Althouse

Friday, August 03, 2007

New Hampshire waitress versus Mitt Romney.

This is a useful video clip, because it shows Mitt Romney explaining his approach to health care and dealing with a high pressure confrontation from a voter. Really, there is nothing he can say that will fully satisfy the woman, but he uses the occasion to display himself as a rational problem-solver. He does not, however, try to connect with the woman on an emotional level, and after the exchange she is close to tears. "That's money off my table," she complains. His hour-long presence in the restaurant has cost her tips.

I think Romney ought to have walked up to the woman and asked her a few questions about the three sick children she mentioned and expressed some sympathy about how hard it is for her. He could have hugged her or taken her hand. Instead, he tried to win the debate on the substantive merits, something he's pretty good at. Yet he missed the chance to do something he could easily have done. And, once again, he looks a little cold and robotic. It's so unnecessary!

Picture how Bill Clinton -- or even George Bush -- would have handled this situation. That woman was emotionally fragile, not a heckler. Someone needs to teach Romney a few tricks.

Labels: health, Mitt Romney

55 Comments:

vet66 said...: The waitress gave up her tips when she confronted Romney. What did she expect when she asked a politician running for the Presidency a loaded question? Either prepare for a marathon answer and no tips or pour coffee, listen and learn, and don't play the "Woe is me" card in front of cameras.

As for Romney not praying with the woman (Mormon prosletyzing?) a la Bush, or getting a close in hug from Bill with all that photo-op portends, Romney is not about to try and calm a weepy woman who is having financial problems.

Romney did all he could in a no-win situation. Hopefully, his entourage picked up the tab and left a 20% tip.; 9:34 AM
MadisonMan said...: Picture how Bill Clinton -- or even George Bush -- would have handled this situation.

...and look how well those Presidencies turned out!!; 9:35 AM
Tim said...: Yes, Romney should have expressed some sympathy - but even then it wouldn't have helped much.

Republicans are at a decided disadvantage on health care - too many people think they ought to have health care at someone else's expense - their employer, their doctor, the hospital, the drug company - anyone but themselves. The economics of this, of course, are unsustainable - but Democrats pimp the lie you can have free, excellent, and unlimited care, and folks have bought into it.

Sure you can. It's right on the shelf in Halliburton's basement next to the free energy machine they are hiding from us. Another win for demagoguery.; 9:36 AM
AJ Lynch said...: The waitress would not be mollified no matter what. She wanted free stuff and indicated as much when she complained about co-pays, deductibles.

Tim put it better than I will but manyof the people who are demanding universal healthcare view it as encompassing the ability to go to a doctor as many times as they like and at no charge. Can't be done unless the Fed budget is maybe doubled.; 9:41 AM
EnigmatiCore said...: I'm more curious about how Giuliani would have handled the same situation, than I am about how the last two Presidents would have.; 9:43 AM
vet66 said...: Interesting that the subject of health care comes up in a restaurant at the same time the flaming jihadist physician dies of his self-inflicted injuries.

Tongue in cheek? Under the democratic health plan we could hire jihadist physicians to work on the cheap as the countries Marcus Welby types retire.; 9:49 AM

EnigmatiCore said...: "The waitress would not be mollified no matter what. She wanted free stuff and indicated as much when she complained about co-pays, deductibles."

I agree that she would not be mollified. And I guess that there is a way to look at it to say that she wanted 'free stuff', but that sounds to me like trying to make her sound like some lazy freeloader.

Sure, she wants health care for her family. She wants to be able to afford it, and what she can't afford she wants to be able to get anyway. Her wants stem from actual needs, though. She needs health care, and finds it frustrating that she cannot meet her needs.

When you argue that just because she wants something doesn't make it anyone else's problem, then rightfully others are going to look at you as a cold-hearted bastard. Even if you can make a solid philosophic argument against the evils of socialism.

The Democrats have a solution-- have government pay more to make it more affordable for people.

There is are problems with this solution, however. People don't want to pay more in taxes. More importantly, the reason the cost is high is because there is a limited supply. Lowering the price increases demand, and that will just make supply issues more difficult.

The GOP, or at least conservatives, don't have the answer, since they immediately yell 'socialism' and talk about individual responsibility.

I have not read all of the candidate's full plans yet, but hopefully one will have a plan that is focused on increasing supply. Making it more profitable to be a doctor, or to develop new medicines, and less risky to practice (in the form of litigation). That will result in greater availability, which will result in lower prices and shorter waits for care.; 9:57 AM
bill said...: Sounds like Romney was channeling the Food Whore:

But the tide has changed into today's society. All you have to do is click on any given news site to see the decline of so many. People are out for #1, and by God if you get in the way you will get berated, harassed - and in some cases sued. It is this self-entitled, self-indulgent attitude that has put people like me on the defense, or on the offense depending on which way you look at it.

So the customer is not always right. You don't have to be perfect, and you certainly don't have to fall all over yourself gushing with praise and compliments.

Running for president is about a country, so good for him for not condescending to the the individual. Boo emotions. Yea robotic!; 10:09 AM
knoxwhirled said...: I don't think he should have hugged her--she came out swinging, and it would have seemed disingenuous or patronizing if he'd tried to soothe her. But he did sound stupid talking in platitudes like "We Got The Job Done In My State." It's not cold or robotic as much as slimy political rhetoric.

Anyway, she obviously think any solution is not good enough unless it means she has to pay nothing. It sounded to me like no deductible or copay would be small enough to satisfy her.

enigmatic, People don't want to pay more in taxes is only one of many reasons "conservatives" object to socialized medicine. There are many scarier consequences besides higher taxes.; 10:22 AM
vet66 said...: An acquaintance was recently turned down for medical insurance of some sort because the individual was obese.

The medical company specified how much weight was to be lost before elegibility was to be considered.

Be careful what you ask for! Don't smoke, don't drink, don't gain too much weight, don't lose too much weight, get exercise, watch your diet and you may qualify for health care.

Or violate all of the above and pay for your own! Choice is yours!; 10:26 AM
amba said...: I'd rather they don't learn "tricks." I'd rather be unconsoled than manipulated.

Anyway, there are some it comes naturally to, and that's the only time it comes across. For Bill "I feel your pain" Clinton, it was part of his seduction repertoire and need. For George Bush it was . . . I don't know. His comfort with regular folks?; 10:31 AM
Hoosier Daddy said...: Like it or not, universal health care is an inevitability. The rising costs of health care are not only unsustainable by the individual but are putting a huge strain on businesses which is having an impact on our ability to compete. When health care costs increase at rates of 7-12% annually and business are having to foot the lion's share of that costs in the form of benefits, its not surprising to see them outsource jobs to China and India.

If the main burden of providing health care coverage is leveraged across the board with corporate, personal and say, a federal sales tax, you'll see corporate America including small business push for it.

Part of this 'crisis' falls on us and our expectations of health care. AJ Lynch said it right in that many people want unlimited access with no out of pocket costs at which I say people in hell want ice water. We're going to pay for it not in insurance premiums but in taxes and most likely with rationed care. I'm expecting to see an expansion of Medicare in that it will just cover everyone and the private industry will hang in there selling supplements to cover what Medicare doesn't. That is probably the best case scenario; 10:32 AM
carly said...: I'm not a Mitt supporter but I AM a supporter of logic and reason; I don't really care how a person makes me "feel". And I want the President of the US to be a person who thinks, not one who feels. Personally, I don't even care how a person behaves in his/her personal life.

I think it's a shame that candidates for political office have to cozy up to people in order to win; and it's a shame there there seem to be so many people stupid enough to base their decisions on how someone makes them feel.

When I go to the voting booth I pull the lever for someone to represent me in government; not to be my friend--or my parent. If more people accepted the fact that politics is a business, I think we'd get better elected officials. And maybe we'd even be able to move AWAY from a nanny state instead of hurtling faster toward
one.; 10:35 AM
AJ Lynch said...: EC said:

"The GOP, or at least conservatives, don't have the answer, since they immediately yell 'socialism' and talk about individual responsibility. "

That is not true- I have a plan- enact a universal payroll tax of about 3-4% and every citizen gets a voucher that can be used to buy their own insurance. If you choose low deductible and low co-pays, that mean you will pay more of the premium out of your own pocket. The employer gets out of the health insurance game, plans are no longer linked to your job.

Hell citizens get a voucher even if you don't work. That is my plan in a nutshell. Best part is no changing your insurance when you change jobs!! Sound good? Vote for me - I am running for Emperor.

And I think Republicans like Romney, Guiliani have plans too.

So you are wrong when you say Republicans and conservatives have no plan.; 10:39 AM
Tim said...: "...Making it more profitable to be a doctor, or to develop new medicines, and less risky to practice (in the form of litigation). That will result in greater availability, which will result in lower prices and shorter waits for care."

Well, Enigmatic, there's your paradox. We want to increase supply to reduce prices, yet to increase supply we have to improve wages/reimbursements.

As for your erroneous statement that the GOP/conservatives don't have THE answer, sure - no one does, including the Democrats. They would just shift costs to taxpayers, using tax dollars to buy more health care. It ain't rocket science.

The better way to go is to erode the third-party payer system, get employers out of the game, provide tax equity and tax incentives for both buying health care coverage AND taking care of oneself (isn't it odd that as out of pocket health care expenses decline for Americans [as they are], Americans are increasingly unhappy with their health care?). There are, of course, other systemic changes necessary, but until the third-party payer system and its attendant ills are eroded, everything else is in vain.; 10:47 AM
paul a'barge said...: ....He could have hugged her or taken her hand...

Sexual Harassment.

Geez, what is it with you people (feminists). You want to be touched. You don't want to be touched.

Not long ago GWB gave the German leader (female) a friendly pat on the back, and the nuance crowd went ballistic about it.

How about this? We give you folks two white signs with hand sticks on them. One says Touch me! and the other says Do NOT Touch me!!. And you folks walk around holding up one of the other.

Would that be ok?; 11:02 AM
EnigmatiCore said...: "If you choose low deductible and low co-pays, that mean you will pay more of the premium out of your own pocket. The employer gets out of the health insurance game, plans are no longer linked to your job."

I can see how this can impact demand.

I fail to see how this would increase supply. And when it boils right down to it, this is what everyone really wants/needs. We want/need the supply for the catch-all "health care" to be significantly more abundant.; 11:15 AM
EnigmatiCore said...: "Well, Enigmatic, there's your paradox. We want to increase supply to reduce prices, yet to increase supply we have to improve wages/reimbursements."

I guess I am failing to see the paradox here, unless one believes that the only way to reduce prices is to reduce profits. I do not believe this to be the case.

There are plenty of things which increase the "cost-to-market" for doctors and for medicines. Working on eliminating or minimizing those would be the approach that appeals to me.; 11:18 AM
EnigmatiCore said...: By the way, I completely understand the dynamics where third-party pay systems increase demand to levels that are unnecessary.

I just believe that it is less important to fix that side of the equation as to fix the other side. We want to live, and we want to increase the health of our families. We, therefore, are always going to want to improve the supply side of the health care equation. That is where the focus needs to be.; 11:22 AM
AJ Lynch said...: Enigmatic said:
"I fail to see how this would increase supply. And when it boils right down to it, this is what everyone really wants/needs. We want/need the supply for the catch-all "health care" to be significantly more abundant."

Do ANY of the Dem candidates have a plan that increases the "supply" (number of) doctors, nurses, healthcare providers??

No they do not- the Dem plans just want to take the "Pain spelled PAYING" OUT OF THE EQUATION. That will greatly increase demand and will not increase the supply unless the Dems pump more billions into the equation.

My plan gives every citizen the resources to buy basic coverage and every citizen has to dig into theor own pocket to pay for other than basic services. That sound fair? If not, let's just give everyone a BMW too so they can drive themselves to the doctor.; 11:49 AM
hdhouse said...: That poor woman spends probably $15,000+ a year on health care. That is $15,000 after tax dollars so if she is in a minimal situation it equates to nearly $20,000 in earned income.

People who go to the emergency room for routine care with no way of paying get it for free as Romney pointed out but that argument means nothing to someone who is paying through the nose. The ones who pay the most are the ones who don't have insurance but have enough money because the fee charges are based on insurance payment schedules and are thus inflated to maximize insurance receiveables.

What she is saying to Romney is "that isn't fair" and what Romney was pressed into doing in Massachusetts won't play nationally because of the "for profit" insurance interests and physician money.

We may have all the technology the world has ever seen but we fail to realize that preventive medicine is the greatest cost savings. She is right to demand a fix

NOT as VET says about "wanting a handout" and others ascribe to her as "get it for free".

He cared about his soundbites and talking points and not an iota about her. That stinks.; 11:55 AM
hdhouse said...: paul a'barge said...
"Not long ago GWB gave the German leader (female) a friendly pat on the back, and the nuance crowd went ballistic about it."

NO HE DIDN'T. He gave her a shoulder rub..and unwelcomed one at that. Stop being inaccurate.; 11:57 AM
EnigmatiCore said...: "Do ANY of the Dem candidates have a plan that increases the "supply" (number of) doctors, nurses, healthcare providers??"

I did not say that they do. What I said was at least their plan has some appeal for people who feel they cannot get what they want or need.

"My plan gives every citizen the resources to buy basic coverage and every citizen has to dig into theor own pocket to pay for other than basic services. That sound fair?"

It sounds fair, except if one cannot get the health care they want or need, or at least not without incredible hardship. Like the waitress here. I doubt it would sound fair to her.

So do not wonder why she'll turn to the Democrats' plans.

If we solve the harder problem-- making health care and the components thereof abundant, then the questions of fairness melt away, the possibilities for class warfare diminish, and we all get to be healthier.

I say we try to tackle the harder problem. Figure out how to lower the entry costs to being a doctor. Figure out how to make it cheaper to bring new medicines to market. Figure out how to reduce the risks that cause insurance to be so prohibitive, but do so carefully so that people still have protection from negligence and malpractice.

Not easy, but more likely to work than socialized medicine, and more likely to win public favor than "go it alone, because that's fair."; 11:58 AM
Tim said...: EC said: "I just believe that it is less important to fix that side of the equation as to fix the other side."

Except it is the primary, underlying economic relationship of our entire health care system. Not fixing that is like adding on to a house with a crumbling foundation - you're just making a big problem bigger.

I know you aren't arguing that "health care is a right," but they, and anyone, seeking to effectively "reform" health care in the U.S. has to address the underlying economic dysfunction of the third-party payer system. Most Americans, save for the small percentage of those in the individual market, get their health care from a third-party - either the government (Medicaid, Medicare, VA/Champus) - or their employer. This distorts economic signals on both the supply and demand side; until we fix that, everything - supply, demand, innovation, etc., will continue to be distorted as well.; 12:26 PM
Tim said...: PS: Dems just want to redistribute wealth to buy more health care, er, strike that, they want to buy votes by buying voters health care.; 12:28 PM
AJ Lynch said...: "If we solve the harder problem-- making health care and the components thereof abundant, then the questions of fairness melt away, the possibilities for class warfare diminish, and we all get to be healthier."

You can't make more doctors unless you can do one of two things:
1- Increase the average earnings of doctors. 2- Increase the average IQ of human beings.

I have a niece and nephew in pre-med and they have to study their asses off to get good grades and I have to bite my tongue from trying to persuade them from going to work on Wall Street instead.

Hdhouse - my plan would cover many of her costs via my voucher program. But I will exclude you from my plan because you are too dumb to select your own insurance plan heh.; 12:29 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: "You can't make more doctors unless you can do one of two things:
1- Increase the average earnings of doctors. "

You can reduce the costs of being a doctor.

I further suggest to you that our supply of doctors is not limited by our supply of smart people. There are plenty of people with more than sufficient brainpower to be doctors, who make less than what doctors make. Some would have chosen to be doctors if the costs of becoming a doctor were not so high, or if the risks of being a doctor were not so high.

The problem with health care is one of scarcity. We can remove scarcity by removing demand. Or we can remove scarcity by increasing supply.

As long as people have health issues, there is only so much demand that can be removed. It is a challenge, but the right answer is to increase supply.; 12:38 PM
chickenlittle said...: We could reduce the costs of educating doctors along the lines of what we do in graduate science education. The eventual result may be what happened to science though- an initial perceived shortage lead to an overabundance, which finally led to a domestic shortage which was fed by overseas applicants.; 12:56 PM
TMink said...: I don't vote for a hug.

Trey; 12:57 PM
Original Mike said...: Maybe I wasn't paying attention prior, but it was with Bill Clinton that I first noticed this expectation that the President of the United States feel my pain. This is the last thing I want from my President. The person should be too busy to be the emoter-in-chief. Good grief.

With respect to this woman and health care; if she's poor enough, the government should pick up her health care costs. And it does. It's called Medicaid. And if Medicaid is underfunded, we should talk about fixing that. But the problem with universal health care is precisely that it covers everybody. There no such thing as "free for everybody". Haven't any of the Dems ever taken an economics course?; 1:17 PM
Matthew said...: The woman said her copays were too high, but I thought I heard her say they were $30. To me, anything less than $100 is ridiculous. But in fact, I do think chronic disabilities should be covered by the government, because it's simply too expensive a burden for the individual or family. I favor universal catastrophic insurance for this. But it only should cover those without, and the sytem should be totally private. Government would just dole out funds with no strings attached.

Everything else including end of life care should be provided by private insurance or paid out of pocket. And the entire medical field should be totally deregulated. When you can go to India and get American level open-heart surgery for 90% less than it costs here, you know we've got some major issues with taxes, regulations, and tort.; 1:25 PM
Original Mike said...: This post has been removed by the author.; 1:42 PM
AJ Lynch said...: Did anyone else notice there are many more good ideas and propoals here than you will find in a Dem or Rep debate.; 1:42 PM
Original Mike said...: "Universal catastrophic insurance."

I could get behind that, but that isn't even remotely what they're talking about. One of our regulars, Freder, couldn't even understand the concept.; 1:43 PM
Original Mike said...: "Universal catastrophic insurance."

I could get behind that, but that isn't even remotely what they're talking about. One of our regulars, Freder, couldn't even understand the concept.; 1:46 PM
Galvanized said...: The Presidency isn't about being the Boss and telling people how it is. Empathy and interpersonal skills are quite high on my list in a Presidential candidate. And the ability to answer tough questions from irate or dissatisfied voters and make them feel listened to and effective in your policy decision-making is a basic requirement.; 1:54 PM
Galvanized said...: And I think that the "feel your pain" technique in campaiging began long before Clinton. Remember the "chicken in every pot, a car in every garage" speech? There is a need to be accountable to the "little man" in politics, even in the highest office.; 1:57 PM
chickenlittle said...: Matthew said: "But in fact, I do think chronic disabilities should be covered by the government"

"should" is becoming "will be". People like me have voluntarily help carry such burdens without help of the government. I buy health insurance for my family of four and because we are healthy, we have paid much more in healthcare than we have gotten out. In a year or so, my employer will be offering a much high deductable option. I'm ambivalent about switching (feeling older?, unlucky?), but I cannot blame younger people from contemplating doing so.; 2:00 PM
Fred said...: You know, I think George W. would have handled this situation a lot better, and that says a lot.

Bush struggles with speech, but he wears his heart on his sleeve and that will be his saving grace as politics eat away at what remains of the administration.

Bill Clinton would've received an A+ for effort and a gold star for performance, it's just an unfair comparison. When it comes to 'handling' crowds, people, and hostile environments, he is in a league of his own.; 2:03 PM
Geoff Matthews said...: The last I saw, there were in excess of 300 million people in the U.S., and I'd bet there are at least 300 million different problems that they face. I'd rather that my president were a problem solver than an sympathizer. A president will be overwhelmed if (s)he takes an actual interest in 300 million+ people. Solving problems is less so.

But showing sympathy plays well for the emotional. Fine and all, but it doesn't SOLVE PROBLEMS.; 2:07 PM
ricpic said...: Being rational isn't enough in feminized America, the candidate has to exude oily feelings!; 2:10 PM
paul a'barge said...: HDHouse: NO HE DIDN'T. He gave her a shoulder rub..and unwelcomed one at that. Stop being inaccurate

A shoulder rub takes more than a couple of seconds. I watched the film, and his hands were on her shoulders no longer than a couple of seconds. So you're wrong.

Not only are you wrong (congenitally), but you have no idea what was in her brain as GWB proceeded to the podium to give his portion of the speeches. So, not only are you wrong, you're an idiot.

Please hold that little white sign up a bit higher, HDHouse ... the one that says No! Do NOT Touch me!!

Just so we can figure out where all sphincter-monkeys are coming from.; 2:13 PM
MadisonMan said...: A shoulder rub takes more than a couple of seconds

I'm curious where that rule comes from.

If you go to youtube and search on Bush Shoulder Rub, you can see it. My opinion is that A. Merkel is pretty weirded out by the whole thing. She certainly didn't react like she welcomed it.; 2:28 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: "I'm curious where that rule comes from."

I don't know, but whenever I try to cut one short my spouse brings it up and I have to keep going.; 4:41 PM
Simon said...: I think Trey nailed it with a kind of zen mantra- "I don't vote for a hug." Romney gave the best answer he could have given, although I'd rather he said "I'm sorry, maybe you misheard me, I'm running for President of the United States, not Governor of New Hampshire."; 4:59 PM
Revenant said...: I favor universal catastrophic insurance for this.

The day we get universal catastrophic insurance is the day the government starts making dangerous activities illegal.

Skydiving? Absolutely not -- raises health care costs.

You want a motorcycle? Well, you can't have one! The odds of catastrophic injury are far too high!

Smoking? Flat-out illegal. Why, think of all the money you'll cost us when you get cancer.

What, you want to visit *Africa*? Sorry, that requires special government dispensation. The chance of contracting AIDS or getting shot is just too high, you know.

Oh, and then the Republicans take over again. Now there's a government *interest* in banning sodomy. Oh, not because they're against gays or anything (heavens no, not them), but because it is a medical fact that anal sex transmits disease so much more easily than other forms of sex do. All those catastrophic medical expenses are just too much for the government to be asked to handle.

Then here come the Democrats. Hunting just carries too high a risk of shooting accidents, and that costs the taxpayers money.

Etc, etc.; 5:13 PM
Simon said...: Rev - and why stop at sodomy in the modern meaning of anal sex? Why not ban all sodomy in the biblical sense of non-reproductive sex? That'd sure cut down on STD transmission.; 5:19 PM
Cedarford said...: Vet66 - vet66 said...
Tongue in cheek? Under the democratic health plan we could hire jihadist physicians to work on the cheap as the countries Marcus Welby types retire.

Guess what, Maxwell Smart...1/3rd of American doctors are foreign born already as are 1/4 of the nurses - producing a service that is 50% more expensive than any other advanced nations. With 3 times the error rate, twice the "dirty hospital infection rate", with lower life expectency.

Of course, medical professionals are like scientists and engineers - according to Dubya. They come here to do the low-pay jobs Americans refuse to do and we need more H1-B visas and more amnesty instead of trying to train more doctors at university.

Why try funding a new nursing school to open up the middle class opportunities for Americans to work 55,000 -75,000 a year RN, RN specialist jobs when you can hire Peruvian, Nigerian, and Yemeni nurses instead? Besides, such nurses work better with the Yemeni and Oba tribe doctors hired.

***********************
While I agree with Hoosier Daddy that universal health care is inevitable in America - in part because the "genius of the free market" has miserably failed where professionals collude to set prices and control supply pf professionals, where lobbies collude with gov't to set prices and how many new millionaires are created in the nursing home and med labs industries - Romney had strong points.

And remember this is New Hampshire, the "sick of Bush incompetence, sick of Iraq, but still Live Free or Die State". Romney standing up to a parasite liberal will play well with NH Reps and Independents.

A parasite who tried to emotionally confront him, who argued that all she needs should be free from the government taxpayer then whined she lost tips because she favored a tirade over doing her job for a solid hour while other customers arrived, waited, and were served by others that got the tips while the waitress vented.

Sometimes when you stand up to an emotional bully or someone in Full Throttle Victimhood Entitlement Demanding...you will appear to be the "Father that says NO!" rather than the "Mummy that hugs you and cares about you and understands and asks you to go see Daddy about the money".

But I think Romney understands people are looking for "The Person Who Says No!" after Bush has gone 6 years with a 40% increase in government spending that exceeds even LBJ's with a single veto...and even that was not against the corrupt porkmeisters of both parties. He runs on the fact that he vetos crazy spenders, did so hundreds of times, likes vetoing, and wants to control demands without fiscal limit rather than massively jack up taxes.

Far better to see a candidate that frankly states the truth a voter doesn't want to hear rather than a manipulative head nod, an faux empathetic "I hear you", stand if listening raptly for a minute while the prole vents, then wrap things up with a hug and a "I feel your pain, and things will be better when I can care for all your needs better as President" then move on to the next crowd and wipe you mind fresh and clean of that last confrontation...

Of course, his handlers will likely tell him that he wasted way too much time - and work more with him so he can completely deliver his message, stand up for his beliefs, then slide out of the confrontation -in 5-10 minutes - without looking dismissive.

As an executive, Romney will likely agree that his time management in the "waitress debate" sucked. An hour squandored. She wasn't exactly Teddy Kennedy, they weren't exactly going to get 15 minutes of the cafe debate on national news..He wasn't going to convince her and have her hand over a big campaign donation or rally 10,000 voters in her "irritated Democrat-favoring waitresses association" to his side.; 6:00 PM
Ruth Anne Adams said...: Holy smokes! Who knew Janice Soprano took a waitress job in New Hampshire?; 8:09 PM
knoxwhirled said...: hee

I thought the same thing; 8:12 PM
Harkonnendog said...: "1/3rd of American doctors are foreign born already as are 1/4 of the nurses - producing a service that is 50% more expensive than any other advanced nations. With 3 times the error rate, twice the "dirty hospital infection rate", with lower life expectency."

What a bunch of crap... sigh...; 8:19 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: "Why not ban all sodomy in the biblical sense of non-reproductive sex?"

Hmm. Then I might be able to get away with having a backrub be only seconds long.

No, I don't think I like that tradeoff.; 8:46 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: "What a bunch of crap"

Don't sweat it. 76.8% of all statistics quoted on the internet are made up.; 8:47 PM
Theo Boehm said...: What a bunch of crap... sigh...

76.8% of all statistics quoted on the internet are made up.

What is the sound of one link clicking?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY – WE MUST DEFEAT GROUPS LIKE HEZBOLLAH

"Governor Romney believes that bloodthirsty terrorist organizations like Hezbollah and Hamas have smothered the progress of the people and nations where they have built their networks, Lebanon serving as an example. These terror organizations cannot and should not be allowed to gain an advantage with the citizenry in Muslim nations just because they mask their terror agenda with an offering of some vital services. America can make great progress and provide more stability by creating partnerships with moderate Muslim governments to perfect the institutions of democracy and showcase the wonders and benefits of American democracy, such as our healthcare technology, educational institutions and free market commerce.

"By working with moderate Muslims to break down and defeat terror organizations like Hezbollah militarily, we can then turn to a new 'Marshall Plan' approach that strengthens the foundations of freedom and prosperity in burgeoning Middle East democracies."

- Romney Press Secretary Kevin Madden

FACT: Governor Romney Has A Long Record Of Denouncing Hezbollah Has A Terrorist Organization We Must Defeat:

Governor Romney Believes Hezbollah Is A "Bloodthirsty" Terrorist Organization. "Romney spokesman Kevin Madden told ABC News that the former Massachusetts governor views Hezbollah as a 'bloodthirsty' terrorist organization which has 'smothered' the progress of the people and nations where it has built its network, 'Lebanon serving as an example.'" (Teddy Davis and Matt Stuart, "Romney: U.S. Can Learn From Hezbollah," ABC News, 7/29/07)

Governor Romney Has Criticized Democrats For Failing To Recognize The Broader Jihadist Threat That Includes Hezbollah. "In his planned remarks at Yeshiva, a 7,000-student research university rooted in the traditions of Jewish law and life, Romney chides former President Carter for suggesting a security fence in Israel prevents peace in the Middle East. … 'What Jimmy Carter fails to understand is what so many fail to understand: Whether it is Hamas or Hezbollah or al Qaeda, there is an overarching goal among the violent jihadists that transcends borders and boundaries,' Romney says." (Glen Johnson, "Romney Favors Ambassador To Deter Nukes," The Associated Press, 4/26/07)

In Israel, Governor Romney Called On Arab States To Halt Financial And Weapon Flows To Groups Like Hezbollah. GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "[Arab states] should support Iraq's nascent government, they can help America's focus on Iran by quickly turning down the temperature of the Arab-Israeli conflict, stopping the financial and weapons flows to Hamas and Hezbollah, thawing relations with Israel, and telling the Palestinians they must drop terror and recognize Israel's right to exist." (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks At The Seventh Annual Herzliya Conference, Herzliya, Israel, 1/23/07)

FACT: In 2006, Governor Romney Ordered State Agencies To Not Support The Harvard Visit Of The Former Iranian President:

Ordering State Agencies To Not Support The Visit Of Former Iranian President Khatami, Governor Romney Cited, In Part, His Praise For Hezbollah. "Governor Mitt Romney today ordered all Massachusetts state government agencies to decline support, if asked, for former Iranian President Mohammed Khatami's September 10 visit to the Boston area, where he is scheduled to speak at Harvard University. … Romney cited a litany of hateful actions by Khatami, including his support for violent jihadist activities: … In the recent conflict along the Israel-Lebanon border, Khatami described the terrorist group Hezbollah as a 'shining sun that illuminates and warms the hearts of all Muslims and supporters of freedom in the world.'" (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, "Romney Denounces Khatami Visit To Harvard," Press Release, 9/5/06)

· Governor Romney: "Well, what I say is that on that September 10th and September 11th, on the fifth anniversary of a extraordinary tragedy in America, you don't welcome a person to Harvard with open arms who has preached the destruction of Israel, who has developed nuclear technology, contrary to what he had said, who has jailed dissident students in his country, who has praised Hezbollah." (Fox News' "The O'Reilly Factor," 9/6/06)

FACT: Governor Romney Believes The United States Can Better Use The Instruments Of Its Civilian Power To Defeat Groups Like Hezbollah:

Governor Romney Says America Must Do A Better Job Of Using All Its Civilian Instruments To Defeat Hezbollah's Efforts In Southern Lebanon To Win Hearts And Minds. GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "Our non-military resources enjoy no such jointness, no such clear leadership, no such clear lines of authority and responsibility. Too often we struggle to integrate our military and civilian instruments of national power into coherent, timely and effective operations. When facing the need to strengthen the democratic underpinnings of a country like Lebanon, our education, health, banking, energy, commerce, law enforcement and diplomatic resources are in separate bureaucracies, all under separate leadership, all protecting their own powers and their own prerogatives. So while we watched, Hezbollah brought healthcare and schools to the Lebanese. Guess who the people followed when conflict ensued? The same thing happened with Hamas and the Palestinians." (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks AT The George Bush Presidential Library, College Station, TX, 4/10/07)

· Governor Romney: "The wonders of America – like our healthcare technology – can be powerful tools to promote the foundations of liberty. It is time that we apply these American wonders to make the world, and in turn to make America, a safer, freer, and more prosperous place." (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks AT The George Bush Presidential Library, College Station, TX, 4/10/07)

· Click Here To Read Governor Romney's Full Speech At The George Bush Presidential Library: http://www.mittromney.com/News/Speeches/Remarks_George_Bush_Library_Center

FACT: This Attack On Governor Romney Is Being Pushed By A Partisan Democrat Organization:

The National Jewish Democratic Council Is Misconstruing Governor Romney's Words To Launch A Negative Partisan Attack. "Yesterday, in an article titled 'Mitt Romney cited Hezbollah's social network as a model for U.S. diplomacy,' the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) reported on recent comments by GOP Presidential candidate Mitt Romney that Hezbollah's 'kind of diplomacy is something that would help America become stronger around the world …' Today, the National Jewish Democratic Council (NJDC) strongly criticized Mitt Romney for his praise of Hezbollah and released the following statement from Executive Director Ira N. Forman…" (National Jewish Democratic Council, "Statement From NJDC On Mitt Romney's Comments That America Should Use Hezbollah As A Model," Press Release, 8/2/07)

Mike Shear

Washington post reporter creating a story, not reporting on the story:

"So what do you think? What would you say to Romney, if he were… when he… when he walks in… he's going to be here…."

Then they cut, cut, cut… why don't they release the video in it's entirety? Agenda journalism at it's finest…

Video: Mike Shear / The Washington Post

Editor: Jonathan Forsythe / washingtonpost.com

From T&T

The source of that Oregon campaign money

The people who want to be our next president reported a couple of weeks ago on their campaign hauls through June 30, and the surprise winner in Oregon (surprising to me, at least) was Republican Mitt Romney, who pulled in nearly a third of a million dollars from the Beaver state.

The most surprising thing, however, was not just that Romney pulled in the most money; the real surprise was that he had 56 percent more than runner-up John Edwards, and almost as much as Edwards and Hillary Clinton combined ($326,610 for Romney vs. $208,447 for Edwards and $126,888 for Clinton). Also surprising was the fact that the Republicans, despite being out-raised nationwide by 50 percent, slightly out-did the Democrats in Oregon.

So that got me wondering where Romney's Oregon money is coming from. And just for good measure, I looked at Edwards' money as well.

(I should note that, while I got all this information from the cool New York Times database , my numbers may be slightly different than those of the Times because of errors I found in the Times' database. For instance, the Times listed some California donors under an Oregon Zip code. Also, when I refer to a "donor," that could mean multiple donations from the same person. If Joe Smith made five different donations of $100 each, I would count that as one donor contributing $500.)

One of the first things I found interesting was that Romney pulled in more money from Multnomah County than did Edwards -- almost 20 percent more. Of course, the Democrats as a whole did what you'd expect in Multnomah County: they raised 36 percent more for their candidates than did the Republicans. Still, considering Multnomah County is home to 2.4 registered Democrats for every registered Republican, this remains notable.

Another interesting -- though predictable -- aspect was the source of the money. Virtually all of Edwards' money came from west of the Cascades, while Romney's cash was more scattered around the state.

Also, if you look at the percentage of the haul that came from each county, and compare that to each county's percentage of the state population, very few counties donated proportionately. For Edwards, only Multnomah, Clackamas and Clatsop counties gave more than their population percentage. For Romney, Multnomah, Clackamas, Washington, Deschutes and Umatilla exceeded their populations. (It would be interesting to do some sort of comparison to per capita income, but -- truth be told -- I've already put in too much effort on this project.)

One of the things that became glaringly obvious was the number of big donors in each camp. As should be obvious by comparing the number of donors to the total haul, the typical Edwards donor was making smaller contributions than the typical Romney donor.

There are certainly plenty of examples of large donations to the Edwards camp -- among them:

$7,400 from David & Christine Vernier of Portland;
$4,600 from Mark and Sheri Bocci of Lake Oswego;
$3,100 from State Rep. Mitch Greenlick and his wife Harriet.
$2,800 from Terri Naito, a policy advisor to Multnomah County Commissioner Lisa Naito;
$2,300 from Columbia Sportswear's Peter Bragdon, the former chief of staff to Gov. Ted Kulongoski;
$2,300 from Portland developer Homer Williams;
$1,656 from Mandate Media's Kari Chisholm (or, as the Times' database calls it, "Madnate Media"); and,
$1,000 from Lynn Lundquist, the former Republican (!) Speaker of the Oregon House of Representatives.

But a typical example is Lorre Lewis of North Bend, who made three separate donations of $20 each, plus another for $19.53. Or Priscilla Oien of Tualatin, who made 10 separate donations of $100 each.

Romney, meanwhile, was supported by a variety of business, legal and investment heavyweights, including:

Rod Wendt of Jeld-Wen, who combined with his wife to give $4,600;
Kevin Mannix, who gave the same amount with his wife;
Peter & Julie Stott of Crown Pacific, $4,600;
Tim & Mary Boyle of Columbia Sportswear, $4,600;
Frederick & Gail Jubitz, $4,600
Ron Saxton of Ater Wynne, who gave $2,100 (his wife Lynne gave another $500 through the Christie School);
H. Gerald Bidwell, $2,000; and,
Richard Reiten, the retired Northwest Natural exec, $1,500.

I know it takes money to run a campaign, but I think this feeds into an achilles heel of the Republicans: the perception that the GOP is controlled by big-money interests. Should Fred Thompson decide to get into the race, however, I think you'll find that many of his supporters will be more similar to the $80 Edwards supporter I mentioned above.
Keep Mitt up in those polls now above fred thompson and ahead of John Edwards.

The Wall Street Journal Shills For Turkey – Yet Again

The lede in this Wall Street Journal editorial about Turkey's tumultuous elections – and the threat of yet another military coup (1960, 1971, 1980, 1997) – absurdly describes the EU-wanna be this way: "The Muslim world's liveliest democracy has long been a work in progress, but the stakes just got a lot higher … Turkey's future as a pluralistic, free society is on the line."

Since Turkey is as democratic, pluralistic and free as any Muslim country can ever be (which is to say, not very) let's deconstruct this nonsense:

† Democracy: Democracies do not have to worry about military coups. 'Nuff said.

† Pluralistic: Turkey is 99.8 percent Muslim; Turks who convert to Christianity are routinely prosecuted and jailed for "insulting Islam" (Turks are apparently so insecure they get insulted at the drop of a fez). ... Three Christian employees of a bible publishing company (two of them converts from Islam) were savagely murdered by a group of Islamist students in April (according to one as yet uncorroborated report The Stiletto has seen, they were disemboweled, castrated and beheaded). ... Since January, three Catholic priests have been murdered.

† Free society: The Turkish parliament is moving to block Web sites that insult Kemal Ataturk (for instance, by suggesting he is homosexual). ... More than 60 fiction and nonfiction writers have been prosecuted for "insulting Turkishness" (typically by acknowledging the Armenian Genocide as settled history) under Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code. ... Just as in any totalitarian regime, all Turkish schoolchildren – including those of Armenian descent whose ancestors were murdered by Ottoman Turks – are required to recite " The Turkish Oath" in school swearing allegiance to the cult of Ataturk, and proclaiming their happiness at being Turks. ... Nationalists have infiltrated all levels of government – the police , the judiciary, municipal governments – and enabled the high-profile assassination of Armenian journalist Hrant Dink (second item, The Daily Blade, February 5, 2007). ... Turkish operatives have carried out an international campaign of intimidation and harassment against a Turkish historian who has written several books about the Armenian Genocide (third item, The Daily Blade , March 7, 2007).

Turkey's tiny Christian population is not living in a democratic, pluralistic and free society. These Turkish citizens are living in fear of their lives. But don't expect to read about any of this in The Wall Street Journal, which must use Armenian Genocide denial as a litmus test when hiring editorial and opinion writers (third item, The Daily Blade, March 2, 2007).

From T&T

Hello Mike:

Here is a larger list.

In HIM

T&T

Adopt a Platoon
www.adoptaplatoon.org
Adopt a Platoon has several ongoing projects to ensure that no soldier overseas walks away from mail call empty-handed.

AnySoldier
www.anysoldier.com
Any Soldier is a non-profit organization that helps people send care packages to members of the armed services in Iraq.

Appreciate Our Troops
www.appreciateourtroops.org
Purchase a Support Our Troops mug and a free personalized mug will be given to a current or former service member.

Blue Star Mothers
www.bluestarmothers.org
The Blue Star Mothers was founded by service members' moms during World War II. Any mother with a son or daughter in the military can join.

Books For Soldiers
www.booksforsoldiers.com/
Help the troops escape boredom by donating some books. You can also donate DVDs and CDs requested by soldiers.

Camp Doha
www.campdoha.org/
Camp Doha provides valuable information for those about to deploy, their friends and families and anyone who wants to support the troops.

Cell Phones for Soldiers
www.cellphonesforsoldiers.com/pages/1/index.htm
Donated cell phones are recycled and turned into cash. The cash is used to purchase calling cards for soldiers in Iraq.

Defend America
www.defendamerica.mil/nmam.html
Thank any service member stationed throughout the U.S. and the world with an e-mail.

Fisher House
www.fisherhouse.org
The Fisher House Foundation donates comfort homes, built on the grounds of major military and VA medical centers. These homes enable family members to be close to a loved one during hospitalization for an unexpected illness, disease, or injury.

Freedom Calls
www.freedomcalls.org
The Freedom Calls Foundation is helping families videoconference with their loved ones in Iraq. You can donate money to help keep this project going.

Groceries for Families
www.commissaries.com/certificheck
The men and women who lay down their lives for us are terribly underpaid. Help a family by purchasing gift certificates to the commissary.

Homes for Our Troops
www.homesforourtroops.org
Homes for Our Troops assists injured veterans and their immediate families by building new or adapting existing homes with handicapped accessibility.

Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund
www.intrepidmuseum.org/pages/intrepidfoundation
The Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund provides grants to the families of servicemen and women who died in Iraq. You can donate online, through mail or by calling a toll-free number.

Military Moms
www.militarymoms.net
This site provides support to all of the moms out there who has a son or daughter in the military.

MarineParents
www.marineparents.com
MarineParents is a place for parents of Marines to meet up. You'll find advice, support and information.

Operation: A Bit of Home
www.operationabitofhome.com
Operation: A Bit of Home supports over 150 different soldiers per day by providing necessary and hard-to-get toiletries.

Operation Air Conditioner
www.operationac.com
Operation Air Conditioner provides not only air conditioners but space heaters (the desert is cold in the winter) for soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Operation Dear Abby
anyservicemember.navy.mil
The U.S. Navy and Dear Abby have teamed up. Their site allows you to send e-mail messages of support to service members.

Operation Give
www.operationgive.org
Operation Give provides toys, clothing and school supplies primarily to the children of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Operation Gratitude
www.opgratitude.com
Operation Gratitude provides a way for you to show your respect and appreciation for the troops. It sends care packages and letters to troops stationed overseas.

Operation Hero Miles
www.heromiles.org
You can donate your unused frequent flier miles to help soldiers travel on emergency leave. They are also used to help families fly to hospitalized soldiers.

Operation Interdependence
www.oidelivers.org
Operation Interdependence supplies care packages to deployed soldiers. You can help out by providing goods, coordinating efforts or donating funds.

Operation Iraqi Children
www.operationiraqichildren.org
Many soldiers are rebuilding schools in Iraq and scrounging around for school supplies. Help by donating a school supplies kit.

Operation Uplink
www.operationuplink.org
Donate money to Operation Uplink. The money is used to purchase phone cards so servicemen and women can call home.

Packages From Home
www.packagesfromhome.org
Packages From Home sends personal care and comfort items to U.S. troops deployed overseas. Find out how to donate time, money or items to this non-profit organization.

Soldiers' Angels
www.soldiersangels.org/heroes/index.php
Become some soldier's angel by adopting a service member.

Treats for Troops
www.treatsfortroops.com
Treats for Troops helps get you provide packages to your loved ones overseas. If you don't know anyone, the Foster-A-Soldier Program matches you with a registered soldier by branch of service, home state, gender, or birthday - or you can choose to sponsor a group of soldiers.

US Central Command
www.centcom.mil
Find out what the Coalition is doing. U.S. Central Command features up-to-date information on Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom.

USO Cares
www.usocares.org
You can sponsor care packages provided by the USO with a $25 donation.

Voice from Home
voicesfromhome.org/home.html
Voices From Home allows military members and their families and friends to send and receive immediate voice e-mail messages in remote locations around the world.

"How 'Bout the USA?" Romney Is Asked In Emotional Exchange on Health Care

Obama and the sit-down with the dictators (toon)

Obama and the sit-down with the dictators (toon)

In Case You Missed It: Governor Romney Believes It Is "Time To Shore Up Ethics"

In Iowa, Governor Romney Proposes New Law To Strengthen Ethics In Washington:

Governor Romney Proposes New Ethics Law That Would Strip Those Who Violate The Public Trust Of Their Government Pensions. "Saying it's time to clean up the ethics in Washington, Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney today said he is proposing to strip pension benefits of any elected official or federal government employee who is convicted of a felony for violating the public trust." (Rod Boshart, "Romney: Time To Shore Up Ethics," Cedar Rapids Gazette, 8/2/07)

- Governor Mitt Romney: "There are a lot of things about Washington that give me real pause. One, by the way, is just watching the scandalous behavior that has been alleged on both sides of the aisle, but frankly I'm particularly disappointed in our own. ... [W]e'll see how many are accurate, but I think we're going to have to find a way to demand a higher standard. There is no excuse for unethical conduct on the part of people who go to Washington to serve this country. One thing I'd like to add, if I'm lucky enough to be President, I will fight for a provision, for a law, which says that if you're convicted of a crime as a government employee or an appointee – you're convicted of a crime that involves violation of the public trust, you've done some kind of abuse of your position – that you get stripped of your pension. A lot of people go [to Washington] for pensions. We're going to take away their pensions if they violate our trust." (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks At An Ask Mitt Anything, Urbandale, IA, 8/2/07)

- To view Governor Romney's full remarks, please see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5atXttLzW0

Background:

Under Massachusetts Law, Any State Employee Convicted Of A "Criminal Offense Involving Violation Of The Laws Applicable To His Office Or Position" Is Not Entitled To Receive A Retirement Pension. "Forfeiture of pension upon misconduct. – In no event shall any member after final conviction of a criminal offense involving violation of the laws applicable to his office or position, be entitled to receive a retirement allowance under the provisions of section one to twenty-eight, inclusive, nor shall any beneficiary be entitled to receive any benefits under such provisions on account of such member." (The General Laws Of Massachusetts, Part I, Title IV, Chapter 32: Section 15, www.mass.gov, Accessed 8/2/07)

Governor Romney Took No Salary As Governor Of Massachusetts And Donated His Salary To Charity As President Of The Salt Lake City Winter Olympics. "In a symbolic move in the midst of a state budget crisis, Gov.-elect Mitt Romney and Lt. Gov.-elect Kerry Healey will not collect a salary when they take office. ... This is the second consecutive job in which Romney has declined a salary. As president of the 2002 Salt Lake City Winter Olympics, Romney donated to charity his $275,000 annual salary for three years, totaling $825,000." (Jennifer Feen, "Citing Crisis, Romney, Healey Forfeit Salaries," Lowell Sun, 1/2/03)

Michelle Malkin on the "mockery of GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith"

Author Archive
Send to a Friend
Print Version

August 1, 2007 12:00 AM

Silently Martyred
Missionary blood spills, the world yawns.

By Michelle Malkin

The blood of innocent Christian missionaries spills on Afghan sands. The world watches and yawns. The United Nations offers nothing more than a formal expression of "concern." Where is the global uproar over the human-rights abuses unfolding before our eyes?

For two weeks, a group of South Korean Christians has been held hostage by Taliban thugs in Afghanistan. This is the largest group of foreign hostages taken in Afghanistan since Operation Enduring Freedom began in 2001. What was their offense? Were they smuggling arms into the country? No. Inciting violence? No. They were peaceful believers in Christ on short-term medical and humanitarian missions. Seventeen of the 23 hostages are females. Most of them are nurses who provide social services and relief.

Over the past few days, the bloodthirsty jihadists have demanded that South Korea immediately withdraw troops from the Middle East, pay ransom and trade the civilian missionaries for imprisoned Taliban fighters. The Taliban leaders have made good on threats to kill the kidnapped Christians while Afghan officials plead fecklessly that their monstrous behavior is "un-Islamic."

Two men, 29-year-old Shim Sung-min and 42-year-old Pastor Bae Hyeong-gyu, have already been shot to death and dumped in the name of Allah. Bae was a married father with a nine-year-old daughter. According to Korean media, he was from a devout Christian family from the island province of Jeju. He helped found the Saemmul Church south of Seoul, which sent the volunteers to Afghanistan.

Across Asia, media coverage is 24/7. Strangers have held nightly prayer vigils. But the human-rights crowd in America has been largely AWOL. And so has most of our mainstream media. Among some of the secular elite, no doubt, is a blame-the-victim apathy: The missionaries deserved what they got. What were they thinking bringing their message of faith to a war zone? Didn't they know they were sitting ducks for Muslim head-choppers whose idea of evangelism is "convert or die"?

I noted the media shoulder-shrugging about jihadist targeting of Christian missionaries five years ago during the kidnapping and murder of American Christian missionaries Martin and Gracia Burnham in the Philippines. The silence is rooted in viewing committed Christians as alien others. At best, there is a collective callousness. At worst, there is outright contempt — from Ted Turner's reference to Catholics as "Jesus freaks" to CBS producer Roxanne Russell's casual insult of former GOP presidential candidate Gary Bauer as "the little nut from the Christian group" to the mockery of GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney's Mormon faith.

Curiously, those who argue that we need to "understand" Islamic terrorists demonstrate little effort to "understand" the Christian evangelical missionaries who risk their lives to spread the gospel — not by sword, but through acts of compassion, healing and education. An estimated 16,000 Korean mission workers risk their lives across the globe — from Africa to the Middle East, China, and North Korea.

These are true practitioners of a religion of peace, not the hate-mongers with bombs and AK-47s strapped to their chests who slay instead of pray their way to martyrdom.

© 2007 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

from: mdroney

I like Mitt Romney more and more each time I hear him speak. Here's an example:

Today, Mitt put forth a great idea. To summarize, he feels it's time for America to put forth a "Surge of Support" to match the troop surge. Great Idea. Here's how you can help: click here.

In addition to the support organizations Romney has posted on his web site, I'd add 2 more that my wife and I have made contributions to:

Wounded Warrior Project

and

Soldier's Angels

These are great ways to make your own surge of support. Every little bit helps.

If I might be so bold as to suggest it, let's all make an effort over the next month to do something individually to create an "Abolition Of Man" Support Surge. We can write and read about this stuff day in and day out. But when we make a contribution to support the hard work our men and women are doing in faraway lands, we can truly make a difference.

Post comments if you have other worthy "Support Surge" causes or if you want to tell the audience how you made your own surge of support. Keep the ideas flowing. I think Mitt is onto something, here.

The Refreshing Strategy of Mitt Romney

Posted by MatthewLee @ 1:58 pm | Categories: Uncategorized, Politics | `

I haven't decided on a candidate for 08 yet, but if Mitt Romney continues making moves like these, he will quickly win my support.

The candidates for President already have a platform, and as such they already have a position of influence. The way they use that position of influence says a lot about them–will they simply use it as a tool to get into the presidency, or do they care enough about the causes they support to use their platforms to do something for them?
Romney's "surge of support" idea for the troops is a good one, but it doesn't go far enough. While he's devoted some web space to linking to organizations that support the troops, why not actually set up a "one-stop donation page" for those organizations as well? Real-estate on the web is cheap, and I doubt such a move would take dollars from his campaign. If nothing else, it would turn his website into something more than a campaign plank and make it useful for people to get involved in moving forward the platform he is espousing.

This sort of strategy seems risky for a Presidential candidate, as it may be relegated to the dustbin of "good ideas that never caught on." Such a failure could be fodder for opponents.

But in a campaign that is now approaching a year old, I'm a little sick of hearing everyone talk. Seeing a presidential candidate actually try to do something with his influence is, if nothing else, refreshing.

(HT: Hugh)

Romney Further Reinforces My Support

It's odd, but every once in a while, a politician will say what I'm thinking. And I like that in a politician. Things like that make me want to vote for them.

For instance, Mitt Romney has recently made some statements that I whole-heartedly agree with.

When it comes to immigration, Mitt said "We should put in place an employment verification system…and then, when an employer is thinking of hiring someone, the federal database immediately tells them whether they're available to be working or not. If they're not, you can't hire them."

Either Mitt Romney is stealing my ideas or we're on the same page!

click here for more...

A Surge Of Support

When I was recently in Colorado Springs, I spoke with a man whose son is serving in Iraq. He said the criticism at home of the war effort was demoralizing. He made the point that as our fighting men and women are defending our liberties overseas, we as Americans need to stand by them. Afterwards, my nephew suggested there should be a "surge of support" to go along with the troop surge. I told him that I couldn't agree more. This is why I'm writing on the blog today and sending this message out to all of Team Mitt.

Content Image

With many views being offered for how to handle the war in Iraq, I've been supportive of giving the troop surge on the ground in Iraq a chance to take effect. We owe that to our men and women in the military who are making the sacrifices they are today.

There is no guarantee that the new strategy pursued by General Petraeus will ultimately succeed, but the stakes are too high and the potential fallout too great to deny our military leaders and troops on the ground the resources and the time needed to give them an opportunity to succeed.

While some Democrats in Congress say they support the troops who are making these sacrifices, many don't support the work they are doing to make the surge a success.

Representative Clyburn, the third-highest ranking House Democrat, said it would be "a real big problem" for Democrats if progress is made in Iraq. That's not a problem but good news for all Americans.

Please take some time today and join a nationwide surge of support for our troops. This is something that all Americans need to come together on. You don't play politics with foreign policy, particularly when men and women are taking bullets in Iraq for America.

There are many ways you can show that you appreciate the surge of sacrifice that so many men and women are making today. Get started and join the surge of support today.

Posted at 2007-08-01 12:29:30 by Mitt Romney

DEL.ICIO.US

FACEBOOK

Comments

I like the idea! We give to the "Treats for Troops" program. It is a lot of fun to shop for items at the site and then they ship it all off for you. Thanks for all you are doing. Go Mitt!!

Posted by Amy at 2007-08-01 13:56:16

This would make a good commercial to get out the word to support our troops. We plan on joining the surge of support. Thank you for your efforts.

Posted by Kim at 2007-08-01 13:01:40