidding…about the Sun Tzu part, I think it was Don Corleone)

Contrast this with what else Rush has featured on his website today:

- Mitt Romney’s Inspiring Speech (with links to the video and the text)

Recall that after the 1st debate, Rush called Romney “Reaganesque.” The high praise from El Rushbo keeps on coming. Rush has steadfastly clarified that he does not endorse in the primaries, but with “non-endorsements” like these, who needs endorsements?!

Complete transcript from Rush after the jump…

More »

Share on Facebook

Share This