Mitt Romney for President, MyManMitt.com
About Us
Contact Us
Donate to Mitt Romney Campaign

Mitt Romney on the Issues
Videos Mitt Romney
Help Mitt Romney




Saturday, November 10, 2007
posted by Justin Hart | 10:18 AM | permalink
Great article in the WSJ on Romney. Here's a quick excerpt:

Having established his biography, he turns without pause to the question, which he asks himself, "Why am I running for president?"

The answer to this question is as abstract as his overture was personal. The "I" in the question seems to disappear: "I think what America faces now are extraordinary challenges, which, if we deal with appropriately, will allow us to remain the world's military and economic superpower for an indefinite period of time."

Mr. Romney does then introduce a personal element, but it's not his own person. "If we instead take the course that Hillary Clinton would prescribe," he warns, "it would lead to America becoming the France of this century--having started as a superpower, ending up as a second-tier power."

Those challenges include: "global jihad" and "the emergence of Asia as an economic challenge." On the domestic front, he lists: "entitlement-driven financial distress," "overuse of foreign oil" and "the inability of our school system to prepare our kids for the jobs of today, let alone tomorrow." To that, Mr. Romney adds, "the inability of the health-care system to rein in the explosive growth in costs." Needless to say, he thinks "we have a good prospect of solving all of them and remaining the world's power."

Those, then, are the problems that, in his word, "drive" him. And it's a pretty good list. But rather than explain why he is the person to solve them, Mr. Romney shifts gears to talk about himself in another sense.

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:WSJ on Romney:
  • DiggWSJ on Romney:
  • Fark:WSJ on Romney:
  • Furl:WSJ on Romney:
  • Ma.gnolia:WSJ on Romney:
  • Netscape:WSJ on Romney:
  • NewsVine:WSJ on Romney:
  • Reddit:WSJ on Romney:
  • Slashdot:WSJ on Romney:
  • StumbleUpon:WSJ on Romney:
  • TailRank:WSJ on Romney:
  • Technorati:WSJ on Romney:
  • YahooMyWeb:WSJ on Romney:

Technorati Tags: |
 
2 Comments:


Mitt Romney doesn't have a chance at all to win the presidency. If you want to check out a real candidate with real values, check out Hillary Clinton. You won't be disappointed.



It's a breath of fresh air to see a Hillary supporter here. It's like comic relief and almost like being visited by aliens from another planet. "We Earthlings are friendly. We come in peace." Hillary supporter- enjoy the blog & hopefully change your mind. :D




posted by Anonymous | 1:32 AM | permalink
The recent reporting that James Dobson was about to throw his support behind Mike Huckabee set off a firestorm of conjecture about how it would effect the race. Now that the reporting appears to have been utterly mistaken, it seems to me that this is a good example of over eagerness to find a story.

Another good example is the recent Ron Paul fundraising drive. Consider this quote:

"Paul now holds the record among Republican White House candidates for fundraising on a single day, according to the Associated Press."

Anyone who has been following this race for a while realizes that Ron Paul did not even get within a million of Mitt Romney's one day total back in January.
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Overzealous Reporting?
  • DiggOverzealous Reporting?
  • Fark:Overzealous Reporting?
  • Furl:Overzealous Reporting?
  • Ma.gnolia:Overzealous Reporting?
  • Netscape:Overzealous Reporting?
  • NewsVine:Overzealous Reporting?
  • Reddit:Overzealous Reporting?
  • Slashdot:Overzealous Reporting?
  • StumbleUpon:Overzealous Reporting?
  • TailRank:Overzealous Reporting?
  • Technorati:Overzealous Reporting?
  • YahooMyWeb:Overzealous Reporting?

Technorati Tags: |
 
1 Comments:


Ron Paul's event was also a 2 day thing, since they counted money 12 hours before and 12 hours after.




Friday, November 9, 2007
posted by Devon Murphy | 5:16 PM | permalink
Don't miss this summary of Rudy's Immigration Record

"YOU'RE ONE OF THE PEOPLE WHO WE WANT IN THIS CITY"
Mayor Giuliani & Sen. Clinton Support Sanctuary For Illegal Alliens


"Giuliani's newfound border-security zeal is intended to blunt criticism by GOP rival Mitt Romney of Rudy's pro-sanctuary record as New York mayor. Giuliani has issued Clintonian denials that he supported sanctuary. But the record is clear." (Michelle Malkin, Op-Ed, "Sanctuary Nation Or Sovereign Nation?" National Review, 8/15/07)

Mayor Giuliani Ran New York City With A Sanctuary State Of Mind:

As Mayor, Giuliani Actually Invited More Illegal Immigrants To Come To New York. "Mr. Giuliani said, 'If you come here and you work hard and you happen to be in an undocumented status, you're one of the people who we want in this city. You're somebody that we want to protect, and we want you to get out from under what is often a life of being like a fugitive, which is really unfair.'" (Deborah Sontag, "New York Officials Welcome Immigrants, Legal Or Illegal," The New York Times, 6/10/94)

- ABC News: "Giuliani Inherited The [Sanctuary] Policy, He Reissued It And Seemed To Embrace It." "New York became a sanctuary city, where illegal immigrants enjoy some measure of protection, through an executive order signed by Mayor Ed Koch in 1989, five years before Giuliani became mayor in January 1994. But if Giuliani inherited the policy, he reissued it and seemed to embrace it." (Jake Tapper and Ron Claiborne, "Romney: Giuliani's NYC 'Sanctuary' For Illegal Immigrants," ABC News, 8/8/07)

Both Sen. Hillary Clinton And Mayor Giuliani Defend Sanctuary Cities:

Sen. Clinton Recently Defended New York's Sanctuary Policy, Saying, "I Don't Think There Is Any Choice." MSNBC's TIM RUSSERT: "But you would allow the sanctuary cities to disobey the federal law?" SEN. CLINTON: "Well, I don't think there is any choice." (MSNBC, Democratic Presidential Candidate Debate, Hanover, NH, 9/26/07)

Mayor Giuliani Has Defended His City's Sanctuary Policy, Saying, "'The Choice Becomes For A City What Do You Do?" "'The reality is that they are here, and they're going to remain here,' Mr. Giuliani said of the children. 'The choice becomes for a city what do you do? Allow them to stay on the streets or allow them to be educated? The preferred choice from the point of view of New York City is to be educated.'" (Eric Schmitt, "Giuliani Criticizes G.O.P. And Dole On Immigration," The New York Times, 6/7/96)

Both Sen. Hillary Clinton And Mayor Giuliani Support Amnesty For Illegal Immigrants:

Sen. Clinton Supports A "Path To Legalization" For The 12 Million Illegal Immigrants Here. "Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York said she was disappointed that the Senate did not move forward with its immigration bill and that the cornerstone of any future measure must be a 'path to legalization' for the 12 million undocumented immigrants already here." (Eunice Moscoso, "Democrats Promise Immigration Reform," Cox News Service, 6/30/07)

Mayor Giuliani, To Illegal Immigrants: "If You Want To Work, Pay Your Fair Share And We'll Sign You Up." "In response to a question by Richard Pope, 75, about the 12 million illegal immigrants already here, Giuliani said, 'I would say come forward, get your ... tamper-proof ID card, get photographed and fingerprinted, and we will check you out.' He added, 'If you want to work, pay your fair share and we'll sign you up.'" (Tom Brune, "Giuliani Vows To End Illegal Immigration," [New York] Newsday, 8/15/07)

- Mayor Giuliani: Give A Path To Citizenship To Illegal Aliens Who Have Not Committed Other Crimes. "Mr. Giuliani said the rest of the 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens already here can gain a path to citizenship after a waiting period if they register and learn English. Those key elements generally track President Bush's immigration bill, which was defeated in the Senate earlier this year." (Stephen Dinan, "Giuliani Eyes Citizenship Path For Illegals," The Washington Times, 8/15/07)

- "Rudy Giuliani Would Allow Most Of The Estimated 12 Million Illegal Immigrants In This Country To Stay, Work And Even Become Citizens – Provisions That GOP Hardliners Blast As 'Amnesty.'" (Tom Brune, "Giuliani Vows To End Illegal Immigration," [New York] Newsday, 8/15/07)

Labels: ,

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Sanctuary State of Mind
  • DiggSanctuary State of Mind
  • Fark:Sanctuary State of Mind
  • Furl:Sanctuary State of Mind
  • Ma.gnolia:Sanctuary State of Mind
  • Netscape:Sanctuary State of Mind
  • NewsVine:Sanctuary State of Mind
  • Reddit:Sanctuary State of Mind
  • Slashdot:Sanctuary State of Mind
  • StumbleUpon:Sanctuary State of Mind
  • TailRank:Sanctuary State of Mind
  • Technorati:Sanctuary State of Mind
  • YahooMyWeb:Sanctuary State of Mind

Technorati Tags: |
 
1 Comments:


FOLKS, DO NOT FALL FOR THE BAMBOOZLE OUR MEDIA HYPED PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES ARE TRYING TO PULL OVER YOU!!
Senator Clinton and Rudy will legalize all ILLEGALS if they get in office!! Vote the candidate that has exhibited the "right behavior" for a duration , not the overnite media conversions, running in the front of the pack!

AMERICA VOTE FOR THE SECURITY AND PROTECTION OF THE COUNTRY AND FOR YOUR KIDS, KIDS!!!




posted by Anonymous | 4:46 PM | permalink
Interesting quote from Giuliani today:

In speaking about Islamic Terrorism, Giuliani said "This country has never, ever, I believe, gotten in trouble by exaggerating a threat," he said. "We've gotten ourselves more into trouble when we underestimate a threat."

While I can understand that Giuliani and Romney, as well as others, agree that we should have an appropriate appreciation for the threat we face in Islamic Terrorism, NEVER, EVER gotten into trouble by exaggeration is a pretty definitive statement that would fail reasonable scrutiny. I'm going to nominate the Gulf of Tonkin incident as a counter example.
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Never, Ever
  • DiggNever, Ever
  • Fark:Never, Ever
  • Furl:Never, Ever
  • Ma.gnolia:Never, Ever
  • Netscape:Never, Ever
  • NewsVine:Never, Ever
  • Reddit:Never, Ever
  • Slashdot:Never, Ever
  • StumbleUpon:Never, Ever
  • TailRank:Never, Ever
  • Technorati:Never, Ever
  • YahooMyWeb:Never, Ever

Technorati Tags: |
 
1 Comments:


What about Japanese internment in WWII?




posted by Anonymous | 4:18 PM | permalink
I have been absent recently (surely not conspicuously) because I have been engaged in back-to-back jury trials. Alas, I will be starting another one after Veteran's Day as well. I just wanted to take this opportunity to issue a challenge to Ron Paul. I like to talk about him from time to time because he has so many lackeys trolling the net looking for references to him, which helps to increase our website traffic.

The Ron Paul Challenge:

I have the distinct impression, Dr. Paul, that you are hijacking the Republican primary process in order to establish yourself as a third party candidate. In fact, I see no indication that you have any plans to concede defeat when Romney or anyone besides you wins the nomination. If you were to run as a third party candidate, as you did against George Bush 41 in 1988, I believe it might very well be disastrous to our party and our country because you may pull votes from our candidate in what may be a very close election.

I called your campaign and was told by one of your staffers that you are on record saying you have no plans to run as a third party candidate at this time. Frankly sir, that's not good enough. If my wife was headed to Las Vegas with some friends and I asked her to be faithful while she was gone, I wouldn't be satisfied if she told me she has no plans to be unfaithful at this time.

Are you going to be faithful to the Republican party?

If you are, I urge you to make a public statement to that effect. Try something like this. "I, Ron Paul, have been treated generously and graciously by the Republican Party. I have been allowed to participate in their debates and to increase my name recognition thereby. I have been allowed to run for many years with an "R" by my name in Texas, which was certainly a lot better in that state than the "L" I used to run against George Bush. In recognition of the support I have received from the Republican party, I hereby promise not to run as a candidate for United States President if I am not nominated as the Republican presidential candidate."
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:From the Wilderness
  • DiggFrom the Wilderness
  • Fark:From the Wilderness
  • Furl:From the Wilderness
  • Ma.gnolia:From the Wilderness
  • Netscape:From the Wilderness
  • NewsVine:From the Wilderness
  • Reddit:From the Wilderness
  • Slashdot:From the Wilderness
  • StumbleUpon:From the Wilderness
  • TailRank:From the Wilderness
  • Technorati:From the Wilderness
  • YahooMyWeb:From the Wilderness

Technorati Tags: |
 
2 Comments:


I would not be at ALL surprised if we found Ron on a ticket after he loses the nomination. It's interesting, though, to see the zeal with which the RonHeads defend and promote Ron on literally every site that his name is mentioned. Though he does have some interesting points, he is no where near as pragmatic and level headed as Our Man Mitt!



Do we really need the nutcases that would support Paul? I'd hope not.




posted by Kyle Hampton | 1:08 PM | permalink
There's a lot out there today about South Carolina, and how it is changing for Mitt.

First, this piece by John King over at CNN:

Some excerpts from the transcript:
That Romney is competitive here impresses people like Spartanburg County Republican Chairman Rick Beltram, who credits Romney with patiently and methodically answering his skeptics and addressing his vulnerabilities...

"If you look at how he has performed in the last six months versus all other candidates, he has made amazing progress going forward," Beltram said...

The results: He leads in the polls in Iowa and New Hampshire, is ahead or in a dead heat with Giuliani in Michigan (Romney' birth state), and is betting early wins would give him the momentum for what could be a decisive victory once the calendar shifts south to South Carolina.

Second, Jonathan Martin has a piece out today about the changing demographics and politics of South Carolina. It it he sees South Carolina placing more and more emphasis on fiscal conservatism and national security, with slightly less focus on social conservatism. He says that this reflects why Romney and Giuliani are so competitive there. He notes:

But the shift also has the potential to help Romney.

None of the Republicans who showed for his rally cared a whit that he was Mormon — as might have been the case in the “old” South Carolina.

Rather it was his promise to restrain spending and patriotic fervor for American strength that resonated.

“Where we have really lost faith with the party faithful is on fiscal issues,” said Warren Tompkins, a veteran South Carolina GOP strategist and Romney’s top consultant in the state.

“There’s a lot of disillusionment with spending.”

But it’s more than that, Tompkins argued. South Carolina Republicans, like those around the country, have been turned off by the scandals in the nation’s capital as well.

“That plays to Romney’s strength. He’s the personification of family values and, as a businessman, the personification of fiscal conservatism.”



Third, Noam Scheiber at TNR asks whether Romney is running away with the nomination:
For all the attention Rudy Giuliani got with that Pat Robertson endorsement earlier this week, the numbers increasingly suggest Romney is going to be the GOP nominee. According to Pollster.com, Romney's up 14 points in Iowa (28.6 to Huckabee's 14.8; Rudy is third at 13.7), has a steady and slightly widening lead in New Hampshire (28.8 to Rudy's 21.4), and, perhaps most interestingly, has begun to surge in South Carolina lately (he's now in a close third at 16.1, behind Thompson's 18.9 and Rudy's 19.8; Romney was languishing around 10 percent there only a few months ago.) Michigan, too, is looking better and better for him. Pollster.com shows Romney in second with 19.5 to Rudy's 21.7, but Rudy has been trending down there for the last several months, while Romney has been trending up.
He also lays out some possible ways to derail Romney's nomination, but finds all of them unlikely.

Finally, not specific to South Carolina, Micheal Luo over at the NYT has this news flash: Romney is optimistic:
Each of the leading Republican contenders has sought to channel in some way the shiny optimism that helped make Ronald Reagan, who famously campaigned on the slogan that it was “morning again in America,” so popular. But it is Mr. Romney who has most thoroughly incorporated such sunbeamy phrases and anecdotes into his repertory on the stump.
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Changing of the SC guard
  • DiggChanging of the SC guard
  • Fark:Changing of the SC guard
  • Furl:Changing of the SC guard
  • Ma.gnolia:Changing of the SC guard
  • Netscape:Changing of the SC guard
  • NewsVine:Changing of the SC guard
  • Reddit:Changing of the SC guard
  • Slashdot:Changing of the SC guard
  • StumbleUpon:Changing of the SC guard
  • TailRank:Changing of the SC guard
  • Technorati:Changing of the SC guard
  • YahooMyWeb:Changing of the SC guard

Technorati Tags: |
 
0 Comments:



posted by Justin Hart | 10:12 AM | permalink

New Romney TV Ad

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:"Change Immigration"
  • Digg"Change Immigration"
  • Fark:"Change Immigration"
  • Furl:"Change Immigration"
  • Ma.gnolia:"Change Immigration"
  • Netscape:"Change Immigration"
  • NewsVine:"Change Immigration"
  • Reddit:"Change Immigration"
  • Slashdot:"Change Immigration"
  • StumbleUpon:"Change Immigration"
  • TailRank:"Change Immigration"
  • Technorati:"Change Immigration"
  • YahooMyWeb:"Change Immigration"

Technorati Tags: |
 
1 Comments:


A large group of Mitt supporters are organizing an event to collect pledges and raise money online for Mitt. We are having it on the 7th of December and the website is http://www.december7thformitt.com/

We would love to get as many Mitt supporters behind this as we can, so please publicize this on your blogs and wherever else you can, thanks!




Thursday, November 8, 2007
posted by Justin Hart | 3:25 PM | permalink
MyManMitt.com and Race42008 team up to bring you an exclusive interview with Mitt Romney.


MyManMitt and Race42008.com are pleased to provide you the following interview with Gov. Mitt Romney.

Gov. Romney was gracious in taking time from his hectic schedule on the campaign trail in Connecticut to speak with Kavon Nikrad, Justin Hart, Jason Bonham, and MattC.

In this interview, Gov. Romney discusses his plan for defusing the Iranian nuclear crisis, reforming the federal government from the top down, providing relief to the African Continent, and how his national health care plan differs from that which was enacted in Massachusetts.
____________________________________________

Kavon W. Nikrad: It seems that in dealing with the Iranian nuclear crisis, the U.S. is forced to choose between different degrees of loss; or perhaps instead, we are in search of the choice in which we lose the least. On one hand, do nothing and the mullahs gain nuclear weapons; act militarily and we at minimum risk enraging a generation of young Iranians that may have overthrown the current regime eventually; and at worse start WWIII. Do you feel there is a scenario where the U.S. can “win”?

Gov. Mitt Romney: Well, I was in Israel early this year and spoke at the Herzliya Conference in Tel Aviv and laid out a seven-point strategy to convince Iran to abandon nuclear ambition and to instead pursue a path towards prosperity and peace. And that plan has at its heart much tougher economic and diplomatic sanctions against Iran during a time when its pursuing nuclear technology. I also believe that we should market democracy much more clearly to the people of Iran and we should make them painfully aware of the tragic course that a nuclear nation is pursuing.

Specifically, becoming a nuclear nation puts them very much at risk. Because as a nuclear nation, there is risk that fissile material that they develop would fall into the hands of terrorists, or others who would use it; and the civilized world will respond not just against the nation or the entity that uses that weapon, but also to the nation that supplies that fissile material. So I believe that it is very much in our interest to communicate these things and to show the world’s displeasure at Iran’s nuclear ambition.

And finally, of course, our military option must be one that we hold ready and that we are willing to take.

Justin Hart: Governor, you’ve spoken on numerous occasions about performing a top to bottom review of the government, an audit as you put it. What will that process look like, what will you be looking for as you conduct the audit, and what do you think you will find?

Gov. Mitt Romney: Well, first of all the people that I would bring together would not be a group of government bureaucrats but instead individuals from outside government who would take review of a particular agency or department or program area and look at all of the spending which we do in that area, all of the agencies that participate in that area, the programs that are focused upon it and we would evaluate the effectiveness of each of those programs, the effectiveness of the dollars spent, determine if there is some unintended by-product either good or bad that are coming from the agency or from the program. And on that basis we would rank/order those programs that should be eliminated, those that out to be expanded, and those that ought to be consolidated into others.

Right now, for instance, in an area like economic development there are some 342 different programs. We really don’t need that many. We ought to find a way to streamline and simplify, eliminate overhead, eliminate bureaucracy and make Washington more responsive to the needs of the people.

Matt C.: You stated a couple weeks ago that you represented the “Republican Wing of the Republican Party”, echoing Howard Dean’s statements in 2004. Could you first explain what you mean by that, and secondly, in hindsight, do you have any regrets saying that seeing the storm of attacks it brought you from Giuliani, McCain, Thompson, and others?

Gov. Mitt Romney: Well, actually the quote’s not quite accurate – which is, I said that I believe we do need to represent the Republican heartland or Republican base vote and that’s not just me, but it’s all of those that are running for office. I’m certainly not the only one that represents, if you will, the Reagan coalition but I’m one of those that does. And I do believe that to win the White House it is essential that we bring together the three branches of conservatism that Ronald Reagan assembled for his great victory – and that is social conservatives, economic conservatives, and foreign policy conservatives. I think if we are missing one of those three branches, we will not be successful in winning the White House.

So, like the others who are fighting for the nomination and establishing our bona fides, I think it’s essential to bring that group together, and I intend to speak on those topics and to try and build my support – I know the other fellows are doing the same thing – and ultimately the people will have their choice as to who they think is best able to represent those values of social, economic, and foreign policy conservatives.

Jason Bonham: A lot of America’s foreign policy focus is based on the War on Terror and European relationships. You have also specifically highlighted a need to take China more seriously. The U.S. and the UN have a past of ignoring serious problems in Africa including genocide. What are your views on the importance of African concerns to our foreign policy and what specifically would you do address these as president?

Gov. Mitt Romney: Well you make a very good point, which is that we as a public tend to focus on one hot spot at a time. And perhaps even our politicians do the same. A president and a nation must focus on all the areas of the world and understand how those areas are developing in ways that might encourage peace and stability or ways which might distract from them.

In my view it’s important for us to consider Africa on the basis of many issues. One of course is the tragic human condition of many in Africa who are subject to diseases such as AIDS, Malaria and others. A second aspect of our concern in Africa has to relate to the genocide occurring in Sudan, and then another area of concern would certainly be the spread of radical Jihadism. Whether it’s in Egypt, Algeria, Nigeria, Tanzania, Kenya, throughout Africa there are efforts on the part of radical jihadists to overthrow moderate modern governments. So we as a nation must join together with other civilized nations to help strengthen Africa so that it can reject the extreme and so that it can overcome the profound humanitarian crises which are upon it.

It is unfortunate that the United Nations has been unsuccessful in fulfilling its mission. The United Nations has not been able to stop genocide, has not stopped war, has not stopped the spread of diseases like AIDS. And so I believe it’s gonna’ take free nations coming together, working together on a global basis -and particularly with regards to a place like Africa- to help support moderate people so they can reject the extreme within them and so that we can combine to stop the spread of radical-violent-Jihadism.

Kavon W. Nikrad: Perhaps the signature accomplishment of your time as Governor of Massachusetts was enacting Massachusetts health care reform. However, while campaigning for President you have stressed that the solution that was right for Massachusetts would not necessarily be the correct one for the nation as a whole. Can you talk about the differences between the plan that was implemented in Massachusetts and the one you would champion as President?

Gov. Mitt Romney: Well I like what we did in Massachusetts and it may well be ideal for other states. But, of course, my view is that you don’t have the federal government put in place a one-size-fits-all plan for every single state. And that’s because of the differences between our state’s populations and their needs. In Massachusetts for instance, 7% of our population was uninsured. But in Texas, 25% of the population is uninsured. And therefore the plan that works in one state may not work perfectly in another. Likewise in California, a single individual can buy a good health care policy for $2000 a year. But in New Jersey, the cost is $6000 a year. So there’s going to be a needed reform of the health insurance market in New Jersey in order to provide the kind of quality insurance options that exist in places like California.

My view is this therefore-I want to get everybody in our country insured. But I do not want the government to mandate to states how they do it. Instead, I’d like the federal government to provide the flexibility to states just like they did to us in Massachusetts so that we could each craft our own plan to get our citizens insured.

Secondly, I don’t want our citizens to all get Medicare or Medicaid. In other words, I don’t think that government insurance is the right course for the uninsured. Rather, I believe that market-based, private insurance is the best course helping people who are uninsured become insured.

And finally, I do not believe that we should spend more money or require additional taxes to pay for these programs. We should, instead, redirect money that is already being used to help the poor.

So on a number of basis I take a very different course than Hillary Clinton’s. Her view is a one-size-fits-all plan. I say no, let it be done by states. Her plan is to give everybody that is uninsured government insurance. I say no, give them free market based insurance. And then her plan calls for an extra $110 billion a year in spending and in new taxes. I say no, use the money we are already spending and no new taxes.

Labels:

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Exclusive Interview with Mitt Romney
  • DiggExclusive Interview with Mitt Romney
  • Fark:Exclusive Interview with Mitt Romney
  • Furl:Exclusive Interview with Mitt Romney
  • Ma.gnolia:Exclusive Interview with Mitt Romney
  • Netscape:Exclusive Interview with Mitt Romney
  • NewsVine:Exclusive Interview with Mitt Romney
  • Reddit:Exclusive Interview with Mitt Romney
  • Slashdot:Exclusive Interview with Mitt Romney
  • StumbleUpon:Exclusive Interview with Mitt Romney
  • TailRank:Exclusive Interview with Mitt Romney
  • Technorati:Exclusive Interview with Mitt Romney
  • YahooMyWeb:Exclusive Interview with Mitt Romney

Technorati Tags: |
 
0 Comments:



posted by Kyle Hampton | 1:55 PM | permalink
Romney is out in front BIG on both of these. First, from New Hampshire, Rasmussen shows Romney up by 15:

Romney 32 (+4 vs. last poll Oct. 23)
Giuliani 17 (-2)
McCain 16 (nc)
Huckabee 10 (nc)
Thompson 7 (+1)


Second, Zogby shows Romney's lead at 16 points in Iowa:

Romney 31 (-2 vs. 8/18 poll)
Huckabee 15 (+7)
Giuliani 11 (-3)
Thompson 10 (-2)
McCain 8 (+2)


Also, don't miss today's article in The State talking about Romney's surge in South Carolina in the last month:

As recently as late September, Romney was polling consistently in the single digits and was typically in fourth place. But recent surveys show the former Massachusetts governor surging, as voters have gotten to know Romney and he has earned the endorsement of key evangelicals such as Bob Jones III, former Chancellor of the fundamentalist Greenville university of the same name.

Romney, who is Mormon, has spent considerable time wooing Christian conservatives here and elsewhere and convincing them he’s strong on social issues.

The effort apparently has paid off.

Labels: , ,

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Two new polls
  • DiggTwo new polls
  • Fark:Two new polls
  • Furl:Two new polls
  • Ma.gnolia:Two new polls
  • Netscape:Two new polls
  • NewsVine:Two new polls
  • Reddit:Two new polls
  • Slashdot:Two new polls
  • StumbleUpon:Two new polls
  • TailRank:Two new polls
  • Technorati:Two new polls
  • YahooMyWeb:Two new polls

Technorati Tags: |
 
2 Comments:


Kicking butt and taking names!



Could/would Mr. Thompson, Mr. Huckabee, Mr. McCain, and Mr. Giuliani please tell me why and how - when they have all stated to Mitt Romney...the latest being Mr. Thompson...that "you can't buy South Carolina", or "you can't buy votes" - will they pleaser inform me just how they plan on getting through to people WITHOUT a decent budget or spending towards advertising and travel?

With media time costing more on television, radio and newspaper - just how do they propose trying to get people to pay attention to them?

Romney is doing it right and getting it right! GO ROMNEY!!!




posted by Aaron Gulbransen | 11:55 AM | permalink
Here are excerpts from an article in the New York Sun:

"Mr. Giuliani, whose support of abortion and gay rights has been well documented, spoke at Mr. Robertson's Regent University in June, and the two have talked about sharing a bond as survivors of prostate cancer."

"
Those personal ties mitigate the level of shock at an endorsement from a conservative leader so staunchly opposed to abortion...'The announcement does not come as a surprise,' the dean of Regent's Robertson School of Government, Charles Dunn, said. 'Their relationship goes back some time.' "

"
Mr. Dunn described the move as a "win-win" for both Mr. Giuliani and Mr. Robertson. The former mayor, he said, 'needed a whale of the evangelical movement to endorse him' to slow down Mr. Romney's momentum with social conservatives. 'This is a big whale,' Mr. Dunn said. And as for Mr. Robertson, endorsing Mr. Giuliani 'makes him a big player in the game,' Mr. Dunn said."

"
For Mr. Giuliani, the endorsement will help him in the Republican primary, but it is not without risk. Mr. Robertson has drawn the ire of an array of interest groups in recent years with outlandish statements that have angered women, homosexuals, and Jews, among others."

While most were shocked, initially, as I was yesterday about this report. Dr. Dunn's comments seem to put it in perspective.

While this is good news for the Giuliani Campaign at the moment, I believe that the impact this move has in negligible compared to what a Robertson endorsement would have been 8 years ago. While the article somewhat denigrates the notion that the Christian Right is coalescing around Governor Romney and uses this endorsement as proof, the numbers don't lie. Thus far, Governor Romney has been getting the majority of endorsements from the Christian Right and I think that will continue. Robertson's endorsement certainly will not begin a mass exodus of Christian leaders falling over themselves to endorse Giuliani.

What this does, in my mind, is to solidify the notion that this is truly a two-man race between Governor Romney and Major Giuliani. As things are trending, one can just look at the new NH poll, the tide is turning overwhelmingly in Governor Romney's favor.

"Let not your heart be troubled..."
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Robertson/Giuliani Endorsement Not As Surprising As Previously Thought
  • DiggRobertson/Giuliani Endorsement Not As Surprising As Previously Thought
  • Fark:Robertson/Giuliani Endorsement Not As Surprising As Previously Thought
  • Furl:Robertson/Giuliani Endorsement Not As Surprising As Previously Thought
  • Ma.gnolia:Robertson/Giuliani Endorsement Not As Surprising As Previously Thought
  • Netscape:Robertson/Giuliani Endorsement Not As Surprising As Previously Thought
  • NewsVine:Robertson/Giuliani Endorsement Not As Surprising As Previously Thought
  • Reddit:Robertson/Giuliani Endorsement Not As Surprising As Previously Thought
  • Slashdot:Robertson/Giuliani Endorsement Not As Surprising As Previously Thought
  • StumbleUpon:Robertson/Giuliani Endorsement Not As Surprising As Previously Thought
  • TailRank:Robertson/Giuliani Endorsement Not As Surprising As Previously Thought
  • Technorati:Robertson/Giuliani Endorsement Not As Surprising As Previously Thought
  • YahooMyWeb:Robertson/Giuliani Endorsement Not As Surprising As Previously Thought

Technorati Tags: |
 
4 Comments:


We can say many things about Giuliani (who I wouldn't vote for if my life depended upon it unless he seriously changes his position on abortion), but one thing for sure about Rudy is that he is an extremely, extremely strong supporter of Israel. I think that Giuliani's support of Israel is underplayed in its importance as to why Robertson endorsed him. With Robertson's predictions about the end of the world coming so soon, Robertson might be looking to make sure that he supports someone who he knows will be on Israel's side during Armageddon. This may sound a bit out there, but many have argued that Robertson is a bit out there also. Is Robertson thinking that a Giuliani Presidency will somehow speed up the Second Coming of Christ? I wouldn't put it past Pat Robertson. I don't necessarily think that Pat Robertson is prophetic, but maybe he is in tune to something that I'm missing. Anyway, Giuliani's support of Israel is also very enticing to me. And Pat Robertson said that he spoke with Giuliani at length during a flight back from Israel. I can't imagine this not affecting someone as pro-Israel as Pat Robertson.

In fact, Giuliani's positions on many issues are extremely appealing - Giuliani's personal flaws aside. But this does not excuse his support for the horrific practice of abortion. To explain the importance of a candiate's opposition to abortion to prove that a candidate is not flawed beyond repair, it would be like having a Republican candidate who was perfect on every issue but supported slavery before the Civil War. I could not do vote for that person. For that matter, supporting abortion now is like supporting slavery after the Civil War. When Robertson talks about the "blood lust" of terrorists who want to kill us, he seems to forget about something that he's worked hard to bring to an end: the "blood lust" of Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and other pro-abortion activists.



Have you read any of GMR's pro-Israel speaches? I for one think that not only is GMRE just as ardent a supporter of Israel as RG (not that it is a contest or something), but he is also the best equiped to advocate for Israel to the rest of the world. But that's just my opinion, it is certainly open to discussion, and a case can definitely be made for RG.



Interesting point, although its not as though Mitt isn't a strong backer of Israel. He even gave a speech there earlier this year on dealing with Iran.



My point wasn't that Mitt isn't a strong backer of Israel, I believe that he is, but my point was that Giuliani's defense of Israel may have been what made Robertson overlook all of Giuliani's problems on social issues. It's not a game of "I'm that too." It's a game of who does a certain individual believe can get something done on a certain issue. Like I said, maybe Robertson believes that Giuliani will speed up the process for the Second Coming somehow. It's just a thought.




posted by Justin Hart | 9:54 AM | permalink
MMM inquired into the campaign about their thoughts on the Pat Robertson endorsement:

"I guess Rudy will be having Pat Robertson pray away Hurracaine Mitt which is washing over him in Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan, and now South Carolina."
- Senior Romney Aide

Watch close, new NH poll at the top of the hour.

Also, don't miss our exclusive interview with Mitt Romney.
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Senior Romney Aide Reacts to the Robertson/Rudy Endorsement
  • DiggSenior Romney Aide Reacts to the Robertson/Rudy Endorsement
  • Fark:Senior Romney Aide Reacts to the Robertson/Rudy Endorsement
  • Furl:Senior Romney Aide Reacts to the Robertson/Rudy Endorsement
  • Ma.gnolia:Senior Romney Aide Reacts to the Robertson/Rudy Endorsement
  • Netscape:Senior Romney Aide Reacts to the Robertson/Rudy Endorsement
  • NewsVine:Senior Romney Aide Reacts to the Robertson/Rudy Endorsement
  • Reddit:Senior Romney Aide Reacts to the Robertson/Rudy Endorsement
  • Slashdot:Senior Romney Aide Reacts to the Robertson/Rudy Endorsement
  • StumbleUpon:Senior Romney Aide Reacts to the Robertson/Rudy Endorsement
  • TailRank:Senior Romney Aide Reacts to the Robertson/Rudy Endorsement
  • Technorati:Senior Romney Aide Reacts to the Robertson/Rudy Endorsement
  • YahooMyWeb:Senior Romney Aide Reacts to the Robertson/Rudy Endorsement

Technorati Tags: |
 
3 Comments:


Is the point of this joke that people who pray for protection from hurricanes are ridiculous? I don't mush care for Pat Robertson, but sneering at people who believe in the power of prayer is a turn off to me.



Huh? The joke on prayers here? Where? No, the point here is that Mitt's momentum has gotten to the point that it is considerable more powerful; at least, is now at point no one can ignore. It will take a miracle for Rudy to pull off a win in one of those 3 states mentioned. How is it a joke?



Sneering at people who believe in the power of prayer? I cannot speak for GMR personally, but knowing he is a Mormon through and through, you will have a hard time finding one who believes more fully in the power of prayer than a Mormon. Their entire belief system is founded on it. But I think you knew that that was not the point of the comment, didn't you?




Wednesday, November 7, 2007
posted by Jeff Fuller | 9:59 PM | permalink
Iowa Christian Alliance President Steve Scheffler sent out an important Press release tonight (and sent it out to the entire ICA email list.) Some interesting parts:
Iowa Conservatives: Don’t Fall for Rudy

. . .

Iowans should nominate a candidate who can draw a contrast with Hillary, not someone who shares her New York values.

. . .

Social conservatives such as Pat Robertson who back pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage candidates do a disservice to the conservative movement. At the end of the day, we have to stand for something, or our movement has no purpose.”

See the whole press release and my commentary at Iowans for Romney.

Jeff Fuller
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Iowa Christian Alliance President Slams Pat Robertson's Endorsement of Giuliani
  • DiggIowa Christian Alliance President Slams Pat Robertson's Endorsement of Giuliani
  • Fark:Iowa Christian Alliance President Slams Pat Robertson's Endorsement of Giuliani
  • Furl:Iowa Christian Alliance President Slams Pat Robertson's Endorsement of Giuliani
  • Ma.gnolia:Iowa Christian Alliance President Slams Pat Robertson's Endorsement of Giuliani
  • Netscape:Iowa Christian Alliance President Slams Pat Robertson's Endorsement of Giuliani
  • NewsVine:Iowa Christian Alliance President Slams Pat Robertson's Endorsement of Giuliani
  • Reddit:Iowa Christian Alliance President Slams Pat Robertson's Endorsement of Giuliani
  • Slashdot:Iowa Christian Alliance President Slams Pat Robertson's Endorsement of Giuliani
  • StumbleUpon:Iowa Christian Alliance President Slams Pat Robertson's Endorsement of Giuliani
  • TailRank:Iowa Christian Alliance President Slams Pat Robertson's Endorsement of Giuliani
  • Technorati:Iowa Christian Alliance President Slams Pat Robertson's Endorsement of Giuliani
  • YahooMyWeb:Iowa Christian Alliance President Slams Pat Robertson's Endorsement of Giuliani

Technorati Tags: |
 
0 Comments:



posted by Justin Hart | 9:23 PM | permalink

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Governor Romney Takes The Clinton Debate Quiz
  • DiggGovernor Romney Takes The Clinton Debate Quiz
  • Fark:Governor Romney Takes The Clinton Debate Quiz
  • Furl:Governor Romney Takes The Clinton Debate Quiz
  • Ma.gnolia:Governor Romney Takes The Clinton Debate Quiz
  • Netscape:Governor Romney Takes The Clinton Debate Quiz
  • NewsVine:Governor Romney Takes The Clinton Debate Quiz
  • Reddit:Governor Romney Takes The Clinton Debate Quiz
  • Slashdot:Governor Romney Takes The Clinton Debate Quiz
  • StumbleUpon:Governor Romney Takes The Clinton Debate Quiz
  • TailRank:Governor Romney Takes The Clinton Debate Quiz
  • Technorati:Governor Romney Takes The Clinton Debate Quiz
  • YahooMyWeb:Governor Romney Takes The Clinton Debate Quiz

Technorati Tags: |
 
1 Comments:


I didn't get to hear the interview when it happened but was listening to the comments on the show afterwards. Medved, who has been somewhat skeptical, was very complimentary and especially liked his honest and direct answers. Listeners that called in seemed impressed as well.




posted by Mike | 8:16 PM | permalink
UPDATE: The ENPR Editors contacted us to admit that they were not specific enough on their comparison (It is accurate that Paul beat the actual dollars pulled in by Romney on January 8th. The Romney campaign had actual dollars and "pledges" for $6.5 million while Paul's amount was in actual dollars for that day.) The original title of this post ("Evans-Novak et al. Meet the Facts") is thus misleading and we apologize.

I received the Evans-Novak Political Report today in which they report:
Rep. Ron Paul set fundraising records on Monday, pulling in $4.2 million in online donations in one day. This is the largest single day of online fundraising in political history, and the largest single day of donations for any Republican candidate ever.
It is really hard to know where this story got started, because "Googling" the search string:
fundraising record republicans "ron paul"
reveals 573,000 references to Ron Paul's supposed record of $4.2 million!

Changing the entry to:
fundraising record republicans romney january
yields at the top of the list an article in the Washington Post with this quote:

Romney has labored in single digits in polling but has been an aggressive fundraiser. He launched his campaign with a "National Call Day" at the convention center in Boston in January, where nearly 400 of his supporters, including Meg Whitman, the chief executive of eBay, and Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt called friends to ask them to back Romney. The event raised a whopping $6.5 million in a single day.

The January event was also covered in the Boston Globe.

As I was wondering who to blame for the inaccurate reporting, I suddenly remembered all those dial-in polls on Fox after the Republican debates, which always show that Ron Paul wins handily...

Need proof? Check out the picture Justin took in January:

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Evans-Novak Numbers Need More Context
  • DiggEvans-Novak Numbers Need More Context
  • Fark:Evans-Novak Numbers Need More Context
  • Furl:Evans-Novak Numbers Need More Context
  • Ma.gnolia:Evans-Novak Numbers Need More Context
  • Netscape:Evans-Novak Numbers Need More Context
  • NewsVine:Evans-Novak Numbers Need More Context
  • Reddit:Evans-Novak Numbers Need More Context
  • Slashdot:Evans-Novak Numbers Need More Context
  • StumbleUpon:Evans-Novak Numbers Need More Context
  • TailRank:Evans-Novak Numbers Need More Context
  • Technorati:Evans-Novak Numbers Need More Context
  • YahooMyWeb:Evans-Novak Numbers Need More Context

Technorati Tags: |
 
5 Comments:


The amount claimed by the Ron Paul campaign is described as "donations" and they probably didn't consider pledges raised by Mitt in the comparison.



I think they are distinguishing between online fund raising (Ron Paul supporters) and one day fund raising (Mitt's combination of online and phone bank fund raising). With that distinction, I don't think the reporting is inaccurate, merely misleading.

Matt Erickson
Bangor, Maine



I believe the hair that is being split is that GMR's total included "commitments", with the implication that the Ronulans all got their cash to Paul on that day.

Anyway you look at it, its still an impressive stunt.



I know, I was starting to think I was crazy because no one was pointing out the fallacy for Ron Paul's statement.

A large group of Mitt supporters are organizing an event much like the one Ron Paul's supporters had on November 5th. We are having it on the 7th of December and the website is http://december7thformitt.com/



Why is it that supporters of any candidate would exploit horrible or tragic events? I might donate to Mitt on Dec. 7th, but I'm not sure that the attack on Pearl Harbor should be used as a day to raise money for any candidate.As FDR said, this is "a date which will live in infamy." Romney supporters should change this big drive to a different date. There are probably more uplifting days to choose for fundraising. Regardless, it's still less tactless than Ron Paul's supporters wanting to blow up Parliament or celebrating this act openly. Their display in support of anarchy and murder is disgusting to me.




posted by Justin Hart | 11:52 AM | permalink
Some of the best fights for Mitt happen at EFM and now... EFM is fighting for all of us. David French left his family to serve in the military (I believe as a JAG).

We wish David, Nancy and the rest of the family our safety and prayers as he joins countless others in this important fight.
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Prayers and Praise
  • DiggPrayers and Praise
  • Fark:Prayers and Praise
  • Furl:Prayers and Praise
  • Ma.gnolia:Prayers and Praise
  • Netscape:Prayers and Praise
  • NewsVine:Prayers and Praise
  • Reddit:Prayers and Praise
  • Slashdot:Prayers and Praise
  • StumbleUpon:Prayers and Praise
  • TailRank:Prayers and Praise
  • Technorati:Prayers and Praise
  • YahooMyWeb:Prayers and Praise

Technorati Tags: |
 
1 Comments:


America needs more heroes like David French!!

I'm a big E4M fan too!

Our prayers will be with you.




posted by jason | 11:37 AM | permalink
I don't see how the Giuliani and McCain announcement will beat this:
New Beginnings church hasn’t endorsed anybody in the 2008 presidential race, but God probably has, pastor Larry Huch said Sunday.

..."“I believe that Sen. Huckabee is the David that you’ve brought in to be a head over this nation’s house,” Huch said, misstating Huckabee’s political rank. “And Father, I ask for the blessing on him, on his family, on their campaign, that you will keep them safe, you will give them wisdom, that you will give him favor, for he is giving you all the praise and all the glory.”
Apparently this was welcomed by Huckabee:
The crowd, some of them wearing yarmulkes, cheered noisily after Huch’s declaration, and they later stretched their hands toward Huckabee as they prayed for campaignseason [sic] favor from heaven.
OK folks, let's regather here. Huck stands as a near object of worship, adulation and affection; seemingly accepting the pronounced edict of God's blessing on his campaign.

Lets change some names. Let's replace Huckabee with Romney, Hutch with President Hinckley, and New Beginnings with the LDS Church and see how it plays:
"The LDS Church hasn’t endorsed anybody in the 2008 presidential race, but God probably has, President Hinckley said Sunday."

“I believe that Gov. Romney is the David that you’ve brought in to be a head over this nation’s house,” Hinckley said...“And Father, I ask for the blessing on him, on his family, on their campaign, that you will keep them safe, you will give them wisdom, that you will give him favor, for he is giving you all the praise and all the glory.”
I think we get the point. This would never happen. A list of Questions:

1. Will the MSM carry this to any effect?
2. Did Huckabee in fact accept this messengerial endorsement? Sure seems like it.
3. Since the only way this guy could know if God endorsed Huckabee would be God telling him, How come God didn't tell him he was a Governor and not a Senator?

About a year ago the Boston Globe did an pseudo-investigation into a letter written by Ned Hill sent on BYU letterhead asking fellow BYU friends to help out with Romney. The Globe tried to pin it as LDS Apostles where holding secret meetings with Romney's advisers. The upfront story was the LDS church was seceretly working for the Romney campaign. The read between the lines story was the affect on the LDS Church's IRS tax exemption. I think the Boston Globe had sincerely hoped they would loose it. They ran several articles with very little proof other than emails from an over anxious supporter.

So the real question should be: does Huckabee get the same type of coverage, or will the MSM once again show it's utter bias?


H/T: Evangelicals for Mitt
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Huckabee: Endorsed by God
  • DiggHuckabee: Endorsed by God
  • Fark:Huckabee: Endorsed by God
  • Furl:Huckabee: Endorsed by God
  • Ma.gnolia:Huckabee: Endorsed by God
  • Netscape:Huckabee: Endorsed by God
  • NewsVine:Huckabee: Endorsed by God
  • Reddit:Huckabee: Endorsed by God
  • Slashdot:Huckabee: Endorsed by God
  • StumbleUpon:Huckabee: Endorsed by God
  • TailRank:Huckabee: Endorsed by God
  • Technorati:Huckabee: Endorsed by God
  • YahooMyWeb:Huckabee: Endorsed by God

Technorati Tags: |
 
2 Comments:


So, if Huckabee loses, does that mean the electorate rejected God's chosen President? Would we all be sinners? Interesting implications. Hopefully, the candidate God has endorsed won't mess up because I don't even want to think about what that might say about God's omniscience.



I posted a comment several hours ago. I don't see it post. Was oit because it was negative?




posted by Justin Hart | 7:09 AM | permalink
Our own Jeff Fuller noted last night via email that Paul Weyrich was the number #1 signatory to the infamous MassResistance open letter to Mitt Romney. That is quite the turn around.

Yesterday, Weyrich talked to Jim Geraghty at "The Campaign Spot" on why he endorsed Romney:
"I felt it would come down to a contest between Giuliani and Romney,” Weyrich said. “I don’t want Giuliani as the nominee because a lot of our values voters will defect... I know the same argument is made about Romney, but eventually, I think those voters can be brought around. There is a hardcore group that absolutely will not vote for Giuliani… I don’t think they’ll go for a third party candidate, I think they’ll stay home. I think there’s no convincing them. I’ve talked to a number of these folks. Even though they recognize that Hillary is a real problem, they think that it’s better to have somebody bad like that than it is to have somebody halfway reasonable."
Weyrich next weighs in on the other candidates and why they didn't get his nod:

Fred:
“I’m on the permanent executive committee of the Arlington Group, which was formed to push for the Federal Marriage Amendment. We’ve got [Fred] Thompson who says he can’t support that. I can’t push this for the past several years and then say, ‘oh, that’s not so important.’ … I’ve been working with candidates for close to fifty years I recognize candidates with fire in the belly. I’ve got to tell you, I do not think Thompson really wants to be elected that badly.”
McCain:
“As for McCain, I can’t support him — McCain-Feingold is a dealbreaker, as far as I’m concerned.”
Huckabee:
“Huckabee, I came close to supporting him, and if we were running for some sort of religious organization, I would support him, but we’re not. He has compromised on so many conservative issues, I simply can’t be for him. Every time you turn around, he’s taking the wrong stand on a different issue.”

Labels: ,

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Paul Weyrich, concerned anti-Romney activist turned endorser
  • DiggPaul Weyrich, concerned anti-Romney activist turned endorser
  • Fark:Paul Weyrich, concerned anti-Romney activist turned endorser
  • Furl:Paul Weyrich, concerned anti-Romney activist turned endorser
  • Ma.gnolia:Paul Weyrich, concerned anti-Romney activist turned endorser
  • Netscape:Paul Weyrich, concerned anti-Romney activist turned endorser
  • NewsVine:Paul Weyrich, concerned anti-Romney activist turned endorser
  • Reddit:Paul Weyrich, concerned anti-Romney activist turned endorser
  • Slashdot:Paul Weyrich, concerned anti-Romney activist turned endorser
  • StumbleUpon:Paul Weyrich, concerned anti-Romney activist turned endorser
  • TailRank:Paul Weyrich, concerned anti-Romney activist turned endorser
  • Technorati:Paul Weyrich, concerned anti-Romney activist turned endorser
  • YahooMyWeb:Paul Weyrich, concerned anti-Romney activist turned endorser

Technorati Tags: |
 
1 Comments:


Pat Robertson endorsing Rudy is going to be a blow to Mitt.




Tuesday, November 6, 2007
posted by Kyle Hampton | 3:21 PM | permalink
Kristi L. Remington, who served as deputy assistant attorney general at the Department of Justice, and Jamie E. Brown, who served as special assistant to the president for legislative affairs, have penned an article over at NRO about why Romney would be great at appointing judges. Both were core members of the team that achieved the confirmations of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito to the Supreme Court. Thus, they understand what a judge should be. They write:
For that reason, it is critically important to consider what type of individual a presidential candidate would nominate to the bench. We are confident that if elected as president, Governor Romney would appoint individuals to the federal courts who respect the appropriate role of the judiciary in our democratic system.

It is interesting that these experts did not choose another man who was involved in the nomination of Chief Justice Roberts: Fred Thompson. I think this article, by implication, underscores the role that Fred had in the Roberts nomination: social as opposed to substantive. Perhaps that's some people's idea of preparation for the presidency, social host, but some of us see the Presidency as a more serious endevour.

Labels:

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Romney on judges
  • DiggRomney on judges
  • Fark:Romney on judges
  • Furl:Romney on judges
  • Ma.gnolia:Romney on judges
  • Netscape:Romney on judges
  • NewsVine:Romney on judges
  • Reddit:Romney on judges
  • Slashdot:Romney on judges
  • StumbleUpon:Romney on judges
  • TailRank:Romney on judges
  • Technorati:Romney on judges
  • YahooMyWeb:Romney on judges

Technorati Tags: |
 
0 Comments:



posted by Kyle Hampton | 12:14 PM | permalink
Check out Hugh's discussion of the Weyrich endorsement:
The serious conservatives have done the math and are now breaking for Romney. There is no alternative, and not to announce for Romney is to give tacit support to Giuliani, though spoecific denunications of Giuliani seem to some to be a third way. Many conservatives have also been watching Romney and allowing themselves to be persuaded --not about his LDS faith, but about his sincerity concerning the big issues, especially life. Read this transcript of my interview Friday with James Bopp, long time General Counsel of the Right To Life Committee, and conservative activist-lawyer with huge credibility within leadership circles.

Labels:

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:The Blogfather
  • DiggThe Blogfather
  • Fark:The Blogfather
  • Furl:The Blogfather
  • Ma.gnolia:The Blogfather
  • Netscape:The Blogfather
  • NewsVine:The Blogfather
  • Reddit:The Blogfather
  • Slashdot:The Blogfather
  • StumbleUpon:The Blogfather
  • TailRank:The Blogfather
  • Technorati:The Blogfather
  • YahooMyWeb:The Blogfather

Technorati Tags: |
 
0 Comments:



posted by Justin Hart | 12:07 PM | permalink
I'm here at the Heritage foundation for our weekly bloggers forum with Robert Bluey. Numerous bloggers are present including congressman Connie Mack from Florida who recently endorsed Mitt Romney.

Today we're talking about the impact of Hugo Chavez in the Americas. There's a great and informative website with a DVD: Crisis in the Americas.

Congressman Mack considers our current policy a failure. Chavez is "systematically trying to change" Venezuela to continue to intimidate his countrymen.

"Unless the administration gets serious about putting Chavez in a confined box we are heading for some rough times in Latin America."

"There is a clear difference in the Congress between those that think he is a threat and those that want to shield him from the bad things he is doing."

"The relationship that he has with Castro and the destruction of Democracy is a serious threat"

"If Hugo Chavez continues his relations with President Abedinejad and Chavez beings to allow Abedinejad to get a bigger footprint on our hemisphere we could see the same situation with Fidel, Cuba an Russia."

"I'm not looking for the administration or anyone else to call his worse names... we need a forceful discussion about this... whether its an embargo or something else. One of the things we haven't done very well is to tell the people of Venezuela that we support them."

On his endorsement of Mitt Romney:

Labels: ,

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Bloggers Forum - Heritage Foundation - Congressman Connie Mack
  • DiggBloggers Forum - Heritage Foundation - Congressman Connie Mack
  • Fark:Bloggers Forum - Heritage Foundation - Congressman Connie Mack
  • Furl:Bloggers Forum - Heritage Foundation - Congressman Connie Mack
  • Ma.gnolia:Bloggers Forum - Heritage Foundation - Congressman Connie Mack
  • Netscape:Bloggers Forum - Heritage Foundation - Congressman Connie Mack
  • NewsVine:Bloggers Forum - Heritage Foundation - Congressman Connie Mack
  • Reddit:Bloggers Forum - Heritage Foundation - Congressman Connie Mack
  • Slashdot:Bloggers Forum - Heritage Foundation - Congressman Connie Mack
  • StumbleUpon:Bloggers Forum - Heritage Foundation - Congressman Connie Mack
  • TailRank:Bloggers Forum - Heritage Foundation - Congressman Connie Mack
  • Technorati:Bloggers Forum - Heritage Foundation - Congressman Connie Mack
  • YahooMyWeb:Bloggers Forum - Heritage Foundation - Congressman Connie Mack

Technorati Tags: |
 
0 Comments:



posted by Jeff Fuller | 12:25 AM | permalink
OK, "conspiracy" is probably too strong. However, consider the following figures in early state polling courtesy of Real Clear Politics' and Pollster.com's 2008 Polling sites (other resources used: Electoral Votes from FEC website; Primary calendar from About.com):

Iowa--Jan 3rd (7 electoral votes) has been polled:
  • 9 times in the last 7 weeks.
  • 27 times in the last 6 months-- 4.5X/mo
  • Romney leads RCP average by 14%
Wyoming--Jan 5th (3 electoral votes--only a fraction of state's primary delegates up for grabs on this date though):
  • No polling that I could find
  • Conventional wisdom is that Romney will win here solidly (he just got 61% of vote in a straw poll last weekend)
New Hampshire--Jan 8th (4 electoral votes) has been polled:
  • 10 times in the last 7 weeks.
  • 27 times in the last 6 months-- 4.5X/mo.
  • Romney leads RCP average by 8%
Nevada--Jan 12th (5 electoral votes) has been polled:
  • 2 times in the last 7 weeks.
  • 6 times in the last 6 months--1X/mo.
  • No RCP average calculated . . . but Romney leads Rudy by 1% over last 6 polls (though many expect Romney to do much better in the caucus format than Rudy)
Michigan--Jan 15th (17 electoral votes) has been polled:
  • 2 times in the last 7 weeks.
  • 7 times in the last 6 months--1.2X/mo.
  • Romney leads RCP average by 5%
South Carolina--Jan 19th (8 electoral votes) has been polled:
  • 6 times in the last 7 weeks.
  • 19 times in the last 6 months-- 3.2X/mo.
  • Statistically a 3 way tie for first (Romney,Rudy, Fred)
Florida--Jan 29th (27 electoral votes) has been polled:
  • 11 times in the last 7 weeks.
  • 27 times in the last 6 months-- 4.5X/mo.
  • Rudy leads RCP average by 11%

Some observations:
  1. The traditional "Big Three" early states (IA, NH, SC) have a long history of being frequently polled and this remains the case.
  2. MI and FL seem like they should be polled similarly to me (the two largest states prior to Feb 5th). However, where Romney leads and is expected to win there is a paucity of polls but where Rudy leads and is expected to win there's over a poll per week (and nearly two per week over the last 7 weeks)
  3. There seems to be a polling firm "blind spot" to WY (completely) and Nevada (relatively) when these are two of the first 4 contests . . . and ("coincidentally"???) where Romney is leading polls or expected to win.

Now, moving on to Feb 5th ("Tsunami Tuesday") some of the polling trends border upon comical. Here are all the states going that date:
Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado (caucuses), Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota (caucuses), Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah

New Jersey (15 electoral votes) has been polled:
  • 5 times in the last 7 weeks.
  • 12 times in the last 6 months-- 2X/mo.
  • Rudy leads by OVER 40%!!.
WHY IS NJ BEING POLLED MORE THAN MICHIGAN?!?!? Rudy's never led by less than 32% in any of these copious NJ polls. Who's wasting all this money polling a state that's never been close when it's just another Feb 5th state? Something's fishy there.

California (51 electoral votes) has been polled:
  • 5 times in the last 7 weeks.
  • 15 times in the last 6 months--2.5X/mo.
  • Rudy leads RCP average by 19%
CA is the biggest prize and so I see why it's polled frequently

Moving on:

Pennsylvania--April 11th (YES, that's over 2 months AFTER Tsunami Tues!; 21 electoral votes) has been polled:
  • 3 times in the last 7 weeks.
  • 11 times in the last 6 months-- ~2X/mo.
  • Rudy leading by about 22%
Again, why in the world is this state being polled more than MI!? Don't you think the results of the early states and the results of Tsunami Tuesday just might have a little effect on how Penn votes on April 11th? That's called wasted money.

Conclusions/Questions:
So, is this ample evidence that there is an over-abundance and over-representation of polls for states where Rudy leads strongly? Or is there an ignoring of non-traditional early states where Romney is leading? Is this an attempt to get repeated positive news/headlines for Rudy and/or to downplay/diminish Mitt's potential?

Why the huge disparity between MI and FL? Why more NJ and Penn polls than MI? Why is NV being largely ignored? Am I missing something? Am I doomed to become a "conspiracy theorist?"

Thoughts? Comments?

Jeff Fuller
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Pro-Rudy/Anti-Mitt Polling Conspiracy?
  • DiggPro-Rudy/Anti-Mitt Polling Conspiracy?
  • Fark:Pro-Rudy/Anti-Mitt Polling Conspiracy?
  • Furl:Pro-Rudy/Anti-Mitt Polling Conspiracy?
  • Ma.gnolia:Pro-Rudy/Anti-Mitt Polling Conspiracy?
  • Netscape:Pro-Rudy/Anti-Mitt Polling Conspiracy?
  • NewsVine:Pro-Rudy/Anti-Mitt Polling Conspiracy?
  • Reddit:Pro-Rudy/Anti-Mitt Polling Conspiracy?
  • Slashdot:Pro-Rudy/Anti-Mitt Polling Conspiracy?
  • StumbleUpon:Pro-Rudy/Anti-Mitt Polling Conspiracy?
  • TailRank:Pro-Rudy/Anti-Mitt Polling Conspiracy?
  • Technorati:Pro-Rudy/Anti-Mitt Polling Conspiracy?
  • YahooMyWeb:Pro-Rudy/Anti-Mitt Polling Conspiracy?

Technorati Tags: |
 
1 Comments:


I think it's quite obviously bias, Jeff. I actually think the numbers you have shown are quite tell-tale of the MSM's rejection of Mitt, based largely on his beliefs. Truly, a very fascinating post!




Monday, November 5, 2007
posted by Justin Hart | 9:46 PM | permalink
Tomorrow, the National Press Club is hosting a very interesting forum in DC entitled: "Women Voters and the Right Guy"

The panel includes:

Barbara Comstock, Romney for President
Karen Hanretty, Thompson for President
Jill Hazelbaker, McCain for President
Katie Levinson, Rudy for President

moderated by NR Washington Editor, Kate O'Beirne at the National Press 1 - 3
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Women Voters and the Right Guy
  • DiggWomen Voters and the Right Guy
  • Fark:Women Voters and the Right Guy
  • Furl:Women Voters and the Right Guy
  • Ma.gnolia:Women Voters and the Right Guy
  • Netscape:Women Voters and the Right Guy
  • NewsVine:Women Voters and the Right Guy
  • Reddit:Women Voters and the Right Guy
  • Slashdot:Women Voters and the Right Guy
  • StumbleUpon:Women Voters and the Right Guy
  • TailRank:Women Voters and the Right Guy
  • Technorati:Women Voters and the Right Guy
  • YahooMyWeb:Women Voters and the Right Guy

Technorati Tags: |
 
0 Comments:



posted by Justin Hart | 9:13 PM | permalink
As David Brody notes in his exclusive post today: "This is a big one"
Today, Paul Weyrich, Chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Research and Education Foundation, announced his support for Governor Mitt Romney and his campaign to be our country's next President. Paul Weyrich is one of the premier leaders in the conservative movement, having founded the Heritage Foundation and the American Legislative Exchange Council.
Returning to Brody: "Where do I begin? Let me start by saying that Paul Weyrich is a huge name in the social conservative movement. If you know anything about the conservative movement in this country in the last 30 years or so, you know how big a deal this is."

Labels:

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Paul Weyrich Endorsement
  • DiggPaul Weyrich Endorsement
  • Fark:Paul Weyrich Endorsement
  • Furl:Paul Weyrich Endorsement
  • Ma.gnolia:Paul Weyrich Endorsement
  • Netscape:Paul Weyrich Endorsement
  • NewsVine:Paul Weyrich Endorsement
  • Reddit:Paul Weyrich Endorsement
  • Slashdot:Paul Weyrich Endorsement
  • StumbleUpon:Paul Weyrich Endorsement
  • TailRank:Paul Weyrich Endorsement
  • Technorati:Paul Weyrich Endorsement
  • YahooMyWeb:Paul Weyrich Endorsement

Technorati Tags: |
 
0 Comments:



posted by Kyle Hampton | 8:23 PM | permalink
...endorsements. The latest endorsement is from Paul Weyrich, chairman of the Free Congress Foundation and one of the founders back in the day of the Moral Majority. The NY Times' Caucus has the details:
Mr. Weyrich, who has been described as the father of the religious right and also founded the Heritage Foundation, had been critical of talk that broke out earlier this year among Christian conservatives about bolting the Republican Party if Rudolph W. Giuliani, a supporter of abortion rights, is the nominee and backing a third-party candidate.

So now it appears he is backing up that criticism with action, lining up behind Mr. Romney, despite questions many Christian conservatives continue to harbor about his relatively recent conversation from supporter of abortion rights to opponent and his Mormon faith.

Yeah, it's practically unbelievable that Christians could get over their doubts. It's almost as if they had faith in Mitt Romney.

I'm just giving Luo, the author of the story (who I generally like for his fair reporting), a hard time. Indeed, Luo lines up the list of names of prominent social conservatives backing Romney:
Mr. Romney had lined up a host of social conservative endorsements up to this point, including James Bopp Jr., a major anti-abortion activist; Jay Sekulow, another prominent Christian conservative; and Bob Jones III, chancellor of Bob Jones University, most recently. But he had lacked one of the scions of the religious right, which Mr. Weyrich unquestionably remains.

Of course there's a much longer list than just those names. One important point to remember is that if these people were just looking for someone to advance their doctrinal beliefs, they would have chosen a different candidate. As Mitt has coined, neither he no anyone else is running for Pastor-in-Chief. If they were, there would be no question that the former pastor in the race would be the consensus candidate. Mitt represents not only a socially conservative voice, but a proven leader and executive.
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:More, more, more...
  • DiggMore, more, more...
  • Fark:More, more, more...
  • Furl:More, more, more...
  • Ma.gnolia:More, more, more...
  • Netscape:More, more, more...
  • NewsVine:More, more, more...
  • Reddit:More, more, more...
  • Slashdot:More, more, more...
  • StumbleUpon:More, more, more...
  • TailRank:More, more, more...
  • Technorati:More, more, more...
  • YahooMyWeb:More, more, more...

Technorati Tags: |
 
0 Comments:



posted by SteveT | 9:34 AM | permalink
Fred Thompson was on “Meet the Press” yesterday and got into some substantial questions about abortion. The headline from many news accounts is that Fred said no to supporting a constitutional amendment that would ban abortion. However, there is a much bigger story than just that.

In line with his view of federalism, Fred also said that he could not support a federal law that would ban abortion as well:

While he called for no federal funding or legislation that would assist in abortion, Thompson also came out against a federal law. "Nobody's proposed a federal law on this,” he said. “Nobody's recently proposed a federal constitutional amendment."

Here is where it gets interesting. At this point Fred Thompson seems to get away from the issue of federalism and tackle the issue of whether in his view abortion should be outlawed at all:

He continued, "I do not think it is a wise thing to criminalize young girls. It's not a sense of the Senate. You're talking about potential criminal law. I said those things are going to ultimately be one in the hearts and minds of people."


The interview continues, and Fred starts to step in a little deeper:

RUSSERT: You would allow abortion to be performed in states if chosen by states for people who think otherwise.

THOMPSON: I do not think that you can have a law that would be effective and that would be the right thing to do, as I say, in terms of potentially — you can't have a law that cuts off an age group or something like that which potentially would take young girls in extreme situations and say, basically, we're going to put them in jail to do that. I just don't think that that's the right thing to do. It cannot change the way I feel about it morally, but legally and practically, I've got to recognize that fact. It is a dilemma that I'm not totally comfortable with, but that's the best I can do in resolving it in my own mind.


Just to show that this is not a one interview mistake, here is what Fred started to say in an interview in June of this year, before being cut off by Sean Hannity:

“And I would not be and never have been for a law that says, on the state level, if I were back in Tennessee voting on this, for example, that if they chose to criminalize a young woman, and...

HANNITY: So states' rights for you?”


So Fred Thompson believes abortion should not be criminalized and instead should be decided, “in the hearts and minds of people.” Sorry folks, Fred Thompson is still pro-choice. He may have a pro-life voting record as far as opposing taxpayer funding of abortion and voting to ban “partial-birth” abortion, but when it comes down to it he would still allow almost all abortions to be legal.

If Republicans want somebody who is a true pro-life leader, they will have to look elsewhere than Fred Thompson.
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Has Fred just blown his “Pro-Life Cover?”
  • DiggHas Fred just blown his “Pro-Life Cover?”
  • Fark:Has Fred just blown his “Pro-Life Cover?”
  • Furl:Has Fred just blown his “Pro-Life Cover?”
  • Ma.gnolia:Has Fred just blown his “Pro-Life Cover?”
  • Netscape:Has Fred just blown his “Pro-Life Cover?”
  • NewsVine:Has Fred just blown his “Pro-Life Cover?”
  • Reddit:Has Fred just blown his “Pro-Life Cover?”
  • Slashdot:Has Fred just blown his “Pro-Life Cover?”
  • StumbleUpon:Has Fred just blown his “Pro-Life Cover?”
  • TailRank:Has Fred just blown his “Pro-Life Cover?”
  • Technorati:Has Fred just blown his “Pro-Life Cover?”
  • YahooMyWeb:Has Fred just blown his “Pro-Life Cover?”

Technorati Tags: |
 
3 Comments:


So is it me or is Fred running so he can hand off all the power to the states to let them sort out our problems fifty different ways? If that is the case, then why do we need him as a president in the first place? Instead of "Girls Gone Wild", it can be
"States Gone Wild". Sounds like fun.



Well, I wouldn't say that this blows Thompson's "Pro-Life cover;" but I think it adds to a list of Pro-Life issues at which Mitt Romney is more in step with the Pro-Life movement.

I don't doubt for a second that Fred would govern as a Pro-Life President, just as I don't doubt that McCain would. But it is a measure of degree.

Mitt Romney has shown a clear and concise understanding of what being a Pro-Life President would mean: Vetoing ANY attempt to further Abortion rights, and pushing forward - ACTIVELY - legislation that will further the Pro-Life, Pro-Family movement. He has indicated that he will appoint Pro-Life individuals to important Cabinet positions like Health and Human Services and Surgeon General - where they can make a real difference; these are bigger appointments than they are often given credit for (RU-486, for example). It matters.

Fred is Pro-Life like McCain in Pro-Life: passively. Yes, he'll sign the bill if it comes across his desk, but until then there are other issues to attend to. Mitt Romney has convinced me that he gets it. As President, you need to lead the Pro-Life movement, like Bush and Reagan before him, and be a Pro-Life, Pro-Family advocate from the Oval Office. You need to fight the Abortionists from the Department of Health and Human Services on down. Fight through legislation, and prosecute those who violate the laws and prey on the young and vulnerable.

Paul Weyrich came to the same conclusion. Mitt Romney just gets it. Fred would be good - Mitt will be better. More importantly, Fred will be a "no litmus tests" kind of Pro-Lifer - Mitt has promised (albeit, not in those exact words - for obvious reasons) to have those all-important litmus tests.

To this Pro-Lifer, Mitt gets it best (of the serious contenders). I will vote for whoever can stop Rudy - but you can damn well bet Mitt is sitting atop my list right now!

--Freeper "TitansAFC"



Freeper-

Thanks for the post, that was rather insightful actually. I don't even think it's all that different from Rudy, in the sense that Fred and McCain are more of the "I-am-pro-life-but-won't-fight-to-ban-death" camp. Maybe I am off the mark, but Mitt is really the only one in the top tier that would not only fight against abortion, but fight FOR pro-life as well. Go Mitt!




posted by Justin Hart | 6:49 AM | permalink
Just a quick plug for myself (a dubious approach to be sure... but I like the attention).

Over the weekend, American Thinker (Rush Limbaugh's favorite website) published an article which I penned. In it, I note the significant "thaw" that has taken place between Evangelicals and Mormons. Here's a quick excerpt:
In 2004, hundreds of Mormons crowded into the Provo Tabernacle and listened intently as the speaker, who was not a member of the LDS faith, declared: "We have sinned against you."

Was this Bryant Gumbel apologizing for belittling the BYU Cougar's 1984 NCAAF title? Was it Jim McMahon asking forgiveness for consistently sitting on the Wyoming stands for BYU homecoming games? No, it was noted evangelical scholar Richard J. Mouw, President of the Fuller Theological Seminary.

In the rush of news articles handicapping Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney's presidential aspirations is an unnoticed but significant thaw in the troubled relations between Evangelicals and Mormons.
Read the whole thing here.

Labels: , ,

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Justin on AmericanThinker.com: The Big Thaw
  • DiggJustin on AmericanThinker.com: The Big Thaw
  • Fark:Justin on AmericanThinker.com: The Big Thaw
  • Furl:Justin on AmericanThinker.com: The Big Thaw
  • Ma.gnolia:Justin on AmericanThinker.com: The Big Thaw
  • Netscape:Justin on AmericanThinker.com: The Big Thaw
  • NewsVine:Justin on AmericanThinker.com: The Big Thaw
  • Reddit:Justin on AmericanThinker.com: The Big Thaw
  • Slashdot:Justin on AmericanThinker.com: The Big Thaw
  • StumbleUpon:Justin on AmericanThinker.com: The Big Thaw
  • TailRank:Justin on AmericanThinker.com: The Big Thaw
  • Technorati:Justin on AmericanThinker.com: The Big Thaw
  • YahooMyWeb:Justin on AmericanThinker.com: The Big Thaw

Technorati Tags: |
 
0 Comments:



Sunday, November 4, 2007
posted by Jeff Fuller | 10:22 AM | permalink
Go see all the descriptions, links, and photos of Romney's recent time in Iowa over at Iowans for Romney. A good trip for him, no doubt.

Jeff Fuller
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Iowa Swing Coverage
  • DiggIowa Swing Coverage
  • Fark:Iowa Swing Coverage
  • Furl:Iowa Swing Coverage
  • Ma.gnolia:Iowa Swing Coverage
  • Netscape:Iowa Swing Coverage
  • NewsVine:Iowa Swing Coverage
  • Reddit:Iowa Swing Coverage
  • Slashdot:Iowa Swing Coverage
  • StumbleUpon:Iowa Swing Coverage
  • TailRank:Iowa Swing Coverage
  • Technorati:Iowa Swing Coverage
  • YahooMyWeb:Iowa Swing Coverage

Technorati Tags: |
 
0 Comments:



posted by Myclob | 8:59 AM | permalink
This is Mitt Romney's Biography on Wikipedia:

Born on March 12, 1947 in Detroit, Michigan, Mitt Romney is the son of 1968 presidential candidate George W. Romney and 1970 U.S. Senate candidate Lenore Romney. He was named after hotel magnate J. Willard Marriott, his father's best friend.[3]

Romney married his high school girlfriend Ann Davies in 1968. Both are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, commonly known as Mormons, though Ann was raised Episcopalian .[4] They have five sons as well as ten grandchildren.

Romney's great-grandparents were polygamist Mormons who fled to Mexico in 1884 after the U.S. Supreme Court upheld various anti-polygamy laws in 1879. [5] Romney's father was born in Chihuahua, Mexico, and moved to the United States in 1912 [5] after the outbreak of the Mexican Revolution. [6] [7]

Romney is a former bishop and stake president in his church, and he attends a temple regularly. As such, he doesn't drink or smoke. He's also a proponent of family values, saying that he abstained from sex until marriage and has since remained faithful to his wife of 38 years. [8] [9] [10]

My count has 6 mentions of his families religion in 10 sentences. 60% of his 10 sentences Biography mentions his religion. John McCain's article doesn't mention his religion once in the entire text of his article. Off to the side it mentions that he is " Baptist" (yes another McCain flip-flop)
The article says:
  1. the Romney's are "members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints "
  2. "Mormons"
  3. "Ann was raised Episcopalian" (this is an article about Mitt Romney. None of the other articles mention the religion of their spouse.)
  4. "Romney's great-grandparents were polygamist Mormons" No other presidential article mentions any of their great-grandparents, good or bad. It is just not relevant. I bet their were slave owners in Bill Clinton's past. Mentioning Bill Clinton's slave holding ancestors would be similar to mentioning Romney's would be similar as mentioning that in his wikipedia article as mentioning this in Romney's.
  5. it say; "Romney is a former bishop "
  6. "and stake president in his church". Mitt Romney's inclusion in Wikipedia is a result of his activities in the 2002 winter Olympics, a businessman, governor, and presidential candidate. People don't get included in wikipedia for being former "Mormon bishops or stake presidents". Romney is note-worthy and therefore worthey of being included in wikipedia because of his run for president, his governorship, Olympic experience, and business accomplishments, but the first thing you read about in his article is his religion, and his great-grandparent's practice of polygamy.
  7. But this last point is the worst: "...in his church, and he attends a temple regularly. As such, he doesn't drink or smoke. He's also a proponent of family values , saying that he abstained from sex until marriage and has since remained faithful to his wife of 38 years. [8][9] [10]" Does any other presidential candidate's wikipedia article investigate if they "regularly" attend to religious duties? How often does Hillary Clinton or Barak Obama go to church? No one cares. They get included in wikipedia because of their accomplishments (none) and because the media thinks they deserve to be president. As such their religious practices are not really relevant, except to the non-professional people who edit Mitt Romney's wikipedia article.

The democrats know that Romney will lose to the extent that he is "the Mormon" candidate. Apparently only democrats edit his wikipedia article.

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Mitt Romney's Wiki-Biography
  • DiggMitt Romney's Wiki-Biography
  • Fark:Mitt Romney's Wiki-Biography
  • Furl:Mitt Romney's Wiki-Biography
  • Ma.gnolia:Mitt Romney's Wiki-Biography
  • Netscape:Mitt Romney's Wiki-Biography
  • NewsVine:Mitt Romney's Wiki-Biography
  • Reddit:Mitt Romney's Wiki-Biography
  • Slashdot:Mitt Romney's Wiki-Biography
  • StumbleUpon:Mitt Romney's Wiki-Biography
  • TailRank:Mitt Romney's Wiki-Biography
  • Technorati:Mitt Romney's Wiki-Biography
  • YahooMyWeb:Mitt Romney's Wiki-Biography

Technorati Tags: |
 
3 Comments:


Good points. Why didn't you click edit and make some changes?



I do but it keeps getting changed back... I complained in the discussion page, but the majority of people who edit Romney's page suck...



I heard that Wikipedia information can be edited - perhaps the campaign should develop an edited biography that truly represents the wonderful personal and professional accomplishments of Governor Romney. I will research some contacts and inquire.

BC




posted by jason | 7:32 AM | permalink
Mitt Romney was in Chicago this past Tuesday. Unfortunately I couldn't attend, but the blogger at Backyard Conservative was and has a pretty good post on the event. Check it out.
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Romney in Chicago
  • DiggRomney in Chicago
  • Fark:Romney in Chicago
  • Furl:Romney in Chicago
  • Ma.gnolia:Romney in Chicago
  • Netscape:Romney in Chicago
  • NewsVine:Romney in Chicago
  • Reddit:Romney in Chicago
  • Slashdot:Romney in Chicago
  • StumbleUpon:Romney in Chicago
  • TailRank:Romney in Chicago
  • Technorati:Romney in Chicago
  • YahooMyWeb:Romney in Chicago

Technorati Tags: |
 
0 Comments:



Sign up for MyManMitt
Enter your email address:

RSS Feed MyManMitt.com
Mitt Romney Facebook MyManMitt
Mitt Romney YouTube






Copyright 2007 MyManMitt.com