McCain not the conservative choice for President ACU RATING TELLS IT ALL

Senator John McCain's lifetime rating of 82.3% from the American Conservative Union is often cited as proof that he is conservative.

Here is a closer look at that 82.3 rating.

First, a rating of 82.3 is not really that high. It puts Senator McCain in 39th place among senators serving in 2006, the latest year for which the ACU has its ratings posted online. For that most recent year in particular, McCain scored only 65, putting him in 47th place for that year. Ben Nelson (D-NE) and Chuck Hagel (R-NE), for example, scored 64 and 75, respectively, in 2006.

Generally, McCain has voted less conservatively in more recent years. His average for 1990-97 was 88, but was only 74 for 1998-2006. Below are his yearly ratings since 1990.



So where did McCain differ from the ACU? The big areas were taxes, campaign finance reform, the environment and, most recently, immigration. There was also a smattering of support for trial lawyers; federal intervention in health, education, safety or voting issues; internationalism; and some social issues. He was more consistently conservative on spending and defense issues. The list below summarizes all his votes since 1998 that differed from the ACU's position.
Read more about at American Thinker.

McCain, Huckabee the wrong choice for Evangelicals

McCain, Huckabee Worst Picks for Evangelicals

MEDIA ADVISORY, Feb. 4 /Christian Newswire/ -- The Reverend Rob Schenck (pronounced SHANK), in his capacity as a private citizen, today released this statement regarding tomorrow's primary votes:

"I have spent the last 33 years as an active evangelical Christian. I am an ordained evangelical minister. I graduated from an evangelical Bible college and an evangelical seminary. I serve on the board of America's oldest association of evangelical church leaders, and I head one of the most active evangelical ministries in Washington, DC.

"I have thought long and hard about the upcoming elections. I have prayed earnestly about them, and I have met many of the candidates and their top campaign people and I have studied their platforms and policy proposals.

"After careful and prayerful consideration, I have concluded that an evangelical vote for Mike Huckabee is a vote for John McCain, and a vote for John McCain will be a disaster for this country.

"Let me explain. It's clear to me and many others that Mike Huckabee is not broadening his appeal enough to win the primary. Therefore, his only contribution is to siphon off votes, giving McCain a clear path to victory. It's very possible Huckabee is being positioned to be John McCain's pick for vice president. In order to win, McCain needs Mike Huckabee and the evangelical votes he brings with him. The specter of a McCain-Huckabee ticket is bad for evangelicals.

"McCain is proud of his signature accomplishment, the McCain-Feingold law co-authored with liberal Democrat senator Russ Feingold. McCain-Feingold severely limits the First Amendment rights of evangelicals. McCain will use this law as the litmus test for his Supreme Court nominees. If a judge is likely to be against McCain's unconstitutional law, McCain will not nominate him. Make no mistake about it, constitutional originalist judges will be against McCain-Feingold. These same judges will also be pro-life, for traditional marriage and for the public acknowledgment of God.

"Only liberal judges will support McCain-Feingold. They will also be pro-abortion, anti-traditional marriage and against the public acknowledgement of God. So, with a McCain-Huckabee administration, or with a McCain-anyone administration, we get the wrong judges. Most distressing, we get the wrong justices on the U.S. Supreme Court."Evangelicals must consider both the stakes and the realities in this election. Mike Huckabee's continuation only helps John McCain. The consequences are just too great to take this risk. A McCain victory will hurt this country because of the long-term damage of the wrong judges and justices. Worse, McCain's court legacy will continue to hurt our children and our grandchildren, perhaps even our great grandchildren.

"Evangelicals must choose wisely from among candidates other than Mike Huckabee and John McCain as they vote tomorrow, February 5.

"For identification purposes only, the Reverend Rob Schenck (pronounced SHANK) is president of Faith and Action in the Nation's Capital, chairman of the Committee on Church and Society for the Evangelical Church Alliance and co-founder of the annual National Memorial for the Pre-born and their Mothers and Fathers, the only pro-life worship service held inside the U.S. Capitol complex in Washington, DC.

McCain Nervous, Romney Hopeful, Huckabee Bitter

Republicans spar over economy MSNBC reported the following:

McCain told "Fox News Sunday" he would veto any tax increase passed by a Democratic-controlled Congress. McCain, who opposed President Bush's first two tax cuts, now says Congress should make the reductions permanent, and that there also should be further tax reductions for business investments.

Romney told ABC's "This Week" that McCain "doesn't understand the economy" and that his advocacy of a higher gasoline tax to combat global warming would hurt U.S. consumers.
Romney added, "If we want a party that is indistinguishable from Hillary Clinton on an issue like illegal immigration, we're going to have John McCain as a nominee. That's the wrong way to go."
Romney said he will continue pouring his own money into his campaign, contending that McCain is much better known to most voters.

McCain, who also appeared on "Face the Nation," said he is "far more conservative" than Romney.

McCain later told reporters that despite polls showing him with a 20-point lead over Romney, "I'm incredibly nervous, and I've seen that movie before." Knocking twice on a wooden table in his campaign bus, he said, "a lot of this business is expectation levels, so it's our job to keep our own expectation levels down."

Huckabee said it was time for Romney, who lost major contests in South Carolina and Florida to McCain, to drop out of the race.

"I think it's time for Mitt Romney to step aside," the former governor, who has won only the Iowa caucuses, said on CNN. "If he wants to call it a two-man race, fine. But that makes it John McCain and me."

Update: Republicans consider Mitt Romney the strongest CONSERVATIVE for the Presidential Nomination. Here's hoping for another upset, like the NY Giants over the Patriots.

Conservatives flocking to Romney here are a few sites:
The Problem with John McCain
But, as we learned with former Sen. Bob Dole, the American people want more than a war hero to lead our country. We need somebody who is level-headed on the big issues: immigration, the war against radical Muslim jihadists, (which goes far beyond the “surge”) the economy, taxation, threats of government-run health care, and the man made issue of global warming.

Why I will Not be Voting for John McCain and yes I did invent the term Blogosphere
Here is an example from a commenter named Scott Martin:
"I’m still confused about the intensity of the hatred towards McCain. I know he has bucked the conservative movement on a few occasions but the level of animosity is amazing."
I don’t ipso facto ascribe this sort of response to wilful stupidity or robotic submission to a political party, but I do ascribe it to ignorance. And the cure for ignorance is facts. If you can read the following and still vote for John McCain, fine. But don’t consider that you are doing yourself, your country, or your party any favors.

It's time to unite around Mitt Romney
What's with this mutual admiration society with McCain and the Democrats? They have such high regard for one another because McCain has more in common with the Democrats than he does with conservative Republicans. Democrats like Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and Hillary Clinton love John McCain because they are on the same team so many times. They have different letters by their names but they hold much in common.
A Vote for Huckabee is a Vote for McCain
How? Like it or not, Huckabee is done. Huckabee does not and will not have the delegates, momentum, or money. Huckabee will probably win Alabama and maybe a couple other states but he will not win the nomination. Most Huckabee supporters probably realize this. If you are one of the few who still thinks that Huckabee can win the nomination, there is probably very little that can persuade you to change your vote. But if you are one of the majority who understands that Huckabee will not win the nomination, please switch your vote to Mitt Romney.

A WIN IN CA WILL HELP MITT ROMNEY Zogby says

Reuters reports on a new Zogby poll on February 4, 2008:

Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, led McCain 40 percent to 32 percent in California, where the margin of error was 3.3 percentage points. A win in California, the most populous state, could help puncture McCain's growing momentum in the Republican nomination fight.

McCain won the last two contests, in South Carolina and Florida, to seize the front-runner's slot in a hard-fought Republican race despite qualms among some conservatives about his past views on taxes, immigration and campaign finance.

"Romney is widening his lead in California and has a really big advantage with conservatives," Zogby said. "Romney winning California would give some Republicans pause when they look at McCain as the potential nominee."

Romney said he would cut short a scheduled trip to Georgia and fly back to California on Monday for a last-minute campaign visit.

'A GOOD SHOT'

"People there are taking a real close look at the race and it looks like I've got a good shot there," Romney told reporters.

In Missouri, McCain leads former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee by 35 percent to 27 percent, with Romney in third place at 24 percent. The margin of error was 3.4 percentage points.

"Huckabee and Romney are splitting the anti-McCain vote in states like Missouri," Zogby said.

A trouncing in Maine! Who was blown away by 31%?

John McCain got blown away in the Maine caucus. Even after McCain's supposed momentum from Florida, he was trounced by Mitt Romney. Beat by 31% of the vote!

Results:
Mitt Romney 52%, John McCain 21%, Ron Paul 19%, Mike Huckabee 6%, Thompson 4%

Even Mike Huckabee barely registered, he was back down there by Thompson who kindly dropped out when he realized he was wasting time BEFORE the Maine caucus.

With the win in Maine, Mitt Romney is just 5 delegates behind McCain!

Mitt Romney is electable. Vote Romney 2008!

Victory in Utah for Mitt Romney - A Landslide Win

Five Reasons Jeff Fuller Predicts a Mitt Romney Victory in Utah:

1) Romney lived in Utah recently and saved the state's reputation through turning around the Olympics. Utah voters both saw his amazing leadership/turnaround skills and want to reward him for his service to their state. The key from the exit polls will be to see how non-Mormon Republicans break for Romney . . . I'm predicting that it won't be too different from the LDS percentage . . . and THAT WILL BE THE POINT TO DRIVE HOME.

2) Let's face it, Mormons will vote overwhelmingly for Romney in Utah. We already saw something similar in Nevada where 94% of the LDS GOP caucus goers were for Romney. However, I also detailed in a previous blog that, counting the LDS Democrat caucus goers in NV, the real percentage of LDS choosing Romney was actually 73%. That's still a strong base of support, and an email from my friend helped me understand why this may be:

Maybe this is a false distinction that exists only in my own brain, but I think there's a difference between Huckabee's evangelical support and Mitt's mormon support. I think some evangelicals vote Huckabee not because of his policy or conservative nature but because of his religion. I think there is high support for Romney among Mormons because Mormons are less likely to be suspicious of Romney's mormonism and so are able to back him because of his policies and conservative nature.

I'm sure there are exceptions to that for both Huckabee and Romney supporters. But, basically I sense that religion has prevented objective comparison on the issues, and when such comparison happens, Romney benefits. I thought this was a great point and can be used pre-voting to explain part of why Romney will win Utah so convincingly . . . THAT UTAH REPUBLICANS ARE SO PAST/BEYOND ANY CONCERN WITH VOTING FOR A MORMON THAT THEY ARE ABLE TO VIEW ROMNEY AMONG THE CANDIDATES WITHOUT A FEAR/BIAS (Conscious or not) OF HAVING A MORMON NOMINEE/PRESIDENT. WITHOUT THIS, THEY OBVIOUSLY REALIZE THAT ROMNEY IS, FAR AND AWAY THE BEST CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT!

3) Utah's full of "very conservative" Republicans. Romney has won this demographic by a very wide margin in just about every state so far . . . they'll break in a major way again for Romney in Utah.

4) There will be PLENTY of Mormons voting for Obama or Hillary. We'll have to wait for the exit polling, but this factor will help lessen the "block Mormon vote" criticisms that will be sure to be the main headline out of Utah's primary.

5) If being LDS is enough to clean up in Utah, please show me the poll that ever had Orrin Hatch (a long-time and well-loved UTAH Senator who is LDS) leading in the 2000 GOP race for President in either Utah or Idaho (yeah, I know he dropped out after Iowa, but Romney was leading Utah polls big early and way before Iowa). I think this factor combines nicely with point #2 above . . . that it's not that they're voting for Romney because he's Mormon, it's that they're not freaked out that he IS a Mormon and can view him without that potential bias . . . that Mormons weren't that impressed with Hatch as POTUS material and rejected him on those grounds.

Who is more electable? McCain, Clinton, Obama or Romney?

I just found this awesome website that compares John McCain, Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama and Mitt Romney - the four main Presidential Candidates. This is incredible detail into who is most electable. Everyone keeps talking about which candidate can beat whom, and which one appeals the most to the American people. This objective analysis was fascinating to me.

There are two spreadsheets so look at both then post your thoughts about who is most electable. You'll need to visit Political Scene 2008 and click on the spreadsheets to see for yourself the data.

Review the Leadership and Electability Indices, then come back and let me know who you think is most electable?

Mitt Romney MA Healthcare Plan Bust Boom or Experiment

I was discussing with a nice person Rosemary about this health plan in MA. Here is my response to a question about the plan.

The health plan in MA is difficult to explain, but I will do my best as I work in health insurance.

I am a student and we recently studied Romney's healthcare idea in my managerial economics class (funny his idea is used to teach economics). Anyway, because the government made a law requiring emergency rooms to provide services to anyone coming through the door (an unfunded government mandate), hospitals raise their rates to earn money to cover this "bad debt/charity care" as they call it. The rise in hospital costs requires insurers to raise the insurance premiums to cover the expected risks. The main idea of insurance is to spread risk across the largest healthy population as possible, thereby decreasing the amount each person needs to contribute (that is why large employers get better insurance rates than individuals and small employers).

Contrary to popular thought that a majority of those without insurance were poor people that could not afford it, an MA study revealed the largest population without health insurance were healthy and wealthy single males who for one reason or another didn’t want insurance because of the common "invincibility complex". Well, in health insurance, the less healthy people in the pool, the higher the cost per person. Thus a small pool of sick persons (with high utilization) will have higher premiums than a large pool with a mix of sick and healthy persons (both high and low utilization). The MA health plan attempted to bring everyone in MA into the insurance pool in order to lower the insurance premiums for everyone. And this has been successful, in that people now pay a lower premium but receive a lot more benefits. MA residents also have increased choices – they can choose between 42 plans (I get to choose between three, how many for you?).

Romney spoke about his Healthcare plan in the last debate (he hasn’t hid from the questions on it). If I remember correctly he said that after he left, the current democratic governor added some things that made the plans more expensive. The new governor raised the minimum coverage benefits which naturally led to a higher price. Some good things have come, for instance, most MA residents can get a health plan worth twice the value at half the price. And MA has reversed the number of uninsured, over 300,000 more people are in the insurance pool.

A disadvantage claimed by some is that the insurance premiums jumped by 12% this last year. However, it should be noted that in 2006 nationaly insurance premiums moved up 7.7% and in 2007 national insurance rates moved up 6.1%. With utilization being the main driver in healthcare costs the 12% represents higher premium costs and a higher utilization of services. The bottomline is that MA is experiencing the baby boom effect - more people are using healthcare services than ever before. Covering more people's procedures requires more money leading to higher insurance premiums. 12% isn't too bad, just talk to those small and large employers that got hit with 18% increases!

On April 11, 2006 Mitt Romney said in the Wall Street Journal with regards to the healthcare plan, "Will it work? I'm optimistic, but time will tell. A great deal will depend on the people who implement the program. Legislative adjustments will surely be needed along the way. One great thing about federalism is that states can innovate, demonstrate and incorporate ideas from one another. Other states will learn from our experience and improve on what we've done. That's the way we'll make health care work for everyone."

Mitt Romney worked with MA to start the experiment on Healthcare - NOBODY else has even come so close to trying. It is an impressive thing, unlike some Senators that have passed no meaningful legislation, Mitt Romney worked with the people of MA and got a plan passed that they liked. On abortions, one of the requirements from the MA legislature was that an oversight group be in charge of the approved benefits (not the governor, not the legislature). Romney signed the law and the committee chose the benefits including the abortion money (what do you expect from a blue state?). Having been a participant in the Healthcare for All Americans forum, I can tell you one major debate is what constitutes "a basic level of care". I personally would not have added abortion to that list and neither would President Mitt Romney (his Presidential Platform is pro-life).

In conclusion, even if this healthcare experiment fails, Mitt Romney has more knowledge and skills to work on the next experiment. With 60% of our entire budget spent on entitlement programs like Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security our biggest savings can be realized by tackling these tough questions. I think Mitt Romney can do the job in a smart efficient way – the guy owes no favors to anybody in Washington and is smart about data.

Anyway, I know it was more than you wanted and I am tired so I’ll have to work on the other one later. Good night.

John McCain's John Kerry Ad - Is He Forgeting Things?

A long time ago, well just four years ago, John Kerry reminisced from his journal about a Christmas night when he lay gazing up into the empyrean reflecting on the great President Nixon. The only problem was Nixon wasn’t elected President until a year after that Christmas.

It’s now septuagenarian John McCain’s turn to “forget” the timing of his life events.

In a recent ad, John McCain talks about the inspiration that President Ronald Reagan was to him while he was a POW in Vietnam. The ad starts by saying, "As a prisoner of war John McCain was inspired by Ronald Reagan". The only trouble is John McCain lived in Florida before he entered the war and Ronald Reagan was a governor of California when McCain was a POW. In fact, Ronald Reagan became President seven years after John McCain got back from Vietnam. Even more interesting, John McCain entered politics two years into Ronald Reagan’s first term. McCain enlisted as a foot soldier for Reagan in 1982, unless he was some sort of visionary in Nam, I don't understand how Reagan was inspiring him. Ah, the vicissitudes of old age.

Unless I am missing something, McCain can’t remember what was happening, can’t remember what you said, nor can he understand when he's been caught in a lie – at least that’s what McCain appears to demonstrate.

I am going to vote for Mitt Romney.

IMMIGRATION Don't Ask Presidential Candidate John McCain

First off, John McCain lost Maine by a long shot. Sure hardly anybody campaigned there, although Ron Paul stopped by and Mitt Romney sent his son Tagg to get a hotdog. But what surprised me is that John McCain had all the endorsements. But to the residents of Maine the endorsements meant nothing. Endorsements aren't part of the 2008 voter information packet and McCain once said, "I hope people will judge me by those who have endorsed me." Is that because conservatives don't trust him on economics and social issues?

The crushing defeat in Maine is a blow to McCain for the following two reasons:
1. McCain brought in the most money from Maine residents and still lost.
2. Look at the long list of distinguished groupies that endorsed McCain and he still lost.

JOHN MCCAIN 2008 MAINE LEADERSHIP TEAM

Honorary Chair
Former Governor John R. McKernan

Co-Chairs
United Senator Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine)
United States Senator Susan M. Collins (R-Maine)

Vice Chair
State Representative Josh Tardy (R-Newport)

Legislative Team (see below)

Even with McCain's powerhouse group, he still got toasted. However, the purpose of this post is to bring to your attention McCain's distaste with questions about immigration. In Arizona, his own state, look at how he treats a man who presents a question about illegal immigrants.


Don't" Ask McCain - Watch a funny movie here


Legislative Team
Representative James Annis (R-Dover-Foxcroft)
Representative Rich Cebra (R-Naples)
Representative Kathy Chase (R-Wells)
Representative Dean Cray (R-Palmyra)
Representative Phil Curtis (R-Madison)
Representative Harold Ian Emery (R-Cutler)
Representative Stacey Fitts (R-Pittsfield)
Representative Ken Fletcher (R-Winslow)
Representative Jeff Gifford (R-Lincoln)
Representative John McDonough (R-Scarborough)
Representative Everett McLeod (R-Lee)
Representative H. Sawin Millett (R-Waterford)
Representative Gary Moore (R-Standish)
Representative Kerri Prescott (R-Topsham)
Representative John Robinson (R-Raymond)
Representative David Richardson (R-Carmel)
Representative Wes Richardson (R-Warren)
Representative David Savage (R-Falmouth)
Representative Thomas Saviello (U-Wilton)
Representative Joseph Tibbetts (R-Columbia)
Representative Windol Weaver (R-York)

John McCain the Arm Chair Warrior? and Assymetric Warfare

I read a blog today from an individual who had decided to back John McCain. The blogger states, "And above all else, the most important issue facing this country is the declared war on America perpitrated by the Islamo-Fascits across the Globe, and the Iraq War."

Here is my response:
I enjoyed your analysis; however, the greatest threat originally proposed by Osama Bin Laden was not related to the military – it is economic. Osama wants to drain the US of its economic power by engaging us in a protracted war where we will use billions of dollars and end up leaving much like Russia in Afghanistan. The Institute for the Analysis of Global Security wrote a strong piece on this subject called Energy Security.

Osama Bin Ladin boasted in 2004, We "bled Russia for ten years until it went bankrupt and was forced to withdraw in defeat". His current strategy is the same. I propose a military man is not our best choice in this protracted conflict. We need an economic man.

With Bush in the White House, our generals have done a superb job fighting – Petraeus and the other generals have great ideas (not politicians like McCain who claim Petraeus’ ideas are his own). McCain has been in the Senate for 24 years – he is not a solution but part of the problem. McCain sitting on all those defense committees did not keep us safe! He was advising them when all of the junk occurred, he missed it just like everybody else. He will do just as much for America continuing as the committee member he has always been.

The future of warfare is not in McCain’s experience. We are talking technology and that requires a strong economy. We need unmanned planes, smart bombs, strategic missiles, robotic arms and satellites. The next generation of warfare is Asymmetric – McCain has no experience in it.

Mitt Romney understands economic incentives – both domestic and foreign. Whether it is aiding our allies, or hindering our enemies, economics is the key to the future. Economists estimates 80% of jobs in 20 years haven’t even been thought of yet. Mitt Romney knows how to incentivize research and development in new technologies. Only Mitt Romney has the experience to position America globally to take advantage of those opportunities.

It’s time to Rally to Romney for a truly strong America. A strong economy allows us to build the strong military – thus defending us both financially and militarily.

Please note: John McCain is technically not an "Armchair Warrior" as the Urban Dictionary defines an armchair warrior as "someone who has never served in the military, but who rah-rahs a war when it is broadcast on TV from his armchair while swilling beer."

John McCain says Its not the social issues I care about

Wow, the ONLY issue John McCain carries any weight on is defense. I would argue that he is poor on that as well. He has been a US Senator for Arizona for nigh on 25 years. His claim is the same thing over and over, "I've been on the committees in Washington all this time defending America".

Ha, ha, ha, ha. Sorry, I can't help but laugh at that.

If John McCain has been on the committees all this time, then he is PART OF THE PROBLEM. He hasn't kept us safe; he didn't protect America sitting in a plush seat in Washington. It was the soldiers that did the work. But I digress; this post is about social issues.

The Washington Post recently reported the following surprising statement:

McCain seems distinctly uninterested when asked questions concerning abortion
and gay rights. While campaigning in South Carolina, he told reporters riding with him on his bus that he was comfortable pledging to appoint judges who would strictly interpret the Constitution in part because it would reassure conservatives who might otherwise distrust him.
"It's not social issues I care about," he explained.

John McCain ignores economic and social conservatives. Only Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee have declared their intentions to keep conservative judges and move forward on social issues. Their Presidential platforms are pro-life and pro-family.

I found this on Article VI blog (this is a MUST READ):

As things have turned out, Evangelicals have not refused, so much, to vote for Mitt Romney because he is Mormon, they have instead chosen to vote for Mike Huckabee because he is “one of us.” How much a role suspicion and bias against Mormonism has played in that somewhat more positive-appearing choice is a determination that will ultimately be up to pollsters and psychologists in the years after the election to determine. And while it may not be “bigotry” it is identity politics, and they are as suicidal as pure bigotry.
No identity group is sufficiently large to carry a presidential election. A coalition is required. What Mike Huckabee has done is peel off one section of the traditional conservative coalition, Evangelicals, and claimed it for himself. With the coalition split, neither Evangelicals or the greater conservative coalition can win.
The presidential candidate for a party leads that party. That leader is going to pay attention to and drive the agenda of the coalition that got him there. Not only are Evangelicals not part of the coalition that has gotten John McCain this far, McCain has in the past loudly and actively found Evangelicals distasteful.

Let's face it though, only Mitt Romney has the money to continue on. And recent polls show Huckabee with a 5 to 8 percent change of winning against a Democrat. I hope Huckabee supporters will throw their support behind Romney so we can ALL block McCain.

McCain can continue to help the war from his plush Washington chair. Romney can help America face the global economy. In fact, economists estimate that 80% of jobs in 20 years haven’t even been thought of yet. I believe Mitt Romney can position America on a global scale to take advantage of those opportunities. He supports social issues and he knows how to bring together a strong team for national defense.

Now is the time to Rally to Romney.

Update: New ad showing how close McCain and Clinton are.

The Mormon faces more prejudice than the Black Man

This Presidential race is a step forward in many respects. We have as candidates a woman, a black man, a Mormon, and a POW.

Now I want to state up front that I do not subscribe to labels per se, but the purpose of this post is to point out an interesting fact.

The players:
The woman Hillary Clinton
The black man Barak Obama
The Mormon Mitt Romney
The POW John McCain

The setting:
Present day the United States of America.

Background:

Women - Although women were allowed to vote in 1869 and 1870 in Wyoming and Utah respectively, Congress disenfranchised women in 1887. The national woman's suffrage movement has it's beginnings in 1850. After seventy years of parades, picketing, and demonstrations the 19th Amendment granted Women the right to vote in 1920.

Blacks - The terrible subjection of fellow humans to slavery began a long time ago. On the American continent, slavery has been a scar on the face of freedom since 1619. In the 1750's the abolitionist movement slowly began to take hold. In 1780 the Massachusetts Constitution declared all men born "free and equal" effectively abolishing slavery in the state. (I find it interesting that MA is also the state that elected Mitt Romney as Governor.) After hundreds of years and a civil war, black men were freed with the passage of the 13th Amendment in 1865.

Mormons - The Mormons originally began in 1830 and were subsequently harried and harassed until they fled to the territory of Mexico (what is now Utah, Nevada, Idaho, Wyoming, and Arizona). The term "Mormon" was originally used as a slur against Mormons but has over time been accepted as a label (although it should be noted that most adherents of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints prefer to be called Latter-day Saints not Mormons). No other religion has ever been persecuted in America so vehemently and violently, including an extermination order by Governor Lilburn Boggs of Missouri in 1838 (I just learned that Quakers and Baptists were violently persecuted in Virginia early in America's history). Freedom of religion was granted to Mormons in 1791 with the passage of the Bill of Rights Article the third. Freedom for a Mormon to run for President came with the ratification of Article VI of the Constitution of the United States in 1787. (Notice these two items pre-date the formation of the Mormon church.)

POWs - To be entitled to prisoner of war status, a captured service member must have conducted operations according to the laws and customs of war: be part of a chain of command and wear a uniform and bear arms openly. American POWs, sometimes mistreated by their captors, are usually viewed as heroes and are accorded hero status. I am unaware of American POWs being treated pejoratively upon their return to the US. Mr. McCain returned to the US in 1973 and has subsequently served 25 years in the Senate.

Discussion:
History has already been made with the distance each of these candidates have come (even the POW dodged the South Carolina elimination round of yester year). One item of interest, however, is that Mormons continue to receive a significant amount of prejudice in America. An American born religion is despised and hated by a vocal yet small group of people. In fact, in many circles it is OK to discuss Mormons in a way that would not be done to women, blacks, or POWs.

I admire America, I think the American people are our strongest advantage in the world. We are a people that because of, NOT in spite of, our diversity are able to tackle complex problems and reach solutions. Although three of the four groups above still receive pejorative treatment at the hands of fellow Americans, we have come a long way in tolerance.

The Reverend Cecil "Chip" Murray, a Senior Fellow in the Center for Religion and Civic Culture at the University of Southern California and the Tanzy Chair in Christian Ethics, is the Senior Pastor of the Los Angeles First African Methodist Episcopal Church (FAME). Reverend Murray in an interview on November 6, 2007 was asked, "In 2008 whose candidacy will face the most opposition, Barack Obama or Mitt Romney? Who do you think will face the most opposition or the most prejudice today?"

The Reverend Murray replied, "The Mormon. Because America is still growing."

I recognize that everyone has their prejudices, but how sad for America, land of the free and home of the brave, when blindness covers their sight and prejudice beats their minds back into eighteen hundreds. Amy Sullivan in an article in the Washington Monthly pointed out that some of the anti-Mormon sentiment is based on rumors, unfamiliarity and "a vague feeling Mormons are kind of weird." She talks about being in fifth grade in the basement of her Baptist church and being instructed by her teacher that Mormons fall somewhere between "devil worshippers and Jim Jones." I find it repulsive that anyone is still teaching intolerance and hatred based on religion.

To quote Mitt Romney, "I just don't believe the people in this country are going to choose their candidate based on which church he or she goes to. I just don't believe that... my faith isn't terribly well known around this country. But I don't think for a minute the American people are going to say, "You know what, we're not going to vote for this guy on a secular position because of his church." I just don't believe that. I think when the constitution and the founders said no religious test shall ever be required for qualification for office or public trust in these United States, that the founders meant just that. And I don't believe for a minute that Republicans, or Americans for that matter, are going to impose a religious test, it's as un-American as anything you can think of... I believe that free American people are the source of America's greatness."

I agree with Mitt Romney. America is better than bigotry, and no matter how many distorted anti-Mormon mailers are sent, and no matter how many distorted anti-Mormon phone calls are made, and no matter how many distorted anti-Mormon people blog, the American people, true believers in freedom of religion, can rise above the storm of words and elect a President that John McCain called, "A man of honesty and integrity. A man prepared to serve... a man of unimpeachable integrity and honesty... he could do a lot of things, yet this man has willingly stepped forward... [he is] somebody the young can look up to and admire."

Place a historic vote for Mitt Romney in 2008.


The full interview of Reverend Murray.

McCain endorses Romney United States IMPORTANT VOTER INFORMATION

Campaign Election 2008 You Decide

Either Mitt Romney has risen rapidly politically, or John McCain has risen slowly. Oh, United States voters, McCain endorses Romney. McCain said: Mitt Romney is 'a man of honesty and integrity. A man prepared to serve... a man of unimpeachable integrity and honesty... he could do a lot of things, yet this man has willingly stepped forward... [he is] somebody the young can look up to and admire.'

Place your vote for Mitt Romney, endorsed by John McCain.

Hey Americans - Sweet Tax Relief Plan on the Horizon!

Great article about the details of Mitt Romney's Tax plan
NICOLE GELINAS

Mitt Romney’s Smart Tax Plan
Investment-friendly tax cuts, not one-time rebates

31 January 2008

Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney made a respectable showing in Tuesday’s Florida primary, and that’s good news for Americans worried about both the home-mortgage meltdown and their tax bills. Unlike Washington politicians, vying to outdo one another printing money to rescue Americans from falling home prices, Romney has proposed a bold long-term tax policy that would encourage Americans to choose their investments, both housing and otherwise, more wisely.
For the past two weeks, what’s passed for a debate in Washington over taxes and the mortgage crisis is an inane frenzy over a “stimulus” package, which means supposedly free money: $100 billion or so in taxpayer “rebates” to be mailed out this year, once Congress and the president work out the details. The rebates are supposed to avert a recession. If five-figure-earning American families have an extra $300 to $2,100 to spend, the thinking goes, they won’t pinch pennies as home values plummet. But this form of stimulus is unlikely to work, as plenty of smart observers have already pointed out. A one-time cash payment won’t change most people’s spending behavior; the reason they felt comfortable spending so freely before was that they figured that they could tap their rising home equity for extra cash regularly, not just once. Besides, the stimulus comes at the cost of further debasing the dollar over the long term, since the Treasury Department doesn’t have extra money lying around to pay for it.
Both Romney and John McCain deserve credit for mostly staying out of this frenzy, but Romney’s tax plan seems particularly fresh and intelligent in such a foolish atmosphere. Romney seems to believe that Americans are smart enough to plan for the long term rather than salivate over a one-shot check. His audacious plan would cut the tax rate on capital gains, interest, and dividends for any taxpayer making less than $200,000 annually to “absolutely zero.” This elegantly simple proposal would invite Americans to save and invest as much as they can or wish to without worrying about mind-numbingly complicated tax calculations.
But just as important, the plan would encourage people to diversify their investments without fear of poking the hornet’s nest of tax liability. Right now, a middle-aged American who has spent a few decades building up an investment portfolio outside his tax-favored IRA faces constraints if, like any wise investor, he wants to rebalance and update that portfolio periodically. If he was smart enough to invest in John Deere a few years back, for example, and wants to lock in some of his hefty profits today and rebalance his portfolio by selling some shares, he has to pause and consider the tax consequences, not to mention the annoyance of the whole process. Even if he already uses an accountant, he must dig up a trade confirmation from years ago as proof of what he paid for his stock in the first place. Under Romney’s plan, investment decisions would become simply investment decisions—and the investor would no longer have to ask himself, “Do I really want to go through all these tax calculations?”
Romney’s plan would accomplish another important goal: getting Americans to invest in something besides their homes. Even as capital-gains taxes have discouraged investing in stocks, the tax code has long encouraged people to invest in bigger houses—even if those houses are overpriced by any rational measure—because Americans know that they can deduct the interest that they pay on their mortgages from their IRS bills every year and, in many cases, get tax breaks when they sell their homes at a profit. Romney’s new incentive for market investing would serve as a counterweight to this lopsided code—which was meant to encourage Americans to own their homes rather than rent, but which has also led them to put far too much of their wealth in one large asset.
Romney would also enact permanent tax cuts for businesses and make permanent the Bush personal income-tax cuts, including dividend and capital gains reductions and rate cuts for top earners. He’d reduce the lowest tax rate, again permanently, from 10 percent to 7.5 percent, adding up to an average annual savings of $400 for working-class families as well as a one-time retroactive check. This move would make continued tax cuts for upper-income earners more politically palatable, and it’s far superior to the rebate plan that Congress and the White House are discussing because families could count on the savings every year.
McCain, Romney’s chief rival for the Republican nomination, has likewise pledged to keep the Bush tax cuts permanent, including keeping the current rates on capital gains and dividends. He’d also roll back business taxes and work to repeal the onerous alternative minimum tax. These are good ideas—and far better than those that Democratic candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, who propose to eliminate the Bush tax cuts for families earning $200,000 and $250,000 respectively, have offered. But so far, only Romney has come forward with a daring new proposal to encourage tens of millions of Americans to invest in the capital markets.
Here’s a good question for McCain before next Tuesday’s nationwide primary showdown:

Do you support a Romney-style investment-creating plan—and if not, why not?

Nicole Gelinas is a contributing editor to City Journal and a Chartered Financial Analyst.

John McCain and Hillary Clinton Share a Special Bond

What do Hillary Clinton and John McCain have in common?

I am not sure, but I hear they are "very close".

John McCain is not the conservative Romney, Huckabee, and Paul supporters would have hoped for. Even Michael Reagan son of Ronald Reagan says, "John McCain Hates Me." Ann Coulter claims she will vote for Clinton if McCain wins.

"Nobody does it* better."



Special thanks to my spouse for taking three hours of her time for this gem.

*it = being a flip flopping politician

Update: New ad comparing John McCain's record with Hilary Clinton.

Mitt Romney is the Ronald Reagan of Our Time

So the Main Stream Media is still rooting for its liberal Republican baby John McCain (I know what you're thinking, McCain is really old, but he still throws fits like a baby). Anyway, McCain looked like a smug, lying politician during the debate last night. I wrote down three or four times when John McCain's "Straight Talk Express" hurdled off the bridge and exploded into a great ball of fire. McCain is definitely a Washington Politician (I'll post more on that later).

So why is it that I call Mitt Romney the Ronald Reagan of our time? Because he represents all three groups of the conservative Republican base: the Social conservatives, the defense conservatives and the economic conservatives. I am excited about what Mitt Romney can do with America. Senator Jim DeMint was interviewed today on NPR. He too is excited about what Mitt Romney can accomplish in Washington. A true outsider, just like Reagan, Romney owes no favors (just look at McCain with all of his endorsement baggage piling up).

Joshua Trevino writes: CNN has the exit-poll numbers, and they reveal some surprising things:

Romney won pro-lifers.
Romney won the mainstream religious. (Huckabee won the very religious ­ less than one-fifth of the pool.)
Romney won the Protestants.
Romney tied Huckabee with Evangelicals.
Romney won the pro-GWB voters.
Romney is the primary second choice of Giuliani voters, Thompson voters …. and McCain voters.
Romney won the immigration hard-liners.
Romney won the upper-middle class, earning between $100,000 and $200,000 annually.
Romney won the terrorism-oriented voters.
Romney won the self-identified conservatives and the self-identified very conservative.
Romney won the values-oriented voters.
Romney won the tax-cutting voters.

Now I won't say, "My friends" with the sarcasm displayed by John McCain yesterday, but I will say, Fellow Americans - Mitt Romney has the poise, the leadership, and the tempered demeanor to be a President and Commander in Chief. John McCain displays the one style old "bossing people around" leadership practice (I'll be posting more about that soon) while Mitt Romney represents the new adaptive participative leadership style. I can tell you that Mitt Romney will get more done in Washington than John McCain has in his 22+ years in the Senate!!!

Rally to Romney, the Ronald Reagan of our time.


You can find out more about Mitt Romney by learning about his positions: Check out this book that summarizes Romney's positions.

Presidential Debate January 30, 2008 Reagan Library

Presidential Debate January 30, 2008 Reagan Library

Here are my notes from the debate; I missed the first half hour.

They are all Federalists, in other words they think each state has the freedom to experiment. (McCain looks like a small man sitting next to Romney)

Huckabee on the Economy: Question about using money for highways sounds like a Democratic plan. Again mentioned parents not getting home to soccer games (as if that is a government concern).

Romney disses the Big Dig in MA. (I bet MA residents liked that.)

Ron Paul doesn't like the idea of borrowing money from China. (I agree, however, Market Place talked about the reliance between China and the US on borrowing)

McCain asked a question about the economy. (Twirling his pen, is he nervous about this question?) Blah, blah, blah, one page mortgage paper, fix rating system. (Yeah right.)

(It's interesting to me that Romney always pays attention to the others as they speak. McCain on the other hand looks like an arrogant, smug jerk.)

McCain asked about opposing the tax cuts originally because they favored the rich. Now he has flip flopped and claims it was because of spending. (So much for Straight Talk Express, what a joke.)

Romney asked about economy. I doubt many people understood this comment, but it actually makes a lot of sense. Romney explains McCain's ideas about stopping spending are basically nickel and dimes. The US economy spends 60% of the money on entitlement programs like Medicare and Medicaid, 20% on the military, and 20% is discretionary spending. The biggest impact we can have is by tackling the 60% spending on entitlement programs. (That makes so much sense! Romney is definitely a smart man.)

Huckabee says he will have a fence built within 18 months.

Romney on immigration. No amnesty, no special path way to citizenship. Illegal immigration those recently arrived head home; kid in school? give them time to finish school then head on home; others with commitments, give them time then have them gather up their belongings and head on home to get in line. Prolegal immigration, they are a valuable source of vitality for America. (Lots of applause)

McCain on border security, would he vote for his bill if it came to the senate floor. POLITICAL SPEAK McCain dodged the question. Flip flopper McCain - either his original idea was stupid, or he has changed his position. Then he talks using "we" instead of standing up for his stupid idea and admitting guilt. What a flip flopper. "We are all committed" McCain says. What a joke, Straight Talk Express plunges off the tracks and blows up in the valley.

Huckabee mentioned about everyone being equal. He mentioned fetuses, humans, but left out religion. He lost an opportunity to appease some fears about him. He also dodges every question presented to him. "I am not going to say anything about Reagan."

Everybody was basically the same on Judges - EXCEPT McCain who talked about all the favors he owes to his "good" friend O'Conner. This guy is a political snake.

Romney Question did George Bush destroy the Republican Party? I think the party is better off. I blame Washington, they overspent, and they didn't keep their promises. (Note McCain rubs his hands with a weasely look on his face as Romney talks about the military). Romney is appealing to Social, Economic, and Family Value conservatives.

Back and forth about the Timetables.
McCain comment about timetables. He smirks and looks self righteous.

Romney I have never supported time tables for withdrawal. McCain smirks again. (Well excuse Romney for not knowing your Washington speak! McCain is looking like a freaking jerk! He is bumbling his words and sounds a bit crazy, "If we had lain in the weeds until they had gone." What the hey? McCain is babbling.)

McCain says, "Of course, he said their should be a withdrawal." "I'm the expert on what you said." (McCain is an arrogant son of a gun. He's flip flopping and incoherent, not only that McCain is smiling like a village idiot. Just like someone that can't solve problems, McCain blasts out three quick attacks on Romney. Straight Talk Express slams off the bridge and plunges hundreds of feet into the raging river.)

Romney says McCain is Washington style old politics (I'll be posting my old leadership style verse new leadership style essay soon.) I loved Romney's comment, "[McCain] you got three Pinocchio for your mischaracterization from the Washington Post".

(I've got to take a break and shout McCain is a freaking smug guy!)

McCain - attacks Romney again about his success. "My friend, Huckabee will agree with me about your money.”Vote for me McCain, I want 100 years in Iraq!"

Paul puts McCain and Romney in the same boat with respect to Iraq. They both want to get the job done there.

Huckabee If Iraq fails it will create a vacuum there that could be used by Al Qaeda.

McCain "Protecting America's interest it’s not about casualties." Huh? McCain claims he came up with the Petraeus strategy. (What an egomaniac.)

Huckabee "I look at the actions rather than what they are saying."

Romney There are four major strategies in the world today: 1. Those countries that control energy like Russia, 2. China communism and a wild west free enterprise, 3. Al Qaeda, 4. Free enterprise and free individuals the USA.

McCain on leadership and management. I know how to lead, vision knowledge, background. 20 years on security committees (doesn't this mean that McCain is partially to blame for 9/11 - he sucks at making good security measures)

Romney McCain would not be good for the economy. Governors are leaders. Legislators are committee members. Leaders are small business, middle sized business - they are leaders not just managers. Govern in charge of National Guard and state police.

Romney the problems facing a commander of chief does not require service in the military. Foreign policy and military is no longer like a checkers game, it is more like three dimensional chess. McCain thinks its checkers. Romney has the capacity to think in the manner of chess.

McCain Starts with what looks like a compliment then turns it into a dig against Romney (McCain is such a double talking politician. The Straight Talk Express drives off the end of the tracks and explodes.) McCain says he hopes people will judge him by those that have endorsed him (that would be liberal newspapers and a cross dressing Rudy).

Huckabee political speak genius. Agrees with Romney that a governor is a better leader than a senator.

Romney thinks Reagan would support him.

McCain hits at Romney with his first statement again (what a loser, he looks like an angry little man)


Paul kind of impressive talk there. Liked the gold standard.

Huckabee just called the other candidates arrogant and presumptuous for thinking Reagan would support any of them. (What a politician, the guy is just like McCain - political speak champions)

At the end I noticed two things about the cameras:
1. Huckabee's wife is as tall as Arnold
2. Little camera time given to Romney, mostly on Huckabee and McCain.

Concluding thoughts: I am ticked off at McCain! The straight talk express is a bunch of garbage. John McCain showed himself to be a pig headed jerk. Digging Romney at every comment. What a smug jerk.

Paintball with the Presidential Candidates - Happy Shooting

McCain: Shifting American Politics to the Left - MSM Loving it!

The only good thing for conservatives about John McCain is that he survived as a POW. Aside from that John McCain is a flip flopping liberal. Now I am not good enough to claim when someone is a hypocrite, but I think John McCain comes pretty close. For instance, he stated he wouldn't get involved in negative politics, yet McCain has been called on the carpet by news outlets and bloggers for his dishonest characterization of Mitt Romney's position on Iraq. Here are a few comments on the subject:

[McCain] said he was quoting Romney as favoring a "timetable" for withdrawal and argued that he was not misquoting Romney, saying, "Clearly, the impression was that he was ready to set a date for withdrawal." But Romney quotes circulated by McCain's campaign didn't show Romney making that exact comment _ nor did aides back up McCain's earlier comment that suggested that Romney "wanted to set a date for withdrawal." See the Huffington Post.

In doing so, [McCain] relies on a statement which cannot fairly be construed as advocating withdrawal. This is the conclusion of virtually everyone who has looked at the issue, except for some of McCain’s supporters. McCain, in short, has smeared Romney. See Paul Mirengoff.

John McCain today flat-out lied about Gov. Romney's position on the troop "surge," etc. This is no surprise. McCain's "straight talk express" has been anything but straight for quite some time now. He has been making false claims about what his position on immigration was just last summer. He has been making false claims about why he opposed Bush's tax cuts. He has been making false claims about Romney's stance on "torture." He has made misleading (not exactly false, but certainly misleading) representations about Giuliani's position on the line item veto. He has misrepresented his helpfulness on judicial nominations. And I know I am forgetting some of the other things he has not been exactly straight about. See Quin Hillyer.

Since McCain and his surrogates insist on making this a big issue, let's engage them. They are dissembling about what Romney said. I have provided quotes below. We have now heard from Woolsey, who is repeating the disinformation. And we have now viewed the video-tape, which clears Romney of the allegation, i.e., he did not call for a specific time to withdraw our troops. Now, if this is the big bombshell the McCain campaign is using in the days before the Florida vote (albeit people are casting votes throughout via absentee ballots), it's pretty disgraceful stuff. See Mark Levin.

Yeah, pretty egregious [of McCain]. [Romney] never said he “wanted” to withdraw or that he wanted a date set, and it’s patently clear he doesn’t want any timetables publicly announced. See Allahpundit.

It’s a reminder — like the McCain campaign’s dishonest line of attack this weekend — that as admirable McCain is as both a hero and a politician, he is not irreproachable even on national-security issues. McCain is fond of saying he’d rather lose a political campaign than a war; he now seems to be swimming close to using the war to win a political campaign in the most dishonest of ways. It’s conduct unbecoming a man we all respect. See Kathryn Jean Lopez.

Then he was asked to justify his contention that Romney once supported a withdrawal timetable for Iraq. (I wrote this morning that McCain "stretched" history with the remark, and a few moments before this particular question received a stern talking to by two McCain aides and one reporter.) See Marc Ambinder.

This is a fundamentally dishonest attack. One of the reasons why some Republicans who have opposed McCain over issues like the BCRA and immigration have tried to keep a civil tongue in discussing McCain is because of the respect he has earned as a stalwart on the war. He deserves that respect; he has been an indispensable voice for the effort and has the right to hold himself up as that. However, he should be showing that respect to others who have supported the war and the troops. See Ed Morrissey.

McCain’s unfair stab at Romney this weekend may not cost him anything. The endorsement from Florida’s popular governor, Charles Crist, came at just the right time to bury the item in the local news. And if he does win the nomination, this moment may not even be remembered. Unfortunately, the truth is always too complicated for a quick explanation. See David Freddoso.

McCain is Political Speak:
In the brief economic part of his presentation, McCain is insistent, absolutely insistent, that the Bush tax cuts he voted against, and would still vote against today, be made permanent. It’s hard to imagine how he can say the word “permanent” much more in the course of a couple of sentences: “But I think, my friends, that’s what we should do, I think it’s very important, to keep the tax cuts permanent, make the tax cuts permanent. If we don’t do that, every family and business in America is going to see an increase in their taxes in 2010. So we need to keep the tax cuts permanent.” See article by Rich Lowry.

Doesn't anyone else see what is happening? McCain is a darling of the liberal media (as are all the democratic candidates). If McCain can get elected with the help of the main stream media then the only two candidates available are a liberal democrat and a liberal republican. This dynamic would shift the entire United States of America to the left away from conservatism. Maybe Huckabee is doing to Romney, what Huckabee accused Thompson of doing to Huckabee.

Again, I am shocked at how the other Republican candidates have ganged up against Romney. You've got to see this video.

Update: I stumbled across this article by Vic Lundquist who analyzes the Florida results and discusses religious bigotry in America.

Florida Prediction for GOP President - Lost Mormon?

The night before the big primary. I think Mitt Romney will come out ahead 1%. I am looking forward to the results.

Update: McCain 36%, Romney 31%, Giuliani 15%, Huckabee 14%, Paul 3%

I was wrong. I have to admit Florida was an exciting race (makes me wonder how much money the TV/Radio/Newspaper companies are making off this campaign season). I heard three comments, however, which surprised me:

Sheridan Kernop said she originally considered Romney, but moved to Huckabee. And why the change? “The honest truth? Because he’s a Mormon.”

Humberto Leach voted for Mitt Romney because he thinks he is the best candidate to beat the Democrats. "It was a hard choice because I voted against my religion. [Meaning religiously he should have voted for Huckabee]."

On another blog, which shall remain nameless since they deleted my comments and instead of talking politics went straight to Mormon bashing. The blogger didn't support Huckabee tax policy, he didn't think Huckabee was the best candidate, but they shared a religion and because of that simple reason, "God forbid any other candidate should win".

I guess the Founding Fathers, John F. Kennedy, and Mitt Romney are wrong, there is a religious test for President. If Mitt Romney wasn't a Mormon he would have had the nomination wrapped up months ago - the man is head and shoulders above the others. I am a little bit saddened by America, Land of the Free, Home of the Brave, do you see the subscript there? Does it say something like "except for Mormons"? I don't think everyone thinks bad of Mormons, but I have been surprised by all the distasteful phone calls slamming Mormons from Huckabee's campaign, and the snide remarks from Ron Paul's campaign, not to mention the bizarre attitude that "any body except a Mormon body will do". Or Americans thinking a Mormon (even one as accomplished as Mitt Romney) cannot be President because of his faith - who cares about his Presidential platform.

John F. Kennedy respected religions, even the Mormons. You don't have to agree on doctrine to remain secure in your faith and to complement people of other faiths. Voting for Mitt Romney is not against one's faith - you're not voting for a Pastor in Chief. You're voting for an executive officer to provide vision, values, set priorities and deadlines for the next four years in America. I believe Mitt Romney, even if he is a Mormon, will do just that.

Calling Floridians Political Phone Calls

Now that the Sunshine state is in the spotlight, I volunteered two hours today and made some phone calls into Florida. Here are some of the conversation highlights from talking with real people in Florida. I always introduce myself and then ask how they are doing - almost everyone was sick of political phone calls.

Conversation A:
I talked with a sweet woman who had been tracking the number of phone calls she had received. She said she had received 19 so far. When I expressed surprise, she said she realistically was expecting around 30 before Tuesday's primary. As a registered voter, she recognized that political phone calls are part of the process.

Conversation B:
I talked with a man who started out saying he didn't care what I thought about politics because it was the candidates that needed his vote. I agreed and asked him what he thought (he also mentioned it was nice to talk to a real person) and then he unloaded. His main concerns had to do with raising his family and getting his kids through college so they could get a great job. At a jab at McCain and Giuliani he said he didn't care about terrorists, even though he lived by a military base. He wanted economic prosperity so his kids could move out of the house and find a job that would provide for their needs. He really got worked up and before I knew it he was using cuss words, then he dropped the f-bomb and hung up.
Well, I didn't find that very fair, I didn't even get to tell him that I was a student with three kids living in an apartment and knew exactly what he was talking about. So I did what any good phone person would do, I called him back.
He was completely surprised. He talked for another ten minutes about the economy and his worries about his family and the future. Finally, I was able to tell him my story. As an MBA and an MHA student, I support Mitt Romney because of his economic policies. A strong economy begets a strong military, and both of those provide protection for my family, both financially and economically. I then gave him the local phone number and suggested he call them and say, "These are my concerns, I'll be watching closely over the next few days to see what Romney says about this." Our conversation ended very well, "God bless you" he said.

Conversation C:
I talked with a lady who said she had already made up her mind. I asked if I could share with her my reasons for supporting Mitt Romney. She reluctantly agreed. I explained the US spends 4% of GDP on the military and 16% on healthcare. It takes a strong economy to support the military and only Mitt Romney has the real world experience to help America prosper. Economists estimate 80% of jobs in twenty years haven't even been thought of yet. Only Mitt Romney can position America to take advantage of those jobs. When I finished, she seemed very impressed and said, "That was very convincing." I think she will be checking that box for Mitt Romney on Tuesday the 29th of January.

Conversation D:
I talked with a young lady who answered the phone, "Victoria's Secret, how may I help you?". (I think they were tired of political calls.)

Conversation E:
A man answered the phone and said he had already cast his ballot, but that his wife hadn't. In the background she protested, but he finally got her to answer the phone. After a brief conversation, she wondered aloud, "My husband voted for John McCain, can he get his ballot back and change his vote to Mitt Romney?"

Conversation F:
A woman asked me right off the bat, what is Mitt Romney's position on pro-life issues. I told her about how Mitt Romney converted to the pro-life stance as Governor of Massachusetts. As a governor he came down on the side of pro-life issues over and over again. His Presidential platform is pro-life and pro-family values. She said those were the issues important to her and I suggested she check out mittromney.com for more information.

Conversation G:
I talked with a man who was one of the most polite people I've talked with. He was debating between Giuliani and Romney. He said, "I would never vote for McCain - even if he won I would vote for the democrat, unless it was Hillary Clinton." He thought McCain was one of the most liberal political figures to call themselves a Republican that he had ever seen in politics. We had a great discussion, talking about healthcare and some of the trends in Florida hospitals. As an MHA student I promised to look into fellowships in Florida. We ended the conversation very well - sometimes I wish I could keep track of some of those people. Good Folk!

Anyway, I've never followed politics, but I must admit that people are excited and enthusiastic about Mitt Romney. Over and over people admired his economic knowledge and admitted the fact that we need a great economy to support our soldiers in the field with the best equipment and technology, people also admired his family values, and his great example for MBA students across the nation. Every MBA student wishes to be successful like Romney. As an economic conservative, I strongly endorse Mitt Romney for President of these United States.

McCain Continues His "Straight Talk" Express, Huh?

So John McCain pulls another Huckabee! McCain claims he is the gentleman of politics and then purposefully misrepresents another candidates' position. This is the same type of thing that McCain caught flack on in South Carolina.

In the course of a few hours, McCain said that Romney once wanted to set a date to withdraw from Iraq, accused him of working on the same side as Hillary Clinton in the Iraq debate, and accused him of disrespecting American servicemen and women. Check out this myth debunked here.

What exactly does McCain mean by demanding that Romney apologize to
American troops? Is McCain suggesting than any American who opposed the surge
was somehow not supporting American troops? Is he saying that it is unpatriotic
to debate American policy in Iraq? It sure sounds like it. And it is an
unbecoming posture for McCain, who has been boasting in
recent days about the "respectful debate" he would have with Hillary
Clinton, John Edwards or Barack Obama should he win the nomination.

John McCain's statements on Iraq, early on - what a Flip Flopper.

“Mr. President, can anyone seriously argue that another 6 months of United States forces in harm’s way means the difference between peace and prosperity in Somalia and war and starvation there? Is that very dim prospect worth one more American life? No, it is not.” -John McCain Senate Floor, 10/14/93
"There is no reason for the United States of America to remain in Somalia. The American people want them home, I believe the majority of Congress wants them home, and to set an artificial date of March 31 or even February 1, in my view, is not acceptable. The criteria should be to bring them home as rapidly and safely as possible, an evolution which I think could be completed in a matter of weeks.
Our continued military presence in Somalia allows another situation to arise which could then lead to the wounding, killing or capture of American fighting men and women. We should do all in our power to avoid that.
I listened carefully to the President's remarks at a news conference that he held earlier today. I heard nothing in his discussion of the issue that would persuade me that further U.S. military involvement in the area is necessary. In fact, his remarks have persuaded me more profoundly that we should leave and leave soon.
Dates certain, Mr. President, are not the criteria here. What is the criteria and what should be the criteria is our immediate, orderly withdrawal from Somalia. And if we do not do that and other Americans die, other Americans are wounded, other Americans are captured because we stay too long--longer than necessary--then I would say that the responsibilities for that lie with the Congress of the United States who did not exercise their authority under the Constitution of the United States and mandate that they be brought home quickly and safely as possible. . . .
I know that this debate is going to go on this afternoon and I have a lot more to say, but the argument that somehow the United States would suffer a loss to our prestige and our viability, as far as the No. 1 superpower in the world, I think is baloney. The fact is, we won the cold war. The fact is, we won the Persian Gulf conflict. And the fact is that the United States is still the only major world superpower.
I can tell you what will erode our prestige. I can tell you what will hurt our viability as the world's superpower, and that is if we enmesh ourselves in a drawn-out situation which entails the loss of American lives, more debacles like the one we saw with the failed mission to capture Aideed's lieutenants, using American forces, and that then will be what hurts our prestige.
We suffered a terrible tragedy in Beirut, Mr. President; 240 young marines lost their lives, but we got out. Now is the time for us to get out of Somalia as rapidly and as promptly and as safely as possible.
I, along with many others, will have an amendment that says exactly that. It does not give any date certain. It does not say anything about any other missions that the United States may need or feels it needs to carry out. It will say that we should get out as rapidly and orderly as possible."-John McCain Senate Floor, 10/19/93

Straight Talk - John McCain's Straight Talk Express plunges off the road and into a revine exploding a ball of fire.

Crist Endorses John McCain? What the hey?

We are getting down to the wire and Florida Governor Crist endorsed John McCain for President. Here are some comments I picked up from various locations. True Republicans don't seem too pleased (for that matter the Florida democrats also sent out a statement).

Florida democratic party said:
“Crist: Screw You, Florida. This is a slap in the face to every Floridian. Of all the candidates in the race, Charlie Crist picks the one who ridicules the proposed national catastrophic fund that would reduce insurance rates for all Floridians,” state party spokesman Mark Bubriski said. “So much for being the ‘People’s Governor.’”

Nate said:
It seemed like Governor Crist was a little fake in his endorsement. He said, “I just decided today.” Was he waiting to see who the clear winner would be so he could endorse the winner? The whole thing seemed a little odd.

Mitt Romney Communications Director Kristy Campbell:
“We have a great deal of respect for Governor Crist but we happen to disagree with him on who would make the best President. Governor Romney is working hard for the support of every single Floridian who wants lower taxes, less government, stronger families and a strong military. Governor Crist’s vote is only one vote. The endorsement that matters most to Governor Romney is the endorsement of the People of Florida.”

Miami Herald
''Crist is popular, but he's not Oprah,'' said pollster Kellyanne Conway.
And top Crist advisors, such as lobbyists Brian Ballard and J.M. ''Mac'' Stipanovich, have been longtime McCain men. ''We've been working this for a long time,'' Stipanovich said.

Hucks Army Defecting in Droves

Over and over the story reads the same...
I donated money to Mike Huckabee, but now I support Romney.

Being new to blogging, I wanted to post comments and have comments posted. So I searched the blogosphere looking for people that felt the same as I. Finally I stumbled onto http://www.mikehuckabee.com/ and lo and behold I found 754 "bloggers for Huckabee". I thought, well I guess this is a good place to start. Unfortunately, over and over as I clicked through the blogs, the bloggers had moved from Mike Huckabee to Fred Thompson and many had moved on to Mitt Romney; while other blogs like Latter Day Saints for Huckabee and Michigan for Huckabee came up as Error 404: Page does not exist. People had even posted their emails to Mike Huckabee asking to be removed from his blog roll!

Then I stumbled across a Bob Lonsberry, a guy that does a radio show in New York on 1180 WHAM and Utah on Family Values 570 KRNS. His story was similar to many, many others I have read:

Mike Huckabee is the only politician I've ever donated money to. I sent him $50 last fall, when he was on the Glenn Beck TV show. I liked what he had to say about the Second Amendment and I liked the way he was so upfront with his strong religious values.
But this guy's only a conservative when it suits him, and he's got a new brand of conservatism he's peddling that is nothing but the old brand of liberalism. He is, to me, a keen, keen disappointment.
He has prostituted his religion, seeming to actively promote his Christian ties for personal political gain, and cunningly using religious bigotry against at least one opponent. He is too clever by half and it comes off looking not just cunning, but sinister. He did grow government, he did raise taxes, he was a good friend of illegal aliens – and all the 180s he's pulled in the last few weeks won't change that. Mike Huckabee is talented, and part of me still likes him a lot, but the more I learn about him, the more he reminds me of Elmer Gantry. -January 22, 2008

As more and more evangelicals realize how Huckabee misuses his religion to get votes, Hucks Army gets smaller and smaller. His "I am more Christian than thou" doesn't help any one's cause. From the debate the other night, more people thought a former Baptist Preacher was the least likely to bring the country together than a woman, a black man, or a Mormon. Huckabee has turned out to be a major disappointment.

Bob Lonsberry and former Huckabee supports, I challenge you to make Mitt Romney the second campaign to which you have donated. Just click here to make your donation. And welcome to Team Mitt!

What does Miss South Carolina and McCain have in Common?

MSNBC Republican Debate January 24, 2008

McCain gets a question from Ron Paul about abolishing a committee.

McCain doesn't know what he is talking about when it comes to economics. This video shows the comparison between Miss South Carolina and John McCain as they both try to answer a question about which they have no idea. Miss South Carolina stumbled all over the place, and John McCain does the same. I love the music, "Don't know much about history, don't know much about geography..."

Ron Paul at the end says, "I don't think he knew what I was saying... He had to be [confused], because the people he brought up were actually on that committee."

You can see many of the democrats that love McCain here.

Mitt Romney wins Republican Debate January 24, 2008 MSNBC

MSNBC Republican Debate January 24, 2008

Joe Scarbourough, "Mitt Romney absolutely dominated."
McCain talking twice about bridge to no where, left us scratching our head.
"Conservatives probably related to Mitt Romney."
"This was probably Mitt Romney's best performance."
"This was Mitt Romney's best debate performance."
"I saw a man who made two or three commanding responses to some questions."
"Run against not only Hillary Clinton but Bill Clinton. How would you run against them? Frankly, I can't wait. With Bill Clinton in the White House with nothing to do..."

Mitt Romney Respects Candidates - Make Tax Cuts Permanent

MSNBC Republican Debate January 24, 2008

"I trust these two gentlemen (McCain and Giuliani)"
"MA was in a ditch, 3 billion dollar short fall"
"Thought they would need to raise taxes"
"Said to the business community, you don't have to worry about Taxachucetts coming back again."
"McCain should have voted for the Bush tax cuts the first time around."
"Economy in my DNA. I know how jobs come and how they go."
"I'll make sure we create more jobs."

Mitt Romney on Size of Military Republican Debate

MSNBC Republican debate January 24, 2008

Welcome home bill in MA. We will pay for your entire education. Enrollment went up 30%. We need to improve the GI bill, so young people get a full ride and go to college.
"Unthinkable that democrats would say... getting out as fast or win? Get out as fast as you can is the answer to Iraq."
"We cannot turn Iraq over to Al Queda."
"I will not walk away from Iraq until we are successful and have finished that job."
Democrats claiming they are the reason for success. "Not General Hillary Clinton."

What is Mitt Romney going to stand for as President?

MSNBC Republican debate January 24, 2008

Mitt Romney answers on what he is going to run? Why is he trying to be President?
"I'm gonna run on my own record."
"Washington is fundamentally broken."
"They said they would fix social security, they haven't."
"They said they would get us off of foreign oil, they haven't."
"They said they would live by higher ethics, they haven't."
"When Republicans act like democrats, America loses."
"We all agree pork barrel spending should end."
"How do we bring down taxes?"
"We are the party of fiscal responsibility."
Foundation of economy being shaken because Washington is not getting the job done.
"I am going to Washington to change Washington."