comMITTed to Romney!

Before you pull the lever for John McCain on Super Tuesday, please consider the following information first. As a Mitt Romney supporter, I would prefer to convince people why they should vote for my candidate, rather than against John McCain. However, I’ve tried this approach for the past 18 months, but people haven’t been able to get past his religion or the false impression that he’s a flip-flopper. As governor, Romney never contradicted a position he campaigned for in 2002 and while he did change his stance on abortion, he upheld his campaign promises throughout the end of his term. You can trust that the stances he is taking for America (which are decidedly different than the needs of Massachusetts in 2002), will be consistently adhered to while he is in office.

McCain on the other hand consistently changes positions, or blatantly lies about his record and the records of others. As accounts continue to surface about his private dealings with fellow legislators, staffers, and other private individuals, it is abundantly clear that John McCain is concerned about the one thing he’s always been concerned about—himself.

Perhaps you’ve resigned yourself to the “electability” argument, and believe that John McCain is the only Republican who could win in November. McCain will be the first one to tell you not to trust polls that come out 6 months before an election (just look at last July’s polling data for McCain). Additionally, you give the Democrats too much credit. As the economy and budget woes worsen, neither Hillary Clinton nor Barak Obama has any credibility to solve this impending crisis. On this issue alone, John McCain would be much easier to beat than Romney since he can’t run effectively on the economy. If we nominate John McCain, it will be like nominating Bob Dole all over again (and he was supposed to be the most electable at the time).

For all you know, everything I have just said could simply be made up charges for political reasons. So I ask you to take a look at the whole picture of John McCain’s life and his accelerated advancement through the naval ranks—in spite of his poor record and actions unbecoming of a Naval officer. As you read the following story of McCain’s Naval record, compare this with Mitt Romney and answer the following questions:

· Both had influential fathers, what did this give them in life?
· Both were accepted to prestigious universities, what did they do with that opportunity?
· Both had careers that ended in high-profile positions. How did they get there?
· How do their personal and family lives compare?
· What kind of people do they associate themselves with?
· What have these two candidate shown that they are good at?

More »

Share on Facebook

Share This

It’s still the economy

There, I said it. Last night’s debate once again proved that McCain and Huckabee have no sense on the economy. Are you kidding me? A cap and trade system with no limit to the taxes it imposes on the U.S.? Who does McCain represent, anyway? Mitt continues to show that despite good sounding proposals from the other candidates, his knowledge of the economy trumps their half-baked solutions. Want to solve global warming? McCain’s approach taxes U.S. citizens without a cap for a problem we’re only a part of. Want to stimulate the economy? Huckabee’s solution of using infrastructure projects sounds good, but as Mitt points out, they take years to develop. These are insights that McCain and Huckabee couldn’t come to on their own, suggesting their programs as President would continue to have similar flaws. As usual Mitt’s responses were the most thoughtful, substantive and intelligent. For me, in my relatively few 41 years, I saw Reagan take office with little foreign policy experience and end up winning the cold war. McCain’s Vietnam experience was 30-40 years ago and not as relevant now. Mitt would be a fantastic commander-in-chief. But I’m not ready to see John McCain try to run an economy he barely understands, taking risks with my pocket-book along the way while collecting his government salary and living off his wife’s riches. Mitt’s lived in the real economy and has had to perform in a real job, as well as in government. He’s lived in both worlds; McCain has lived in one, out of touch with me and mine.

Kudos to My Wife

Kudos to my wife for finding the following useful information pre-Super Tuesday:

1. Someone on a Canadian website calls it like it is for U.S. Republicans and their choice of Mitt vs. Mac. This person isn’t even a Mitt fan, but recognizes the choice of McCain would be disastrous. If you’re a Republican reading this, whether conservative or moderate, think about John McCain essentially having free-reign to sign bills into law that a liberal Democratic Congress sends to his desk. Do you think he’d stick with Republican ideals? I really don’t think so as his record indicates otherwise.

2. The National Review seems to remain a voice of reason on Mitt vs. Mac. McCain’s coronation is pre-mature. Sure we would have liked to have had Florida, and we’d have been saying the same things about our being a front-runner if we’d won. But the truth would have been, as it is now, that Mitt’s leading in a number of Super Tuesday states, and the race is unlikely to be decided even afterward. See this link for recent analysis from National Review Online.

Super Tuesday: Who Wins Your Confidence?

With 23 states and, as I recall, a thousand or so delegates up for grabs Tuesday, McCain’s “imposing” lead is how many? Twenty-eight whole delegates, according to CNN. This race is not about those delegates, but about winning the 40X that amount available Tuesday. And even then, the GOP nominee still won’t be decided. This cite is from USA Today:

There will be more than 1,000 Republican delegates at stake on Feb. 5, enough to give a candidate a substantial boost toward the 1,191 needed to win the nomination — but only if one man emerges victorious in numerous states.

“I think you could have two or three viable (GOP) candidates” following Super Tuesday, said Ohio Republican Chairman Robert Bennett.

“Somebody’s going to have some big wins, but you’re going to go into March 4, and you’re not going to have an apparent (GOP) nominee,” Bennett said.

So the race is still up for grabs.

If you’re a California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, etc. etc. voter voting this Tuesday, and you’re choosing between Mitt and Mac, think about who’d you rather have trying to stem the tide from a Democratic Congress: Mitt Romney, the consistent choice of the conservatives in every state so far, or John McCain, choice of the liberals.

Don’t think it matters? Remember the recent debate about expanding SCHIP, the welfare program Congress wanted to expand by multiple billions of dollars? Democrats in Congress passed it, but who stood in the way? President Bush. Without his veto pen, we’d be looking to foot that tax bill now when it’s become clear that tax rebates are required to stimulate the economy, and not huge welfare projects that increase the deficit. When the next bill comes to the desk of the President, and we know it will come, are we confident McCain would vote according to Republican principles? If you think so, think again: McCain was one of two Senators to vote against the Bush tax cuts (McCain admits he was wrong, but if he’d had his way the economy would have been tanked); illegal immigration (McCain supported a permanent residence for illegals, and now only partially admits he was wrong and has assumed Mitt’s position on securing the border); campaign finance reform (he’d do it again); global warming (bad approach, and he’s a co-author). It’s nice to admit when you’re wrong, but it’s even better not to be wrong in the first place on issues that will cost us billions. On issues as complicated as the economy, and even on national security, we need an intelligent man who can figure out what to do before he forms an opinion.

We are not alone.

All us Mittsters, and those who feel they align with Mitt but aren’t sure about voting for him due to the press’ coronation of McCain, should realize that there are a lot of people out there that are looking at Mitt vs. Mac for the first time, whether because they left Fred or Giuliani, because they realize Huckabee isn’t going to win (just look at the Ron Paul-like marginalization of Huckabee in last night’s debate) or whether they just can’t stomach McCain and his liberal past, and Mitt will win among principled Republican voters. Let’s also remind ourselves of the hundreds of thousands that have already voted for Mitt: the total number of voters who have decided 1st vs. 2d in Iowa, NH and FL has been very small. I’d be interested in seeing what the current popular vote count is (the difference between McCain and Mitt is not large). And if we work to get Mitt more delegates than McCain on Super Tuesday, McCain’s 28 delegate lead will recede into memory.

No Scaling Back Now

Some reporting went on this morning about Mitt scaling back advertising, but the National Review pointed to this article at Yahoo to the contrary.

McCain Stole Florida

For those of you first-time readers, you should realize that John McCain’s apparent momentum (all of 5% of the voters in Florida) was the result of what many have reported to be dirty politics. In 2000 McCain got am-Bushed in South Carolina with lies and innuendo. The people who did it to him worked for George Bush, and now work for McCain. And they pulled a similar trick last weekend: they purposefully distorted Mitt’s record supporting the surge and as Massachusetts governor. Issues aside about the actual record (both issues are Mitt strengths), many media outlets have continued to ask McCain about this (including in the debate last night) because it takes a real contortionist to come up with an argument that McCain was using “straight talk,” and Mitt of course called McCain on it. The media then said the fight was getting “nasty,” but in reality it was Mitt responding to lies about his positions. The resulting swing, based on McCain’s untruth’s and the public’s perception of the race getting ugly, turned some in McCain’s favor. Of course it’s ugly to call someone dishonest, but it’s even uglier if that claim is true. In addition there were reports of lots of mis-deeds reported elsewhere on this site. Bottom line: don’t be fooled by the reported “momentum.” The margin of victory wasn’t significant, conservatives are voting for Mitt, many when faced with Mitt vs. Mac are repulsed by the latter, and, last but not least, the most qualified candidate is still Mitt Romney, who hasn’t resorted to the sorts of dishonesty as McCain has.

Huckabee Supporters’ Coming Crisis of Conscience

If you’re a Huckabee supporter, I believe you have a real crisis of conscience developing. Should you support Mike, who represents your views on social issues but is unlikely to get beyond Tuesday, or do you bet on Mitt or Mac. With McCain’s less than solid record on social issues (other posters help me out here), you may want to consider whether you’d be comfortable with McCain as the candidate. Mitt may be your only choice for a real, pro-life, pro-family, anti-gay marriage candidate. It’s been nice to have Mike in the race I’m sure, as he probably looks like folks you know and see in church on Sunday. But who’s closer to your real ideals, Mitt or McCain? I believe it’s Mitt, and would encourage you to really think about who you’re voting for Tuesday. Damaging Mitt for Mac’s gain is counter-productive to your real concerns, and I believe it’s time to switch horses. It looks like Fred Thompson’s supporters have come our way, and it’s likely many Rudy supporters (though not all) will move to McCain. Who are you most like? Conservative Fred, or socially liberal Rudy? Notwithstanding our candidates’ disagreements, we’d welcome you into the fold.

What you can do to help win

Super Tuesday isn’t about Mitt, it’s about us. He carried the load in the “retail politics” states of Iowa, New Hampshire, etc. But now we need to get out in our own areas with signs, buttons, phone calls and reach out to everyone we know to pull them into Mitt’s fold. So, no. 1, get out and vote. No. 2, make those calls if you’re in the campaign. Talk to friends. If they’re pro-Mitt, or supported Fred, Rudy or Huckabee, tell them they have a choice: Mitt vs. Mac, and they need to choose who they really want. Let’s go.

Share on Facebook

Share This

Yesterday I had to take my daughter Erin in for her quarterly CF clinic appointment at Vanderbilt. As always happens I got lost in the parking garage (you’d think after going there for two years I’d of figured it out, right??? Wrong), anyway, getting back to the story. I ended up in the Physicians parking area, and had to back out. In the process low and behold look what I found:

For the sake of transparency, I later found out that the car belonged to the very pulmonologist that Erin was seeing in the clinic. He and I have been talking Romney for about eighteen months now (and I’d like to believe that I’m part of the reason he’s supporting him). He was aware of Romney having lived and worked in Boston in the 90’s. It was cool to see another person sporting the sticker though, especially in Thompson country.

Share on Facebook

Share This

A couple of days ago, I posted this: Fred Thompson: Truth & Integrity. For those who wish to challenge me and this site for seeking the truth on FT’s past position on abortion and who think this is a non-issue, I strongly disagree.

Others have stated they believe the Los Angeles Times article may be completely innaccurate or even fabricated (see new, big LA Times article [FRONT PAGE] below challenging FT’s conservative credentials). On this note, let me say this — Until this year and for many years I subscribed to the print edition of the Times for one reason: It’s journalistic integrity and in-depth reporting. Sure it is recognized as having an editorial bent to the far left; no question. But generally speaking, the stories it chooses to hunt down and pursue are well researched and reported. This story about FT working for a pro-abortion lobbying effort just came out and more truth will eventually emerge. My only point with it is this: FT has stated all along that he has been staunchly pro-life his whole life. He has denied that he did the lobbying work in question (through his spokesman). What if he is lying?

It now appears he is trying to backtrack. See these brief excerpts from LifeSiteNews.com:

Initially Thompson media spokesman Mark Corallo denied that Thompson did any work for NFPRHA, but later told the Times that Thompson may have offered assistance to another lawyer working in the firm, saying it was “not unusual for one lawyer on one side of an issue to be asked to give advice to colleagues for clients who engage in conduct or activities with which they personally disagree.”
—–
According to conservative analysts at the National Review, Thompson’s abortion past should not be a liability, but failing to admit openly a pro-abortion past could hurt him more.

“There’s no question that Thompson has moved on abortion,” stated NR’s Ramesh Ponnuru on the Corner. “[H]e wasn’t pro-life at the start of his political career - and he is doing himself no favors by failing to acknowledge it.”

My only issue with FT is his position that he has always been pro-life and never admitting that he shifted from a pro-choice position. It appears (emphasis on “appears”) that FT is doing everything in his power to cover the truth about this important fact. In his mind, since he has always been pro-life, he needs no explanation for a shift from being pro-choice. My personal opinion? His statements, and those of his team, appear to be designed to buy him time to come up with his dance card on the issue of how and why he shifted. So far, I think he has played very loose with truth. If so, is that germain to his candidacy?

How important is core integrity in a presidential candidate?

Today the LA Times came out with a big article about FT and whether he is the core conservative that he and his team are portraying him to be. To read the full Los Angeles Times article from today, click here:

Thompson not always at GOP core

~ Vic

Share on Facebook

Share This

These are quotes from this Associated Press article. Who do these remind you of (except the deep voice)?

• “Deep Voice”
• “Southern Drawl”
• “Conversational Manner”
• “Laid-back, guy-next-door-nature”
• “Ability to talk to people like he’s sitting on their front porch”
• “A little folksy”

The descriptions I keep reading about Fred Thompson remind me of President Bush. Almost every article I see touting the great Fred Thompson these days, I see quotes like these above — in essence. As wonderful as these personal traits may be to many people, it is a bit disturbing to me that so many people hold them up as “his greatest strengths.” If these are his greatest strengths, do we need to be worried if he is elected President?

Now, I admit that I could be missing something of substance in the media but I have yet to read about or see an interview of FT in which he even states he wants to be President of the United States. He seems to be taking the tack that his greatest strength is that others want to draft him to be President. If he does want the job, why? What is his vision and why are we to believe he is the most qualified to be chief executive? Are reports true that he lacks that “fire-in-the-belly” to be President?

I realize that others like MyMannMitt and Evangelicals for Mitt have challenged the core competencies of FT by contrast to Governor Romney. This article by Liz Sidoti is but another widely held view that FT has yet to demonstrate the true substance of a chief executive.

Sooner or later, the all-but-declared Republican candidate will have to answer the question: What else do you offer?
—–
His stump speech consists of broad conservative themes, talk of bipartisanship and commentary on issues of the day, but it largely lacks any vision for the future of the country. He deflects questions on what a Thompson presidency would look like and demurs when pressed for specific proposals for how to fix the nation’s ills. He opines on hot topics, from taxes to terrorism, in online columns and on his Web site, usually without being challenged.

Click here to read the online AP article ——–> Analysis: Potential US presidential candidate Fred Thompson’s strength is his style

Do we want another George W. Bush? At least President Bush had quite a bit of executive experience.

Check here for more background on Fred —–> Encyclopedia Mittanica

Also, was Fred Thompson a “mole” of sorts for the Nixon administration? —–> Ex-Watergate prober: Thompson ‘was mole for the White House’

Also ——-> Presidential Hopeful And Actor Fred Thompson Has Style, Needs Substance

~ Vic

More »

Share on Facebook

Share This

Well, it appears that Fred Thompson is about to feel what it is like to walk out of the shade of an oak tree during a family picnic into the burning rays of national politics. This short piece in Earthtimes.org refers to a Newsweek article that will be on newstands tomorrow (June 18th) about Fred Thompson. Click here to read the article —–> NEWSWEEK: Thompson’s Strategy on Key Issues May Cost Him the Conservative Vote

An excerpt from that article:

Combing through Thompson’s archive, Newsweek found several files on his campaign strategy on abortion that could roil his 2008 bid. On a 1994 Eagle Forum survey, Thompson said he opposed criminalizing abortion. Two years later, on a Christian Coalition questionnaire, he checked “opposed” to a proposed constitutional amendment protecting the sanctity of human life. In a campaign policy statement filed in the archives, he also said he believes “the decision to have an early term abortion is a moral issue and should not be a legal one subject to the dictates of the government.” During an interview with the Conservative Spectator, a Tennessee newspaper, he claimed to be pro-life but also said that, “The ultimate decision on abortion should be left with the woman and not the government.”

The article refers the reader to the Newsweek online article and I could not find it. I searched for 15 minutes and could not find the article about Thompson.

As usual, Mike Laub has spent countless hours compiling valuable facts about another competitor of Mitt Romney. If I was in charge of making awards to hand out to volunteer promoters of Mitt Romney for President, I would give one to Mike Laub. Seriously. He is tireless in his work for the man. More importantly, his work is amazing. Please take a minute and visit this new page developed by Mike and bookmark it for future reference. This is definitely a page I plan to use in my research of Fred Thompson and one to which I will send friends who tell me they will support him for President. Click here to see it ——> The Encyclopedia Mittanica — Fred Thompson

There are two bookmarks I am sending friends to when they want to read about FT. It is this one by Mike and this one: This is the category for Fred Thompson for this site ——> Fred Thompson

~ Vic

Share on Facebook

Share This

~ Mike

Share on Facebook

Share This

Photo: (DIPTI VAIDYA / THE TENNESSEAN)

“I know there’s been some speculation among Republicans about a certain former senator from Tennessee getting into the presidential race. Everyone is waiting and wondering, all the hype is building. I feel great comfort in the fact that no one in this room, not a single person, will be voting for Al Gore.”

Romney during the Tennessee state Republican party’s annual Statemen’s Dinner fundraiser at the Gaylord Opryland Resort and Convention Center.

Share on Facebook

Share This

http://billhobbs.com/2006…_tennessee.html

The following blog entry comes from Bill Hobbs, if you click the link it’ll take you to the original entry, and the picture it mentions below. Sounds like it was a great get together with some big names from Tennessee. Glad to see that he’s continuing to impress wherever he goes; and that he’s not only focusing on early primary states, but visiting others as well. I especially liked this observation [Romney, who at times seems to be channeling some of the speaking mannerisms of Ronald Reagan, stressed the need for Republicans to project optimism in the face of challenges, and also urged Republicans not to cede such issues as healthcare, education and the environment to Democrats.]

The photo shows Massachussets Gov. Mitt Romney at a gathering of Republicans at the Brentwood home of newly elected state Sen. Jack Johnson. I was lucky enough to score an invitation. Among the crowd: state Rep. Brian Kelsey, state Rep. Debra Young Maggart, state Rep. Donna Rowland, state Rep. Glen Casada, Steve Gill, Van Hilleary, Nathan Moore, U.S. Rep. Marsha Blackburn, and many others whose names I either can’t recall or don’t know. There were about 40 people there, maybe more.

Why was he here? Well, with U.S. Sen. Bill Frist announcing he won’t afterall be a candidate for the GOP presidential nod, Tennessee is now in play in the primaries.

I didn’t take notes, and Gov. Romney didn’t speak long, but Romney, running for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination, talked very effectively about healthcare and also touched on education and other issues, including the threat we face from Islamist extremists. Romney, who at times seems to be channeling some of the speaking mannerisms of Ronald Reagan, stressed the need for Republicans to project optimism in the face of challenges, and also urged Republicans not to cede such issues as healthcare, education and the environment to Democrats. He noted that Democrats are captive to special interests on those issues, so they can’t solve those problems - for example, Democrats are too in the pocket of the teachers’ unions to lead any effort at meaningful education reform.

For more on Romney, there’s a Mitt Romney for President blog, and an Americans for Mitt Romney website in addition to Romney’s Commonwealth PAC website that I linked to above.

The first primary ballots will be cast in Iowa in less than 14 months.

Ann Marie

Thanks so much to Bill Hobbs for this piece!

Share on Facebook

Share This

http://deseretnews.com/dn…0208386,00.html

The Deseret News (out of SLC, Utah) has recently highlighted our friends at E4M (Evangelicals for Mitt).

They’re getting over 5,000 hits per day and it will be surging as things heat up. The article concludes with:

Meanwhile, blogs like EvangelicalsforMitt.org, are going to play a bigger role in the 2008 election than ever before, Corrado said.
“You can’t simply put them aside,” Corrado said. “They have become part of the culture.”

Jeff

Share on Facebook

Share This

I’m not going to post anything lengthy at the moment, having just got home from Franklin. But, I will say that everyone at my table had an absolute blast. I’ll be offering further details and pictures after a good nights rest.

Ann Marie

Add to Del.icio.us

Share on Facebook

Share This

URGENT:

To those of you in the region (meaning Tennessee, Kentucky, Alabama, Arkansas, Missouri, Georgia and beyond if you like), Governor Romney will be keynoting an event of The Williamson County GOP on August 4th, 2006. Below is a copy of the invitation. I am attempting to fill a table of ten, but if more than ten of you are interested we can fill two or three if need be. If you are interested in attending this event, please contact me ASAP either by email or by phone (the number is listed in the contact section on the bottom of the right side bar) so that I can get our table arranged. Lets show Governor Romney what we’re made of, and turn out a large crowd!

Dinner Reservations - $150 per person or $275 per couple

Chairman�s Circle Reception - $500 per person/couple
A private reception and Photo-Op with Governor Romney - 6:00pm

Table Host - $1500 per table of 10 guests
A private reception and Photo-Op with Governor Romney - 6:00pm

Share on Facebook

Share This