A blog for America's neighbour to the north that support Mitt Romney and what he stands for. As the U.S.'s closest friend and ally Canada is greatly affected by U.S. policy and politics.
Tonight watching the Super Bowl, as I usually do, I was routing for the underdog. The New England Patriots went into the Bowl with a perfect 18-0 record. They were the clear favourite going into the final against the New York Giants. Almost everyone predicted a Patriot win, and until the final minutes that's what it looked like it would be.
But with less than a minute left, Eli Manning threw a pass, that I'm sure will become legendary and will be played countless times tomorrow on television and on the internet, and hit Plaxico Burress for the touchdown to win the game 17-14.
What happened tonight was spectacular and reminds of what I believe can and will happen to Mitt Romney, not at the Super Bowl but Super Tuesday. Until recently, John McCain was the clear favourite in the polls. It appeared as if Romney couldn't touch him. But much like what happened tonight, the tide is turning, and with less than 4 days left (like a minute left in a football game) Romney will catch the game winning pass from conservatives all over America, producing a huge upset and glorious victory.
A lesson was learned tonight ... In the words of the great Winston Churchill, "Never give in, never, never, never, never." Mitt won't give in, and neither will we. In America everything is possible.
Romney won in Maine on Saturday by a landslide (he got 52% of the vote). Of course the media won't make a big deal of it because Romney won (it's only a big deal when someone they support wins). Apparently they had great voter turnout, and in some areas the biggest since Ronald Reagan was running in the 80's. The best part is that McCain got two huge (or at least he thinks they are) endorsements from two Maine Senators and is still getting slain by Romney. Heck, Ron Paul is in a close race with McCain for second (good job Ron)! Well done Maine ... you are an example for the rest of us and vote like true conservatives should ... you know ... for conservatives (not male versions of Hilary Clinton)! Maine has 21 delegates up for grabs (but 3 are unpledged). So Romney took all 18 available delegates from Maine. Here is the updated map (I will update the delegate scoreboard and medal count when all the polls have reported. Delegate Count/Score board: (as per CNN)
This "is a delicious victory, because it shows that when the media stays out of the way and lets the people just vote, they overwhelming vote in favor of Romney. Romney has done extremely well in three contests so far, and won a fourth by a fair margin. The three he did amazingly well in were Wyoming, Nevada, and now Maine. In all three where he won by LARGE margins, the media didn’t focus on the race much, and the people were not inundated with news reports done by the “We Love McCain” media (also known as the mainstream media.) Left to their own devices, and their own investigations of Romney and McCain online, voters overwhelming chose Mitt.
The media will most likely disparage this caucus too, in an attempt to downplay Romney yet again. Never mind that this will mean that Romney will have won more states than McCain, and will have roughly the same amount of delegates. No, if the media brought that up, no doubt they’d get kicked off the air for giving such “biased” coverage of the race.
Whether the MSM wants to admit it or not, Romney is not out, not by a long shot. It’s time to Rally to Romney, FredHeads, Rudyiacs, and MittHeads alike!!! We know who the conservative is! And to the Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee supporters: Whether you want to admit it or not, it’s time to face the facts - this has quickly become a two-man race. Do you want a conservative nominee or a moderate (on a good day - liberal 89% of the time) nominee? There is no other plausible scenario. Choose, and please do so wisely. The future of our great country is in your hands.
America, it’s time to decide. For me, the choice has been made: RALLY TO ROMNEY!!!!!!"
So Thompson bows out this morning and for captain Mitt, this is great news. Remember, McCain is losing among pure bred republicans which make up the majority of Thompson voters so one could logically conclude that the Thompson following will be divvied up among Huckster and Romney. Huckabee is only a contender in the southern states, which leaves the new found free votes out west up for grabs. Making Romney's close second in the polls all of the sudden become a dangerous second chasing McCain with a new found vigour, and with legitimate money and not just hopes of money.
Thompson was one of the last to join the race and one of the first to drop out. Look out folks, the party just got interesting.
So here's a question I'd love an answer to.Watching the news yesterday as results came in, the media was consistent to point out that Romney would have wanted to campaign in Nevada rather than South Carolina because there is a strong Mormon population in Nevada, and therefore Mitt's got an in, a sure fire population that "no one had taken into consideration."Well at maybe 4% of the US population, I want to know how they think this underground movement is working?The Mormon card seems to be played way too much by the media to be realistic.We know it wasn't the reason for a strong showing in Iowa, nor New Hampshire, Wyoming, and Nevada for that matter.If the Jews aren't making Giuliani magically win states, and the blacks don't give the election to Obama, I really don't understand how the media thinks a few Mormons stand a chance at throwing their 'weight' in an election.
No, it's not those who affiliate with the same religion that are making Mitt Romney America's choice, it's what happens when the race comes down to the issues.You see, the more of the candidates we get to enjoy, the more fragile every other candidates platform becomes with slip ups and semantics as well as voting preferences and their true stance on issues comes forth.But with Romney, who may have started out a bit fragile with accusations of flip flopping and being a "pretty boy," he is becoming more and more solid as the campaigns wear on.His stance on issues continually supports what he's been saying all along, no one is surprised as they find out his stance on the war, his vision for the economy, or his actual, real, plans to change Washington (as opposed to rhetoric on top of rhetoric reminiscent of deep fried froth).
No CNN - Fox News - Network media, as much fun as it would be to have a secret underground movement of Mormons electing the next president, the numbers aren't there, which means eventually you're going to have to take a look at the bigger issue... Romney brought an A game sweethearts.
Elect Romney in 2008 just released an article entitled "Who is the Real Conservative? Here’s an Easy Test." It sums up Rush Limbaugh's recent words on his popular radio show about how Republicans can conduct a simple test to see who the real conservative in the race is.The article:
Human Events just named Rush Limbaugh the “Man of the Year.” They proclaim that
“His voice defined the conservative movement in 2007.”
But on his radio program today, Rush offered all conservatives a simple test anyone can use to determine the best conservative candidate in the 2008 Presidential Race. The test is this: Look at who the Mainstream Media attacks repeatedly and then look at who they “prop up.” The conservatives are the ones who will reap the most attacks. The phony conservatives will be “propped up” by the Mainstream Media in an effort to “break up the conservative coalition.”
Huckabee and McCain are conservative cut-outs that have been propped up by the MSM. There is little or no conservative substance to their messages. Any wins for these two are not definitive of the conservative movement.
Instead, look at who the MSM is trying to bring down. Look at whose doom is consistently prophesied. If one were to believe all the predictions of Romney’s imminent downfall, it would be amazing that he is still enough of a threat that they must still tout his coming destruction.
Even though Rush claims not to endorse any candidate, he sure spells out pretty clearly who he doesn't like and makes it easy to see who he does. Read more!
Marketwatch did a write up this morning entitled "Romney vaults Huckabee in Iowa polls" which made me chuckle a bit. The reason this is so fantastic is not only because Mitt is finally getting his moment in the sun (well snow if I know Iowa) but it's more Huckabee's reaction that I love.
What would you do if the person you'd been leading all of the sudden is in front of you? Do you step up your campaigning, do you try to highlight the topics that you feel are your strong points and his weak points, do you out smart your opponent with cunning strategies of the likes Iowa ain't nevah seen? Nope, not if your Huckabee, you just call your opponent dumb and tell him he can't read good. Well, so to speak.
Huckabee has blamed his falling on Romney being "dishonest" and "desperate", also popular is the if I was rich as you, then this would be different plea that we all know and love from the days of poor hockey performance being blamed on the rental skates and not the fact that the guy doesn't have a wristshot.
So "Huckabee, who claims Romney is outspending him 20-1 in Iowa, is relying on an informal network of evangelicals, home-schoolers, hunters and economic conservatives who, like him, want to replace the income tax with a national sales tax." Now a few things stand out to me. First, there's an underground network of home-schoolers!? That's amazing in its own right but the idea that they, along with the underground hunter scene will sway the election is something I hadn't anticipated.
Pretty much, if Huckabee's reaction to the poll changes doesn't save him, his only chance is to signal the Chuck Norris..../cue the bat-esque sign Ed, it's time for a roundhouse kick in the 8th dimension. Huckabee's is probably ahead in that dimension. Quotes from - http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/politics/bal-te.iowa31dec31,0,5847918.story http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/romney-too-rich-for-me-huckabee-wails/2007/12/31/1198949742016.html http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-campaign31dec31,1,5301685.story?coll=la-politics-campaign
Just a few short weeks ago, Mike Huckabee came out of nowhere and rocketed to the top of the polls in Iowa. He implied on many occasions that the reason for his success is that God wanted him to win. He kept this lead for a while, until now, when the latest polls are showing Mitt Romney with as much as a 9 point lead in Iowa (but an overall average of a 0.6% lead).
Well Mikey boy, as the Lord giveth He taketh away thy lead (not that God would ever support a religious bigot who has a tainted past full of deceit anyway). Mitt has not only closed up the gap, but has even surpassed Huckabee (I guess by Huckabee's logic that means that God loves Romney more. It's about time that people realized that voting for Huckabee is the surest and fastest way to give Rudolph Giuliani the nomination. Listen to the following quotes from Huck's campaign manager regarding the fact that Huck and his team think that Reagan's conservative coalition is dead (taken from an article written by Elect Romney in 2008) after the jump:
Campaign Chairman Says Reagan Legacy “Doesn’t Mean A Whole Lot” “All along, Mitt Romney has wisely run as the only candidate who represents all three legs of the ‘three legged stool’ that is the Republican coalition. For those of us who believe it is imperative to preserve the Reagan coalition, Rollins’ pronouncement is almost an argument to vote for Mitt Romney.” – Townhall’s Matt Lewis (Matt Lewis, “Rollins: Reagan Coalition Is Done,” Townhall, Posted 12/29/07)
Gov. Huckabee’s Campaign Chairman Declared The Reagan Coalition Dead: Gov. Huckabee’s Campaign Chair Ed Rollins: The Reagan Coalition Of Social, Fiscal, And Defense Conservatives “Doesn’t Mean A Whole Lot To People Anymore.” Huckabee Campaign Chairman Ed Rollins: “The breakup of what was the Reagan coalition — social conservatives, defense conservatives, anti-tax conservatives — it doesn’t mean a whole lot to people anymore.” (David Kirkpatrick, “Shake, Rattle And Roil The Grand Ol’ Coalition,” The New York Times, 12/30/07) Rollins On The Reagan Coalition: “It’s Gone.” “[Huckabee’s] success is setting off a debate in his party over whether his success marks the fading of the old Reaganite conservative coalition — social conservatives, anti-tax activists and advocates of a muscular defense — or, rather, offers a chance for its rejuvenation. ‘It’s gone,’ said Ed Rollins, who once worked as President Reagan’s political director and recently became Mr. Huckabee’s national campaign chairman.” (David Kirkpatrick, “Shake, Rattle And Roil The Grand Ol’ Coalition,” The New York Times, 12/30/07) Rollins: Some Parts Of Reagan Coalition May “Go By The Wayside.” “‘It is a time for a whole new coalition — that is the key,’ he said, adding that some part of the original triad might ‘go by the wayside.’” (David Kirkpatrick, “Shake, Rattle And Roil The Grand Ol’ Coalition,” The New York Times, 12/30/07)
Huckabee is trying to destroy the most powerful coalition created by Republicans, which Ronald Reagan himself claimed would win time and time again against the Democrats. Notice the the democrats basically leave Huckabee alone, instead targeting Mitt Romney in their criticism? Hmmmmm....could they be trying to leave themselves low hanging fruit (Huck) to pick during the national election? They know as well as the rest of us that the conservative coalition is the only thing that can beat them and that Mitt Romney not only has the potential to unite it (because of his policies) but also has the desire to do so. The following quotes from the same site mentioned above support the fact that Mitt Romney not only believes in, but is trying to unite the three legged conservative stool together:
Gov. Romney Aims To Keep The Reagan Coalition United: Townhall’s Matt Lewis: “Rollins’ Pronouncement Is Almost An Argument To Vote For Mitt Romney.” “All along, Mitt Romney has wisely run as the only candidate who represents all three legs of the ‘three legged stool’ that is the Republican coalition. For those of us who believe it is imperative to preserve the Reagan coalition, Rollins’ pronouncement is almost an argument to vote for Mitt Romney.” (Matt Lewis, “Rollins: Reagan Coalition Is Done,” Townhall, Posted 12/29/07) National Review: “Romney Is A Full-Spectrum Conservative.” “Our guiding principle has always been to select the most conservative viable candidate. In our judgment, that candidate is Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts. Unlike some other candidates in the race, Romney is a full-spectrum conservative: a supporter of free-market economics and limited government, moral causes such as the right to life and the preservation of marriage, and a foreign policy based on the national interest.” (Editorial, “Romney For President,” National Review, 12/11/07) Gov. Mitt Romney: We Need To Unite “Social Conservatives, Economic Conservatives And Defense Conservatives.” GOV. ROMNEY: “I believe that to win the White House that our candidate has to be somebody who can represent and speak for all three legs of the conservative stool or conservative coalition that Ronald Reagan put together – social conservatives, economic conservatives and defense conservatives.” (Gov. Mitt Romney, Press Availability, Grand Rapids, MI, 10/13/07)
As the Iowa primary rapidly approaches, many are realizing that Mitt is the only man who can win for the Republicans and save us all from higher taxes, inefficiency of government programs, weak border control and military against the war on terror, and an economy slipping into recession. Vote Mitt in 2008!
I am an avid Risk player and one of the best strategies is to quickly take out the opponent with the best positioning on the board before they get strong enough to dominate the game. This strategy reminds me of countless football movies that I can think of where the coach of the "enemy" team will send out one of his dirty players to purposely injure the "good-guy team's" star quarterback or receiver. Similarly, the same strategy of removing the candidate that is most likely to defeat you before he grows too popular is used in politics, specifically with regards to Mitt Romney, a popular target for most Republican and Democrat candidates. The fact that he is the object of so much attention and negativity sends out the clear message that he is the man to beat.
Today Race 4 2008 posted an excellent article which I thought was worthy of spreading to anyone who will read it. In a nutshell, it explains how Mitt Romney is one of the, if not the most feared candidates by both Republicans and Democrats. He leads a relentless, well funded, organized campaign that is building up a steady and loyal base. I won't tell too much more but I would highly recommend reading this article entitled "Mitt Will Win".
An excerpt from the article after the jump: Romney is the man to beat. There is no denying it. He has the strongest position. As a matter of fact, if you offered Team Mitt the opportunity to trade strategic places with any candidate, I am positive they would decline. Really who’s spot would you want to be in? A guy who seems to be making a small resurgence in a state he won in 2000, yet has not taken the lead, has no money and is sputtering every where else? A guy who peaked 2 weeks ago and seems to be relying on a niche of the party to support him? A guy who peaked last summer and faded within a month? A guy who ran high in the national polls for a year, than dropped half the support and has no organization except in the state of Florida? None of those are welcoming options.
Like it or not Mitt has for the last 2 years methodically laid the ground work for the next month. He has put together the brightest minds in politics in all the key states, built the strongest organization, and frankly has the most impressive record of running organizations and achieving success.
There is no question the early entrants to the field recognized this. In May of 2006 when I opened my first blog, Illinoisans4Mitt, I quickly began to receive a steady stream of hate mail from anonymous Brownback supporters who worked with Mass Resistance. When John McCain started to build his organization in 06, it was no secret he was pining at Romney by pulling in the Governor of Utah, and the Attorney General- and it was no secret the governor of Utah is bitter at Romney that he was passed over to lead the Olympics.
As a matter of fact Mitt has been the constant object of derision from the competing campaigns since day 1. This is not only a testament to his shear leadership genius, but also to his positioning in the Race.
Jim Cramer, the popular TV/Book stock market guru of America, endorsed Mitt Romney in a short interview with MSNBC. He told them that Mitt was "THE BEST businessman in North America" and would be hands-down the best candidate for the economy. Cramer believes that Romney would increase growth in American GDP and effectively compete against China. It is more than clear from the vast number of economic, wall street, and top business people supporting Mitt Romney that he would be the #1 man for the job as far as economic conservatives are concerned. Many agree that America's massive debt and economy, on the verge of recession, can use a healthy dose of Romney. But don't take it from me....take it from Jim Cramer after the jump.
Many of you may have already seen this video, but I found it very inspiring and rejuvenating in my support for Mitt. Sometimes when it seems like progress is slow it really pays to take a step back and experience a change of perspective to see what has actually been accomplished. Even though Mitt's rise in the polls has been slow but steady, this video shows the monumental strides of progress he has made and it is clear that a real chance to win is emerging. Mitt is probably the best strategist of all the candidates and knows exactly what needs to transpire for him to take the nomination, and it is very obvious that his opponents see this, as the democrats take more shots at Romney than any other Republican. They are well aware of his ability to unite the conservative coalition and create a voting force that can dominate any one of them in the national election. Here is the video of Mitt's path to victory after the jump
Tom Tancredo has decided to drop out of the race for POTUS and throw his support behind Governor Romney. I kind of like Tancredo! He knows what is important to him and stays strong in supporting that stance. I hope he remains in the public in his support and look forward to his contributions to Team Romney. Well done Tom and welcome aboard. By the way, tell us what you thing about immigration. Just kidding, we know!
So I have to be honest, I didn't come to be a Romney supporter right out of the gate, I was converted, though not by your traditional means; every other candidate has schmuckified themselves leaving the only respectable choice as Romney and thus my conversion. Let me walk you through my logic, and if you disagree, by all means, lets talk about it.
The crowd of potential republican nominees is thick with good politicians made pathetic by presidential aspirations. The ones that had enough of a following to get consideration are Thompson, McCain, Huckabee, Gulianni, and by sheer ignorance of the internet, Ron Paul. When the race started, I was a Gulianni supporter, I had high hopes for the fella. He has a smooth demeanor about him, he handled the pressures of 9/11 well, and most emphatic was his popular momentum. He was the name on the ticket if you had a heart and wanted someone who knew what they were doing. So what happened? Gulianni pulled out all his stops too early. He had enough ammo to get us all excited, then nothing to sustain his momentum. There was no character to back up his ideas, and since his ideas aren't revolutionary enough to carry his platform on their own, he just looks like a schmuck when the proverbial poop hits the fan. He's the mayor with no federal level experience to give clout to his ambitions, just a lot of people who gave credit where credit was claimed and not necessarily earned.
Then Thompson. I like Thompson. I liked him because I saw him in a movie about nuclear terrorism and the US being attacked by middle eastern terrorists who get these bombs and smuggle one in through the Canadian border. See, Thompson recognizes the power of "The Friendly Neighbor to the North" and dang straight, we hold yer fate in our hands... well, that's what I remember from the movie anyway. So Thompson plays the president in this flick and has a kind of West Wing flair to him that played to his favor when I found out the ole Arizonan was gonna try and take his Hollywood role to reality. So what happened? Hollywood lied to Thompson. In the debates, it almost seems like Thompson is considering policy questions for the first time. He is yet to have his feet put to the fire and as such, he has been able to wing it as he goes. The problem with that is that is simply insufficient. He realized he could be a "real life president for realses" a little bit too late. I'd like to see him run again, but only when he wants it a bit more and has thought out what he would actually do with a term as president. More on this when we get to Ron Paul. Though to Thompson's credit, there's no video of him in drag smothering his face in another draq queens bosoms *cough* Gulianni *cough*.
McCain I've never been able to fully appreciate. He is the Ross Perot of the modern era. How many times did Ross run, like three? Welcome back McCain, it's good to have back for another try at it. Lets refresh on Perot, brilliant platform, could have taken care of our national debt, probably with his own investments, and would stare incredulously as he would lose time and time again to inferior plans, platforms, and policy. He lost cause he could never be a president, he was just a guy with good ideas. Not a leader. Not someone America could ever follow as a commander and chief... enters McCain. The guy has good ideas, probably right up there so far as qualifications go, and has stared, or screamed when in Iowa, as he loses to guys who may be inferior in many ways. He will never be president because he's not a leader, America could never follow him as commander and chief, the guy is too unpredictable. McCain, fella, your a great guy, but your brand loses value every time you run and don't win, and like the hot chick to the geek in high school, we all say to you... It's never gonna work, it's not you, it's us... all of us, everyone McCain... not gonna happen. Please stop waiting for me outside the gym, you're creeping me out.
Huckabee. ahem. Where to begin. Now honestly, Huckabee isn't half bad, he's a pastor for crying outloud, and in case you hadn't heard give him a 30 second spot, he'll work it in somehow, like
Moderator: Huckabee, what's your stance on foreign policy Huckabee: Well when I was a pastor Jesus said to do it like this... Anybody want to contradict Jesus?
That's paraphrased, sadly it's only modified slightly. He's in a Gulianni situation right now though, only he lacked any 9/11 catalyst to give him real merit. I don't know why he has such a huge following, but again, flash in the pan syndrome. He doens't know where to go from here. When you're at the top, you have to be able to pull something off to keep momentum. To his credit I think he's genuinely surprised he's even contending. When you listen to his speech rhetoric it goes from an "if I ever were to be president" to "when I become president" The fact that it's only after he gets a following in Iowa that he begins to invest in a real staff that underlines the unexpected nature of Huckabee's appearance. Indicative of this will be his shining moment [passed] and then supernova self destruction [McCain again?]
Finally, Ron Paul. Ron Paul is hearted by youngsters everywhere. I think Ron Paul is what Perot wishes he had been able to become, a cult classic. He has a huge following on the internet because of his strict adherence to the constitution. It's a simplistic approach in my mind that takes no consideration for real issues and scenarios that require one to apply the constitution to real situations and not just read it and hope everyone will interpret it the same as you. Ron Paul, in all fairness, is probably one of the best candidates out there, but he doesn't know how to play the game. There's more to running a country than good ideas. The ability to bring rubber and asphalt together and make things move cannot be underestimated, and unfortunately in a Ron Paul scenario, his rose will never bloom, poor fella.
Then you look at Mitt, who isn't perfect by any stretch, but he's got real experience, has yet to make a buffoon of himself, and good ideas that build on each other. He not only has proven capable of sustaining himself while on top, but look at him after being knocked back in Iowa, there's no hiccup in his stride, the man has real substance. Flaws acknowledged, there is no better option.
Now since seeing the light o' Romney, I've found much more reason to sing praises to the man, turns out he's great, but that's for another post. Or the reasons to vote for mitt series. My personal favorite is number 11,021,419 I love that one.
Warning – Even though the first paragraph is solely about Canada, I promise that I will make a point pertinent to the US election later!
Canada is known for many things, including its famous world class health care system.Sure we pay higher taxes in Canada, but we all get “free” health care.Even film maker, Michael Moore rants and raves about the superiority of Canada’s health care system in his movie “Sicko” (even though he based much of the movie on his opinion instead of facts).Unfortunately, the grass isn’t always greener on the other side.Now I am not ripping on Canada, as I am proud of my country and what it stands for.However, our supposed world-class health care system isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.It started off great decades ago, but over the years it has worsened.Canadians actually complain vehemently about long wait times at hospitals, the yearly decrease in what is actually “covered” under the public health plan and, most of all, the increased taxes to pay for it all.Despite its downside, I do consider Canadian health care to be among the best in the world, but at the same time I believe it needs improvement in many ways.The root of most of the problems associated with Canadian health care is the fact that it is run directly by the government.
Unfortunately when the government runs social programs such as health care, it is extremely inefficient in its use of funds.Since there is no competition, it often spends the money unwisely, creating superfluous departments and committees, hiring way too many people to do the job of one person (hence why the Soviet Union was so inefficient and corrupt).However, it is also important that the government have a role in some aspects of public life, such as health care, otherwise only the wealthy would be served and the poor left to fend for themselves.This is the one of the biggest catch 22s in politics.The republicans say that the government should tax people less and offer less social programs, where democrats say that the government should intervene by raising taxes and offer the public more social programs.This fundamental difference creates much contention between these two parties.But isn’t there a happy medium?The answer is YES! When I first heard about what Mitt Romney did for health care in Massachusetts I was blown away.He was somehow able to get the best of both worlds; he made health care universally available to the whole state, yet he did not raise taxes.This is an amazing accomplishment and it easier said than done.So how did he do this?Well basically he made it mandatory citizens for of the state to purchase health insurance if they wanted the basic personal exemption on their income tax and therefore less of a tax refund.Essentially, just as people must buy car insurance, they would also have to buy health coverage.But you’re probably saying “wait just a second there man….don’t they just end up paying the insurance instead of tax….that’s just the same as raising taxes, only calling it ‘health insurance’ instead”.This is true, except that collecting taxes means that the government will then have to use the money in the pot to provide the health care, which essentially means that it will most likely be used inefficiently.On the other hand, citizens who pay for their own health plans instead of the paying increased taxes, can shop around and get the best rates.The availability of competition means better consumer prices and ultimately more health care coverage for less money than if it had been done through tax collection and government run health care.I don’t know about you, but I’d rather pay $500 on my own than $1000 in taxes for the exact same services.
Mitt has an amazing ability to improve the social life of Americans without having to raise taxes or burden the people.With the US debt becoming unbearable to look at, a president is needed who can balance the national books without sacrificing the things that make the United States a great nation.That president is Mitt Romney.He has done it in the past and can and will do it again.
Jonathan Martin over at Politico has just highlighted this ad called "Searched," that will be running in N.H. I happen to have an old article that tells more of the heartwarming story and more...
Mitt Romney was faced with a crisis in July 1996. The 14-year-old daughter of Robert Gay, a partner in Romney's new venture capital firm, Bain Capital, had disappeared. As it turned out, she had attended a rave party in New York City and had become high on ecstasy. Three days later, her distraught father had no idea where she was.
Romney took immediate action. He closed down the entire firm and asked all 30 partners and employees to fly to New York to try to find Gay's daughter. Romney set up a command center in a conference room at the LaGuardia Marriott just outside Manhattan. He hired a private detective firm to assist with the search and established a toll-free number for tips, coordinating the effort with the New York City Police Department, but he still wasn't satisfied. He raced through his Rolodex and called everyone Bain did business with in New York. He asked them to help his company find their friend's missing daughter.
The company's accounting firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers, and its law firm, put up posters on street poles with a photo of the missing teenager. Cashiers at Duane Reade Pharmacies, which was owned by Bain Capital, put fliers in the bag of each shopper. Romney and others from the Bain Capital posse trudged through every part of New York, even scouring Central Park, and talked with everyone they could - prostitutes, drug addicts - anyone who may have seen her. They also made rounds at the local nightclubs at 3 a.m., hoping someone somewhere could identify her.
The same day the Romney team came to New York, the hunt made the evening news. Television cameras showed photos of the girl and video of investment banker types prowling through Central Park.
The next day, a teenage boy she was with phoned in. He asked if there was a reward. But the boy got nervous and quickly hung up. Luckily, the police traced the call to a home in Montville Township, N.J.
Gay's daughter, when they found her in the basement of that home, was shivering through detox after a massive dose of ecstasy. Doctors later told Gay that he was indeed fortunate - his daughter probably would not have lasted another day. "It was the most amazing thing, and I'll never forget this to the day I die," Gay says, adding of Romney's intervention, "I'm not sure we would have gotten her back without him."
It is often during a crisis that we gain insight into a person's real character. Romney's action demonstrated leadership, loyalty, and selflessness - attributes that Americans just might like to see in a president of the United States. People say that Mitt Romney lights up a room. But there are all kinds of ways to light up a room - fluorescent, neon, sunlight, strobe. Romney alternates between sparkle and a warm, steady glow. He is not in your face. He is low-key, self-assured, and self-contained.
That could be a metaphor for Romney's candidacy. When the subject of the 2008 presidential election comes up, Republicans talk about the prospects of the obvious front-runners, Arizona Sen. John McCain and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. But they often end the conversation by saying, "You know, I really like Mitt Romney." The fact that Massachusetts, where only 13 percent of registered voters are Republicans, could elect Romney governor by a five-point margin (50 percent versus 45 percent for his Democratic opponent) underscores his popularity among Republicans and Democrats alike.
...
When Mitt Romney was a senior in high school, he met Ann Davies, the attractive daughter of the mayor of Bloomfield Hills. Davies attended Kingswood School, the sister school of Cranbrook. She and Romney came to the party with dates but left together. Soon they were going steady. She was 15 and he was 18.
Romney went off to Stanford, where he and Davies continued to see each other. After his freshman year, Romney left for France to begin a 30-month stint as a Mormon missionary, just as his father and Marriott had done. Romney lived in a seedy hotel in Le Havre
In the summer of 1968, 21-year-old Romney was driving a Citroën in the rain on a mountainous road near Bordeaux with five other missionaries. As they rounded a curve, a Mercedes, possibly passing another car, veered over the median. The Mercedes, traveling at 70 mph, slammed almost head-on into Romney's car. Viola Anderson, the wife of his mission president, suffered crushed lungs and died. Romney was thrown from the car.
"He was unconscious from a blow to the head," Jane Romney says.
A police officer who came on the scene thought Romney was dead. On his passport, he wrote in pencil, Il est mort" ("he is dead"). Fortunately, Romney had suffered only a broken arm.
While Romney was in France, Davies, an Episcopalian, decided to convert to Mormonism. She began attending Brigham Young University, which is affiliated with the Mormon church. Upon his return, Romney transferred to the school as a sophomore to be with her.
They were married on March 21, 1969. She was 19 and he was 22.
An English major, Romney graduated in 1971 with a 3.97 grade-point average. Because he ranked at the top of his class in the College of Humanities, he was chosen to speak on graduation day.
After a series of student and missionary deferments, Romney became available for military service in 1970. He drew a 300 in the draft lottery, but no man who had a number of 196 or higher was called from that particular drawing.
Mitt decided to attend Harvard Business School, but his father thought he should obtain a law degree, so he enrolled in a joint program at Harvard Law School. In 1975, he graduated from Harvard Law Cum Laude and from Harvard Business School, where he was named a Baker Scholar and was in the top 5 percent of his class. One of his classmates at Harvard Business School was George W. Bush.
The Romneys eventually settled in Belmont, Mass., a suburb of Boston that adjoins Cambridge. They own a Colonial-style home on 2.4 acres of land on Marsh Street. The home is worth $3.3 million. The Romneys have five sons - Taggart, Matt, Josh Benjamin, and Craig.
Convinced that being a consultant would prepare him to be a top manager, Romney joined Boston Consulting Group. In 1978, Bain & Co., another management consulting company, lured him away and named him vice president. His colleagues included future eBay CEO Meg Whitman.
While he was successful, Romney's role of recommending strategy rather than implementing it frustrated him. He was about to join a Chicago corporation when William Bain, the founder of Bain & Co., persuaded him to start a sister company where Romney would have operational control.
After raising $37 million in startup funds, Romney founded Bain Capital, a venture capital firm, in 1984. For the most part, the company looked for troubled companies that had good potential if management was improved.
Romney had an eye for identifying future success. Notable was Romney's investment in Staples, which had not yet opened its first office supply store.
...
Bain Capital went on to help launch or acquire Domino's Pizza, Sealy, Brookstone, and The Sports Authority. Each time Romney looked into an opportunity, he submerged himself in data, analyzed the business, and then was willing to take risks if his instincts told him he was on the right track.
Because of these and other successful investments, Bain Capital now manages $40 billion. By 1990,Bain & Co., the mother ship, was in dire straits because of excess debt. Founder William Bain asked Romney to return to the company as interim CEO to straighten things out.
Romney tightened expenses, renegotiated loans, and improved morale. He returned the company to profitability within a year before returning to lead Bain Capital.
In 1994, Romney decided to run for the Senate against Democrat Ted Kennedy. It was an audacious move, and Romney spent $6.1 million of his own money on the campaign. He felt liberal social programs of the 1960s and 1970s had created a permanent underclass and fostered poverty rather than eliminating it.
Romney managed to win 41 percent of the votes to Kennedy's 58 percent. Generally, that's not a good showing, but it was remarkable considering he was running as a Republican in a staunchly liberal state - against a Kennedy, no less.
...
In 1998, Utah state leaders approached Romney about taking over the scandal-ridden 2002 Winter Olympics. More than $1 million in bribes had been paid to members of the International Olympic Committee organizers. Before the scandal erupted, the Salt Lake Olympics Organizing Committee (SLOC) had a projected shortfall of $397 million.
Romney accepted the position and asked Fraser Bullock, one of the seven original partners of Bain Capital, to become his chief operating officer.
Romney traveled all over the world to gather support, as he cut back on SLOC expenses. Without foundation, Woody Paige, a Denver Post columnist, blasted the Winter Olympics as a "massive Mormon marketing scheme."
With Romney at the helm, the games ended with a surplus of $56 million. The surplus money went to fund future Olympics. It was during his busy days guiding the Olympics that Romney received a call from Barbara Anderson, executive director of Massachusetts Citizens for Limited Taxation.
"I know you're busy with the Olympics right now," said the message she left on his answering machine, "but when you get back please save the commonwealth."
It was Anderson's way of telling him she wanted him to run for governor.
"There was no one else on the horizon, and with the legislature almost entirely Democratic, we felt it was necessary to have a grown-up in the corner office," she says.
With the Olympics success under his belt, Romney ran for governor of Massachusetts in 2002 on a platform of fiscal conservatism, promising to erase the state's $3 billion deficit.
As the new governor, Romney consolidated state agencies, cut employees, and closed what he called loopholes in the corporate tax code. He also tackled the most difficult public policy issue of all, health insurance.
With input from the Heritage Foundation, Romney came up with a way to provide universal health insurance by requiring that everyone buy coverage, just as drivers are required to buy car insurance. If they don't, they lose their personal exemption on their state income taxes and part of their state tax refund. The idea was that in a reformed marketplace, everyone has the responsibility to have health insurance - no more free riders.
...
Romney's bottom line in Massachusetts: He erased the budget deficit he inherited when he took over, just as he'd done with the Olympics.
When Romney left office on Jan. 4, 2006, the Bay State had a balanced budget plus a "rainy day fund" - all without ever raising taxes.
...
Romney emphasizes four priorities if elected president: defeating the jihadists, competing with Asia, stopping runaway spending, and affirming America's culture and values.
In his NewsMax interview, Romney says he wants to see more money devoted to stopping the next terrorist plot through additional funding for the FBI and CIA. In running the Olympics, he became heavily involved in security issues to make the event safe, says David M. Tubbs, a former FBI agent who was in charge of security at the games.
"Fundamentally, the most important thing you can do to secure this homeland is to keep a bomb from going off," Romney points out. "And the only way you can do that effectively is through intelligence work and counterterrorism. And that means more FBI agents, more careful screening, more tracking of people who represent potential threats."
The FBI has only about 4,000 agents working counterterrorism, compared to New York City's 40,000 police officers. Romney also favors a tougher immigration policy, investing in technology, extending health insurance to all Americans, achieving energy independence, and improving education by measuring progress and "making teaching a true profession."
He has staked out more conservative positions than Giuliani and McCain on immigration policy and abortion. As governor, he decided that 30 state troopers should be trained to arrest illegal immigrants in the state.
On another bedrock issue for conservatives, he believes McCain was on the wrong side. "He voted against the Bush tax cuts," Romney points out. "I was in favor of the Bush tax cuts."
While Romney has generally supported Bush, he criticizes his creation of the Medicare drug prescription benefit without finding ways to pay for it.
Promising to build "a new American dream," Romney formally announced his candidacy on Feb. 13 at the Henry Ford Museum in his home state of Michigan. He cast himself as an optimistic and forward-thinking Washington outsider with the experience and vision to lead the country into a new age.
...
Romney's fans range from Kathryn Jean Lopez, editor of National Review Online, to Ann Coulter, to talk-show host Laura Ingraham. While governor of Florida, Jeb Bush gave his blessing to key staffers to migrate to the Romney camp. Grover Norquist notes that Romney was the first major candidate to sign Americans for Tax Reform's pledge to oppose any effort to raise marginal income tax rates. Norquist says Romney is moving to "place himself dead center of the Reagan coalition." If he succeeds, Norquist says, "He will be the strongest candidate for the nomination."
...
Romney is "a spectacular candidate," says Republican strategist Mary Matalin, a former aide to Vice President Dick Cheney. "He is methodical, and he's definitely got the happy warrior thing. He's substantive, and he's got executive skills. And he's 21st century, too." Romney's Mormon religion will turn out to be a plus, she says, because people "like that have a source of strength."
...
Romney said he is "very concerned about the America that my grandkids will enjoy, and your grandkids will enjoy. It can be a stronger, more vibrant nation, or it can become the France of the 21st century - starting off as the economic superpower, military superpower, ending still a great nation, but not the world's superpower. The choices we make today will determine whether America is a more prosperous and secure place for our grandchildren. I can help do that."
Among former presidents, Romney admires Dwight D. Eisenhower. Besides taking on communism, "He was a person whose leadership during World War II made him someone the entire nation revered and respected," Romney says. "And there's nothing wrong with having heroes in positions of prominence."
Having rescued the commonwealth of Massachusetts, the Winter Olympics, Bain & Co., and his partner's daughter, Romney could well be talking about himself.
Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson have something in common; they both think it would be an absolute travesty if Mike Huckabee won the nomination. Thompson, in an interview, said that Huckabee isn't really even a conservative. Although he stands for some moral issues that many conservatives feel are important, that's about the extent of his appeal. Thompson claims that Huckabee doesn't share the same views as most conservatives on issues like immigration, taxes, social policies, and more (on these issues, he's as good as a democrat). Furthermore, there are many other candidates that represent these moral opinions and also fit the bill for what a true conservative should be. Mitt Romney is that man. He is a candidate who can please the masses and has the money and brains behind his campaign, not only to win the republican nomination, but also defeat the democrats in one of the most important elections the US have ever seen.
NY for Mitt did an excellent article on Fred Thompson's interview with CBN (Christian Broadcast Network) and there is even a link to watch a video of it. Check it out at:
With Mitt already leading in New Hampshire, catching up to Huck in Iowa (even winning according to some polls), and tied for the lead in South Carolina, his chances are looking pretty dang good! Not to mention that he is doing extremely well in Michigan and better in Florida since Giuliani is dropping. However, the battle is far from over. It's time for voters to start voting strategically, by looking at the bigger picture. A few weeks ago we posted an article entitled "Will Evangelicals play checkers or chess?" It talks about the strategy that voters need to have if they want to keep the conservative coalition together. I am reposting the link for those new to this blog, especially if you're on the fence about voting Mitt, as I think will help you realize how to make your vote really count.
For those of us who are already firm Mitt supporters, I think that this advice from Elect Romney in 2008 is the the best I've heard so far. These are practical ways by which each of us can do our part to help Mitt get the trifecta! Then he will be unstoppable.
Just a few days ago Huckabee was in the leading Mitt in South Carolina, but recently, according to Rasmussen Reports the two are tied at 23% a piece. Good job Mitt! He is bouncing back, just like he always does. Mitt predicted that Huckabee's success would just be another surge, and it looks like he is beginning to be right. He said:
"I have been through a couple of surges now. First was the McCain surge, then the Giuliani surge, and then the Fred Thompson surge, and now it's the Mike Huckabee surge. And in the past, what's happened is, when the surge occurs, people look more closely at the record of the vision of the person running … and inevitably the surge kinda deflates. I think you will see the same thing here." http://canadiansformitt.blogspot.com/2007/12/huckabees-recent-success-is-just-surge.html
And it's not very hard to see why Huckabee is quickly losing support. From what I've seen, the most comprehensive list of reasons why Huck shouldn't get your vote is compiled the "Red State". Check out the following link from Elect Romney in 2008, which will lead you to the full list at the source.
Mitt may not currently show up at the top of the national polls for the republican nomination, but for those who know his strategy, this is not a major concern. Since Mitt doesn't have the celebrity flare of a Giuliani (911 mayor) or a McCain (ran against Bush in the past), he needs to use a unique strategy that will not only get him free publicity and spark public interest, but will give him the momentum needed to compete against the big names. It is obvious that Romney is a great strategist and has put himself in a good position to do just this. He sits in the proverbial Australia on the Risk board, waiting with his massive armies to sweep the world. He has a solid base and with a good performance in the first three states (Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina) he could build enough momentum to win the nomination.
Patrick Ruffini, a notable political strategist, goes into more detail in one of his most recent articles entitled "Romney's Race to Lose", about why Mitt could very well win the nomination. Very interesting, so take a look:
As I have been in the past, I was inspired by an article written on the Race 4 2008 site. Yesterday an article was posted that exemplified what an American voter should be. The author explains that throughout the election, he has tried his hardest to be fair and objective with all the candidates, and although he has supported many of them at one time or another, he now supports Mitt Romney. He makes a powerful case to back up his claim, and I feel that it is both comprehensive and sincere.
What excites me most is that there are hundreds of thousands, even millions, of voters out there that are doing the same thing right now. They are examining what is at stake, they are learning about the candidates, and realizing that there is only one serious choice that they can make if they want to keep the conservative coalition together and also make a stronger America. As the primaries draw closer, those who sit on the fence are going to have to decide where they can make their vote count the most. I think that this vote, as does the author of the following article, should be for Mitt Romney.
Why are republicans republicans? Good question, but the answer is "it depends". Some are republicans because of the controversial morality issues at stake. Some are republican because they feel like government should intervene less (through tax cuts and other means). Some are republicans because they believe in the war against terror and in securing the border. Some are republicans because they simply just feel like there aren't any quality democrat candidates. Whatever the reason for being republican, the point is that there is a broad range of reasons, and not all republicans prioritize them in the same order, nor do candidates cater to each issue. For example, Mike Huckabee is very strong on morality issues and strikes a cord with many Evangelicals, but severely lacks appeal to the rest of republicans. Conversely, Giuliani, to some, on many issues is a democrat in republican's clothing. He doesn't support almost any of the same views on morality as Evangelicals, but does promise to boost national security and fight the war on terror. It seems like there are so many extreme candidates running for the nomination. Huckabee is too hot, Giuliani is too cold, but who is just right? (I apologize profusely for the childish cliche, but I'm sure you'll get over it!)
Evidently, since I'm writing this on a pro-Mitt site, the correct answer is Mitt Romney. All joking aside, Mitt actually is the only candidate who can please the wide range of republican voters and encourage party unity rather than division. He is strong on the morality issues that Christians hold dear, yet he doesn't forget the importance of the war against terror. In addition, no one, either republican or democrat, even holds a candle to Mitt Romney when it comes to economics - balancing budgets and creating a better society without raising taxes. He is the proverbial all-purpose cleaner for the dirty problems that America faces. Plus his appeal on many issues transcends parties and will be universally accepted by republicans and democrats alike. A vote for Mitt is a vote not only to unite the republican party, but also America.
Mitt Romney is probably the brightest and most talented candidate in the GOP field. (Charlie Cook in The Washington Post)
Kennedy said Romney showed leadership in the state's passage of a plan for comprehensive medical coverage and called him "a tough contender" for president. "I think he's underestimated by a number of Republicans" (Ted Kennedy, U.S. Senator: Mass-D)
"Mitt Romney has more management ability than any potential candidate on either side. He is one of the best managers in the country." (Orrin Hatch, U. S. Senator: Utah-R)
"As more Americans meet Mitt Romney, I think they'll see beyond the handsome exterior and see not just a good salesman, but a thoughtful (and, yes, conservative) leader." (Kathryn Lopez)
"As a politician, Mitt Romney is considered by friend and foe to be the total package." (The Weekly Standard)
Mitt Romney is a brave man. While the GOP glitterocracy attended the first gay wedding of one of their own, Gov. Romney was in Washington, D.C., making the single most eloquent and articulate defense of our traditional understanding of marriage I have heard from an American politician. (Maggie Gallager -- President of the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy)
"I could in very good conscience support Romney as a fellow social conservative on most of the issues we care about." (Charles Colson--Prominent Evangelical Leader)
Romney has done his best to defend the culture of life on what is probably the most inhospitable terrain in the country." (National Review)
"Romney is a true conservative, both fiscally and socially, and has the charisma and personality that reminds you of a younger Ronald Reagan. In fact, he might just be the perfect candidate." (Hugh Hewitt--Conservative Radio Talk Show Host
"We couldn't be happier with him. Without Romney, we would have been slapped with a lot of new taxes." (Barbara Anderson, Citizens for Limited Taxation - Massachusetts)
"Mitt Romney may just be the most appealing candidate Republicans can field in 2008, the one most likely to win the White House by shoring up social conservatives and rallying business interests without frightening swing voters." (The Washington Monthly)
Mitt Romney is the best Republican Governor that we've ever had (David Eischenbaum, M.D. Democrat & personal friend living in Mass)
"Mitt Romney is the consummate leader with a rare combination of talent, sincerity, integrity, and charisma. In a world where 'spin' is too often king, he is the real deal. What he did with Salt Lake City's Olympic Games is the stuff of which legends are made." (Sheri Dew, President & CEO -- Deseret Book Company)
On marriage and cloning, he has provided aggressive leadership as a positive, pro-family governor (Kris Mineau, Massachusetts Family Institute)
QUOTES: ROMNEY SPEAKS
"By the way, had I known I was ever going to get into politics, I think someone would have told me. Don't stay in Massachusetts, the most Democratic state in America, go back home to Michigan where your dad's name is golden."
"America is on the right track, we are way ahead, but we have to move again. We have got to get going and recognize that you can't be the superpower of the planet forever unless you take challenges seriously and improve your game."
"As a governor, I consider my highest promise the promise I made to uphold the constitution of my state and of the country. And regardless of one's faith, that's the biggest responsibility."
America cannot continue to lead the family of nations around the world if we suffer the collapse of the family here at home.
People from both political parties have long recognized that welfare without work creates negative incentives that lead to permanent poverty. It robs people of self-esteem.
And a special thank you to the citizens of Massachusetts: You are paying all the taxes, creating all the jobs, raising all the children. This government is yours. Thank you for letting me serve you. I love this job.
I feel very deeply about the need to respect and tolerate people of different social-or sexual orientation. But at the same time, I believe marriage should be preserved as an institution for one man and one woman.
Our economy is on the move and we are creating thousands of new jobs, but we need to keep our foot on the gas pedal.
We reserve our deepest respect and admiration for those who volunteer for service and give their lives to help keep our nation secure.
"America cannot continue to lead the family of nations around the world if we suffer the collapse of the family here at home."
Tonight watching the Super Bowl, as I usually do, I was routing for the underdog. The New England Patriots went into the Bowl with a perfect 18-0 record. They were the clear favourite going into the final against the New York Giants. Almost everyone predicted a Patriot win, and until the final minutes that's what it looked like it would be. 
