Friday, October 19, 2007



The Hufficrats (and Hufficans, for that matter) shoved their collective heads further in the sand today as yet another KEY South Carolina, Social Conservative endorsement was earned by Mitt Romney. Many are recognizing what your Mittiot has been touting since the get go - MITT ROMNEY IS THE PRINCIPLED CHOICE! Experienced to the "nth" degree, with success after success from his family to his economic endeavors, Mitt Romney is the Left's worst nightmare.

Fresh on the heals of Bob Jones the III's endorsement, comes the support of Don Wilton (immediate past president of the S.C. Baptist Convention). [Read Announcement Here] Together with the "open mind" of James Dobson, the Hufficrats are scrambling to derail the Romney train. Though your Mittiot has gotten an eye full of the Huffington Post early on while still a bloggin' newbie, he'll not be fooled again. I don't recommend you go there either, BUT if one checks out the "Mitt in the Media" page of, you'll see the headline from the Romney search: "Major Baptist Church to Mitt Romney: 'You're a Cultist!' Huffington Post" These are the same yahoo's that tried to make a story out of the family dog's "sheer terror" while riding on top of the family wagon in the dog transport. "Sheer terror," yep, I can't keep my dog's face in the car when the window's open - must be one of those masochist dogs (canine-rollus-coasterus syndrome). But I digress. The point is Mitt's on his way to a (dare I say it?) SWEEP of the EP states.

And, speaking of Early Primary states. . .


We Michiganians love Congressman Connie Mack of Florida. . . turns out Rep. Mack loves us in Michigan, as well. He, too, has endorsed our man Mitt for President.

Connie Mack would be an interesting choice for VP, by the by. However, your Mittiot is stickin' with Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (and, maybe the Senator's announcement that she'll not seek another term is some indication of her willingness to be Mitt's running mate - that'd be one heck of a team!), but Connie Mack would be more than acceptable! [Read Connie Mack Endorsement here] [Read The Mittiot's Hutchinson Prediction Rerun BELOW]


~ so sayeth the Mittiot!




Your Mittiot was just picking through a "" forum on Mitt's VP selection. "Cart-ish before the Horse-ish," I know, but still a lotta fun to think of what kind of dream team might be put together once Mitt wins the nomination.

Some great arguments were made for Newt Gingrich - though your Mittiot has already called on Newt to do what God seemingly put him on this great earth to do: Be the driving force behind "calling a National Constitutional Convention." Newt Gingrich is a modern day Ben Franklin, as smart as the day is long, but best suited for leadership behind the scenes.

Concern for the Hispanic vote led to some convincing talk of Mel Martinez of Florida. Interesting. Only an idiot would discount the importance of Florida, a "Mittiot" would reference the blog below and note that if Hillary gets the nod, Florida is in play. I don't believe Mel needs to be on the ticket to move the Cuban community to Mitt's side, we just need Hillary. . . oh and the photo below:

FLORIDA: Cuban Community Outraged as Elion Gonzales Sent Back to a Dictatorial Regime by Clinton Administration.

No. Mel isn't necessary, plus he has his hands full winning back majorities in the House and Senate for the GOP.

Of those running, Huckabee got a lot of play. Your Mittiot likes Huckabee. I like him personally, and governors have had a nice run in becoming President. In fact, unless my trivia mechanism is off, since the turn of the last century there have been more presidents who haven't served in Congress than have. And, since Ford (God rest his soul) it's been Gov., Gov., VP, Gov., Gov. - so Mike has history on his side. Unfortunately (for Mike), so does Mitt, and Mitt's the better candidate. I don't think 2 Gov.s on the ticket makes sense (which takes Tommy out, too) even though a good argument was made about the need to carry the South and the Christian Right vote - However, I think the South remains "Solid" as long as the Dems put Hillary (or the Northerner - Obama) on the ticket. Under this guise for a "Dream Team" I think Brownback would make a better ticket, but Ol' Sam has been so voracious in his attacks against Romney, I'm afraid he might pull a LBJ on our man Mitt should he actually become VP.

So what of Fred Thompson? Plausible, but what the hell would Fred Thompson want to be VP for (ending in a preposition for the "Aw shucks, Fred" effect)? And, as someone in the forum noted, he seems like he'd be "a pretty lazy Vice President." I don't know about that, but I don't see much incentive for Fred to be second seat on the dreamiest of dream teams (and, all together now, Lefty Media, "He's not even running, yet!").

Which pretty much sums up why John McCain won't be on the ticket with Mitt, either. As a side bar, I think McCain's calling is to be the "Straight Talk Senator" for the War on Terror with its obvious central front in Iraq - this is where our media-hoodwinked country needs him most.

Though I didn't see his name come up often (if at all within the forum), I do have a former student, Lance Hagerman, who swears Duncan Hunter is the man to beat for the presidency. Well, grasshopper, you missed the pebble. BUT, all the attributes noted on Duncan's behalf do make Hunter an interesting choice for VP. California in play would be HUGE. . . I just don't see it happening. Hunter's gift to America (and that of Tancredo) is to keep pushing enforcement of the current immigration laws while first securing the border. Both he and Tancredo's run for president has given a great soap box for this incredibly defining moment in our history.

Who's left (besides the Hufficrats, Socialists, Media, Trial Lawyers. . .)? Oh, Giuliani. Hmmm, NO. Not that your Mittiot has anything against Rudy personally, I could support the G-Man in the unlikelihood that he gets the nod - but he is almost my least favorite of the GOPers (I rank him along side of Tickle-me-Tommy, yet not higher than Tancredo, nor Jim Gillmore). There's no doubt that Rudy is the "Centrist" running. . . and that's the problem. Without going into some long dusty lecture about the ideological makeup of the country - just know this: There are no voting centrists in this country. The closest you get are "Center-Right" and/or "Center-Left" voters casting ballots with the partisans. The country is looking for decisive direction - either liberty through reduced levels of government arm-twisting OR forced equity through centralizing an ever expanding government. Alter egos never make good running mates, even if they're from the same side of the spectrum. And, as such I doubt we will see a Mitt/Rudy ticket.

So, who does the Mittiot see as the other half of the "Dream Team?" Boy, I tell you I would love to see Condi Rice join up with Mitt in a run for the White House. There's really nothing else to say. . . really. . . but. . . If your Mittiot were to play Devil's Advocate, the only possible, minuscule, chink in the armor, might be the nagging question: "Did Mitt choose Condi because she's black?" 40 years after Dr. Kings greatest plea to be judged by the content of one's mind, your Mittiot has no doubt the question would be raised - thank you, "affirmative action." In my humble lil' opinion lets have that debate. . . The bottom line: No, I do not believe the Rice addition would be too much of a distraction. Especially if we find ourselves running against a Clinton/Obama tag-team of futility. The real question, however, is why isn't Rice running for President? She's had the opportunity, but I don't think she has the desire. Would she have the desire to be VP? EEEEEH, Maybe. . .

One thing is certain, I do like the prospect of a strong female on the ticket with Mitt. So your Mittiot's choice of VP candidate would be a female because she's just that, "a she." Though one of my fellow Michiganian strategists said you "can't out-woman a woman candidate." I'm not so sure this is the case with Hillary. I believe there may be a lot of Right Centrist women (and those on the Left who just can't stand Hillary) who stay put (or cross over) with a strong female VP choice. Condi Rice is one, Elizabeth Dole may be another (though, I'm not sure how strong she comes off, after all the VP must be seen as having the potential of becoming President - she tried, didn't work), a member of the forum mentioned the Gov. of Alaska, Sarah Palin, but she's the first term governor of Alaska, which leaves your Mittiot a little, well, cold. No, fellow Mittiots, the best bet for our GOP "Dream Team." (Drum-roll, please) would be adding Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas to the ticket!

Senator Hutchison is strong, seasoned, comes off as being Presidential material, and is from the great state of Texas (33 electoral votes and besides Hollywierd, who doesn't like Texas?). She hasn't, to your Mittiot's knowledge, wavered on the War on Terror, nor Immigration (with credibility in coming from the state with the longest border with Mexico). She would compliment Mitt in her congressional experience (serving on the all important Senate Appropriations Committee, Transportation and Veterans Affairs), and she has been consistent on "issues of the state" from personal protection rights to opposing liberal federal abortion laws. "W. Mitt Romney & Kay Bailey Hutchison" this is your Mittiot's learned pick for our 2008 GOP Dream Team.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot. . . what say you, Senator?

Tuesday, October 16, 2007



That's the Mittiot's "family discussion" not Mitt's. We're a traditional family - as in we make a lot of "traditions" - the most recent is the "Father-Son-Son-Grandson-Grandson Weekend" we spend at the family cabin "up North" as they say. 90% of the time the colors are just right and the air is just chill enough to need a fire. When Grandpa was alive, he and Dad would head up, now we (my brother and I) head up with Dad and take our two sons. Heck, we're so traditional that between the 5 of us there are only two names (and a bunch of Jr.'s, Sr.'s, III's & IV's).

At any rate, my pop doesn't live far from me so I picked him up and we made the 2 1/2 hours trip together with my son in the back. Around, say, Grand Rapids, my father (who's a big Mittiot, himself) says, "Ya know, my friend thinks Mitt's too perfect, and so he's not going to vote for him."

What the? as I nearly drove off the road. I looked over at my father, remembering my son was in the car and started in. . . "what a bunch of poopoo (I had another word in mind) that is." "Well," dad continued, "my friend is a big liberal, loves Hillary, and probably wouldn't be voting for Mitt anyway. . ."

"Oh, you think?" But we did take the moment to pursue this line of thinking. Let's see, "too perfect." I've actually heard this line of "criticism" and it strikes me as the last great act of rationalization as to why one's going to stick to their initial choice of candidate even though they don't stack up. To look at it another way, if Mitt is "too perfect," then their candidate is not perfect enough, so that would make their choice a poor choice given the field. No one likes to admit they're wrong, so. . . "Mitt's 'too perfect' and that's why I made the right choice in pickin' who I picked. . . yeah, that's it. . .right. . . too perfect. . ."

We agreed that this was "irrational rationalization" and moved on to how Mitt's doing in the EP states as an indication of a guy peaking as perfect as the Sugar Maples off 131.

We get to the "Cabin" where my brother and nephew were already waiting for us and no sooner did we unpacked the Ford then my brother throws out a barb - "Mitt's not doing so good. . ." I had to correct, "Mitt's not doing so "well" - and that's a load of crap, Mitt is doing well." My brother likes to stir the nest and we traded verbal blows, but he knew there was no way he'd win the argument, he doesn't spend the time your Mittiot does researching the campaign(s). The conversation was quick, and my brother was more then happy to throw out the Media hype, "well, Mitt's a. . . he's a. . .'Morton'. . . and no one's going to vote for one of those guys." Which is exactly why this issue is Media/Hufficrat/Huffican propelled garbage - no matter what Bob Novak says. My brother, doesn't know salt from a hundred year old religion and this is why he's thinkin' "Mitt's not doing so 'good'." After a brief education, regarding the Senate Majority Leader, former Governor of Michigan, past Governor of Massachusetts (Mitt), and almost every elected official representing part and parcel of Utah, as well as the misgivings regarding Kennedy, Jefferson's lack of formal church affiliation, and the idea's of a man with faith regardless of where they receive it - we began to talk politics. We started with Iowa, moved to NH, discussed Michigan, Nevada, South Carolina and ended on the great state of Florida. Following this we spoke of personal wealth, fundraising, and campaign teams, and finished on the topic of endorsements. After the flurry of facts, figures and financiers, jumped from my tongue and fell heavily to the old wood floor, I broke the silence - reaching out to close my brother's gaping mouth with the tip of my index finger - by declaring the canard, "I'm probably just looking through rose-tinted glasses. . ."

We had a great weekend.


"The South will never support Mitt. . ." Oh, really?

"The fact that I’m seen as a religious right person would hopefully get others to step out for him,” [Bob Talyor, Bob Jones University Dean] said in an interview in Greenville, S.C., the university’s hometown.

[Complete Article Here]


Never mind the blog, take a look at the postings. . . this is why I never put ANY weight in online polls, the net is disproportionately filled with tons of idiots. . . and a sheer lack of Mittiots.

[Complete Blog Here - scroll to the bottom]

~ so sayeth the Mittiot

Labels: , , ,