comMITTed to Romney!

I’m not sure if you’ve noticed that Jonathan Martin of The Politico’s blatant disregard for Romney and the Republican Presidential Nomination. Today for example Not A Single Mention of Romney’s 5pt lead over McCain in Florida.

Here are an example of other posts not exactly favorable to Governor Romney:

• Huckahelpeer
• Split decisions set up GOP fight for Florida
• The Rest of ‘Em
• The Preemptive Romney Spin
• Large Mormon Turnout Powers Mitt (which is nuts, because as Governor Romney said from FL…if you took out every single Mormon vote he still would have won Nevada).

There are several others, just go back into his archives. This guy has nothing but contempt for Romney, and I felt the strong need to call him out on it.

Share on Facebook

Share This

From Jonathan Martin at The Politico

Here is the video from his previous appearance on May 3rd, 2007.

Share on Facebook

Share This

McCain’s Attack Mailer

More than just the same old personal attacks, McCain has now launched a mailer exaggerating increases in fees in Massachusetts while Mitt was governor and criticizing Mitt for other things. See the Politico for the story.

Astute readers will recognize the hypocrisy here. McCain cried “foul” when Mitt presented McCain’s record on the Bush tax cuts and amnesty for illegals. While McCain didn’t agree with Mitt’s definition of amnesty (though Fred Thompson did agree with Mitt in a subsequent debate), McCain’s only responses were to cast aspersions on Mitt’s character, effectively calling Mitt a liar. He also criticized the ads as “negative.” Well, here’s McCain doing what he so roundly criticized. Here’s his campaign’s response:

Asked how they reconcile running a positive campaign with such a mailer, McCain spokeswoman Jill Hazelbaker said: “We’ve been attacked enough times by Mitt Romney to justify getting out front to set the record straight.”

Sound like any two year old you know? “He did it first!”

JMart Points out McCain Flaws (Quoting Mark Lavin)

Jonathan Martin of the Politico recently posted a blog wondering aloud why no GOP candidate is hitting McCain on his “obvious” flaws in his not-so-conservative Senate voting record. He provides a link to a National Review Online article written by Mark Lavin on this subject. The obvious answer to me is that McCain and Huckabee have a marriage of convenience. It’s in both’s interest to take Mitt down, and McCain is gambling he may never have to get negative on Huckabee as Huck is likely to fade on his own. Huckabee knows he’s helped as well and is willing to take his chances against McCain later one on one after a more conservative rival is gone. But for you wondering why everyone considers McCain a liberal (and why he continues to garner more support among liberals than among people classifying themselves as “Republican”) see the following:

There’s a reason some of John McCain’s conservative supporters avoid discussing his record. They want to talk about his personal story, his position on the surge, his supposed electability. But whenever the rest of his career comes up, the knee-jerk reply is to characterize the inquiries as attacks.

The McCain domestic record is a disaster. To say he fought spending, most particularly earmarks, is to nibble around the edges and miss the heart of the matter. For starters, consider:

McCain-Feingold — the most brazen frontal assault on political speech since Buckley v. Valeo.

McCain-Kennedy — the most far-reaching amnesty program in American history.

McCain-Lieberman — the most onerous and intrusive attack on American industry — through reporting, regulating, and taxing authority of greenhouse gases — in American history.

McCain-Kennedy-Edwards — the biggest boon to the trial bar since the tobacco settlement, under the rubric of a patients’ bill of rights.

McCain-Reimportantion of Drugs — a significant blow to pharmaceutical research and development, not to mention consumer safety (hey Rudy, pay attention, see link).

And McCain’s stated opposition to the Bush 2001 and 2003 tax cuts was largely based on socialist, class-warfare rhetoric — tax cuts for the rich, not for the middle class. The public record is full of these statements. Today, he recalls only his insistence on accompanying spending cuts.

As chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, McCain was consistently hostile to American enterprise, from media and pharmaceutical companies to technology and energy companies.

McCain also led the Gang of 14, which prevented the Republican leadership in the Senate from mounting a rule change that would have ended the systematic use (actual and threatened) of the filibuster to prevent majority approval of judicial nominees.

And then there’s the McCain defense record.

His supporters point to essentially one policy strength, McCain’s early support for a surge and counterinsurgency. It has now evolved into McCain taking credit for forcing the president to adopt General David Petreaus’s strategy. Where’s the evidence to support such a claim?

Moreover, Iraq is an important battle in our war against the Islamo-fascist threat. But the war is a global war, and it most certainly includes the continental United States, which, after all, was struck on 9/11. How does McCain fare in that regard?

McCain-ACLU — the unprecedented granting of due-process rights to unlawful enemy combatants (terrorists).

McCain has repeatedly called for the immediate closing of Guantanamo Bay and the introduction of al-Qaeda terrorists into our own prisons — despite the legal rights they would immediately gain and the burdens of managing such a dangerous population.

While McCain proudly and repeatedly points to his battles with Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who had to rebuild the U.S. military and fight a complex war, where was McCain in the lead-up to the war — when the military was being dangerously downsized by the Clinton administration and McCain’s friend, former Secretary of Defense Bill Cohen? Where was McCain when the CIA was in desperate need of attention? Also, McCain was apparently in the dark about al-Qaeda like most of Washington, despite a decade of warnings.

My fingers are crossed that at the next debate, either Fred Thompson or Mitt Romney will find a way to address McCain’s record. (Mike Huckabee won’t, as he is apparently in the tank for him.)

Conservatives need to wake up to the fact that McCain is not one of us and is a better candidate for a third party, or even the democrats, than for the Republicans. Most Republicans have recognized that (remember his no-show in Iowa and losing among actual Republican voters in NH to Mitt). We need to spread the word so we don’t inherit McCain as our candidate through dirty pool.

Share on Facebook

Share This

We all knew McCain had bootstrapped his campaign from near-bankruptcy earlier this summer. The campaign was bragging about this after their NH 1st place showing, talking about how they’d pledged their donor list to a bank for a loan. Here’s what was reported at the Politico yesterday:

Back on the plane, he [McCain campaign manager Rick Davis] reiterated that they had not accepted federal matching funds nor used anticipated receipt of funds to guarantee the line of credit they took out late last year to keep their campaign afloat.

The collateral, Davis said, was their fundraising list. The windfall from selling or leasing such a list was sufficient to get them their cash.”

I wondered at the time whether that was a great idea, and whether donors would be happy about their private, confidentially-given information being pledged to a bank, sold or leased.

Now we find out that McCain’s actions likely violated his own privacy policy. That’s the form you get in the mail saying what the recipient of your private info, like on a credit card application, plans to do with it. I believe the content of these policies is voluntary, meaning you can sell info, you just have to tell people your plans. McCain apparently didn’t. Here’s what McCain’s policy says, in bold in the original: “We will not sell your personal information.”

According to the related story at Politico, the McCain campaign is spinning the angle that “it’s customary” and that all the campaign’s assets were pledged. While that’s likely true, a struggling political campaign’s only valuable asset is the donor list, which would suggest that the campaign, likely with John’s awareness, was probably offering their donors’ private info to one or more banks in trying to get that loan. And while it’s customary to pledge assets to banks when repayment is iffy, it’s also customary for banks to foreclose when loans aren’t repaid, which was a real danger at the time. It looks like the campaign either wilfully violated their own policy or didn’t read their own fine print. Or maybe McCain will try to walk the tightrope that is the semantic difference between “sell” and “pledge.” Perhaps John should have called a lawyer…

Share on Facebook

Share This

Taking the Silver in Iowa.

Like Mitt said, it’s not what we’d hoped but it’s still a great finish, and preparation for the ultimate gold. We need to keep things humming along. What can you do? Make sure you make your phone calls for Mitt (if you’re not already a volunteer, contact the campaign to find out how to become one). As I said yesterday, considering where the campaign’s been and where it’s going it’s no time to get concerned about one bump in the road. Here are some facts to keep in perspective:

Wyoming’s caucuses are tomorrow, and both Mitt and McCain have big appearances on the Sunday shows. As “Richard” posted on Politico, Mitt can actually move into first place in the delegate count depending on the showing in Wyoming, and could even retain that lead with as much as a solid 2d place showing in NH.

“Isn’t it interesting people are making fun of Wyoming. That’s like football fans saying they don’t care about field goals. They would just as soon pass them up. Well, Mitt isn’t going to pass anything up. Since not very many people are aware, it takes 1191 Delegates to WIN the republican nomination. So far Huck has 20, Romney 18, McCain and Thompson 3, Paul 2 and Giuliani 1. Wyoming has 14 delegates up for grabs, New Hampshire 14 and Michigan 30. So, because the media looks to promote certain states, it truly is the number of delegates available. By the way, Romney, Thompson and Paul are the only ones that have been to Wyoming so watch them snatch up the delegates….”

I’m not sure these numbers are right but they’re roughly consistent with what I’ve read elsewhere. Mitt being in first place for delegates after NH is more than we could have hoped for a few months ago, and that’s a very achievable goal. We all knew it would be a close race; now we need to pitch in to make it happen! A quick stat: 2 of the 5 brothers were at the Des Moines airport early this morning, and at least one was headed to Wyoming, so Wyoming is clearly going to be feeling the love.

Mitt’s Game of 3D Chess

I happened to find my way into a Q&A Kevin Madden was giving to reporters before Mitt’s appearance at the Sheraton last night. Here are a few shots:

Kevin may have the best tie I’ve seen so far in the campaign, even including Mitt. Try to get a good look.

Kevin told them that Mitt’s playing 3D chess versus his opponents’ checkers, pursuing a multi-front war while his opponents have largely focused on one state. And (using my words) this race is like the Tour de France: winning a particular stage isn’t the important thing, it’s standings at the end. In Lance’s seven tour wins, he won on average fewer than 3 stages per year (20 total stages in 7 wins).

Bring on NH!

McCain is Mitt’s main competition in NH as we all know. Mitt has a new ad, as does McCain. In his, McCain blatantly spins a couple half-quotes from Mitt to make false claims. In one of Mitt’s statements Mitt said foreign policy expertise is easy to find; you can go to the State Department to find someone versed in knowledge, but that expertise (like McCain’s) alone isn’t enough. But the ad twists the statement to say Mitt would rely on the State Department for leadership, which was the exact opposite of what was intended. We need to make sure we call him on this sort of false claim and twisted quotes. So much for John remaining above negative campaiging (as if he’d ever tried).

As a result, now would be a good time to reinforce Mitt’s leadership experience and executive successes (contrasted to McCain’s 20+ years leisurely creating laws after dispatching lackeys to do the research for him). We need to remind people of Mitt’s strengths and that he’s succeeded at nearly everything he’s touched. A few talking points:

1. He had the leadership to turn around the Olympics.

2. He had the leadership to turn around a collection of companies while at Bain, solving problems people before him couldn’t. Sound like a skill we could use in our President today?

3. He had the leadership and determination to keep all the campaign promises he made in Massachusetts, while working with a democratic legislature. By contrast a “maverick” has a hard time getting things done because they don’t tend to play well with others.

4. He had the leadership to organize and motivate volunteers to turn out more voters than expected in Iowa.

5. He showed grace and leadership last night in acknowledging Mike Huckabee’s success, but motivating and convincing the troops we’ll do better in New Hampshire.

6. He has shown the strength of character to think about solutions to problems before he implements them, but then to decisively execute on his plan.

7. He’s the only one that can represent the entire republican party, as the National Review pointed out in their endorsement. In looking at all the candidates, he has the best chance of winning it all, and if you listen carefully he is still the defacto front runner. All guns seem to be pointed at Mitt.

You heard it here first: if we can remind the people of NH what Mitt has accomplished, we will win in NH. People in NH know we need real leadership in Washington. A repackaging of the same old ideas and people just won’t cut it anymore. If there was anything clear in Iowa last night, change and effective leadership are what people are looking for. John McCain is a member of a Congress whose approval rating is abysmal. He has had his chance to be an agent of change as a Washington insider for the last 20+ years. If he hasn’t had shown the leadership yet to solve the problems we have in our society, how will he suddenly start showing leadership now as President? He’s had his chance. We need to tell Washington and Johnny Mac to lead, follow or get out of the way.

Last Thoughts About the Iowa Caucuses

My wife and I drove to a northern suburb of Des Moines last night and attended a caucus of about 130 people. The process, though less complicated than for the dems, was still fascinating. The republican leader (clearly an untrained volunteer from the local community) had an envelope of instructions on how to run the show, and was learning along with everyone else. I felt like I was watching pure democracy, with all its wrinkles. After getting organized, representatives of each campaign were given a chance to speak. When Rudy’s name came up someone shouted “Rudy who?,” generating guffaws. Statements were made on behalf of Huckabee, Fred and Mitt (this last made by yours truly). Votes were cast on yellow ballots made from quartered sheets of 8.5×11″ paper. Ballots were hand-collected and sorted into stacks for each candidate. Votes were then counted and re-counted, then telephoned into GOP headquarters. My wife noted a number of people changing their party affiliations at the door, confirming anecdotally what the national press has observed, that someone out there was driving new voters to turn out, we believe evangelicals.

The Post-Game Party

At the final party Doug Gross, Mitt and Ann re-enthused the crowd.

Here are some pictures:

Now off to bed so I can come back again tomorrow. It’s now after 3 a.m. central time, so I’ve been up about 23 hours straight. Keep it up everybody out there, we all know how much this country needs a man like Mitt Romney (for a reminder see Thomas Alan’s blog on this very site). One last bit of encouragement. Close your eyes and imagine Mitt raising his hand and taking the oath of office in January 2009. Now open those eyes and let’s get it done!

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

From —–>The Washington Post

“Huckabee said the ad which attacks Romney for being too dishonest to be president — was sent to television and radio stations yesterday but will not be broadcast. He said he had made the decision 10 minutes before his [12:00pm CST] news conference, surprising even his top staff. ‘I pulled the ad. I do not want it to be run at all,’ he said.”

More from —–>The Politico

“[Senior aide Charmaine] Yoest, who set up the staging of the press conference, just came back out to the hallway and said she was told about five minutes before the event started that he would not air the ad. By then, she said, it was too late to remove the signs.”

The Cedar Rapid Gazette tells a different story and says the ad was pulled from KCRG-TV9 TV9 in Cedar Rapids at precisely 10:01am CST:

More—–>Cedar Rapids Gazette

“An official at KCRG-TV9 TV9 in Cedar Rapids confirmed that the station received the 30-second spot from the Huckabee campaign shortly after 6 a.m. today but was told at 10:01 a.m. not to air the commercial and the station did not show the paid advertisement.”

Looks like we have a Drama King on our hands Ladies and Gentlemen.

Share on Facebook

Share This

…but John Bolton denies it.

I’ve lost count of the number of gaffe’s Huckabee has had in the last couple days, but add another one to the mix. Some choice bits:

In recent days, Mike Huckabee has tried to answer long-standing questions about who is on his foreign policy team. On Friday morning, he listed former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton as someone with whom he either has “spoken or will continue to speak.”

At a Thursday evening press conference, Huckabee said, “I’ve corresponded with John Bolton, who’s agreed to work with us on developing foreign policy.”

Bolton, however, has a different view. “I’d be happy to speak with Huckabee, but I haven’t spoken with him yet,” said Bolton, now a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington.

Okay, if that weren’t bad enough, it gets worse:

Transcript from CNN:

WOLF BLITZER: “Let’s go back out to the campaign trail right now. Presidential candidate appears to be trying to change the subject after making what some are calling a notable gaffe. That would be republican Mike Huckabee. He’s a former governor with less foreign policy experience than some of his rivals. Now some are wondering if that is becoming obvious out on the campaign trail. Let’s go out to Iowa, Dana Bash is watching all of this unfold. You’ve learned about the concerns inside Huckabee’s own camp about his national security experience. Explain to our viewers what’s going on.”

DANA BASH: “Well, Wolf, in a very candid moment today, a senior Huckabee campaign official told me that with their candidate, quote, ‘There is no foreign policy credential.’ And that unlike many other presidential candidates, he can’t boast about knowing Benazir Bhutto. This official also said that until they can, quote, ‘get him briefed’ and up to speed on Pakistan, they’re going to try to bring it closer to home. Mike Huckabee is responding to crisis in Pakistan in an offbeat way, tying it to a red hot campaign issue: immigration.”

GOVERNOR MIKE HUCKABEE: “There were more Pakistanis who illegally crossed the border than of any other nationality except for those immediately south of our border. 660 last year. That’s a lot of illegals from Pakistan.” (Me: by the way, that’s wrong, far more illegal immigrants come from the Philippines, Korea, China and Vietnam according to the Dept. of Homeland Security)

BASH: “Sounding an alarm about illegal Pakistanis in America is a surprising tactic for a candidate who preaches tolerance. He dismissed any concern it looks like xenophobia.”

HUCKABEE: “No none. Not at all. I’m just saying that a lot of Americans sitting in Pella, Iowa maybe look halfway around the world and say how does that affect me?”

BASH: “When asked by CNN for the source of his statistic, 660 illegal Pakistanis, Huckabee seemed unsure.”

HUCKABEE: “Its come largely from CIA numbers, and ill get u the exact source, but those are numbers that i got today from a briefing, and I believe they’re CIA and/or immigration numbers.”

BASH: “A senior Huckabee campaign official admitted to CNN the former Arkansas governor has, quote, ‘no foreign policy credential.’ that’s why his campaign turned to immigration, a top concern for Iowa GOP voters especially men he’s been losing ground with. The pivot followed a gaffe, not appearing to know martial law was lifted in Pakistan two weeks ago.”

This is getting embarrassing. Huckabee evidently just makes stuff up and hopes that nobody calls him on it. This might have worked in Arkansas, but he isn’t in Little Rock anymore. (no disrespect intended to Arkansasans)

Share on Facebook

Share This

Is this really 7 days old? Why have I not heard about this? This is big-time crazy, and will be on Drudge, I bet, or all over major newspapers soon….

How many of these stories has the politico broke, and is the date on the link accurate? From 7 days ago?

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1207/7494.html

“

By: Kenneth P. Vogel
Dec 20, 2007 01:03 PM EST

The Federal Election Commission, facing imminent crippling over a confirmation stalemate, on Thursday approved more than $19 million in matching taxpayer money for seven cash-strapped presidential candidates.

“Democrat John Edwards will get $8.8 million in federal funds, and Republican John McCain $5.8 million.

…

“On the other hand, McCain, an Arizona senator, has ‘not made a decision on matching funds,’ said spokeswoman Jill Hazelbaker, who added the campaign hasn’t borrowed against anticipated matching funds.

…

“The matching fund program provides up to $250 in taxpayer money for each donation from an individual, with the maximum amount a candidate could receive currently estimated to be about $21 million.

“But it’s seen as a trade-off, since it also caps at about $50 million the amount of cash campaigns can spend during the primary.”

Maybe this hasn’t been all over the news because not everyone understands it. Since the primary election technically ends after the Republican convention’s conclusion on September 4, Sen. McCain will be essentially be unable to spend virtually any money throughout the summer of 2008. Marc Ambinder at The Atlantic discussed the scenario earlier this year:

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/07/mccain_the_matching_fund_quand.php

“A minefield awaits Sen. John McCain if he asks his campaign to accept federal matching funds for the primary.

“There are two significant limitations that come with the roughly $6M that the federal government would pay McCain. One is that McCain would not be able to raise money beyond the limits proscribed by the system. That’s about $50M. If the nomination contest is wrapped by Feb 6., Mr. McCain will be out of money. The Democratic nominee may find him or herself in a similar predicament, but they have the option of raising and spending as much as they want between February and their late August convention. McCain could raise nothing. And therefore could spend nothing. He would rely on the good graces of the national media to ensure that at the very least, he gets to respond to the Democratic presidential nominee. But he won’t be able to campaign. He wouldn’t be able to build a field organization for the general election, relying instead on the Republican National Committee to conceive, fund, and construct the entire GOTV apparatus. (Forget about RNC soft money ads. Um, McCain-Feingold prohibits them.)

He probably couldn’t even campaign

. Outside allies in the party? They don’t like McCain.

“This is an argument that McCain’s opponents will make to reporters and to wavering Republicans: by accepting federal matching funds, McCain will put himself at a distinct disadvantage if he wins the nomination.

The Democrat, in other words, would have an edge

.”

So how great of a handicap would matching funds be for the Republican nominee? Well, according to the New York Times, President Bush raised roughly $259 million in primary dollars and Senator Kerry raised more than $233.5 million in 2004. Again, Senator McCain would be limited to a mere $50 million total in the primaries.

Share on Facebook

Share This

By: Jonathan Martin

POLITICO

Jonathan Martin has a very brief article at the Politico website that expresses admiration for Gov. Romney’s tenacity in the fight to win Iowa. It reminds me of Gen. Patton’s remarks that were so brilliantly delivered by the late, great George C. Scott in the movie, Patton.

(paraphrased) “When we were growing up, we all admired the champion boxer, the big league baseball player, the best marble-shooter. Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser. I wouldn’t give a hoot for a man that lost and laughed about it.”

No one knows whether are not Gov. Romney will win in Iowa. Of course I hope he does. But in the event that he doesn’t win, he will still be an enormous winner in my book because of the great character he has shown. He continues to campaign, continues to face the media onslaught, continues to criss cross the state and continues to rise in the polls.

Here’s a quote from Mr. Martin.

But that doesn’t change the fact that Romney is doing things here that no other candidate is doing — and that could be the difference in a tight race.

I also included a comment from one of Politico’s readers.

One thing I’ll say about Mitt, he’s resilient. He is the most attacked by the democrats, he is roundly attacked by every other GOP candidate, the media constantly investigates his every utterance, and often makes up stuff (like him being behind push calls), and still he keeps slugging it out. No, he was no one hit wonder like Huck Ray Cyrus or any number of no talent blunders that spent 30 minutes in the spot light. Mitt’s rise has been slow and steady. The more he is hit, the farther he goes. I like that in him. That and he is one of those top 5% people that are great at everything they do and find success no matter the obstacle. He may not win the nomination, but I admire his tenacity.

Posted by DO Dec. 21, 2007

~~John Cronin~~

Share on Facebook

Share This

A new wave of push poll style calls have surfaced in Iowa and this time there is no secret to their origin. The automated calls direct voters to a website paid for by Common Sense Issues, Inc. with the web address trusthuckabee.com. The calls begin by asking questions about the voter’s intent to participate in the upcoming caucauses and then asked for thier stance on issues such as abortion and marriage.

The information then dispensed depends on the answers given by the voter. Many of the call recipients are deluged with negative information about Giuliani, Thompson, and McCain. However, voters who identify themselves as Huckabee supporters were given highlights of the Governor’s accomplishments. All groups were referred to the trusthuckabee website.

The Politico was able to reach Trust Huckabee’s founders. The group stresses that they are independent from the campaign and are trying to organize a grassroots effort to elect Governor Huckabee. They are unapologetic about the Iowa calls and say that they intend to do many more as the race for the GOP nomination continues.

Huckabee as well as representatives of his campaign denounced the calls, saying that it takes the campaign “off message.” Huckabee stated, “I don’t want to become President because I disabled the other candidates, I want to become President because I am the best candidate.”

Share on Facebook

Share This

It get’s even worse…

Not only did Rudy hide the expenses incurred for his tom-catting trips out to the Hamptons…

Not only did Judith Nathan (the kept woman) use the NYPD as her personal car service…

…she even made the NYPD transport her friends and family when she wasn’t even with them!!

…Six years later, presidential candidate Giuliani is facing questions about that security. A source involved with the mayor’s operations at the time tells CBS 2 HD that Nathan took flagrant advantage of that police car and driver.

The source says Nathan forced police to chauffeur her friends and family around the city — even when she wasn’t in the car.

That set off alarms with ethics watchdogs.

“The rules are clear, you can’t use city resources for private reasons,” said Gene Russianoff of the New York Public Interest Research Group. “And if you’re using a city car, a police driven car to chauffeur around relatives, unless they’re explicitly protected and their deemed to be the subject of potential security threats, it’s just wrong.”

Nathan’s detail was approved by the NYPD after a stranger made an unspecified threat to her. The commissioner at the time was Bernard Kerik, who was recently indicted on tax fraud charges in an unrelated matter.

“It wasn’t about her being the mayor’s girlfriend,” Kerik said. “The person spoke to her by name and made comments to her.”

On Friday, Giuliani avoided reporters’ questions about the security for Nathan back then. He told reporters off camera “we’ve explained it.”

Giuliani’s press secretary, Maria Comella, angrily denounced the use of an unnamed source in this story.

But she did not deny the assertion that Nathan used her police detail to ferry around friends and family.

And she repeated what Giuliani has said about reports questioning how his security detail was financed, saying, “This is nothing more than partisan politics aimed at the Republican front-runner.”

A vote for Rudy = a vote for Rudy
A vote for Huckabee = a vote for Rudy

Do we really want Rudy to represent our party? Can you imagine what Judy will do if she gets a hold of Air Force One and the White House?

Share on Facebook

Share This

The only reason I am posting these brief quotes is because we have some readers who think that Fred Thompson is still a strong candidate. My opinion is that Fred Thompson is effectively done. Why? Actually, the only reason I believe this is because Fred Thompson has sealed his reputation as the only candidate who really does not want to be President. And if he does want the job, he has never actually conveyed that he has any desire to be President. Read the entire article here.

Since Fred Thompson stepped onto the field to participate in the game, he has done nothing to change the reputation he earned in the senate that he was comparatively lazy, confirmed a few times in direct quotes when he said he really disliked the work of being a senator. For whatever reason, Fred Thompson hated being senator; it is a fact that being President would NOT be any easier for him. Does he think that being President would be somehow a better job? Since six months ago or more, I have stated that Fred Thompson shows no motivation at all to run for President. He really does not want the job. These are but two quotes of many floating around the Net about the man:

Indeed, the opportunity to talk substance may be the only thing that’s keeping him in the race. Even his own aides and advisers acknowledge privately that there are days when he seems disinterested in running for president at all.

That a presidential hopeful loathes process stories isn’t exactly unique — especially when those stories tell of a rusty candidate whose heart does not appear to be in the race and whose poll numbers are falling.

Fred Thompson is done. We might see a little positive blip now and again. His organization nationally and in key states is thin. He has had a very difficult time keeping key teammates on the team; many are having a hard time getting motivated when their man is himself not motivated. He has comparatively little money and is not a real motivated fund raiser. It makes you wonder why he is even still in the race.

If the man were somehow able to become President, he would likely run the nation the way he runs his campaign.   Scary thought.

It is unlikely that I will include posts about Fred Thompson in the future. He was the flavor of the month several months ago and is now passe. He has let so many good conservatives down.

~ Vic

“To sit back hoping that someday, someway, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the crocodile, hoping he will eat you last–but eat you he will.”

– Ronald Reagan

Share on Facebook

Share This