Romney, Ueberroth, Payne have advice for Chicago on 2016 Olympics bid

By Deanna Bellandi, Associated Press Writer

CHICAGO — Chicago Olympics organizers can turn to some big names with proven track records for advice on how to win the selection process and then run the 2016 Summer Games.

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney rescued the scandal-plagued 2002 Winter Games in Salt Lake City, former baseball commissioner Peter Ueberroth ran the profitable 1984 Los Angeles Olympics and is chairman of the U.S. Olympic Committee, and Masters tournament chief Billy Payne helped Atlanta win the 1996 Summer Games over Athens, Greece, the Olympics' birthplace.

Each recently talked to The Associated Press about what Chicago should do to win its first Olympics and then host a successful Games. Their advice was simple: make friends on the International Olympic Committee, train many volunteers and don't do it for the money.

"I hope people don't think it's a big moneymaker and a source of economic development and good for business, because that's not what the Olympics is about," Romney said. "The Olympics is about an opportunity to serve the world and to welcome the world."

By the end, many felt the Salt Lake City experience became what Romney describes. But that happened only after a bribery scandal in the selection process shook the Olympic movement to its core, resulting in many of the changes Chicago must deal with in this revamped, and supposedly cleaned up, selection process.

And Atlanta? It was unwieldy, included a fatal bombing at Centennial Olympic Park and is largely considered the most over-commercialized Olympics in the history of the modern games.

Chicago is new to the Olympic selection process, and the Chicago 2016 organizing committee can learn plenty from both the successes and failures the three American cities experienced.

With USOC guidance, the Chicago group already has reached out to leaders of the 2012 London Olympics and the Athens and Barcelona Games, Chicago 2016 spokesman Patrick Sandusky said. And Romney met with Mayor Richard Daley during a campaign visit to Chicago in April.

The road to hosting the Games begins with getting to know people in the international sporting world and on the IOC, which Payne said was necessary for Atlanta because the Southern city wasn't well-known outside the United States.

"It occurred to us early on that coming out of the blue as we did virtually unknown ... that the best way that we could compete would be to secure the trust and the friendship of the respective (IOC) members and hoping in the process to convince them that we would be great custodians of this wonderful gift which they give every four years," Payne said.

For Chicago, which has some international recognition but is largely known for its past of gangsters and slaughterhouses, that means hosting international competitions and attending major events.

This week, Daley and a small delegation of the city's Olympic organizers are in Brazil at the Pan American Games in Rio de Janeiro - a chief rival of Chicago for the 2016 Games - where they will attend the opening ceremonies and watch events, Sandusky said.

About 5,500 athletes from 42 countries are expected to attend the Olympic-style Pan Ams, which begin Saturday and run through July 29.

For Daley, it's another chance to interact with IOC members, whose contact with bid cities has been limited by Olympic rules enacted following the Salt Lake City bribery scandal. A few days before he left for Brazil, Daley said he would talk up Chicago, its history and its diversity by touting "how great the people are, first and foremost."

"This city is a, really a secret throughout the world," he said.

Ueberroth said Chicago's high-profile mayor - whom he described as "shake your hand, make a promise, keep a promise" - is key to the city's efforts to build trust among the IOC members and eventually win the 60 votes needed to get the Games.

"They basically will vote for the people that they trust and that they know that are going to stay the course," Ueberroth said.

Other cities competing for the 2016 Games so far are Doha, Qatar; Madrid, Spain; Tokyo; and Baku, Azerbaijan. The IOC will pick a host city in 2009.

A recent misstep before the start of the Pan Am Games has Chicago organizers already trying to counter negative stereotypes about Americans.

A USOC worker last week scrawled the message "Welcome to the Congo!" on a board in the organization's Rio de Janeiro media center. The greeting, reportedly in reference to warm temperatures, was blasted by Brazilians, who didn't like having their country compared to a less-developed nation and viewed the Americans as arrogant.

The USOC apologized, and Sandusky said the Chicago delegation in Brazil was conscious of "being humble and listening."

Another issue Olympic host city hopefuls must address is whether they have the venues - or enough money to build them.

Chicago lacks some of the major Olympic facilities, including a $1 billion lakefront athletes' village and a $366 million temporary stadium. But Payne believes major construction isn't a big hurdle for a city like Chicago.

"I think that they would have confidence that the design, technological expertise that Chicago could bring to the task would be more than adequate to pull it off," Payne said, noting that Atlanta had to build a stadium and athletes' village, too.

Trouble over financing for a new stadium did complicate New York's bid for the 2012 Summer Olympics and the Games eventually were awarded to London.

Ueberroth said the government, private sector and community must come together as one to make the Games work. In Chicago, donors have raised millions of dollars to finance the city's bid, and the government has pledged millions more in financial guarantees in case the Games falter.

An Olympics can't happen without thousands of volunteers, and Romney, a millionaire businessman, said they should be treated like regular employees. Not everyone who applied to volunteer in Salt Lake City got a spot, and those who did went through rigorous training on both the work they would do and the attitude they should have.

"We tried to change the normal American attitude of, 'These are the rules and we're here to enforce them.' Instead it was, 'You were our guests; we're here to make sure you have a great time,"' said Romney, who described the Olympics as one of the great experiences in his life. "Any city who gets the chance (to host the Games) should be ecstatic."

The Associated Press

Romney For President Launches New Radio Ad, "Ann On Family"

Boston, MA – Romney for President today launched its newest radio ad, "Ann On Family." In this ad, Ann Romney talks about her devotion to her family and what it was like raising five sons. Governor Romney and Mrs. Romney strongly believe that the most important work being done in America today is the work being done within the four walls of the American home.

The ad will begin airing today in Iowa and New Hampshire. Script and audio link are below.

Script For "Ann On Family" (Radio:60):

ANN ROMNEY: "The most common question I get is 'How did you guys meet?' It's always so fun to tell that story."

ANNOUNCER: "Ann Romney talks about her husband Mitt Romney."

ANN ROMNEY: "We met in high school at a party, and we've been going steady ever since.

"We've been married 38 years. We have five sons, lovely sons, and ten grandchildren.

"I was always looking for that girl. I had to wait until my first granddaughter. Finally, I get to buy pink!

"Mitt says his greatest success is being able to say 'I've been a good father, and a good husband.'

"Sometimes, I'd be home with those five boys, and it was rough. They were, they were pretty crazy boys. And they were wild.

"He'd call home and remind me that what I was doing was much more important than what he was doing.

"Mitt says there's no work more important than what goes on within the four walls of the American home. And that's the way it was in our home.

"I'm Ann Romney, and if you see us on the campaign trail, please come up and say hello. Or, you can get on the website at MittRomney.com."

GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: "I'm Mitt Romney and I approve this message."

ANNOUNCER: "Paid for by Romney for President. MittRomney.com."

To listen to "Ann On Family," please see: www.mittromney.com/Audio/AnnOnFamily.MP3

Trevor Whiting

Trevor Whiting has sent me an e-mail giving his reason " Why I Support Mitt Romney for President". He says:

My support for Mitt Romney is this!

• He is a problem-solver (Every thing he touches turns to gold)
• He has a good track record of "making things happen"
• Knows how to gain favor of those that may have opposite views
• strong emotional backround
• strongest sense of leadership
• accomplishments and achievements exceed other candidates
• He will help lower our taxes
• whether you like it or not the fact that he has only been married once says alot about character....and also commitment

What do you think about this list? What are your reasons?

~ Mike

The Romney Agenda: July 10, 2007

Governor Romney On The Democrats And The Economy
Governor Romney: "Succeed or fail, America would be the land of opportunity. So when Republicans talk about change, we're talking about opportunity and freedom. We're talking about people, not government. Now Democrats look beyond our heritage to the Europe of the past when they talk about change. They're thinking about big government, big welfare, big taxes, big brother. But those are the very policies that led Europe to their decline. In short, it's a big mistake. Look at how the Democrats like Hillary Clinton think about our economy. She said the other day some very interesting things, you probably saw them. She said that it is 'time to reject the idea of an "on your own" society and replace it with shared responsibility.' She says she prefers a 'we're all in it together society.' I see, out with Adam Smith, in with Karl Marx!" (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks At The 2007 Young Republican National Convention, Hollywood, FL, 7/7/07)

Click To Watch Governor Romney Here.

Governor Romney: The American People Are The Source Of Our Strength

Governor Romney: "Conservatism, Republicanism, it's a philosophy of strength. We believe in a strong military. We believe in a strong economy. We believe in strong families and values. We believe in the American people. ... The American people, of course, are the source of our strength – hard working, educated, risk taking, opportunity loving, God fearing American people. People who are willing to sacrifice for their families. People who will give of themselves for freedom, who love America. They've always been the source of our strength and they always will be!" (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks At The 2007 Young Republican National Convention, Hollywood, FL, 7/7/07)

Click To Watch Governor Romney Here. Governor Romney: We Must Continue To Wage War On The Terrorists

Governor Romney Says America Must Work On All Fronts To Defeat The Jihadists. "In places like Pakistan, America needs to work not just on a military front, he said. Romney proposed putting together a 'Special Partnership Force', a team of CIA agents and Army special forces to work with the local populations. 'Not just to provide guns but to help make sure that they have the rule of law, water projects, bridges built.'" (Susan Spencer-Wendel, "Romney Says Working With Moderate Muslim States Will Help In Mideast," Palm Beach Post, 7/7/07)

Click To Read The Full Article Here.

Governor Romney "Top Choice" Among Voters Identifying Terrorism As An Extremely Important Issue To Them. "Forty percent of likely Republican caucusgoers identified terrorism as extremely important in the Register's May Iowa Poll. No other issue ranked more important to Republicans. Romney was the top choice in the poll, receiving support from 30 percent of likely GOP caucusgoers, followed by McCain with 18 percent and Giuliani with 17 percent." (Thomas Beaumont, "Perception Is The Key In Dealing With Terror," The Des Moines Register, 7/8/07)

Click To Read The Full Article Here.

Governor Romney: "Senator Edwards says there isn't a War on Terror – it's only a slogan. You tell that to the people of London and Glasgow. And to the people in Bali and Malaysia, Pakistan and Lebanon, the people in Tanzania and Kenya, Saudi Arabia and Israel. Tell that to the people in New York and Boston and Washington, D.C. One thing you can count on if I'm President or any Republican is President, and that is if there's a war being waged by the terrorists, there will be war being waged on the terrorists." (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks At The 2007 Young Republican National Convention, Hollywood, FL, 7/7/07)

Click To Watch Governor Romney Here.

Seacoast Women Named To Leadership Team

By: Chris Outcalt

Portsmouth Herald

Monday, Jul 09, 2007

"Ask a Mitt Romney supporter what it is about him they like the most, and chances are you won't hear a lot about the war in Iraq or his energy policy.

"It's not that they don't care about those issues, but they aren't the first things that come to their minds.

"'I like his straightforwardness,' said Hampton resident Cindy Blodgett, who was recently named to the former Massachusetts governor's New Hampshire women's leadership team. 'You can just stand there and talk to him.'"

...

"'His whole family is very strong,' Blodgett said. 'I think they all stand on principles, and I think we need that.'

"This past week, Romney announced that 109 women representing all 10 counties in New Hampshire would be part of his leadership team."

...

"Portsmouth resident Evelyn Marconi, who runs Geno's Chowder & Sandwich Shop, is also a member of the group.

"'He's a tremendous family man,' Marconi said. 'He stands out to be so totally honest.'"...

View Entire Article

Governor Mitt Romney's Remarks At The Young Republican National Convention

Boston, MA - Today, Governor Mitt Romney will deliver remarks at the 2007 Young Republican National Convention in Hollywood, Florida. Governor Romney will speak about his vision of meeting a new generation of challenges and strengthening America by strengthening the American people. Below is the full text of Governor Romney's remarks as prepared for delivery.

Governor Romney's Remarks To The 2007 Young Republican National Convention (As Prepared For Delivery):

"We've just come from celebrating the 4th of July. For me, it was parades in Iowa and fireworks in Idaho. You know, the kind of celebrating the Democrats usually reserve for April 15th.

"But this week, we were celebrating our nation's birthday. July 4, 1776 was an inflection point in history - a moment that set a new course for America.

"Today, we face what is sure to be another inflection point in American history. A new generation of challenges, unprecedented challenges, means that we must change our present course. Domestically, our addiction to spending and borrowing is breaching crisis proportion. Competitively, our citizens choose to buy hundreds of billions more from foreign nations than they buy from us. And militarily, we face an entirely new type of threat - violent Jihad whose sponsors seek nuclear weapons.

"To confront unprecedented challenges, we must change. Both parties claim to be the party of change, and I think both are right. But there's a big difference in the direction their change would take us.

"Republicans look to our American heritage. The 4th of July marked our independence from England. But there was more to it than that. The Founding Fathers established a nation where the people were sovereign, not the state, not the king. We would not rely on the divine right of kings, or their whimsical beneficence. We would rely on ourselves. Succeed or fail, America would be the land of opportunity. So when Republicans talk of change, we are talking about opportunity and freedom. We are talking about people, not government.

"Democrats look beyond our heritage - they look to the Europe of the past. When Democrats talk of change, they are thinking about big government, big welfare, big taxes and big brother. But those are the very policies that led to Europe's decline. In short, big mistake.

"Look at how Democrats like Senator Clinton think about the economy. She said that it is 'time to reject the idea of an "on your own" society and replace it with shared responsibility.' She says she prefers a 'we're all in it together society.' I see, out with Adam Smith and in with Karl Marx!

"Don't Democrats see that individual initiative is at the heart of America's unprecedented march to world economic leadership? Adam Smith wasn't heartless. Adam Smith saw that individual initiative would produce the greatest wealth for the entire society.

"Can't Democrats see that since the 1970's while Europe's growth stagnated, America created 57 million new jobs? Look at unemployment, look at growth - America won, Europe lost. That's why Europeans are beginning to elect conservatives. Come to think of it, with her economic plan, Hillary Clinton couldn't be elected president of France!

"Senator Clinton's economic plan goes beyond utopian visions of collective good. She also has a special program for corporate taxes: she wants to raise them. It's time, she says, to require corporations 'to pay their fair share.'

"The last time I checked, American corporations were subject to the second highest tax rates in the industrialized world, just a smidgen below Japan. In our new 'flat' world economy, many corporations can move their headquarters and their operations almost at will. Just look at the economic boom produced by Ireland's move to lower corporate taxes.

"Let's not raise taxes on the employers who create jobs and national wealth, let's lower them!

"Corporate taxes aren't the end of it. Democrats have their sights on 2011 for a record-breaking personal income tax hike. And whenever you take money away from citizens, and give their money to government, you slow down the economy.

"When Democrats talk about change, they're referring to what you'd have left in your pockets.

"I have a different answer. Let's make the Bush tax cuts permanent. Let's kill the Death Tax. And let's have a new tax rate for middle income Americans who want to save their money, who are investing in America. The tax rate on their interest, dividends and capital gains should be...exactly zero!

"Our fiscal problem is not that we are taxing too little; it is that Washington is spending too much.

"Shame on both parties in Congress for all the earmarks, the waste, the duplication, and the failure to reform entitlements. I am proud to be the first presidential candidate to have signed Grover Norquist's tax pledge. But I have made another pledge as well. If I am elected President, I will cap non-defense discretionary spending at inflation minus one percent. That alone will save $300 billion over ten years. If Congress sends me appropriations that exceed that cap, I will veto them. I don't care if it's a Republican or a Democratic Congress. I will veto.

"And I know how to veto. I like vetoes. I vetoed hundreds of spending appropriations as Governor. And by the way, if Congress doesn't want to do the cutting itself, then give me the line-item veto.

"Of course, I will do more than veto. I will personally lead a top-to-bottom review of government programs, agencies, procurement and spending. It's time to cut out the mountains of waste and inefficiency and duplication from the federal government. Only in Washington would someone think that 342 different economic development programs make sense.

"Cutting waste, streamlining, benchmarking - this is what I do. I have done it in business, I've done it in the Olympics, and I've done it in state government. I simply can't wait to get my hands on Washington!

"Funny thing, Democrats talk about raising taxes on people. We talk about cutting spending by government. For them, it's always government first, people last. Here's an inconvenient truth Al Gore won't tell you about – one thing you can count on if America elects a Democratic president is higher taxes.

"Time and again when Hillary and the Democrats see a problem, they think government first. There are 45 million people who don't have health insurance. That's not good for those people, and it's not good for everyone else either. When people who don't have insurance get sick, they go to the hospital and get free care. Free for them, that is, but expensive for you because you are the ones that pay their bills, either in your taxes or in your insurance premiums.

"The Democrats' solution? Government-managed universal healthcare. But the last thing America needs is socialized medicine - Hillary-care!

"At least Barack Obama had the courage to admit that his plan means higher taxes. It's just like P.J. O'Rourke said: 'If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it's free!'

"The right answer for healthcare isn't government, and the new Secretary of Health and Human Services should not be Michael Moore.

"Let's provide people with their own private, affordable and portable insurance by insisting on personal responsibility and the principles of the free market. Let's not have the same bureaucracy that ran the Katrina clean-up manage our healthcare!

"The Democrats have a plan for illegal immigration as well. It's amnesty. Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and their colleagues insist that every illegal immigrant become a legal permanent resident of this country. Some people think that their position has less to do with compassion than with calculation - they hope these illegal immigrants will vote them in power forever.

"But this is not about power or politics. It is about sovereignty and security. And it is about fairness. Millions of applicants are waiting to come here legally, to be joined with family members, to bring education and skill that will strengthen our nation, not burden it. Legal immigration is a boon to our nation. We are made a greater nation when immigrants come here legally, seeking opportunity.

"Let's secure the border, install an employment verification system and tell illegal immigrants to get in line with everyone else. There should be no special pathway to permanent residency or citizenship for those who have come here illegally!

"Amnesty didn't work before and it won't work now!

"Beyond our domestic challenges, we face a very different world around us. Asia is emerging from generations of poverty. It's becoming a far more effective competitor in the marketplace than we have ever faced before. In the past, we've competed primarily with Europe. We know how to compete with Europeans - they are a lot like us. They like short work weeks and long vacations. But China and India are very different. Their workforce is almost never-ending; and it is very hard-working. Americans are buying hundreds of billions of dollars more from them than they do from us.

"The Democrats see this challenge and shrink from it. They don't think the American people can compete. They want to pull up the drawbridge to protect us. They're so pessimistic about Americans that they have been trying to scuttle free trade agreements with nations in Latin America and Central America. Are they kidding? We can't compete with Colombia?

"Our only choice is to compete.

"Fail to compete and you end up with a Soviet-style economy - laughable products, anemic standards of living and economic collapse. The answer for America is not to retreat, it is to lower the ramps and charge into the emerging Asian marketplace.

"Invest in our people. Invest in technology. Democrats fear the strength of others, Republicans believe in the strength of Americans!

"The new generation of challenges we face today includes challenges to our national security as well. Violent Jihadists are intent on replacing moderate Muslim governments with a Caliphate or Imam. And they seek the collapse of our economy, our government, and our military.

"During this last week, they sought to maim and kill innocent civilians in London and Glasgow. These were not impoverished malcontents; they were doctors serving in Britain's public health system. They were Jihadists. Theirs is a face of evil not seen in the civilized world since the gas chambers of Hitler's horror.

"I know that it is popular today to be critical of the President. And he is not above making mistakes. But we should thank him for doing everything in his power to keep us safe. Against the objections of Democrats and even some in our own party, he pushed though the Patriot Act. He made sure that someone was listening in when Al Qaeda was calling. He made sure we were interrogating terrorists to learn how we could prevent attacks on our citizens.

"When Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, was captured, he said, 'See you with my lawyer in New York.' Nope, that's not at all what he saw: he saw the CIA and our GI's at Guantanamo!

"All this talk of Jihadists, Salafi Muslims, and the War on Terror makes Democrats like John Edwards uncomfortable. Senator Edwards says there isn't a War on Terror - it's only a slogan. Tell that to the people in London and Glasgow. And to the people in Bali and Malaysia, Pakistan and Lebanon, Tanzania and Kenya, Saudi Arabia and Israel. Tell that to the people of New York and Boston and Washington, D.C.

"One thing you can count on if I am President, if there is a war being waged by the terrorists, there will be war waged on the terrorists. And we will win!

"This convergence of challenges is why I am convinced that America is at an inflection point in our history. Our over-spending, our dependence on foreign oil, the emergence of Asia, the Jihadist threat to world civilization – these challenges will force us to change. And that change will either make us stronger or it will make us weaker.

"America will either remain the world's superpower or instead become just another member of the family of nations. If we choose strength, we will be remembered by our children as a great generation. If we choose weakness, we will be remembered as something much less.

"Conservatism, Republicanism, is a philosophy of strength. We believe in a strong military, a strong economy, and in strong families and values. We believe in the American people.

"Democrats believe that government is the source of our strength. They're wrong. I love what Ronald Reagan said: 'It's not that liberals are ignorant, it's just that what they know is wrong!'

"The American people are the source of our strength - hard working, educated, risk taking, opportunity loving, God fearing, willing to sacrifice for their family and their country, freedom loving American people. They have always been the source of our strength and they always will be!

"And when you need to call on the strength of America, you don't strengthen government, you strengthen the American people.

"You strengthen the American people by letting them keep more of their own money, not by taxing them more when they earn, taxing them when they save and taxing them when they die!

"You strengthen the American people by making sure that the voice of millions of voters trumps the voice of a handful of unelected judges.

"You strengthen the American people with the world's best healthcare, the world's best schools, and the world's strongest families. We must preserve the institution of marriage - every child deserves a mother and a father!

"This is not a time for our party to shrink from conservative principles. It is a time to hold them aloft.

"We didn't suffer losses last year because we were conservative. We suffered losses because we strayed from conservative principles. Too much spending, too little ethics and a war that everyone recognizes was not effectively managed.

"The way forward is not to look left. The way forward is to look ahead. There is too much at stake to do otherwise.

"Shimon Peres, the President-elect of Israel, visited Boston not too long ago. He was asked what he thought about the conflict in Iraq.

"'First,' he said, 'I must put that in context. America is unique. In the history of the world, whenever there's been war, the nation that wins takes land from the nation that loses. That is because land has been the source of value in the world. One nation in history, and this during the last century, laid down hundreds of thousands of lives and took no land. No land from the Germans, no land from the Japanese.'

"The only land America takes is enough land to bury her dead.

"America fights for freedom - for itself and for freedom-loving people around the world.

"This is the America our parents chose, a nation that is good, a nation that is strong. And now it is time for us to choose what America will be. I know what I choose. I know what you choose. We choose a strong America that will always be the land of the free, the home of the brave and the hope of the world."

On The Road In Springfield, Illinois

July 03, 2007 12:31pm

On The Road In Springfield, Illinois

I recently had the opportunity to go to Springfield, Illinois to speak to the National Federation of Republican Women's regional conference. Afterwards I visited Abraham Lincoln's old neighborhood which had been restored to its original condition. It was inspiring to visit a place which represents such a pivotal time in American history and the leader who showed such incredible courage during that period.

Senator Rutherford was an incredible host for my two days on the state. Here's a picture of us at the Pasfield House just behind the State Capital.

Posted at 2007-07-03 12:31:39 by Josh Romney

DEL.ICIO.US FACEBOOK

Comments

Thanks Matt, Three generations united with love. A good example is worth 10 thousand words. The spirit of the American Dream, shaped within the four walls of wholesome united families and homes, is where love and respect for neighbours of every nation, people, tongue and creed lives, and where the hope and faith for a better world is born. Families like yours are where love lives in your heart for all nations under the azure skies, and your children will bear the banners of peace, on earth of good-will to all people. --Phill

Posted by dimensio@rogers.com at 2007-07-05 16:39:34

Hey Bros, where is the ASK MITT schedule? Why isn't it available? If they are "meet the public" events, can't they be publicly posted? HAPPY FOURTH GUYS

Posted by MZollinger at 2007-07-05 05:29:19

The easiest way to reach voters across the aisle and not get bogged down in the media crossfire is to relate quotes from our nation's historically favorite past presidents to today's issues. I am very surprised that more politicians don't tap more often into this source of inspiration. It without fail inspires Democrats, Republicans, and Independents, because these great leaders of the past of universally seen as everyone's president.

Posted by nowandlater at 2007-07-05 05:29:44

Hey Josh, nice picture of you and Honest Abe. Coincidentally, my family will be visiting Springfield this summer too, shortly after we drive through IOWA. Are you ever going to post your schedule? We just HAVE to get a family photo in front of the Mitt Mobile! Happy 4th of July to the Romney family and to all of Mitt's supporters! Be sure to catch "A Capitol Fourth" on your PBS station. Our family was there last year in person, and it was awesome but also very hot and muggy! We'll be watching it on the couch with the A/C blowing this year!

Posted by Karla in AZ at 2007-07-04 13:24:02

The Romney Vision: A Stronger America Through Strengthening The American People

Saturday, Jul 07, 2007

THE ROMNEY VISION: A STRONG PEOPLE MEANS A STRONGER AMERICA

Gov. Romney Shared His Vision Of A Stronger America With Young Republicans. GOV. MITT ROMNEY: "Conservatism, Republicanism, is a philosophy of strength. We believe in a strong military, a strong economy, and in strong families and values. We believe in the American people. ... And when you need to call on the strength of America, you don't strengthen government, you strengthen the American people. You strengthen the American people by letting them keep more of their own money, not by taxing them more when they earn, taxing them when they save and taxing them when they die! You strengthen the American people by making sure that the voice of millions of voters trumps the voice of a handful of unelected judges. You strengthen the American people with the world's best healthcare, the world's best schools, and the world's strongest families. We must preserve the institution of marriage – every child deserves a mother and a father!" (Gov. Mitt Romney, Remarks At The Young Republican National Convention, Hollywood, FL, 7/7/07)

Gov. Romney Has A Record Of Supporting Lower Taxes:

Gov. Romney: "Raising Taxes Hurts Working People. It Stifles Innovation." "Now, some states have chosen to raise taxes under the weight of economic stress. We did not, as a state, at least not since I've been in office. Raising taxes is the opposite of giving people the freedom they need to make their own life choices. Raising taxes hurts working people. It stifles innovation. It makes a state and a nation less competitive, not more competitive." (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks At The National Press Club, Washington, DC, 7/14/04)

Gov. Romney Fought For Tax Cuts:

- INCOME TAX CUT: Gov. Romney Fought To Cut The Income Tax Rate In Massachusetts From 5.3% To 5%. (Scott Greenberger, "Tax Revenue Slowdown In Forecast," The Boston Globe, 12/13/05)
- CAPITAL GAINS TAXES: Gov. Romney Turned The Legislature's $250 Million Retroactive Capital Gains Tax Increase Into A $250 Million Tax Refund. (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks At The Conservative Political Action Conference, Washington, D.C., 3/2/07)
- INVESTMENT TAX CREDIT: In November 2003, Gov. Romney Signed An Economic Stimulus Package Making The Investment Tax Credit (ITC) Permanent. (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, "Romney Signs Economic Stimulus, Supplemental Budget Bills," Press Release, 11/26/03)
- PROPERTY TAX RELIEF: Gov. Romney Proposed And Signed Legislation Providing Property Tax Relief To Senior Citizens, Enabling Them To Keep Their Homes. (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, "Romney Signs Bill To Give Seniors Tax Relief," Press Release, 11/20/05)
- SALES TAX HOLIDAYS: Gov. Romney Signed Several Sales Tax Holidays. (Michael Levenson, "Governor Drums Up Business For State's Tax-Free Weekend," The Boston Globe 8/12/05)

Massachusetts Citizens For Limited Taxation Executive Director Barbara Anderson: "There was no one else out on the horizon and with the legislature almost entirely Democratic, we felt it was necessary to have a grown-up in the corner office. ... And we were right to back him. He's been a really good friend to the taxpayers." (Shawn Macomber, "Mighty Mitt Romney," The American Spectator, 3/06)

As President, Gov. Romney Will Fight For Lower Taxes:

Gov. Romney: "You Don't Create Economic Prosperity By Raising Taxes." (John J. Miller, "Matinee Mitt," National Review, 6/20/05)

Gov. Romney Was The First Potential 2008 Presidential Candidate To Sign The "Taxpayer Protection Pledge" Promising To Oppose Any Effort To Increase Taxes. "Demonstrating his commitment to oppose any effort to increase taxes on the American people, Governor Romney has signed Americans For Tax Reform's 'Taxpayer Protection Pledge.' As part of his pledge, Governor Romney will 'oppose any and all efforts to increase the marginal income tax rates' and 'oppose any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits.'" (Romney For President Exploratory Committee, "Governor Mitt Romney Signs 'Taxpayer Protection Pledge'," Press Release, 1/4/07)

Gov. Romney: "It's Absolutely Critical That We Don't Have That Massive Tax Hike And Instead We Make The Bush Tax Cuts Permanent." (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks At The Detroit Economic Club, Detroit, MI, 2/7/07)

Gov. Romney Proposes Lowering Tax Rates For All Americans. GOV. ROMNEY: "We should ... promote fairness and simplicity by ending special interest loopholes and lowering tax rates for all Americans." (Romney For President, "Governor Romney's Remarks At The Club For Growth," Press Release, 3/29/07)

Gov. Romney Has A Record Of Market-Based Healthcare Reform:

Gov. Romney: "No New Taxes, No Employer Mandate And No Government Takeover." "Every uninsured citizen in Massachusetts will soon have affordable health insurance and the costs of health care will be reduced. And we will need no new taxes, no employer mandate and no government takeover to make this happen." (Gov. Mitt Romney, Op-Ed, "Health Care For Everyone?" The Wall Street Journal, 4/11/06)

- Gov. Romney: "[M]y plan calls for a personal responsibility principle: Everyone must either become insured or maintain adequate savings to cover their medical expenses." (Gov. Mitt Romney, Op-Ed, "Health-Care Reform Gets A Fair Shake," Boston Herald, 6/21/05)

The Heritage Foundation: "In reality, those who want to create a consumer-based health system and deregulate health insurance should view Romney's plan as one of the most promising strategies out there." (Edmund F. Haislmaier, "Mitt's Fit," The Heritage Foundation, www.heritage.org, 1/28/07)

As President, Gov. Romney Will Encourage States To Reform Healthcare Without Raising Taxes Or Empowering Big Government:

Gov. Romney: "I Do Not Believe That Putting The Government In Charge Of Health Care For All Our Citizens Is The Way To Go." (Dolly A Butz, "Romney Calls For Isolation Of Iran," Sioux City Journal, 2/19/07)

Gov. Romney Supports Having States Experiment With Their Own Plans, Not A "'One-Size-Fits-All" National Plan. "If elected, Romney said he would not propose a 'one-size-fits-all' national health-care plan, but would encourage the federal government to provide flexibility to let states carry out their own plans. 'Some states will probably do it better,' said Romney, adding that more than 20 states are considering plans similar to the Massachusetts experiment." (Ryan J. Halliday, "Romney Defends His Health-Care Plan," The [Nashua, NH] Telegraph, 6/7/07)

THE DEMOCRATS: BIGGER GOVERNMENT

Democrats Want More Of Your Tax Dollars:

Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) Wants To Eliminate The Bush Tax Cuts. "Joining other Democratic women senators at an event for Sen. Barbara Boxer, who's seeking re-election, Hillary Clinton told hundreds of party faithful to expect to lose some of the tax cuts passed under President George W. Bush if Democrats take control in Washington next year." (Beth Fouhy, "San Francisco Rolls Out Red Carpet For The Clintons," The Associated Press, 6/28/04)

Sen. Clinton: "Shared Responsibility For Shared Prosperity." SEN. HILLARY CLINTON: "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few and for the few, time to reject the idea of an 'on your own' society and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity. I prefer a 'we're all in it together' society." (Manchester School Of Technology, Manchester, NH, 5/29/07)

- Sen. Clinton: "We're Going To Take Things Away From You On Behalf Of The Common Good." (Beth Fouhy, "San Francisco Rolls Out Red Carpet For The Clintons," The Associated Press, 6/28/04)

Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) Wants To "Roll Back" The Bush Tax Cuts. SEN BARACK OBAMA: "I would roll back the Bush cuts for those making over 250,000." (CNBC's "Kudlow & Company," 6/4/07)

Former Sen. John Edwards (D-NC) Wants To End The Bush Tax Cuts. SEN. JOHN EDWARDS: "I would pay for it by getting rid of Bush's tax cuts for people who make over $200,000 a year." (CNN's "Anderson Cooper 360," 6/6/07)

In May 2007, Congressional Democrats Proposed A Budget That Raised Taxes And Boosted Spending. "Congressional Democrats yesterday proposed a $2.9 trillion budget plan that seeks to boost spending by $23 billion over the president's request, setting up a confrontation with the White House over funding for education, health care and veterans' services. ... The five-year budget plan ... assumes, for now, that taxes on dividends, stock sales and the income of the wealthiest families would go up in 2011." (Lori Montgomery, "Democrats Make Budget Proposal," The Washington Post, 5/17/07)

Sen. Clinton Would Raise Corporate Taxes, Too. SEN. HILLARY CLINTON: "Let's start holding corporate America responsible, make them pay their fair share again." (Sen. Hillary Clinton, Remarks At Campaign For America's Future Take Back America Conference, Washington, DC, 5/29/07)

Democrats Want Government-Run Healthcare:

Sen. Clinton, On Paying For Her Big Government Health Plan: "That's Going To Mean Taking Money Away From People Who Make Out Really Well Right Now." "On Saturday, she said that the failure of her proposal for universal coverage in 1994 made her more determined to achieve the goal now. 'It also makes me understand what we are up against,' Mrs. Clinton said. 'We have to modernize and reform the way we deliver health care. But we have to change the way we finance it. That's going to mean taking money away from people who make out really well right now.'" (Robert Pear, "Candidates Outline Ideas For Universal Health Care," The New York Times, 3/25/07)

Sen. Obama Would Pay For His Government-Run Health Plan By Rolling Back Tax Cuts. "Obama said his plan could save the average consumer $2,500 a year and bring health care to all. Campaign aides estimated the cost of the program at $50 billion to $65 billion a year, financed largely by eliminating tax cuts that are scheduled to expire." ("Obama Unveils Universal Health Care Plan," The Associated Press, 5/29/07)

Sen. Edwards "Would Raise Taxes" To Pay For His Health Plan. "Seven Democratic candidates for president promised Saturday to guarantee health insurance for all, but they disagreed over how to pay for it and how fast it could be achieved. ... John Edwards, the former senator from North Carolina, offered the most detailed plan for universal coverage, saying he would raise taxes to help pay the cost, which he estimated at $90 billion to $120 billion a year." (Robert Pear, "Candidates Outline Ideas For Universal Health Care," The New York Times, 3/25/07)

Gov. Bill Richardson (D-NM) Would Redirect Money From The War On Terror To Pay For His Health Proposal. "Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico offered a potpourri of ideas to achieve universal coverage, including tax credits to help people buy insurance and an option to let people ages 55 to 64 buy coverage through Medicare. To help pay for his proposals, Mr. Richardson said, he would 'get out of Iraq' and redirect money from the military to health care." (Robert Pear, "Candidates Outline Ideas For Universal Health Care," The New York Times, 3/25/07)

THE DOUBLE STANDARDS ARE SIMPLY STAGGERING

Friday, July 06, 2007

THE DOUBLE STANDARDS ARE SIMPLY STAGGERING

I'm going to vent for a moment. Please forgive me.

Over the last couple of days I've been reading with interest Beliefnet's "Blogalogue" between Al Mohler and Orson Scott Card about whether Mormons are Christians. While the debate is fascinating on its own terms, it is -- as both participants acknowledge -- taking place only because of the presidential race and only because Mitt Romney has a serious chance to become President of the United States.

So I'm curious, when is Beliefnet going to schedule the debate between Al Mohler and any given pastor or priest in the Presbyterian Church USA, Episcopal Church, a lapsed Catholic, or some "I never darken the door of any church but I consider myself a really spiritual guy" theologian over whether their respective watered-down, unbiblical, faiths (complete with wholesale justifications of immoral and repulsive acts like adultery and abortion) are "Christian."

I respect the heck out of Al Mohler. He's one of the really great and insightful thinkers of the modern evangelical movement, but I just flat-out don't buy the following concern he expresses about Mitt Romney:

I am concerned that a Mormon in the White House would do much to serve the worldwide missionary cause of Mormonism. I do not worry that a President Romney would push that agenda from the White House. My concern is more about symbolism and perception.

Let me ask this (and it's a rhetorical question because the answer is obvious): What is a greater threat to orthodox Christianity? Mormon missionaries or our own theological and moral collapse? As we evangelicals circle our wagons around theology when it comes to the Mormon in the race, perhaps we need to understand that one of the great appeals of the Mormon religion is the fact that these guys tend to live what they believe. A bad Baptist is infinitely more damaging to evangelical Christianity than a good Mormon.

So we approach the Mitt Romney candidacy and worry about the "symbolism" of his election. But I'll tell you the symbolism that worries me more, and that is the symbolism of the evangelical movement embracing the lapsed, watered-down "Chrsitianity" of the other Republicans rather than vote for (eww!) that "Mormon guy."

Is it the case that "thinking" evangelicals should embrace candidates with multiple marriages, overlook adultery, and not worry about theological niceties so long as someone is at least in the pew next to us and mouthing the Nicene Creed (or used to sit in the pew next to us and used say the creed)? But at the same time it's just too much to vote for a Mormon who loves Jesus, loves his wife, has raised five great sons who love Jesus and love their wives, and shares every relevant moral and political value with us -- because, well, it's just symbolically a bad message?

We should never forget that debates like Beliefnet's "Blogalogue" take place in the real world and that tearing down the Mormon candidate invariably helps someone else. And that someone else is not Mike Huckabee. In 2007 and 2008, that someone else will be a person who does not share our moral and political values.

I'm sorry, but that makes no sense at all.

Posted by David French on July 6, 2007 10:36 AM | Permalink

Governor Mitt Romney On Venezuela's Independence Day

Boston, MA – Governor Mitt Romney issued the following statement today regarding Venezuela's Independence Day:

"On the 196th anniversary of Venezuela's independence, we honor the contributions of the thousands of Venezuelan-Americans who have enriched our nation with their talents and energy.

"These are troubling times in Venezuela, as Hugo Chavez continues his methodical assault on democratic institutions and his people's freedom. I am particularly troubled by the government's hostility towards a free press and recent actions to take Radio Caracas Television off the air. There should be no doubt that the United States stands with those men and women of good will who step up to secure their God-given liberty – in Venezuela and throughout the Americas. The future of freedom and democracy in our Hemisphere also requires the friends of freedom in Latin America to speak clearly and forcefully to defend liberty, democracy and human rights."

To listen to Governor Romney's statement, visit: http://www.mittromney.com/Audio/conf470620-58243.wav

Romney's Data Cruncher

By: Chris Cillizza

The Washington Post

Thursday, Jul 05, 2007

"In late 2002, Alex Gage sold his share of a well-established polling firm and set about convincing Karl Rove that he had the answer to ensuring President Bush's reelection.

"His pitch was simple: Take corporate America's love affair with learning everything it can about its customers, and its obsession with carving up the country into smaller and smaller clusters of like-minded consumers, and turn those trends into a political strategy. The Bush majority would be made up of thousands of groups of like-minded voters whom the campaign could reach with precisely the right message on the issues they considered most important.

"At first, Rove and campaign manager Ken Mehlman had doubts about the potential of microtargeting, according to Bush pollster Matthew Dowd."

...

"[But] it wasn't long before this new, more sophisticated form of data mining became part of the mythology surrounding Rove and his role as 'the architect' of Bush's reelection. Its use in Ohio, in particular, was credited with unearthing Bush supporters and delivering the state and the election to him.

"Now Gage is working for another Republican presidential candidate entranced by the possibilities of microtargeting – Mitt Romney. A Harvard Business School graduate who went on to head Bain Capital, Romney has made a point of adapting modern business techniques to politics, and it was in his successful 2002 campaign to be governor of Massachusetts that Gage's methods were first tried.

"'The governor believes in accountability, benchmarks and metrics,' said Beth Myers, Romney's campaign manager, explaining his interest in microtargeting. 'He believes in using data when it comes to making decisions.'"

...

"The more information he has, the better he can group people into 'target clusters' with names such as 'Flag and Family Republicans' or 'Tax and Terrorism Moderates.' Once a person is defined, finding the right message from the campaign becomes fairly simple.

"'Flag and Family Republicans' might receive literature on a flag-burning amendment from its sponsor, while 'Tax and Terrorism Moderates' get an automated call from [former New York mayor] Rudy Giuliani talking about the war on terror, even if they lived right next door to one another,' Alex Lundry, the senior research director of TargetPoint -- the firm Gage founded in 2003 -- wrote recently in Winning Campaigns magazine."

...

"And in a presidential primary, in which voters are far more homogenous than in a general election, can microtargeting find meaningful distinctions between groups? Gage and Romney are convinced that it can."

...

"Gage said that when he pitched microtargeting to the Harvard MBAs advising Romney in his gubernatorial campaign, they were stunned that the idea had never been used in politics. 'You guys don't do this already?' they asked, according to Gage."

...

"Michael Murphy, then Romney's campaign strategist, became intrigued by the high number of independent voters in Massachusetts, seeing them as the key to winning in a Democratic stronghold. He sought out Gage for help.

"'I wanted to break the independent-voter file into target segments and Alex's approach was the best way to do it, so I reached out to Alex and we, along with Tagg Romney and Alex Dunn of the Romney staff, sort of invented microtargeting in that race,' Murphy said.

"What did they find?

"That a 32-year-old white Protestant woman with two children and a retired Roman Catholic male engineer – while both independents – were driven by often contradictory issues, Murphy said. 'Some independents are more base Republican – like, some are pure fiscal [voters], some are focused on education,' he added.

"All of this seems somewhat straightforward."

...

"But, he added, the key insight of political microtargeting is that, rather than simply determining whether married men are more likely than unmarried women to support a candidate, a campaign can identify segments within larger demographic groups and tailor messages down to the household level – an extraordinary amount of precision that helps turn a guessing game into a series of targeted strikes."

...

"The first step in doing this is conducting a large survey of voters. By matching up their political views with detailed information about their consumer habits, a model is established that can be applied to the population as a whole.

"A campaign would then know which issues are important to an unmarried woman who subscribes to Outside magazine and is a frequent flier, and how they are different from issues important to an unmarried woman who has two grown children, uses corrective lenses and is an AARP member -- even if they are next-door neighbors."

...

"What [Gage] does is as much art as science, and he never stops tinkering with his models. 'Part of the challenge is to constantly attack what you're doing and try to do it better,' he said."

...

"Eighteen months ago, Gage made the trip up to Boston to meet with Myers. At a Beacon Hill restaurant, the two old friends chatted about Romney's potential as a presidential candidate and microtargeting's ability to help deliver him the GOP nomination.

"Over the next months, Gage and Myers talked from time to time about how microtargeting might best be used to make a difference in a presidential primary. One Saturday last fall, Myers, Gage and Will Feltus, a member of National Media Inc., the company that handles Romney's advertising, gathered for a final bull session.

"At issue was whether microtargeting could find meaningful – and measurable – differences in a primary electorate that was Republican to begin with and similar in its demographic and ideological traits. After hashing out the details on maps and graphs, Myers and the rest of the Romney team reached a decision. 'The question was whether you could differentiate between the eight kinds of chocolate,' she said. 'I became convinced that the power of microtargeting was enhanced by segregating a generally homogenous universe.'"

...

"Gage is ... humble about his role, calling himself a 'planner.' He said, 'I have always believed in Eisenhower's observation: "In preparing for battle, I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable."'"

View Entire Article

Fwd: Obama asks question, gets answer on Yahoo Answers (Yahoo is right!)

From Paul Ashley

What a phoney this Obama is.

 

Obama asks question, gets answer on Yahoo Answers  (Yahoo is right!)

 

My return question was:

 

If someone is running for the presidency of the most powerful and most democratic nation in history, why in the world does he have to ask such a question?  He should already know the answer.  He's asking this to make it appear as if he wants to include you and to appear to be "hip" because he's using the web.  What a crock.  Obama has hardly any experience and is an ambitious climber according to those who worked with him here in Illinois.

 

One other comment.  How can our children learn democratic principles and love their country when our schools don't teach American history and when they do, spend most of their time denigrating it?

Governor Romney On The Senate Immigration Bill:

Governor Romney: "The immigration bill failed because the politicians in Washington are out of touch with the American people. The voice of the people is loud and clear - secure the border, enforce the law and no special deal for permanent residency or citizenship for illegals. America will always welcome legal immigration, but as a nation we also insist on the rule of law." (Romney for President, "Governor Romney On Today's Senate Immigration Vote," Press Release, 6/28/07)

Governor Romney Would Veto Legislation Reviving The Fairness Doctrine:

Governor Romney: "Well, I'd veto it if it ever got to my desk. And I would fight against it vehemently. The effort to try to impose the Fairness Doctrine on radio stations is, if you will, censorship Democrat style. It basically says we're not going to let you keep talking about the things you want to talk about and the market wants to hear." ("Lars Larson Show," 6/28/07)

Governor Romney Welcomes Supreme Court Ruling On McCain-Feingold:

Governor Romney: "McCain-Feingold was a poorly-crafted bill. Today's decision restores, in part, to the American people a right critical to their freedom of political participation and expression." (Romney for President, "Governor Mitt Romney Welcomes The Supreme Court Campaign Finance Ruling," Press Release, 6/25/07)

Read The Full Statement Here.

Governor Romney's Global Initiative For Values And Freedom:

Governor Romney's Global Initiative For Values And Freedom:

Last Week, Governor Romney Outlined His Global Initiative For Values And Freedom. To defeat the global Jihadist threat, Governor Romney believes we must have a truly global strategy that combines our efforts with others, brings more tools of our national power to bear and implements specific, tailored strategies for every nation at risk. The Global Initiative for Values and Freedom is a comprehensive strategy to defeat radical Jihad, ensure American security and advance freedom and human rights across the globe.

Governor Romney Will Create The Special Partnership Force (SPF) To Mobilize All Elements Of Our National Power To Defeat Jihadists. To meet today's challenges, we must mobilize and integrate all elements of our national power in unstable areas where traditional civilian agencies cannot operate effectively and traditional military power alone cannot succeed. The Special Partnership Force will integrate all elements of national power under a new force with leadership drawn from a core group of our Army Special Forces trained to work with civilian governments and intelligence personnel.

The SPF Will Build On A Long History Of Successful Efforts Against Terrorists And Insurgent Groups. Although a new capability, this force draws on the lessons learned from a long history of successful efforts against terrorist and insurgent groups, including U.S. efforts under the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) in World War II, post-9/11 efforts in Afghanistan, and recent Special Forces efforts in the Philippines.

Seeking sanity on Planet Massachusetts

Kathleen Parker

http://www.NewsAndOpinion.com | There was a time not so long ago when a sane person could say, "Children need a mom and a dad," and the townspeople would yawn, roll their eyes and wonder why some folks insist on sharing such prosaic insights.

This might still be true in some parts of the world, but not in Massachusetts, where the water apparently is tainted with more than old tea, and where stating the obvious — as Gov. Mitt Romney recently did — will get you labeled a hate-mongering radical wing nut.

Actually, it's worse than that. For his support of the traditional, two-parent, heterosexual family, Romney has been accused of being like President George W. Bush. Now them's fightin' words, for sure.

In a damning editorial, the Boston Globe criticized Romney for taking "a page from President Bush's illogic by insisting that every child 'has a right to a mother and a father,' implying that two women or two men could not possibly do the job."

Actually, Romney's statement implies nothing of the sort. Two men and two women can raise children, just as one woman or one man can raise children. But neither case provides an ideal environment, which is Romney's point as well as the opinion of a majority of Americans.

Romney, who made his remarks during visits to Utah and South Carolina, doesn't get a free pass. Some of his remarks were, shall we say, not well considered. In one instance, the governor said that same-sex marriage is "a blow to the family." In another, he noted that some same-sex couples are "actually having children born to them."

As excerpted, that last statement sounds as though Romney were discussing some alien species that somehow managed to replicate human progeny. But within the larger context of the same-sex marriage debate, his meaning might be understood as something else. Not that gays have no right to families of their own, but that in principle, children's interests are best served by having both a mother and a father.

Most Americans agree with that statement — which is imminently reasonable and which surely is just as true for gay children as for straights. How many gays or lesbians, after all, would prefer to have had no mother, or no father, as the case may be?

For purposes of discussion, no abused children are allowed to respond. Clearly, we're talking about ideals and principles, not worst-case scenarios, as The Globe editorial does in one of its most fallacious arguments, posed as questions:

"Would Romney support dissolving that child's family?" the editorial asks, referring to the child of a same-sex family. "Would he prevent gay couples from adopting needy children — products of often abusive homes or dissolved heterosexual unions?"

Again, nothing Romney said suggests either that he would break up gay couples or try to prevent abused children from finding a safe home, even with a same-sex couple. Believing that children are best off with a mother and a father is a principle, not a strategy for hurting people who happen to be homosexual.

The Globe editorial also relies on the testimony of children to make a case for same-sex marriage. Doubtless these are lovely children who love their parents, but they ARE children. One, an 11-year-old boy whose parents are lesbians, spoke at a recent demonstration outside the governor's office, saying:

"My family is just an ordinary family, and I don't know why we can't live together and be happy."

Again, no one has said this child can't live with his two mothers or that he can't be happy. What traditional-family advocates believe is that an 11-year-old boy also would benefit from having a dad. By endorsing same-sex marriage, society effectively declares otherwise.

Obviously, he's better off without a dad who is also an abusive, pill-popping, philandering drunk. But once again, the worst dad possible should not be our standard for defining family policy.

Ultimately, there may be no resolution to these differences in perspective. No one can fault gays and lesbians for wanting spouses and children of their own. We all — hetero and homo — seem to be equally deranged on that score. But the essential question is not what adults want, but what is best for children.

In principle if not always in practice.

Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in Washington and in the media consider "must reading." Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.

JWR contributor Kathleen Parker can be reached by clicking here.

Kathleen Parker Archives

 

The Republicans' Mr. Fix-it

Mitt Romney standing on pier in front of his home on lake Winnipessaukee, NH.

Mitt Romney, a few minutes before appearing at a "Ask Mitt Anything Town Hall Meeting", in Muscatine, Iowa.

Mitt Romney is filthy rich, he's handsome, and he's the first honest-to-god businessman to have a real shot at the White House in 40 years.

By Marcia Vickers, Fortune senior writer

June 27 2007: 10:51 AM EDT

(Fortune Magazine) -- Willard Mitt Romney looks great in a suit. Which is good for him, because all day "Matinee Mitt" has been wearing a crisp, gray number. Speeches, grip-and-grin events, a veterans hall - no venue-appropriate costume changes, just pure Brooks Brothers. Even now, when it's 85 degrees and he's surrounded by people in shorts, the man won't so much as loosen his tie.

It's Memorial Day, we're standing around waiting for a photo shoot to begin in front of his summerhouse on New Hampshire's Lake Winnipesaukee, and he's refusing his handlers' pleas to at least take his jacket off. "This is going to be like Nixon on the beach," a campaign worker mutters, referring to a 1960s photo of the late former President strolling the sands of sunny San Clemente, looking as though he'd rather be negotiating with the Soviets.

You could interpret Romney's wardrobe as a sign of Nixonian stiffness. Or as a deliberate choice, which may be closer to the truth. Perhaps he wants to convey extreme focus and discipline. (He talks the way he looks, in perfectly controlled, press-release-ready platitudes. For example, when I ask what he'd do first as President, he answers, "I will do a complete assessment of where we are, where the problems are, what challenges we face. Every dimension of government I would take apart - look at how effective they are.")

He is, after all, the most serious major-party presidential candidate to come out of the business world since ... well, since his father, George Romney, onetime CEO of American Motors, who ran in 1968. Unlike fellow Republican George W. Bush, Romney, 60, can't be accused of being a political heir with some private-sectorish experience. He's the brilliant strategist-dealmaker who founded Bain Capital and built it into one of the largest private-equity firms in the world - and accumulated a personal fortune of around $400 million in the process. He's the turnaround artist who saved the 2002 Winter Olympics. And, as governor of Massachusetts, he's the policy innovator who pushed through some of the most promising health-care-reform legislation in a generation.

People who know him won't shut up about how smart and pragmatic and decisive he is. "Mitt never takes anything at face value," says Glenn Hubbard, dean of Columbia's business school and a Romney (and former Bush administration) economic advisor. "He's constantly questioning." Says Fraser Bullock, a former Bain partner who worked with Romney on the Olympics: "He's not an ideologue. He makes decisions based on researching data more deeply than anyone I know. As people get to know him better, they'll see an extremely competent, strong leader."

If the election were based on résumé bullet points, the guy would be a shoo-in. That's not how it works, of course. As we'll see, Romney has felt the need to downplay his career highlights. Some in his party worry that he's too pragmatic - that he's not ideological enough. And there's his Mormon faith, which, like it or not, probably hurts his chances.

But his business skills have come in handy. In recent polls he's the leading Republican candidate in both New Hampshire and Iowa, which is impressive, considering that he started out without the name recognition of John McCain or Rudy Giuliani. (Nationally he's lagging behind Giuliani, McCain, and Fred Thompson, the former Tennessee Senator.) More impressive still is his money-raising ability: He's raised more and has been spending it faster than his Republican opponents on ads and campaigning. His strategy, his national campaign director has said, is that "money talks, but early money screams" - legitimacy, that is.

The birth of Bain Capital

Romney was always a self-starter. "He has more energy than anyone I know," says Geoffrey Rehnert, who helped Romney start Bain Capital. He grew up steeped in business and politics. His father had parlayed his automobile industry success into a three-term governorship of Michigan; his mother, Lee, once ran for the Senate. After graduating as valedictorian from Brigham Young University, Romney headed off to Harvard, where he finished in the top 5% of his MBA class and simultaneously earned a law degree. Then he got a job at Bain & Co., where he worked as a management consultant beside Meg Whitman, now chief of eBay, and former Dell CEO Kevin Rollins.

Ultimately Romney grew frustrated because he couldn't implement the strategies he was recommending to clients. He was ready to leave Bain Consulting, the story goes, when Bill Bain offered him a chance to form a company in which he could put his management-consulting skills to work and share in any upside of the firm's stock performance. Bain Capital was born in 1984 with just $37 million to invest.

Romney's new firm set out to find companies that were under-performing their peers. His sales pitch was that Bain Capital wasn't just an investing firm - it also knew from managing. From the beginning, Bain charged its clients a 30% fee, compared with the 20% standard private-equity fee. "Bain figured out before anyone that they could apply their consulting expertise, not just financial engineering, to the companies they bought," says Steve Kaplan, a finance professor at the University of Chicago's business school. "It was very unusual when they first started. Most firms have now copied the Bain model."

For each potential investment, Romney and fellow Bainiacs would stage a "strategic audit," dissecting cash flow and market share and delving into customer satisfaction and management prowess. After studying a business in minute detail, Romney has said, "we had a pretty good map of what was right and wrong in terms of the business - what had to be fixed and which were urgent and which were long term." Under Romney, Bain invested and staged turnarounds in more than 150 companies, among them such household names as Brookstone, Sealy, and Domino's Pizza.

Romney considers Staples ( Charts, Fortune 500) his biggest success. In 1985 entrepreneur Tom Stemberg told Romney that he wanted to launch a chain of office-supply stores. Stemberg was convinced that businesses were paying far too much for paperclips, pens, and, naturally, staples. "Mitt could totally relate to the concept. He's a person who watches his pennies," says Stemberg. (Bain initially invested $600,000. Staples started in May 1986 and went public in 1989. Revenues last fiscal year: $18 billion.)

From the inception of Bain Capital to 1999 - Romney's watch - the firm posted average gross returns in excess of 100% annually. Its assets grew to more than $4 billion. And Romney, of course, got rich.

 

Mitt Romney standing on pier in front of his home on lake Winnipessaukee, NH.

Mitt Romney, a few minutes before appearing at a "Ask Mitt Anything Town Hall Meeting", in Muscatine, Iowa.

Romney on business In between campaign stops in May, Romney spent 45 minutes chatting confidently (if platitudinously) about what he'd do to stage a government turnaround. The big priorities: less wasteful spending and more private-sector-style efficiency. Some highlights...

On the role of government "I'm a big believer in allowing the free market to work and not allowing the government to lay a heavy hand on how businesses operate." On taxes "I want to get rid of all capital gains taxes for middle-income taxpayers. I also think it's fundamentally unfair that you get taxed when you've earned it, taxed when you save it, and taxed when you've died. So I'd get rid of the death [estate] tax, too, for middle-income Americans." On Sarbanes-Oxley "I would keep parts of Sarbanes-Oxley that have proven effective in insisting on managerial responsibilities. For instance, it's important that CEOs and CFOs continue to sign statements attesting to veracity of financial statements. But Sarbanes-Oxley, actually section 404, puts a weighty process and financial burden on small businesses." On his business background "I think it would be helpful to have a leader who understands how the economy works - who knows how to solve problems and would bring a fresh outside view to actually transform Washington into an enterprise that can tackle tough problems and not simply engage in partisan bickering."

Little-known Mitt facts He's a cheapskate Has been known to pop his own popcorn, which he then brings into movie theaters. He was a high school cheerleader Pep squad, Cranbrook School in Bloomfield Hills, Mich. He has run afoul of the law Arrested in high school for sliding down a hill on an ice block at a golf course. He enjoys practical jokes As a teenager, liked to dress up as a policeman and scare friends on dates in their cars. He was once pronounced dead At 21, after a car crash in France. Romney survived, obviously.

"It wasn't always clear that Mitt wanted to go into politics," says Fraser Bullock. "My view is that he was raised in a household dedicated to public service. It was in his DNA." For Romney's part, he says he felt called to serve at this "special time in the history of America [with] the challenges and opportunities." He says he's the guy for the Oval Office because of his experience "innovating and transforming" in the private sector.

Indeed, Romney was a registered Independent in the early '90s. But in 1994, now a Republican, he surprised his Bain colleagues by trying to unseat longtime Senator Ted Kennedy, a Democrat. It was a disaster. Kennedy turned Romney's stellar business record around on him, running attack ads featuring union workers who said they'd been fired after Bain took over their company. Romney claimed he had nothing to do with the layoffs, but it's undeniable that, as with many restructurings, Bain deals involved hundreds of job cuts. In any event, Kennedy trounced Romney.

"Mitt learned a hard lesson there, perhaps too hard, that his business skills can be used against him on the political front," says Eric Kriss, a Bain Capital founding partner who was secretary of administration and finance when Romney was governor. (Romney did get a laugh line out of his defeat: "I was once campaigning in a poor section in Boston when a person came up to me and said, 'What are you doing here? This is Kennedy country.' I looked around at the vacant storefronts and boarded-up windows and replied, 'Yeah, it looks like Kennedy country.'")

Romney returned to Bain yet again, but one person who worked with him says he seemed "on the lookout for the next thing that would make him a bigger star." That would be the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City. As early as 1999, a financial crisis was looming: The Games were mired in a bribery scandal and were running a $379 million deficit. Romney was asked to step in, and he immediately slashed budgets and boosted sponsorships. And since the Games were held just months after Sept. 11, 2001, he oversaw a huge security apparatus. He now says it was one of the most difficult things he'd ever done, comparing it to "arranging 17 Super Bowls a day for 17 days." The Games ended up with a $100 million profit. President Bush publicly praised his management skills, giving him his first brush with national fame.

On a roll, Romney then won the Massachusetts governor's race as a moderate Republican - socially liberal, fiscally conservative. He took office at the beginning of 2003. His administration had three major victories: the health plan, essentially a plausible blueprint for establishing universal health care; an inventive environmental plan (which he backed away from at the last minute, afraid it would be seen as too "Al Gore lefty," as a former advisor puts it); and a balanced budget.

Romney had big plans to revamp education too, but in 2005 "he started to drift off," says the advisor. One reason: He became president of the Republican Governors' Association, another national platform, which allowed him to travel the country supporting gubernatorial candidates. In 2006, the last year of his term, the Boston Globe noted that he'd spent 212 days out of state. Romney was already on his next goal: the presidency.

Mitt-a-thon

This past January Romney raised $6.5 million in one day. He had invited 400 wealthy supporters to a "Mitt-a-Thon" at the Boston convention center and asked them to phone friends and business contacts for donations. While Supertramp's "Give a Little Bit" played, four gigantic TV screens hung from the ceiling broadcast various moments of Mitt magnificence - the Olympics, speeches, etc. There were 40 call centers, each with state-of-the-art technology. "I call it the blitzkrieg fundraiser," says Alex Vogel, a Republican lobbyist with no ties to Romney or other candidates. Vogel notes it was Romney's way of conveying, "Hey, I'm for real."

Given Romney's business acumen, it's no surprise he's assembled one of the most successful political money machines ever. "Romney is an incredibly aggressive and efficient fundraiser," says Vogel, who attributes it to his private-sector skills. In April, when he was still relatively unknown nationally, Romney made headlines when his campaign reported it had blown past the rest of the Republican field and raised $23 million in the first quarter, rivaling Hillary Clinton's $26 million and surpassing Barack Obama's $21 million.

Romney got serious about fundraising three years ago when he started the Commonwealth PAC (political action committee). It's a so-called leadership PAC - that is, the money donated is supposed to push issues; by law, it can't be used to fund the founder's political campaign. In practice, a leadership PAC "can be a bit of a personal slush fund," says Massie Ritsch, communications director for the Center for Responsive Politics in Washington, D.C. The money is often used in a candidate's "exploratory committee" phase to finance travel and staff. Last year Romney used Commonwealth PAC bucks to visit Guantánamo Bay and Iraq.

Romney aggressively took advantage of a loophole that allows donors to contribute to PAC affiliates in multiple states all at one time. He set up affiliate PACs in Iowa, South Carolina, New Hampshire, Arizona, and Michigan. (The most an individual can contribute to a federal PAC like Commonwealth is $5,000 annually; state PACs have different, typically higher limits. A dozen states, including Michigan and Iowa, have no limit at all.) That way Romney supporters were able to spread their contributions among the various state PACs. Last year, for example, Lee Munder, a Florida investment advisor, gave $5,000 to Romney's federal PAC, $5,000 to his New Hampshire affiliate, $18,250 to his Iowa affiliate, $18,250 to the one in Michigan, and $3,500 to his South Carolina fund, according to the Commonwealth PAC. (Romney may not be able to use PAC money to fund his campaign now that he's an official candidate, but he can still dole it out to state Republican candidates to build his power base.)

Romney has also raised more money than any other candidate, Republican or Democrat, over the Internet. In the first quarter ComMitt.com brought in $7.2 million, vs. $6.9 million for Obama and $4.2 million for Clinton - and Romney got more glowing headlines, this time about his red-hot "Netroots" effort. But those numbers were more tactical dexterity than common-man groundswell: The Romney campaign, it turns out, was directing big donors to its website. "It's an innovative use of the Internet," says Patrick Ruffini, an e-campaign expert who recently worked for Giuliani. "We've been focused on a new audience. But you can't neglect the importance of using technology to activate an existing base of supporters."

No matter how whiz-bang Romney's fundraising tactics are, his biggest stumbling block is probably himself. In Alton, N.H., on Memorial Day, Romney is meeting with veterans at the American Legion. It's a flag-waving, mostly blue-collar crowd; many of the older veterans are dripping with military bling. Romney takes the mike and begins his rapid, well-rehearsed talk. He moves from issue to issue, including how "violent jihadists are waging a global war against the United States," and "I want to see more immigration in our country, but more legal immigration and less illegal immigration."

Then it's Q&A time. A few people want to know how to solve personal issues: a son who hasn't received medical benefits since he returned from Iraq; a father who can't get admitted to a VA hospital. Romney looks uneasy. "I'm not an elected official right now," he says, "but if I were ..." He then goes on to say he'd make veteran health care a priority and instructs the people in need to contact their Congressman.

Back at Lake Winnipesaukee, it's an idyllic setting. Romney's Colonial-style house has glorious views of the shimmering lake and the White Mountains beyond. His son Tagg, 37, who seems like a more laid-back version of Mitt and works on the campaign, is running around the yard in a swimsuit and T-shirt with his two dogs. The photographer is about ready, and it's Tagg's turn to cajole the candidate to loosen up. He respectfully asks Dad to lose the jacket. Romney refuses. "All they'll see is my blinding white shirt," he says.

Memorial Day is coming to an end. The grandkids are gathering up toys from the yard. Neighbors have fired up the grill. And there's Mitt Romney, suited up and ready for business.

Telis Demos and Doris Burke contributed to this article. 

From the July 9, 2007 issue

Chris Cillizza embarrasses himself with his logic, but comes to the right conclusion

REPUBLICANS
Mitt Romney

1. Mitt Romney: The former Massachusetts governor takes over the top spot on The Line for the first time this cycle. Why? Because his strength in Iowa led both former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Arizona Sen. John McCain to back out of the state GOP's straw poll set for this summer; because he appears headed for another first- or second-place finish in the money chase; and because he continues to withstand attacks on his decision to change positions on key issues like gay rights without losing the momentum he is building. We know all the reasons why we shouldn't read too much into Romney's pole position in surveys in Iowa and New Hampshire — he's the only major Republican candidate on the airwaves, the race isn't yet engaged etc. But he's still ahead in the two most important early states, and that matters. (Previous ranking: 3)

Here is the link

But how does he embarrass himself? With this terrible long sentence:

Because his strength in Iowa led both former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Arizona Sen. John McCain to back out of the state GOP's straw poll set for this summer; because he appears headed for another first- or second-place finish in the money chase; and because he continues to withstand attacks on his decision to change positions on key issues like gay rights without losing the momentum he is building.

Chris seems like a smart guy, but this post proves that he is unable to do his own research. This sentense proves that he lives inside the echo chamber of Washington where all the "important" people just repeat each other and don't listen to anyone else. The truth doesn't matter. Chris heard someone else say that Romney changed his position on gay rights, this other person was important, and so nothing that us little people can say will change his mind. It doesn't matter that we are right and have proof. This is where Chris embarrasses himself: he is too lazy to do his own research. I don't mean to make it personal, but I don't know what else to do. We have to speak truth to power, and so I think I have to make it a personal attack, and call names.. Maybe I'm wrong.

If Chris went to this website he would read:

During his 1994 campaign against Senator Edward Kennedy, Romney said that same-sex marriage "is not appropriate at this time" and pointed out that marriage was regulated under the jurisdiction of state laws. He also said his voice, as a Republican, would carry more weight on lesbian and gay issues than Kennedy's, even if they took the same position on issues like allowing gays and lesbians in the military. When seeking the campaign support of the Log Cabin Club of Massachusetts, he said, "We must make equality for gays and lesbians a mainstream concern".

SO ROMNEY HAS NOT CHANGED HIS POSITION ON GAY RIGHTS!

Do only losers write in blogs in ALL CAPS? Do only losers complain that "important" people don't listen to him? Do people in Iowa see right past, and ignore these insiders? Maybe I should ignore them, because what they think is even less important than what I write.

Romney, Mitt Letter to Log Cabin Club of Massachusetts (PDF); October 6, 1994. [Published on Bay Windows web site.] Retrieved December 14, 2006.

Lehigh, Scot. "Kennedy, Romney battle for the middle." Boston Globe, October 10, 1994.

Nagourney, Adam; and Kirkpatrick, David D. Romney's Gay Rights Stance Draws Ire The New York Times, December 09, 2006. Retrieved December 11, 2006.

I am not a smart person. But I find it embarrassing for people who get paid to know what is going on, can be so out ignorant.

You say, "this guy is the first major newspaper writer to put Romney in the top spot, and you call him ignorant?!" Maybe I just like being counterintuitive, but maybe it takes something like this to get their attention? Maybe I'm just ignorant? What do you think?

~ Mike

ABC: A Man of Faith Should Explain his Faith

posted 16:33pm by Ryan

ABC's Jake Tapper asserted on the network's This Week today that if Romney wishes to run as a man of faith, he should be expected to explain exactly what his faith requires him to believe. He raises the example of the Mormon beliefs regarding Jesus' eventual Second Coming to the earth. If Romney wishes to be taken seriously as a religious candidate, why can't he tell us exactly how the specific tenets of that religion inform his world view?

This position has a nice logical ring to it, but breaks down on examination. First of all, it is not entirely accurate to say that Romney is running as a man of faith. Rather, he has asserted that he is a religious person in line with the mainstream of America only as a defense to attacks that his Mormonism should disqualify him from office. This is not an affirmative talking point, but a defense against the anti-Mormon crowd. The fact that he is forced to highlight his religious values in order to stay in the race should not be read to open the door to discuss all of Mormon doctrine in a political campaign.

Secondly, note the example Jake Tapper brings up. So Romney is a man of faith, but why should that mean he needs to explain complex doctrines regarding the far off return of Jesus Christ? Surely John McCain, Mike Brownback and Mike Huckabee, if they take their brands of Christianity seriously, have their own beliefs about the mode and meaning of Jesus' return. Mitt Romney has been no more emphatic about his own religiosity than any of these men, so it should follow that we are entitled to hear their own thoughts on this "important" issue.

To imagine John McCain being forced to expound his beliefs on the Second Coming highlights the absurdity of the argument in the first place. Why on earth should voters care what John McCain thinks about how and where Jesus might someday appear on the earth? Is Mitt Romney any different?

Tapper's argument rests on the idea that voters are entitled to understand the basis for their candidates' claims. If you say you're a conservative, you should have to prove it, and if you say you're religious, you should have to back that up too. But there is a certain line to be drawn as well. Mitt Romney's belief about the location of Jesus' return will not inform his administration of the country in any way. His ideas about integrity, fidelity in marriage, and Christian kindness might. Ask away on those topics. But before you can expect him to discuss his beliefs on more obscure points of doctrine (on which topics all religions have their own positions), you'd better explain why those questions bear any relevance to voters.

So, the ball's in your court, Mr. Tapper– as soon as you can explain why voters should care about Mitt Romney's beliefs on the Second Coming of Jesus, Romney can be expected to detail exactly those beliefs. Deal?

Filed under: MSM, Romney, Mormonism

Email this