THE DAILY MITTIOT

THANK YOU MITT

2008-02-09T15:40:00.001-05:00

ON THE MITTIOT'S LAST BLOG. . .

. . . for this presidential cycle.

Thank you, Mitt, for having the courage and conviction to offer America your expertise in addressing what ales us. . .

I am hopeful that IF Government is still "broken" in 2012, you might consider offering your service, once again.

Don't be a stranger to Jackson, and we'll be sure to deliver for you - again - should the need arise.

~ so endeth the Mittiot.

ROMNEY SUSPENDS RACE

2008-02-07T13:19:00.000-05:00

ON THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN:

My pocket went crazy during lecture today - about 15 minutes ago - as my cell buzzed. Call after call after call, I thought I better take a look to make sure something hadn't happen to my son or wife. From the list of the callers - Brownlow, Ray, Doug, Carol, Sachs - I knew it was campaign connected. I looked up at my students and I told them either Romney has dropped out, or McCain has had some sort of age related event that has sent him to the hospital. . . regardless, I knew it wasn't good news. . . so I called Brownlow and he let me know that Romney had suspended his run. A sad day in Mudville, a sad day for conservatives, a VERY sad day for Michigan.

Speculation? Your "suspened-Mittiot" will give you a little. Romney could beat McCain (he did here in Michigan and elsewhere) but he COULD NOT beat McCain AND Huckabee AND the Hufficrats AND the Hufficans AND the Media as it poured all over McCain and insisted on labeling Mitt a flip-flopper. Romney is too smart to fool himself into thinking that he (and his band of faithful Mittiots) could overcome those odds. Romney made the right decision to suspend his campaign.

What now? Hmmmm, you're asking me? Here's what I'd LIKE to see happen: "Romney 2012" and all that implies. If I were Mitt, I'd spend the next four years dispelling the "flip-flopper" myth through action, AND I'd work to focus the nation on the short comings of our "Broken Washington." Mitt could/should lead the charge to break our dependence on foreign oil, using his vast network to coordinate the states in an effort to do what the federal government (which includes McCain) has been to inept to do. Or, on the other hand, I might just go home and hang out with my family. . . your Mittiot sincerely hopes it the former. . .

A sad day in Mudville, indeed.

~ so concludeth the Mittiot.

SUPER ROMNEY!

2008-02-06T01:14:00.000-05:00

ON THE SUPER TUESDAY RESULTS:

Fellow Mittiots - for those of us GMT -5:00 (or Eastern Standard) . . . IT'S LATE! So, I'll not attempt to give some mildly coherent breakdown of the positives versus the negatives and the clear path to victory that certainly exists for the inevitable outcome of a Romney triumph sometime late in May as the last delegate is awarded. . . in short, I don't have the energy to "spin." Not to the degree that the Hufficans, Hufficrats and MEDIA do, anyway.

So, I'll leave you with something to ponder. . .

WHERE IS HUCKABEE GOING TO GAIN DELEGATES NOW? AND WHERE IS MCCAIN A SHOE-IN (Well, besides Mississippi and Vermont respectively)?

THIS NOMINATION IS ANYTHING BUT OVER - AND WITH CPAC, A STRONG FINANCIAL BACKING AND, A CONTINUATION OF THE CIRCLING THE CONSERVATIVE WAGONS AROUND ROMNEY, THERE WILL BE A BROKERED CONVENTION (IF NOT A CLEAR ROMNEY NOMINATION) COME SEPTEMBER. . .

Now, go to bed.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

PS. A muffled shout out to the MI-ND crew, nice job! Could have used you in WV.

ON THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN

2008-02-04T21:20:00.000-05:00

WHAT'S AT STAKE?:

ALMOST EVERYTHING!

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

ROMNEY WINS ANOTHER STATE

2008-02-03T11:51:00.001-05:00

ON THE MAINE VICTORY:

BOSTON, Feb 02, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Throughout the state of Maine, people have gathered at their local caucus site over the last two days and cast their vote for conservative change in Washington. With only a few caucus sites left to report tomorrow, Governor Romney issued the following statement concerning his victory in Maine:

"Today, the people of Maine joined those from across the nation in casting their vote for conservative change in Washington. All across the state, men and women gathered to help chart the future course of our country. Tonight, they have made their voice known and have endorsed our conservative vision for a stronger America. Like many Americans, the people of Maine are tired of Washington promises made but broken.
"The need for change in Washington is even more apparent today. With our economy facing uncertain times, we need a leader who actually understands how the economy works and how jobs are created. We also need a leader from outside of Washington who is ready to meet the long-term challenges facing our country. With a career spent working in the economy, creating jobs, turning around faltering institutions and imposing fiscal discipline, I am ready to bring conservative change to Washington. In this campaign, I am proud to have the support of the people of Maine."

DELEGATE COUNT NECK AND NECK GOING INTO SUPER TUESDAY.

Something's in the air!

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

SOMETHING'S IN THE AIR. . .

2008-01-31T21:19:00.000-05:00

ON THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN:

Howdy Ho, Fellow Mittiots. DOWN! That's was me - "Mister Optimist - after the Florida Primary. Down. . . and a wee bit grumpy - NOT SO TODAY! Why? Just something in the air. I can't put my finger on it but it comes from just hearing (and reading) the points made by the stalwarts of my party. . . You see, one thing that has yet to cease to amaze me is how "I'm not alone." I mean I think, "How can my party be so blind?" "How could so and so be so stupid?" "Doesn't anyone catch this or that?" and so on and so. Then I opened some email and clicked on some links and began to realize the ground swell. . . I even thought that someone might actually be reading the blog. . . then I came to my senses and realized, "There are a lot of Mittiots out there." And, for that - from that - I feel something in the air. . .

ON THE DEMOCRAT-ESK , DIRTY, CAMPAIGN CRAP:

I'm not speaking of the John McCain lieing stuff, or the dishonest campaign lit we received here in the SPARTAN state from the "Maverick," or even the BS Robo-Calls in FL regarding MA's abortion laws and/or the Castro tripe (all worthy of outrage). I'm speaking of the AP HACK JOB on printing a story that Romney wasn't going to buy television spots in Super Tuesday states. This original story was "printed on the condition of aninimity" and is an OLD, TRANSPARENT, campaign tactic. Printing the false "leak" as fact has the potential to undermine the support for a candidate as it (as printed) signals the campaign is giving up. THE MEDIA KNOWS THIS - ESPECIALLY AP - AND THEY HAVE A RESPONCIBILTY TO EITHER PRINT THE SOURCE, ASK THE CANDIDATE, OR IGNORE THE STORY. Fellow Mittiots, I don't swear on my blog, but THAT WAS/IS BULLSHIT. . . and the AP knows it.

Oh looky there, here's an UPDATE from 40 minutes ago:

Romney will be running ads in Super Tuesday states
After reporting last night that Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney "was not attempting to purchase television advertising time in any of the 21 states on the (Republican) calendar for Feb. 5," the Associated Press this morning is saying that Romney "plans to run a 'significant' level of television ads in California and other states that vote Tuesday in essentially a national primary, aides said."
And we've got an on-the-record confirmation of that from Romney campaign spokesman Matt Rhoades, who responded to a query from us with this statement: "Romney for president will be making a significant ad buy in California and other Feb. 5 states."
So the AP's conclusion last night that Romney is not "ready to finance a costly campaign in the states holding primaries and caucuses next week" may no longer hold.

Hmmmmmm, imagine that, "AN ON-THE-RECORD CONFIRMATION" what a novel Fricken' idea. (I guess, upon reflection, there may be a hint of residual grumpiness. . . but that should tick anyone off.)

ON THE MAINE CAUCUS:

Lastly, just a little something to add to the feeling in the air:

Freeport turnout higher than expected, voters choose Romney

CAN YOU FEEL IT?

~ so asketh the Mittiot.

PS. If you haven't done so in a while (or at all) and fear for the GOP if the Hufficrats, Hufficans, and MEDIA (like the AP Liberals) get their way, it's time to contribute (again). We're going to win and no underhanded, less than "straight" campaign tactic is going to stop us.

ROMNEY CONTINUES TO MOVE FORWARD

2008-01-29T21:54:00.001-05:00

ON THE BIG PICTURE:

THIS IS NOW A TWO MAN RACE. . . Expect Huckabee to attempt to be the spoiler - expect Giuliani to endorse the "Maverick" - and expect the Conservative Republicans to continue to move briskly to the Mitt camp.

Though we shouldn't forget about Maine (According to the web they vote this Friday?) We'll see what happens in a week. As for what happened tonight the Crist endorsement hurt a bit and probably put McCain over. I don't understand it. . . why he endorsed, that is. . . but he did. I guess we'll have to see if Charlie's endorsement carries any weight in the upcoming states - or Florida does for that matter. . .

What'll happen? Hard to say, but of the Super Tuesday states: IT AIN'T GOING TO BE UNANIMOUS. . .

1081 GOP delegates up for grabs. Depending on whether Huckabee's supporters will stay "Stuck on Huck" or not, it could be a pretty good night for Romney.

If the Huckabee conservatives come home, Romney will have a BIG night. If they buy into the idea that it is some how better for the GOP to compromise its principles and put up McCain - the Maverick will end up with the lion's share of delegates.

One thing is for sure, as stated above: "THIS IS A TWO MAN RACE!" Your Mittiot thought it was going to be Romney versus Rudy - and it might have been save for the "start with FL gamble" - turns out that the two man race is Romney versus McCain.

Without a doubt it is far from over. . . look for McCain to get a mini bump, and look for Mitt to raise the dollars necessary to score huge wins in those "non-competitive, Wyoming, Nevada, type" states (you know, the ones McCain and the Media ignore). DO YOU THINK THE NATION IS ENGAGED? We shall see.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

SOME "STRAIGHT TALK..."

2008-01-27T21:26:00.000-05:00

ON THE FLORIDA PRIMARY:

Floridians if you're still thinking about who to vote for this Tuesday in the GOP contest - your Mittiot has a little info he'd like to share for your consideration:

In 2003 (Cong. Record - S14221) McCain sought a special exemption for specific South Carolina beach front property to ensure flood insurance coverage. It went as follows:

EXEMPTING CERTAIN COASTAL BARRIER PROPERTY FROM FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE AND FLOOD INSURANCE LIMITATIONS
Mr. MCCAIN: Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 352, S. 1643.
The PRESIDING OFFICER: The clerk will report the bill by title. The legislative clerk read as follows: A bill (S. 1643) to exempt certain coastal barrier property from financial assistance and flood insurance limitations under the Coastal Barriers Resources Act and the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968. There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill, which had been reported from the Committee on Environment and Public Works, with amendments, as follows: [Strike the parts shown in black brackets and insert the parts shown in italic.]
S. 1643 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE; FLOOD INSURANCE. The limitations on Federal expenditures or financial assistance in section 6. section 5 of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3504) and the limitations on flood insurance coverage in section 1321(a) of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4028(a)) shall not apply to lots 15, 16, 25, and 29 within the Jeremy Cay Subdivision on Edisto Island, South Carolina, depicted on the map. (reference map entitled ‘‘John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System Edisto Complex M09/M09P’’ dated January 24, 2003.)

Now, I'd be less then honest if I let it dangle that I support the idea of the "nation" insuring only certain parts of the U.S. at the expense of us "non beachfront property owning" citizens (I think the Romney approach to "regional pooling" makes much more sense), but this is about "Straight Talk:"

In 2003, McCain supported exempting specific properties (including some in Texas) from the financial assistance and flood insurance LIMITATIONS - there by making the nation pony up to cover the gap in insurance fees - TODAY, it's "screw Florida. . . my friends."

What gives? I'd like to know who owns "lots 15, 16, 25, and 29 within the Jeremy Cay Subdivision on Edisto Island, South Carolina."

ON ENDORSEMENTS (JUST A REMINDER):

U.S. Congressman Connie Mack Endorses Governor Mitt Romney For President

Wednesday, Oct 17, 2007

Boston, MA – Today, Governor Mitt Romney announced that U.S. Congressman Connie Mack (R-FL) has endorsed his candidacy for President of the United States. Congressman Mack will serve as a Chair of Governor Romney's Florida Statewide Steering Committee and as a campaign surrogate to help communicate Governor Romney's message of conservative change in Washington.

"Congressman Mack has been a champion of conservative leadership in Florida and in the United States Congress. I am proud to have his support and counsel," said Governor Romney. "We agree that we have lost our way in Washington and that it is time for us to return to the core Republican principles of fiscal discipline, lower taxes, a strong military and less government. I look forward to working with Congressman Mack to take our message of strong new leadership to Floridians across the state during the coming months."

"Governor Romney is a proven problem solver with an unparalleled record of success in both the public and private sectors," said Congressman Mack. "Governor Romney is a mainstream conservative leader who will be a champion of hope and opportunity for every American, a catalyst for conservative change in Washington, and a staunch defender of our freedom, security and prosperity. I'm pleased to offer Governor Romney my endorsement and look forward to working hard to help elect him the next President of the United States."

Congressman Mack joins former Lieutenant Governor Toni Jennings, former Speakers of the House Allan Bense and John Thrasher, Florida Agriculture and Consumer Services Commissioner Charles Bronson, former Chairman of the Florida Republican Party Al Cardenas and U.S. Congressman Tom Feeney (R-FL) as a leader of Governor Romney's Florida Steering Committee. Additional Co-Chairs include St. Petersburg Mayor Rick Baker, State Representatives Anitere Flores and Trey Traviesa, former Representatives Dennis Baxley and Dudley Goodlette, David Griffin, former Florida Secretary of State Glenda Hood and former Senator and Chairman of the Republican Party of Florida Van Poole. U.S. Congresswoman Ginny Brown-Waite (R-FL) also serves as a member of Governor Romney's Congressional Whip Team.

Background On U.S. Congressman Connie Mack: United States Congressman Connie Mack Is A Highly Regarded Leader In The Fight To Protect Freedom, Safeguard Security And Forge A New Era Of Prosperity For Every American. As a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Mack is Congress' leading critic of Venezuela's Communist President Hugo Chavez, and the countless actions that Chavez and his allies are taking to snuff-out freedom and democracy in Latin America and to destabilize the Western Hemisphere.

As a member of the Budget Committee, Mack has been a champion for lower taxes and less spending, so that people can continue to receive the services they need, but at a price they can afford.

And as a member of the Transportation Committee, Mack has helped lead the charge for sound investments to meet both the nation's growing infrastructure and environmental needs, including the expansion of Interstate 75 and the restoration of the Everglades. Congressman Mack was previously a member of the Florida House of Representatives from 2000 to 2003 and served as Deputy Majority Leader. Prior to being elected to Congress, Mack was a business executive and an independent business and marketing consultant. Connie Mack was born and raised in Southwest Florida and is a graduate of the University of Florida. He is the son of former United States Senator Connie Mack and well-known cancer prevention advocate Priscilla Mack.

Mack resides in Fort Myers and is the proud father of two children, Addison and Connie.

ON THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN:

WE'RE GOING TO WIN FLORIDA!

~ so sayeth the Mittiot

COME ON OL' SUNSHINE STATE!

2008-01-23T19:20:00.000-05:00

ON THE FLORIDA PRIMARY:

H'OLA, MI MITT-IGOS! Just wanted to let y'all know I ain't dead - just "dead tired." Had some yard signs to pick up. . . and save for the November General. [Sachs: I don't give a rip if you are in Florida, I'm NOT gathering the 4x8's in 1 degree weather - that's your frickin' job!]

On the Florida campaign, Mitt's looking good. Any short lived bump from South Carolina (or Nevada or Mitt-chigan, for that matter) is all but gone and the voters of the Sunshine State are looking at the candidates based on their message, track record, and capability. Which, is why Mitt is looking good! Latest polls (see below) have the candidates neck-in-neck and are wildly fluctuating. . . the trends, however, appear to be coming home. It's amazing what happens when "Republicans" are the only genre' voting in a REPUBLICAN primary.

The big question from the fellow Mittiots is, "What CAN I do to help the effort in FL?" Well, if you live in Florida, display your support unabashedly for our Mittster. BUT, if you are outside of Florida and primary has come and gone or will be in the next couple of weeks - THE MOST IMPORTANT THING YOU CAN DO TO HELP GET MITT TO THE WHITE HOUSE IS CLICK ON ONE OF THE LINKS BELOW:

PHONE CALLING

FUND RAISING

ON THE POLLS IN FLORIDA:

Here's the buzz - your Mittiot received in his old in-box today:

New InsiderAdvantage Florida GOP Poll

SOUTHERN POLITICAL REPORT

Compiled from InsiderAdvantage and Southern Political Report staff http://www.southernpoliticalreport.com/storylink_123_160.aspx January 23, 2008 — For the latest InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion Florida GOP poll results, click here to see Matt Towery as he reveals the new GOP leader via his latest webcast.

24 Romney 19 Giuliani 18 McCain 12 Huck 7 Paul 5 Other 15 Undecided

PPP Poll: Romney Takes Florida Lead After Thompson Exit

POLITICAL WIRE
A new Public Policy Polling survey http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Florida_Release_012308.pdf in Florida -- the first taken after Fred Thompson ended his presidential bid -- shows Mitt Romney leading among Republicans with 28%, followed by Sen. John McCain at 25%, Rudy Giuliani at 19% and Mike Huckabee at 15%.Key finding:"The key to Romney's lead is the immigration issue. 15% of the state's GOP voters listed immigration as their biggest concern and within that group, 50% support Romney compared to just 14% for McCain. It isn't the biggest issue in the state -- the economy and the war in Iraq were listed by more respondents -- but it is the one creating the greatest separation between one candidate and the rest of the pack."

Poll: Fading Rudy ST. PETERSBURG TIMES BUZZ BLOG Adam C. Smith http://blogs.tampabay.com/buzz/2008/01/poll-tables-ple.html#more

It’s Mitt Romney vs. John McCain in the final stretch of Florida’s crucial Republican primary. A new St. Petersburg Times poll shows the former Massachusetts governor and Arizona senator neck and neck among Florida Republicans, while Rudy Giuliani’s Florida-or-bust strategy has been a bust. Among Florida voters likely to vote in Tuesday’s primary, 25 percent are backing McCain and 23 percent Romney, a statistical tie, while Giuliani and Mike Huckabee were tied for third place with 15 percent each. In Florida’s odd candidate-free, campaign-free Democratic primary, Hillary Clinton is trouncing Barack Obama by 19 percentage points in a race with stark racial divisions. The poll found 42 percent backing Clinton, 23 percent supporting Obama and 12 percent former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards. But it’s the volatile GOP race the nation is mainly watching, as Florida Republicans stand to have a huge influence over which candidates have a shot at competing as nearly two dozen states vote on Feb. 5. Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani staked his candidacy on Florida, and even with 27 percent of Florida Republicans saying they might change their minds, it looks like a bad gamble. "Giuliani for all intents and purposes has virtually no chance to win,’’ said pollster Rob Schroth, noting the difficulty of overtaking two other candidates comfortably ahead. The survey was conducted Jan. 20-22 for the St. Petersburg Times, Bay News 9 and the Miami Herald. It was conducted by telephone from a list of registered and frequent voters in Florida who described themselves as likely to vote Jan. 29. The full sample of 800 interviews has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percent, while the margin of error for the Democrats is plus or minus 5.4 percent and for the Republicans it's 5.1 percent.

Romney Team –
I wanted to give you the heads up on the call from home info for Florida. As most of you know the Governor is up by a small margin but gaining momentum in the Sunshine State. Here is a very effective way to get folks in your respective communities involved. In Michigan this really turned the tide, and it was heartening to see the massive number of calls coming in from all over the country.
Pass this info along to your lists and encourage folks to call from home and help Mitt win Florida!
Thanks so much, Jason

The last note was from Jason McBride, our Team Romney - Michigan campaign leader. He, too, is down in sunny Florida - though you wouldn't know it. According to the Michigan team, "you don't get a chance to see the sun when you're making phone calls all day. . ." Let's give them a hand and contribute to the effort in contacting 400,000 Floridians in 4 days! THE BOTTOM LINE FELLOW MITTIOTS: WE CAN WIN THIS NOMINATION RIGHT HERE - RIGHT NOW - BY STEPPING UP! JOIN YOUR MITTIOT. . . LET'S WIN THIS THING!

ON THE MEDIA COVERAGE:

Just a little reminder to our media friends out there hoping to shape the outcome of this nomination by injecting opinion where the simple facts will do: It is not an issue as to whether we like Mitt Rommney - REPUBLICANS LOVE MITT ROMNEY - it is an issue as to whether the Liberal Media, Hufficrats and Hufficans do. . . they do not, and they (YOU) continue to perpetuate every negative hit, contrived or not, they (YOU) can to bring Romney down. They (YOU) could not in Wyoming, they (YOU) could not in Nevada, they (YOU) COULD NOT IN MICHIGAN, AND THEY (YOU) WILL NOT IN FLORIDA! Romney is going to win the Sunshine State and you (YEAH, YOU) can take that to the bank.

ON THE DEM PRIMARY:

Frankly, your Mittiot has been watching the dem race just as closely as the GOP race. Why? It's my job. . . for some reason, I've got students who aren't yet smart enough to know the democrat party is outta ideas. . . AND, unlike, my more liberal fellow faculty - I do not try and "correct" their leanings or reprogram their ideologies (cough - DELAWARE - cough, cough - UNIVERSITY - cough). So, we look at both the dem race and the GOP race. However, your Mittiot was a little more then tickled to watch Bill Clinton give the Media "what for" regarding what I mentioned above - perpetuating the story they want to print rather then the true story of the campaign... I think back to the "He's a Mormon 'problem'" hype of the Media - and got a chuckle. Today, I witnessed Bill taking the "Media" to task for perpetuating the split in the dem party via race and gender. . . I hope they keep it up. When Hillary is nominated, maybe the GOP can pull more then 2 of 10 African-Americans to the GOP. . . seeing as how the dem party has done such a great job in fostering "equity" among the "races." In a party of factions that love to rail against the "white, male, capitalist" what did you expect would happen when someone other than a white, male, capitalist was sure to be the dem nominee. . . WAKE UP - if you believe there is only "one race" the HUMAN RACE - if you believe that it takes EQUAL PARTS woman and man to make a family - if you believe there are no workers without businesses and no business without workers, then WAKE UP and join the GOP.

ON THE LATEST FLORIDA CLIP:

NOW, LET'S WIN THIS THING!

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

MITT-CHIGAN!

2008-01-16T21:44:00.001-05:00

ON THE ROMNEY VICTORY IN MICHIGAN:

Your Mittiot had another press interview re: the Michigan Primary - not as the Mittiot - but as the PoliSci Instructor from the Battle Creek area. The Coldwater Record, (small town, less leading, a smidgen less liberal) wanted to know my thoughts. It was damn difficult as a staunch Romney supporter to put the pale "consensus" probables of the primary forth - but I did. Your Mittiot, a big droopy-eyed from hangin' at the victory party in Southfield, wanted to blurt - "MITT WON BECAUSE MICHIGAN LEARNED ITS LESSON!" - but I was a bit more composed. In a round about way, I let the reporter know that "organization" was the key - everyone knew it, everyone on the inside knows it - Mitt had us at "Hello." I, also, think I made the point (as I did with the BC Enquirer) that this is about GOP delegates - NOT STATES, and Mitt is the candidate best positioned to capture the majority of delegates. . . As such, we'll fight on regardless of S.C. or FL's outcome. . . and in the end we may look back and think, "Hmmmm, Wyoming. . . who knew?"

ON THE SOUTH CAROLINA PRIMARY:

Speaking of organization, Mitt does have a good organization in SC. I believe he can win South Carolina, as he'll get a bump from MI - and that'll pull him "close." What the Thompson supporters do to the Huckabee numbers still remains to be seen. Will there be a consensus of conformity around Huckabee by the Evangelical Conservatives? Will the "Thompson Strategy" pay off? If there is a indecision among the Evangelical GOP voters - Romney's in pretty good shape. Let's not forget, though the Media might want to spin differently, Romney is not unattractive to the pro-family voter. AND, he has done a fine job of picking up some of the Evangelical leaders in South Carolina already. So, Mittiot, what'll happen?

I believe, Romney is hedging his bets with the prediction that McCain wins (or will win) South Carolina. This is smart, as it gives a little cover and a lot of political pause for the GOP faithful. If Mitt moves up into second place behind McCain - which I predict he will - the Evangelicals with have to make a decision to what they want to do: Stick with Huckabee on principle and give McCain a win - or hedge their bets to a more palatable conservative. In any event - claiming McCain will be the winner in a close election in the Great Palmetto State - is as politically smart as pushing - DRUMMING - the rhetoric that "the race is so close in Michigan, independents and dem cross overs will decide the outcome" in hopes of enticing such an outcome. It didn't happen, BUT it was a fine strategy. There was just enough intrigue and apathy on the dem side to keep 'em battling within their own ballot - or at least keep them home all together. THANK GOD.

An open note to Saul Anuzis" COULD WE PLEASE GO BACK TO A CLOSED SYSTEM? [Which reminds me. . . an open note to Jack Lessenberry: Republican's are not "afraid of independent minded voters" (lumping "dem crossovers" as "independent thinkers" is a bit of a stretch) - we love 'em when they choose our Republican candidates come the GENERAL ELECTION - BUT for a PARTY nomination, wouldn't it make sense that the members of the PARTY choose the candidate who best represents the PARTY? ]

So, Mittiot, in SC, WHAT WILL HAPPEN? We'll McCain looks like he'll probably win South Carolina, of course - wink, wink, nod, nod.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

VICTORY IN MICHIGAN

2008-01-15T23:54:00.001-05:00

ON THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN:

We can breakdown the campaign victory tomorrow. . . as for tonight, I'm going to soak it in - tomorrow, it's back to work!

TO VICTORY!

~so sayeth the Mittiot.

MICHIGAN'S CHANCE

2008-01-14T21:58:00.001-05:00

ON THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN: First, dear readers, allow your Mittiot to make one last pitch for our man Mitt. Following, I've posted the official campaign's last Michigan Primary YouTube vid (which I hope you'll view and consider). Lastly, I had to comment on the latest piece of "Straight Talk" literature your Mittiot got from our "Maverick" Senator. Then our fate is in the hands of the voters. . .

ON MICHIGAN'S PRIMARY TOMORROW: No need to try and spin the polls, they are what they are (neck and neck), BUT, there is a reason to think long and hard about the facts:

MICHIGAN IS HURTING

Fact: No one in Washington - NO ONE - has shown the leadership to right Michigan's woes.

Fact: No one in Washington - NO ONE - has had the intelligence to end illegal immigration.

Fact: No one in Washington - NO ONE - has the foresight to level the playing field of trade.

WASHINGTON IS BROKEN

Fact: Only one candidate - ONE - understands Michigan's Manufacturing woes.

Fact: Only one candidate - ONE - has a plan to end the defacto amnesty of illegal immigrants.

Fact: Only one candidate - ONE - has the experience to level the playing field of trade.

MICHIGAN NEEDS MITT ROMNEY. . .and this is the biggest "FACT"

Lastly, fellow Mittiots don't you believe for a minute that the liberal press, the Hufficrats and Hufficans are going to be able to drive Mitt from this race regardless of tomorrows vote (like I said earlier, unless MItt wins by 10 points, the media will call it a "loss"). They keep saying "Mitt doesn't connect with the voters. . . he just doesn't catch on. . ." Let me tell you something: That is MEDIA DRIVEN B.S.! (as in BULL $#!^).

Of every "Republican" (and I use the term loosely given the number of "independents" who've voted) ballot cast, Mitt has more in his column than ANY other GOP candidate. He also has more delegates to boot! This IS NOT a question of whether or not Republicans like Mitt Romney - WE LOVE HIM - this is a question of whether the LIBERAL MEDIA likes MITT. And, the answer is - THEY ARE SCARED TO DEATH OF HIM.

Take Michigan for example: The Grand Rapids Press (our most conservative major paper in the state) endorses Mitt, while the Detroit Free Press (our most liberal major paper in the state) endorses McCain. . . and goes on to all but beg dems to cross over and vote in the GOP primary. Why? Can't a Republican candidate win a Republican primary WITHOUT DEMOCRAT VOTES? Hmmmmm.

So, you take it from me - Win, lose or draw, Mitt Romney will not get out of this race for the GOP NOMINATION as long as he continues to have the support from the actual REPUBLICAN voters of the party... your Mittiot will not let him... THE "CAMPAIGN" ON ROMNEY: Please watch the video. Mitt has been here for a long time prior to last Thursday. With your help, Mitt will be here for a long time to come. . .

ON THE "STRAIGHT TALK:"

Here's some straight talk for ya': Mitt Romney has received the Pro-Life Michigan Coalition Endorsement! Really? YEP, REALLY. Really, really? YEP, REALLY, REALLY. How come I didn't hear of the endorsement? Well, that's because I just decided to endorse Mitt. You see, I'm the Pro-Life Michigan Coalition and Mitt's got my seal of approval! You can't just make up a pro-life group and endorse who you want. . . OH REALLY? Really. Really, Really? Because that's what I got from the ol' straight shooter.

If you look real closely - you'll see the endorsement IS NOT from Michigan Right To Life - it's from Jerry Zandstra's Pro-Life Federation. Who's Jerry Zandstra (though a nice enough guy) he was Michigan's Brownback for President Campaign Chair and when Brownback dropped out and got on the McCain wagon - Zandstra came with him. Jerry hasn't always been on friendly terms with the GOP - nor Right To Life of Michigan (of which, your Mittiot is a contributor via Jackson Citizens for Life)

"Right to Life, Zandstra Part Ways" - Grand Rapids Press Article

And HE created the Pro-Life Federation. . . just like your Mittiot, who's a very "anti-abortion", "life at conception", "protect those who cannot protect themselves", kinda guy, created the Michigan Pro-Life Coalition. AND, based on my grading scale (and by considering the records and ELECTABILITY and CAPABILITY) find Mitt Romney to be the best candidate for President.

MITT ROMNEY RECEIVES THE PRO-LIFE MICHIGAN COALITION ENDORSEMENT!

Bottom Line: That's not "Straight Talk," Senator, that's deception.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

ROMNEY - LOOKING GOOD!

2008-01-13T15:35:00.001-05:00

ON THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN:

First things first. I actually had "Christmas" with my in-laws yesterday and didn't find the time to post yesterday. "Why Christmas so late in the season?" you ask. Because my Michigan native, brother in-law (who I love dearly) could not get back to Michigan until this past Saturday. You see, he's living in South Carolina assisting in the building of a NEW BMW plant. . . My sister-in-law and two nieces went down to stay with him during Christmas and have since come back to get the girls back in school. . . hence, Christmas on Saturday. SOUND FAMILIAR? For some 100,000 Michiganians this has been the reality for TOO many Christmases and birthdays and anniversaries. . .

Here's what I believe the "Maverick" US Senator is failing to get: We believe Washington has been the problem - We believe Washington has been broken for too looooong - and we know the Senator has been in Washington for the duration of Michigan's one-state recession - we've needed leadership in Washington for the last 8 years. . .

Your Mittiot pulled this out of his mailbox this morning -

Michigan's question to John McCain, "WHERE THE HELL HAVE YOU & WASHINGTON BEEN? Michigan workers have been being displaced for the last 8 years. . ."

Bottom line: The Senator couldn't even fix his own border while the Senior Senator from Arizona. Why should Michiganians believe he can assist us in overcoming our challenges while the President of the United States?

~ so asketh the Mittiot

SPEAKS FOR ITSELF. . .

2008-01-11T23:26:00.001-05:00

ROMNEY ON THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN:

ROMNEY: "IF I'M PRESIDENT, THAT ONE-STATE RECESSION IS OVER"

Clinton, Obama Follow Granholm Toward Higher Taxes "And I recognize that when Michigan is hurting, it is a precursor of what could happen to the entire country. Because our manufacturing base, if it's threatened there, it's threatened everywhere. … Michigan is a state going through a one-state recession. … I'll mcommitment: if I'm President, that one-state recession is over." – Gov. Mitt Romney (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks, 1/9/08)

Gov. Romney Understands That Higher Taxes Don't Help Michigan: Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm's Answer To Fleeing Businesses And Rising Unemployment? Raise Taxes. "With the recent announcement of Comerica's relocation to Texas, the hemorrhaging of Michigan businesses continues. Astonishingly, instead of taking bold steps to make Michigan more competitive and attract investment, Gov. Jennifer Granholm's plan to end the mass exodus of employers is to raise taxes on them. … Michigan is indeed in a debilitating economic crisis, but no state has ever taxed its way into prosperity. Unfortunately, with a new, 'stand alone' tax on business services and a new gross receipts tax, the governor hopes to be the exception to the rule. I wouldn't advise anyone hold their breath." (John Williams, Op-Ed, "Michigan Can't Tax Its Way To Prosperity," The Detroit News, 3/16/07)

Gov. Romney: "[Granholm's] Taxes Are Going Up, Unemployment Rates Are High, Housing Prices Are Collapsing, The Auto Industry Is Not Thriving." GOV. MITT ROMNEY: "They've elected Jennifer Granholm, a liberal Democrat, as their governor and the laboratory experiment is out. Her taxes are going up, unemployment rates are high, housing prices are collapsing, the auto industry is not thriving." (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks, 1/9/08)

Gov. Romney: "Michigan Is A State Going Through A One-State Recession." "And I recognize that when Michigan is hurting, it is a precursor of what could happen to the entire country. Because our manufacturing base, if it's threatened there, it's threatened everywhere. And so for me, Michigan is not just, oh, one state that I hope they're doing well. No, for me, Michigan is a state that has to do well. Michigan is a state going through a one-state recession." (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks, 1/9/08)

Gov. Romney: "I'll Make A Commitment: If I'm President, That One-State Recession Is Over." "It ain't working and you're going to find that experiment is going to be rejected by the people of Michigan who want instead, somebody who knows, cares and loves that state and will fight very hard to help it come out of its one-state recession. I'll make a commitment: if I'm president, that one-state recession is over." (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks, 1/9/08)

Gov. Romney Rejects Democrats' Attempts To Raise Taxes On American Families.

Gov. Romney Believes That "We Can't Afford" The Democrats' Plans To Increase Taxes: GOV. ROMNEY: "Charlie Rangel just came out this week saying he wants to put a surcharge on taxes, largest increase in the history of America. Look, more taxes are what the Democrats have in mind to fund many of Hillary Clinton's million good ideas. We can't afford that. It would slow down the economy. It would kill job creation in this country." (CNBC's "Mad Money," 10/28/07)

Gov. Romney: "The Right Answer Is Always To Keep Taxes Down." GOV. ROMNEY: "The right answer is always to keep taxes down. Don't add new taxes, but instead allow the American people and the entrepreneurial spirit to grow our economy. That's the best way to get revenues for government and the best ways to get good jobs for our people." (CNBC's "Mad Money," 10/28/07)

Gov. Romney Opposes The Democrats' Plans To Roll Back The Bush Tax Cuts: GOV. ROMNEY: "Let me tell you what I'd do, as opposed to what Hillary Clinton would do with regard to our tax and spending policies. First of all, I would make the Bush tax cuts permanent immediately – all of them, not some of them, but all of them." (Gov. Mitt Romney, Remarks To The Club For Growth, 10/17/07)

As President, Gov. Romney Will Fight To Grow The Economy And Keep Our Jobs: Gov. Romney Will Strengthen The American Economy By Lowering Taxes, Including Making Middle Class Savings Tax-Free. "As President, Governor Romney will cut marginal tax rates across the board, allowing all Americans to save more money. … Governor Romney's plan will allow middle class Americans to save tax free by changing the tax rate on interest, capital gains and dividends to absolutely 0%." (Romney For President, "Helping Michigan By Fixing A Broken Washington," Press Release, 1/9/08)

Gov. Romney Will Expand Free Trade And Promote U.S. Goods: "Governor Romney will seek to bring together nations committed to open markets and playing by the rules in the largest ever Free Trade Area, and go beyond traditional trade to promote high standards in areas critical to U.S. competitiveness." (Romney For President, "Helping Michigan By Fixing A Broken Washington," Press Release, 1/9/08)

Gov. Romney Will Expand Enforcement And Competitiveness: "Governor Romney's vision for expanding trade includes stronger enforcement efforts, multilateral efforts to stop currency manipulation, action against intellectual property rights theft, negotiations to open markets for services, and building food, safety and other standards to protect Americans." (Romney For President, "Helping Michigan By Fixing A Broken Washington," Press Release, 1/9/08)

Gov. Romney Will Streamline And Enhance Access To Worker Training And Educational Programs: "Governor Romney will initiate an audit of all existing worker training and educational programs to ensure that workers are being helped most efficiently." (Romney For President, "Helping Michigan By Fixing A Broken Washington," Press Release, 1/9/08)

"And I want to do a better job for the American worker. And by the way, this is key for Michigan. And for me, Michigan is personal. I'm going to go to work to help Michigan." – Gov. Mitt Romney (CNBC, Republican Presidential Candidate Debate, Dearborn, MI, 10/9/07)

~ so sayeth the Mitt

ROMNEY ON TASK - UPDATE (1/11)

2008-01-10T23:11:00.000-05:00

ON THE FOX S.C. DEBATE:

"I have received more votes for President than any other candidate on the Republican side." - Mitt Romney

AND YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT, GOVERNOR! - The Mittiot

Governor Romney was on task tonight. He was sharp with a great command of the economic, social, and security issues this country faces. . . In short, Mitt Romney continues to prove himself as the multifaceted candidate we need to address ALL the challenges this country faces. And, it is a FACT, that so far the Republicans who have voted in this nomination process have given Mitt the lead in votes AND DELEGATES. Allow me to continue to post the "After 3 Events Results:"

The vote numbers, by the way, have gone up as more precincts have reported. . . Romney is still up by some 1500 votes - and this doesn't include the Wyoming victory (not because your Mittiot is discounting the Big Sky voters, but because I couldn't find a vote number on the web . . . feel free to email it to me).

But for all the good points Mitt made tonight - especially about Michigan manufacturing jobs NOT being lost forever (ie. Free-Trade v. STUPID-Trade) - your Mittiot knows this debate in South Carolina is going to end up being a study of how well Fred out "aw shucks-ed" Huckabee. Which, by all accounts, he did.

Your Mittiot has said in past blogs that I do not have anything personal against Mike Huckabee - he IS a likable guy. However, I do believe he is too liberal a candidate to right the wrongs of Washington. . . For instance, how would the former Gov. of Arkansas have voted on the S-CHIP fiasco. Would that step towards socialized medicine (that goes way beyond insuring poor-children) have been signed into law - "to raise hope" - by a Huckabee administration? What if, God help us, the dems keep control of the legislature? Would this be Huckabee (or McCain, for that matter) style "bi-partisanship"?

And, again, your Mittiot isn't here to try and dust Mike Huckabee - true, I have a clear dog in this fight, I'm a Romney guy - but this issue of possibly nominating a liberal candidate for office, makes me wonder why the heck I fight for the Republican party so vehemently. This is a conflict of ideology and party versus this particular presidential race, and if the party has to keep changing to get elected, then what are we "conserving?"

"But, Mittiot, that's just one example of Mike being 'sort of liberal' and that was from a while ago. You can't. . ." I can already hear it, but here's my second case in point:

While watching the Fox debate - I flipped through the channels during the commercial (or maybe when Campaign Carl was smirking another loaded question) and I just happened to catch Anderson Cooper on CNN interviewing former dem candidate, Bill Richardson. Seems Kerry has endorsed Obama, and Cooper was looking to see if Richardson was endorsing anyone. Richardson replied: "Sure, I gotta a call from President Clinton. . . I also got a call from Sen. Obama, and John Edwards. . . I EVEN GOT A CALL FROM MIKE HUCKABEE. Really? "I got a call from Mike Huckabee. . ."

[UPDATE: 1/11 - Transcript from AC360: GOV. BILL RICHARDSON (D-NM), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I am ending my campaign for president of the United States. CROWLEY: New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, a Latino, dropped out of the race today. It's just over a week before the Nevada caucuses, where the Latino vote may play a major role. Raise your hand if you think it's a coincidence Bill Clinton has been in touch. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "THE SITUATION ROOM") RICHARDSON: Well, yes, he called me quite a bit in the last couple of days. We talked. I talked to Senator Clinton. So did Senator Obama and Edwards called. You know, I even had a nice call from Mike Huckabee, who is an old pal of mine. (END VIDEO CLIP) ....... To be fair, this may have been just a "sorry to see you get out, ol' pal" call from Huckabee. . . but the context was in "courting endorsements" - The Mittiot] Governor Huckabee is looking for the endorsement of LIBERAL DEMOCRAT, Bill Richardson? As your Mittiot is fond of saying, "What the?" This is no way to win a GOP nomination.

Ponder this, we had a dem congressional candidate who ran against our now congressman, Cong. Tim Walberg (MI7), come to one of our local county GOP meetings. She came in to tout the need to support Ron Paul. Well, let me tell you something, that went over like a lead balloon. Dems have "No Cred" within the GOP - and they shouldn't. That's why we are "we" and they are "they." The fact that Mike Huckabee is courting democrats for endorsements (the fact that ANY candidate would seek such an endorsement) during a GOP nomination - leaves one to wonder who's voting for this guy. . .

Which brings me to McCain. Your Mittiot's been a little critical of Senator McCain, but again, I'm a Romney guy. And, "Friends" let me tell you - here in Michigan - the Senator has been attackin' as much as he's been attacked - more so. I'm doing my best to hold to Reagan's 11th, but some days. . .

In case you missed it (now, this comes from the debate tonight, so I'm not pulling out-of-date statements together to convolve some some anti-McCain message. BUT, in case you missed it. . .), I was left scratchin' my head - and this time it wasn't because of the Ron Paul non-protectionism, protectionist plan. Senator McCain said something to the effect of "I've never takin' special project money for my state. . ." [UPDATE: 1/10 - Youtube clip 7 of the debate, @3:45] and then he goes on to repeatedly tell America that his state is a major part of the illegal immigration problem [UPDATE: 1/10 - Youtube clip 8 of the debate, @7:39]. In his words, he's worried noting the pork and ignoring the problem. More illegals come through his state then any other. . . Has the senator at least asked for an appropriation to fix the fence? And, if so, where's the "leadership" been in getting it?

Call me "silly" but why the heck do I send a stack of tax dollars to DC if the people we - America - sends there aren't going to take care of the NATIONAL problems. I'm pretty sure, most Americans would not consider it as "pork" to seek an appropriation to fix the Arizona/Mexico border - YOUR BORDER, Senator. In fact, if the federal government did it's job and there was some leadership on this issue, I don't think the approval ratings of the US legislature would be in the low 20's. AND, I, for one, wouldn't have to wince every time I eyeballed my paycheck.

The bottom line: I believe this is what Governor Romney is speaking about when he says, "WASHINGTON IS BROKEN."

MITT ROMNEY IS THE MAN WHO WILL FIX THE PROBLEMS IN DC. And that, "my friends" is what MICHIGAN needs.

~ so "ranteth" the Mittiot.

ROMNEY ON TOP!

2008-01-09T00:59:00.000-05:00

ON THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN:

After three "GOP" events, ROMNEY LEADS THE PACK IN DELEGATES AND VOTES!

ON TO MICHIGAN!

Your Mittiot shouldn't have to remind individuals that these contests send delegates to the National Convention - this isn't the Electoral College. The delegates sent will chose the nominee.

Now, I'd be a liar if I didn't spill that I was disappointed in the N.H. results - not because we lost, per se, but because we had a chance to conclude the inevitable Romney nomination in the Granite State. . . now we have to wait another week.

There's no doubt the Michigan election will be tight - and with the Media's lips puckered tight to McCain's 71 year old tushy - anything other than a 10 point win will be considered a "loss" for the Romney campaign. So, we're in a tough spot. . . but ROMNEY WILL WIN MICHIGAN.

Why and how? Yes, McCain won Michigan in 2000 - but it was NOT a primary where independents (or democrats for that matter) had to choose one or the other ballots. In fact, the dems chose their candidates by closed caucus, while the GOP held an open primary. STUPID, STUPID, STUPID! Dems voted for their candidates and ours! And, wouldn't you know it - McCain the "Maverick" won. That shouldn't happen this time around.

Why not? A couple of things - the dems (though feebly) are choosing their candidates via the same primary as the GOP - and you can only vote on one ballot. So, again I ask, "For whom will the Indys vote?" Well, here's the 10 cent analysis:

In NH Indys were supposed to break for Obama - they didn't. Why? The Media had Obama up by 10 and "unbeatable" - and the Media had the McCain Romney race "tight." Well, if I could vote in either race as an Indy - I'd vote in the race that would have an impact, too. And that's what we got. Not that your Mittiot was certain we were going to win (you see, while we were actually campaigning in Iowa, McCain was cherry-picking his "most likely". . . don't forget, Romney beat McCain in Iowa 2 to 1) but I did believe we'd be within 2% - turns out it was 5. And wouldn't that 3% have made all the difference to the Obama team? Frickin' Media. . . but I digress.
Secondly, had Hillary lost by 10, she' d be done. BUT, she won, and now Michigan DOES matter for the momentum. It is very likely that Clinton - though the only candidate on the Michigan Ballot - could LOSE the Spartan State. Why? Because dems can vote "Uncommitted" and if they want to stop Clinton's MO, they better... and I believe they will. So, dems vote for dems. . . and so do the Indys.
Third, if it were an Obama/Clinton race, Michigan would be a lock (voting "Uncommitted" is a little tough to get excited about, AND in a tight race Hillary's being the only name on the ballot - doesn't leave much chance for Obama). BUT, Edwards is not going to get out - even though he took third in Iowa. Why? He has enough money to last until Michigan, he understands that he and Obama will both draw voters to vote "uncommitted", he can "share" a victory in Michigan (giving him a second, third and "first" place finish), but mostly, his national chairman is David Bonier - the former Michigan Congressman. There's no way Edwards will drop out before Michigan. So no dems for McCain, either.
Lastly, the MIGOP have been tweaked about the 2000 shenanigans for the past 8 years. Many believe, including your Mittiot, that because of McCain's underhanded win in Michigan, we've been ignored by Bush for the better part of his administration (Hey, I love the guy - and appreciate the tough love of DC - it'd be a lot easier to handle, though, if we weren't in a "one state recession.") and the MIGOP won't - MUST NOT - be fooled again.
And lastly, lastly, Mitt is a Michiganian. . . and a car guy. . . and has been plowing the primary field here for a longggggg time now.

We will take Michigan - Huckabee will get NO BOUNCE from NH - and McCain will run into "real republicans" in Michigan. . . which by the way, Iowa and NH, you have proven to be "unrepresentative" in the primary process - you taint the wishes of the party - and you should not be "first in the nation." In short, you blew it.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

AMERICA FACES CHALLENGES

2008-01-07T23:53:00.000-05:00

ON THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN:

As I peck these keys, "New Hampshirites" are 5 minutes away from beginning the NH Primary. This "little - rock solid - state" of 1.5 million citizens will have a BIG impact upon the political landscape. And, that's an understatement.

If you remember nothing else the Mittiot has said, NH, remember this: "America faces multiple challenges and we need a President who can identify, assess, and lead us through these challenges."

Not the least of which is the issue of "free-trade." Hey, "free-trade" is okee dokee, fine with me, but "STUPID TRADE" is killing this country, and we need a candidate who knows the frickin' difference between the two.

You know you wouldn't be reading this blog if I wasn't trying to get you to vote for Mitt Romney as that person - I'm the "MITTIOT", it's what I do. But I'm the Mittiot because I truly believe this issue is important, and I believe Mitt Romney is the best candidate to navigate this country through this challenge. If I didn't, I'd be sleeping right now. If you have yet to make up your mind, view the following video - you'll not see a piece like this from any other candidate in this race. . .

NEW HAMPSHIRE - LOOK FOREVER FORWARD!

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

ROMNEY HAS "GREAT NIGHT IN NEW HAMPSHIRE"

2008-01-06T22:28:00.000-05:00

ON THE FOX NEW HAMPSHIRE DEBATE:

Your Mittiot knows, "One great night does not a campaign make. . ." or something like that, but again and again, Romney shows he has command of the issues and is a multifaceted candidate. . . not a "one hit wonder." He's not just a "Pro-Family" candidate, not just a "Secure Borders" candidate, not just a "Fiscal Conservative" candidate, but the COMPLETE package.

Now, I'm going to rant here a bit, probably repeat myself as I feverishly peck the keys, BUT, NEW HAMPSHIRE YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SHOW THE GOP WHY - WHY - YOU SHOULD BE THE "FIRST IN THE NATION" PRIMARY. You have an opportunity to show the U.S. that when you pick a candidate you do it based on "ability across the board" and not just the "issue de'jour." NH, you and I and the rest of country know that the person we send to the White House must be prepared for whatever may come. . . not just the problems here and now, but the unpredictable nature of the WORLD. You know Romney is that candidate.

If you read the blog, you know your Mittiot is from the great state of Michigan. I do love this state dearly but I can tell you Michigan is suffering: Home foreclosures, high energy prices, issues with public education, high unemployment, and a governor who thinks she can tax her way out of this mess. Above all, Michigan is suffering because of the economy - THE WORLD ECONOMY. We've got a great workforce, maybe the best in the world, but we cannot compete in the spectrum of wholesale manufacturing when 1 billion Chinese are willing to attempt (that's right, "attempt") to work a production-line for 12 cents an hour. We're hurtin' in the Great Lake State because we DO care about the environment but are forced to compete with countries that absolutely DO NOT. We're hurting in Michigan because, though the state government has a big taxing problem, the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT still spends money faster than they can take it out of our pockets. For the families in Michigan, the "World Economy" is killin' us. . .

What's this got to do with New Hampshire? Alright, do your Mittiot a favor and try this if you would:

Take the above paragraph and substitute "New Hampshire" for "Michigan," (and "Granite State" for "Great Lakes State,") and tell me if the passage stills rings true.

If it does, if the World Economy is hurting the families of New Hampshire, then Romney has got to be your pick. No other candidate in this race - Republican or Democrat - can possibly understand WASHINGTON's economic impact upon the American Family and American Business better than Mitt Romney.

Why Romney? (First, you could read economist, Larry Kudlow, and why he thinks Romney has the "Right Stuff" if you're sick of the Mittiot's harpin' - he sums it up better than I, But. . .) I say Romney is the right candidate because he knows (as I, you, and everybody outside of the Washington can attest) that if we continue to spend more money then we actually have our quality of life goes down - not up. I know I'm preachin' to the choir but it can't be said enough, "when the government gives you something, it's never 'free' - somebody's got to pay for it." The bottom line is that if we want to expand the quality of life for ALL Americans we need to expand the economy INTELLIGENTLY. AND, Washington (in general) just doesn't get it! This is why we need an "outsider" with busines experience in the White House. If we really want to get the right kinda "CHANGE," we need Mitt Romney.

I'll leave you with this headline linked to a piece that should cause you to ponder the stakes:

"The Rise of the 'Brics'"

Voters of New Hampshire, the stakes COULD NOT be higher. . .

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

NEW HAMPSHIRE PREDICTION (1/5 UPDATE)

2008-01-04T18:37:00.001-05:00

ON THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN:

Well, first, let's not forget Wyoming (UPDATE 1/5 - ROMNEY HAS WON THE WY CONVENTION). My sources say Romney is going to be OK for the Wyoming Convention - 2/5ths of the "Five Brothers" are on their way as surrogates - and conventions are a bit easier to predict than caucuses (though no one is certain of who is going to win at this point). Romney should win, he's the only top-tier candidate to campaign there, and that does matter. . . Expect a mini-bump, but like the Tancredo endorsement, do not expect the good news to linger. Why? The Hufficrats and Hufficans (with which your Mittiot has now associated "Campaign-Carl") are hell-bent on a futile attempt to derail the inevitable.

As for New Hampshire, here's the order: Romney, Huckabee, McCain, and after the Bronze? Well, you know. . . by the way, so does McCain.

"But Mittiot, the polls don't reflect it. . . look at ARG." Yeah, I looked at the NH ARG Poll - I also looked at the ARG Poll for Iowa before the caucus. . . ARG Sucks! Look at the Suffolk Poll (which is the most recent poll) and trust the locals. . . like the Des Moines Register.

Why the order predicted? The conventional wisdom is that McCain's support comes from a lot of Indys. Unfortunately for the "Maverick," so does Barrack Obama's. Like Michigan, you only get to vote for a Republican OR a Dem in the NH Primary. And, "Who do you think the Indys will break towards?" Smart money says "Obama" before McCain.

Secondly, believe it or not, there are Evangelical Christians in Hew Hampshire - maybe not 60% of the primary voters, but they are there. We've seen how well McCain does with that group. . . as in "off the medal podium" (cough, cough, 4th Place cough). But, will these individuals break towards Romney? Many will, but many. . . most. . . will probably support Huckabee. So without the staunch social conservatives and without the independents, who's left in the GOP primary? Well, the fiscal conservatives. . . and, the national security conservatives. Bhutto's assassination may have put the "Maverick" in the spot-light (though I'm not sure how his positions on Pakistan/terrorism differed from the pack - sans Huckabee), but now the focus has become the ECONOMY: $100 barrels of oil, a stretched social safety-net, home foreclosures, the potential for stag-flation, even recession - a real WASHINGTON mess. So, your Mittiot is betting "fiscal emotions" trump national security concerns (if not, "Amnesty" becomes an issue) and Romney wins.

Hence: Romney, Huckabee, McCain.

When McCain loses NH, Michigan becomes ALL SO IMPORTANT, as it is held BEFORE South Carolina.

Now, to further postulate, IF Clinton loses NH - look for the Indys to vote in the MI Primary much the same as the NH Primary: Obama over McCain. Your Mittiot understands that Clinton will be the ONLY individual on the ballot - but not the only candidate in the race, you can write-in, and "Obama" ain't that hard to spell. (UPDATE 1/5 - DEM CANDIDATES MISS DEADLINE FOR WRITE-IN. MUST DESIGNATE "UNCOMMITTED" TO SUPPORT OBAMA/EDWARDS)

If (again, "if") this is the case, Romney will have two victories under his belt (three, if Wyoming comes through) heading into South Carolina a mere 4 days later. The question is, will Huckabee bother campaigning in Michigan when he takes second in NH? Or, go right to South Carolina? Taking second, he may come to Michigan.

If he goes right to South Carolina this will be a dogfight and we could get Iowa all over again. (Do remember, however, Nevada is going on at the same time and Romney is doing well in NV - though the eyes will be on SC.) Romney has a good team in SC and could easily erase the Iowa speed-bump. If so, he's our nominee. If not, Florida, now, becomes the decider.

If Romney wins Wyoming(DONE THAT), NH, MI and loses SC to Huckabee - Rudy becomes a non-factor as all eyes turn to the "two-man race" in Florida (I don't think Thompson will hold on much after NH - he may make it to SC, but if so, Southern Baptists stick with Huckabee and Fred drops) . I predict Mitt wins Florida (IF all the above falls into place).

The bottom line: a Wyoming victory first(CHECK), followed by a NH victory are absolutely essential to Romney's inevitable nomination. All will be answered in four days.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot

WAY TO GO MITT!

2008-01-03T22:17:00.001-05:00

BRING ON NEW HAMPSHIRE!

First, your Mittiot would not be able to sleep tonight if he did not point out that the Des Moines Register knows their polling. . . we here at Mittiot Central kinda got the feeling that our man Mitt was in for a second place finish when the campaign, itself, lowered expectations. Still, you carry the mantel and work 'til the end.

Your Mittiot is, however, very excited about Romney's strong showing where 60% - YES SIXTY PERCENT - of the GOP caucus goers were self-described "Evangelicals." I'm hopeful this fact isn't lost on those that want to simply undermine the inevitable nomination of Romney. Had Romney taken second to anyone other than Huckabee, your Mittiot would be nervous, but you can't out Evangelical an Evangelical in Iowa, we knew that going in!

The real story tonight. . ."McCain takes 4th". . . what is that? Let me see, there's Gold, Silver, Bronze, and. . . oh that's right, NOTHING.

Go get 'em Mitt!

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

IOWA!

2008-01-03T19:04:00.000-05:00

ON THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN:

O.K. Hawkeyes - the eyes of the Nation are upon you.

SHOW US THAT YOU CARE ABOUT VIABILITY AND CAPABILITY! Make the case that Iowa should ALWAYS go first in the nomination process. . .

TO VICTORY!

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

ONE DAY 'TIL IOWA!

2008-01-02T11:43:00.000-05:00

ON THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN:

Your Mittiot has already spilled his guts on why I'm supporting Romney - 1. I like the guy, 2. I like his positions, and, 3. HE'S THE MOST QUALIFIED AND ELECTABLE. . . The National Review - following your Mittiot's lead, of course, - came to same conclusion. See Below:

COVER STORY: Romney for President. Our guiding principle has always been to select the most conservative viable candidate. In our judgment, that candidate is Mitt Romney. Unlike some other candidates in the race, Romney is a full-spectrum conservative: a supporter of free-market economics and limited government, moral causes such as the right to life and the preservation of marriage, and a foreign policy based on the national interest. By the Editors. . .

The Concorde Monitor, however, does not agree. In a REPUBLICAN primary race, I'll take the National Review over the Concorde Monitor any day. Let's not fool ourselves the Monitor is on a mission to get a democrat elected.

I have read that about 10-15% of the caucus goers are undecided (or holding their choice close to their chest), and I doubt anything your Mittiot pecks will have an impact upon that decision. So below, I offer the words from the Gov. himself, through the interview by Deacon Fournier of Catholic Online. (It shoud be noted: ONLY three candidates bothered to respond to Catholic Online's request - this fact absolutely perplexes your Mittiot).

As the important Iowa Caucus draws close, we are happy to present the responses sent to us from Governor Mitt Romney, a Republican candidate for President. Former Governor Romney was born on March 12, 1947 and has an extensive background in business and public service. He was the 70th Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The Governor responded in writing to our questions. We present the questions and his answers below.

DEACON FOURNIER: What do you think is the biggest challenge facing America today?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: The best ally peace has ever known is a strong America. The aim of our foreign and domestic policies must be to keep America strong, to remain the world’s economic and military leader. For our children to live safe and abundant lives, we must strengthen the family, the economy, and the military. First, we must strengthen the American family. I want our children to learn that before they have babies, they should get married because every child deserves a mother and a father. I want to protect marriage as the union of a man and a woman. I will work to improve our schools. I will help every American obtain health insurance, not through the government, but free-market insurance that is affordable and portable. Second, I will work to strengthen our economy to provide good jobs. I will keep taxes down by, in part, letting middle income families save tax free. We must finally end our dependence on foreign oil by investing in new energy sources and new levels of energy efficiency. We must open foreign markets to American goods. We must stop illegal immigration. Third, we must also strengthen our national security. I will add more troops to our military, with better equipment, armament and better care for our veterans. I will invest in intelligence capabilities, which is the most effective way to prevent terror in the homeland. And we must win the war in Iraq and Afghanistan to make sure that neither becomes a safe haven for Al Qaeda or other terror groups. Our country faces great challenges, but the people of this nation have such heart and passion, love of liberty, education, and willingness to risk all for their family, for their freedom, and for their future, that I am confident that our future will be even brighter than our past.

DEACON FOURNIER: What is your position on the dignity of every human life from conception to natural death and the fundamental right to life?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: I am pro-life. I believe that abortion is the wrong choice except in cases of incest, rape, and to save the life of the mother. I wish the people of America agreed, and that the laws of our nation could reflect that view. But while the nation remains so divided over abortion, I believe that the states, through the democratic process, should determine their own abortion laws and not have them dictated by judicial mandate.

DEACON FOURNIER: How have you lived that commitment personally, as well as in your years of public service as an elected official?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: I wasn't always pro-life, but I follow a long line of converts on this issue – Ronald Reagan, Henry Hyde and George Herbert Walker Bush, to name a few. My experience has taught me that we need to create a culture of life that welcomes all children into this world and protects them under the law. I am encouraged that the Supreme Court upheld the Congressional ban on the practice of partial birth abortion. Further, every decision I made as governor in a very liberal state was on the side of favoring life.

DEACON FOURNIER: What have you done to build a new culture of life and defend the right to life against the encroachment of what the late Pope John Paul II rightly called a culture of death?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: As Governor, I vetoed a bill that authorized embryonic cloning and embryo farming. I proposed a ban on these practices. I resisted efforts by the legislature to change the definition of human life from conception to implantation. I also vetoed an emergency contraception bill. During our administration, we implemented classroom teaching of abstinence education. Because of our obligation to respect the good of life and our obligation to hear the cry of the poor, what is your plan to help us as a Nation ensure the availability of health insurance coverage for all Americans, including the poor? I believe that we can put conservative principles to work to ensure that every American has access to quality, affordable health insurance. My plan to reform the American health care system brings down the cost of health care, helps the low-income uninsured, enhances the portability of private insurance, and slows the rate of inflation in health care spending. It accomplishes these goals by recognizing the importance of states in leading reform and the need for innovation in dealing with the parts of our system that are broken. I propose the following six steps to improve America's health care system:

1. Give states incentives to deregulate and reform their health insurance markets so market forces can work. Over-regulation is driving up the cost of insurance and limiting consumer choice, making it difficult for many Americans to afford coverage.

2. Redirect existing spending on "free care" to help the low-income uninsured purchase private insurance. Currently, taxpayers subsidize billions of dollars of "free care" for uninsured Americans who receive treatment when they need it. This money would be better spent helping the uninsured to acquire their own private insurance, expanding coverage without the need for new spending or taxes.

3. Improve Health Savings Accounts and make qualified medical expenses fully deductible. This change will help to bring down the cost of health care, end the discrimination against those who do not buy their health insurance through an employer, and curb the over-consumption of health care services.

4. Promote innovation in Medicaid by giving states a block grant of funding each year and allowing them to spend it as they choose. States have very little flexibility under current law to enact innovative changes to Medicaid that help more of their citizens while containing costs.

5. Implement medical liability reform, including caps on non-economic and punitive damage awards in malpractice cases. Our out-of-control medical liability system is forcing doctors to practice defensive medicine and driving up health care costs.

6. Bring market dynamics and modern technology to health care. Introducing the same free market principles present elsewhere in our economy will help to drive the same innovation, quality, and efficiency that we enjoy in our other products and services.

I believe that these steps, in concert with the meaningful state-level reforms that they enable, will increase the availability, affordability, and portability of private insurance, increase the quality of care, and slow the rate at which costs are growing.

DEACON FOURNIER: Many Catholics opposed the initial decision to enter Iraq, not believing it fit a "just war" analysis. However, most now agree that we have an obligation to do what is right for the struggling people of that Nation and to support our troops. What are your thoughts on the way forward in Iraq?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: All Americans want U.S. troops to come home as soon as possible. But walking away now or dividing Iraq up into parts and later walking away would present grave risks to the United States and the world. Iran could seize the Shiite south, al Qaeda could dominate the Sunni west, and Kurdish nationalism could destabilize the border with Turkey. A regional conflict could ensue, perhaps even requiring the return of U.S. troops under far worse circumstances. The new strategy pursued by General David Petraeus is getting results and the stakes are too high and the potential fallout too great to deny our military leaders and troops on the ground the resources and the time they need.

DEACON FOURNIER: What would you do to protect and defend marriage and the family founded upon it as the first institution of society?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: I support an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that defines marriage as between a man and a woman. Marriage is fundamentally an institution about the development and nurturing of children. Every child deserves a mom and a dad. We must recognize the traditional union of a man and a woman as the bedrock of the family in our society. If our courts are determined to undermine this principle, then we have no choice but to defend it through a constitutional amendment.

DEACON FOURNIER: How would you expand participation in the great promise, opportunity and bounty of America to those less fortunate?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Fighting poverty starts with strengthening the American family. Unfortunately, too many kids grow up today in broken homes that are mired in poverty. Kids in single parent homes are four times more likely to live in poverty, and more likely to be poorer than their fathers. Strong families, by contrast, can teach our kids the values they need to succeed in America and lift themselves out of poverty. Second, we must improve our country's educational system. The achievement gap is the civil rights issue of our time, because kids are not getting the education they need to prepare them for the jobs of tomorrow. We can help to end the cycle of poverty by allowing parents to exercise choice in education so their kids don't have to be relegated to failing schools. Finally, we must strengthen and grow our economy to create the jobs and opportunities that will lift people out of poverty. Reasonable and sustainable entitlement spending that does not promote dependency is compassionate and just, but higher taxes and runaway spending slow the growth of our economy and leave everyone worse off in the long run. In my view, we must cut taxes and spending, eliminate excessive regulation, and promote policies that encourage innovation, entrepreneurship, and free trade. A strong economy with low unemployment, high wages, and expanding wealth is the only path to better opportunities for all Americans.

DEACON FOURNIER: Catholics believe that parents are the first teachers of their children and that they should be able to choose how to extend their own teaching office from among all of the available alternatives; public schools, charter schools, private and parochial schools and home schools. What is your position on parental choice in education?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: I believe we need to let freedom ring in our educational system. That means giving all parents the opportunity to exercise a choice over where their child goes to school. When parents and kids are free to choose their school, everyone benefits. That’s because competition and choice in educational opportunities—whether it comes from private schools, charter schools, or home-schooling—makes traditional public schools better and improves the quality of education for all of America’s kids. I have a record of supporting school choice initiatives. As Governor of Massachusetts, I wanted school choice to be available to all parents, particularly those with children in low-performing districts. I also fought for charter schools and resisted attempts to derail their expansion. I believe that charter schools embrace innovative educational practices that encourage competition and hold teachers and administrators accountable for the academic achievement of their students. When I took office, I proposed an elimination of the statutory caps that the state had in place on the growth of charter schools. Furthermore, in 2004, I vetoed the Legislature’s moratorium on charter school expansion. Despite a Legislature that was largely hostile to charter schools and school choice, I led the fight to increase the number of charter schools and the number of students attending charter schools. In fiscal year 2003, there were 46 existing charter schools serving more than 15,000 students. When I left office, Massachusetts was on course to have 61 charter schools open in the fall of 2007, educating over 23,000 students. I am proud of the record I had as Governor on school choice. As President, I will fight for school choice and to ensure that existing provisions promoting choice in No Child Left Behind (NCLB) are properly enforced. I support, for example, the provision in NCLB that provides a public school choice option for parents of children in public schools that are designated as “In Need of Improvement.” There is no reason why our children should be forced to remain in failing schools. I believe that it is time for us to raise the bar in education. And I know that giving every parent and child in America the opportunity to choose the school that suits them best will move us toward this very important goal.

DEACON FOURNIER: What are your plans to improve the economy and expand participation in the market economy to more and more Americans?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: All Americans enjoy a vastly improved standard of living thanks to the dynamic power of our economy. Most now have cell phones in their pockets and Internet-connected computers in their homes. Medical advances have provided drugs and procedures that save lives and allow for better treatment of chronic ailments. The American people do face challenges, but all benefit from an expanding economy. The best way to help the country is to implement pro-growth policies that will help the economy to grow faster. First, I will cut taxes. Keeping taxes low is crucial to the health of our economy, which is why I have pledged not to raise taxes. I will make the Bush tax cuts permanent, abolish the Death Tax, and bring down marginal tax rates. I will implement a middle class savings plan, which eliminates all taxes on interest, dividends, and capital gains for middle class Americans. People should be able to save their money tax-free. I also believe that we need to lower our corporate tax rate if American companies are to remain competitive in the global economy. Second, I will promote free trade. Protectionism might feel good for a few years, but it would virtually guarantee a decline to a second-tier economy in the near future, with a second-class standard of living. I will keep trade barriers low and insist that Congress give me the "Trade Promotion Authority" they are currently denying President Bush, so that I can work to establish new free trade agreements with our partners. I will also make sure that free trade is a two-way street, so that foreign markets remain open to our goods and services and respect the intellectual property rights of our companies. Third, I will make it easier for American companies to compete in the global economy. Above, I mentioned the need to bring corporate taxes in line with the rest of the world. We must reform the excessive regulatory burden on our companies – things like the Sarbanes-Oxley internal control requirements, which impose millions of dollars of costs on any company that wants to be publicly traded. I will reinstitute a regulatory relief board to cut back on the regulations that choke off growth. We need comprehensive federal tort reform to prevent frivolous and excessive tort claims which hurt our economy and drive up prices. And we must strengthen our own work force by giving our children a better education, especially in math and science, and by attracting the best and the brightest from around the world through legal immigration.

DEACON FOURNIER: What is your position on illegal immigration and legal immigration? How do you propose the United States move forward on this issue in a manner which protects its borders while respecting the fundamental human rights of all persons? Are you in favor of amnesty for illegal immigrants?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Legal immigration is a great source of strength for America; illegal immigration is not. Legal immigration has brought vitality, energy, and family values to communities throughout the country. Illegal immigration, on the other hand, presents numerous challenges for our communities. I support reforming our immigration system and enforcing current immigration laws. I will secure the border, implement a mandatory and enforceable employment verification system and turn off the magnets that encourage illegal immigration. I oppose giving amnesty or any special pathway to permanent residency or citizenship to those who are here illegally. Instead, I believe we should enforce and respect the rule of law. America will always welcome legal immigration, but as a nation we must reform our immigration laws and end illegal immigration.

DEACON FOURNIER: What will be your position with regard to the growing threat of extremist acts of terrorism at home and abroad?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Less than six years after 9/11, Washington is as divided and conflicted over foreign policy as it has been at any point in the last 50 years. We face a new generation of challenges, led by the rise of radical Islam seen in current conflict in Iraq, the resurgent Taliban, Iran's destabilizing actions including threats to wipe Israel off the map, and terrorist networks made even more menacing by the threat of nuclear proliferation. This is the defining challenge of our generation, yet it is one of a range of challenges that include the rise of China, genocide in Darfur, AIDS across Africa, and authoritarian regimes such as Cuba's Castro and Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez seeking to reverse the spread of freedom. To achieve national security in the face of these challenges, we must unite America and our allies around a shared vision to build a stronger America and a safer world. Second, we must strengthen America. We must reverse the Clinton Administration's cuts to our military by providing at least 100,000 more troops and devoting at least 4% of GDP to make long overdue investments to ensure they have the equipment, armament, weapon systems, and health care they need. We need to dramatically and fundamentally transform our civilian capabilities—in areas like intelligence, diplomacy and homeland security-- to promote peace, security, and freedom. For example, we need to build joint capabilities by unifying our regional civilian capabilities under single regional leaders equivalent to military commanders such as the CENTCOM commander who oversees the Middle East. To address America's vulnerability to foreign oil, energy independence efforts must move beyond rhetoric to become our generation's equivalent of the Manhattan Project or the mission to the moon. Finally, America should not go it alone. Our strength is amplified when it's combined with that of others. We must reinvigorate old partnerships and alliances, and inaugurate new ones to meet today's challenges. We should combine forces to defeat shared threats such as radical jihad and look to expand cooperation in NATO and elsewhere on issues such as counter-terrorism, nonproliferation and homeland security. As described above, we should unite the leading developed nations and our friends and allies in the Muslim world in a Partnership for Prosperity and Progress to mobilize resources like education, health, banking, and development to win the struggle against radical Islam.

*****

Very specific answers from the best qualified candidate. . . and one wonders why I call myself "Thee Mittiot. . ."

1 DAY UNTIL VICTORY!

~ so sayeth the Mittiot

2 DAYS 'TIL IOWA!

2008-01-01T20:07:00.000-05:00

ON THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN:

First, HAPPY NEW YEAR! Second, nice job U of M - though I am a staunch SPARTAN, today - EVERY MICHIGANIAN IS A WOLVERINE. Hats off to the Florida Gators. . . anybody else, your Mittiot would be doin' the Gator Chump. Lastly, WHAT THE? - I'm thinking that the pollsters of the Des Moines Register have some 'splainin' to do. . .

Real Clear Politics

OR, maybe just the other pollsters are all wrong. . .

As your Mittiot has said before he's not one to dwell on a particular poll - BUT, this one is reportedly the "last poll to be taken prior to caucus." If that's the case, the trends (which are important in political campaigns) are all mucked up.

The CNN Poll over the same period has Romney up (but within the margin) - the ARG Poll taken a day prior has Romney WAY up. Adding to the confusion is that the Clinton camp has faulted the Register for over-inflating the Independents. According to the Clinton Campaign,

"The Des Moines Register Poll this time has 40% independent voters and 5% GOP voters in the poll when past independent participation has been 15% in 2000 and 19% in 2004, and the GOP has generally made up 1% of the vote. So they are depicting an unprecedented departure from historically established turnout patterns in the caucus. Under their model, only 55% of the caucus goers would be Democrats."- Mark Penn.

Did they do the same for the GOP poll? If not, why? (well, if so. . . why?) It's perplexing because the ARG poll (below) gives Mitt a huge lead among Indys, and if the Register's pollsters were inflating the the Indys' impact (as the Clinton camp contends) shouldn't Mitt be way, way, up?

AMERICAN RESOURSE GROUP

Like I said, "the Register has some 'splainin' to do."

Regardless, the bottom line is it all comes down to organization. . . Romney is going to win Iowa!

2 DAYS UNTIL VICTORY!

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

3 DAYS 'TIL IOWA!

2007-12-31T13:24:00.001-05:00

ON THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN:

Side note: Your Mittiot was reading his daily rag here in ol' Jacktown and it mustered a chuckle. The paper allows for "one-liners" in its op-ed section and one of the regular dems put in a quip about "knowing 2008 would be a good year." His rationale? Because it would be Bush's last year in office. Now, knowing the guy's a dem, I get the slight - BUT knowing that the dems haven't done crap-ola while holding the majority in DC, might leave one to conclude that because of GW, this country HAS NOT gone to hell in a hand basket. . . In other words, because of Bush being in the White House, 2008 WILL be a good year. Yep, this is the way I'm choosing to pass it on (though don't tell Huckabee, he might think that's an "arrogant" point of view).

What to say about Iowa? Well, Romney's going to win - which is what I've been predicting even with the 50/50 toss-up. Why? Again, the tie goes to the "organization" when it comes to caucusing. . .

Now, New Hampshire is a bit more art than science. It all depends on who gets out. Your Mittiot isn't losing sleep, however, I think the NH deal was sealed for Romney as soon as the liberal Concorde Monitor opined that Mitt "MUST BE STOPPED." Romney will win New Hampshire and fend off those late charges of desperation.

One thing that does have your Mittiot grinding his hind molars, is the familiar "run to the center" for McCain. . . He wants NH so bad, he's dropped his republican-reformation and has followed the path of milk-toast. Hey, I tell my students to "follow their heart" - if you don't like either of two parties, find another to support, BUT DON'T FAULT THE PARTY. The party is what the members want it to be - if you don't like it. . . get the heck out. Neither the Libertarian-Republican, Ron Paul, nor the Liberal-Republican, John McCain, are representing the true tenants via platform of the "Just-Republican" party.

Now, listen (or read) - Your Mittiot doesn't want to jump on the "negative bandwagon" - and I'm not. I truly do believe any of the GOP (yes, even Ron Paul) would be better then the alternative, and I'm right there come the nomination. So, what's the rant? Well, I guess the long and the short of it is that, to me, a victory is meaningless if we aren't gong to follow through on the principles that have drawn the partisans together. For your Mittiot, in other words, a "Maverick" has no business playing this team sport, and if McCain continues to follow this short-sighted path, he will, again, be stopped in the South. . . and rightfully so.

3 DAYS UNTIL VICTORY!

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

4 DAYS 'TIl IOWA!

2007-12-30T19:09:00.000-05:00

ON THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN:

Whoa Nelly! Things are heating up in Iowa - and the dems continue their same ol' sorry act.

A lot has been said of Mitt being the first in "going negative" - OH REALLY? Where have these individuals been the past six months? I've witnessed multiple times where one of the fellow GOP campaigns paid to have some guy (or girl) dressed as a dolphin wearing a "Flip Romney" shirt to attend each and every Romney event in Michigan. . . What about the GOP campaign (you know who you are - wink, wink) and the paid anti-Romney push-polling in NH and Iowa? And the list goes on. . . But let's quit fooling ourselves shall we - this is a CAMPAIGN. As Putz Matthews likes to say, "This ain't softball." And, if you think the dems are going to play nice come the general - you're an idiot. We'll need a candidate that can hit the trenches and give as good as they get (remember, H. C.'s negatives are 50%). Lastly, let's be clear - unlike some of the candidates who feel some sort of entitlement to the GOP nomination - Romney, himself, has remained positive regarding the GOP and its future - and has been sure to separate the campaign from the individual when talking about our GOP candidates.

Regarding the dems same ol', same ol', your Mittiot was watching FOX Sunday (with that little Huffican, Chris Wallace) and was pleased to note that 3 of the 4 panelists picked Romney to win Iowa. Who was the lone hold out? Go figure, Juan Williams (no relation). Biting at the bit to try and knock Romney down, refusing to acknowledge his strength in Iowa, NH, MI and SC, and being sure to through the "flip flop/Republicans hate all their candidates" rhetoric into the mix, Juan stayed true to color. . . that being "pink" of course.

Latest polls show a dead heat in Iowa. I'm stickin' with my prediction.

4 DAYS UNTIL VICTORY!

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

5 DAYS 'TIL IOWA

2007-12-29T16:02:00.000-05:00

ON THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN:

Here's the prediction - though your Mittiot has been wrong before (I mean who would have thought the Dems would be so stupid re: the Michigan Primary. . . but) - "ROMNEY WINS IOWA."

Not much of a prediction, as he's going to be 1 or 2 for sure - So, what's the kicker? Organization and Money. The Romney team has invested a lot into the organization of Iowa, AND, Romney has had a lot of money to invest into his well-oiled campaign machine in the land of the Hawkeyes. In other words the tipping of scales - especially when talking caucus - comes down to A.) identifying your supporters (done that) and, B.) getting them to the caucus (to be done with great precision).

I've seen - am a part of - Mitt's Michigan Machine and if Iowa's is anything like the Sparton State's - Mitt will win - hence the prediction.

Just a little anecdote to drive home the point. Mackinac Island, last September, BIG REPUBLICAN EVENT/STRAW POLL, Mitt crushes the competition, Huckabee hasn't even enough money to fly out to Michigan's most important GOP fall event. Will he, does he, for Iowa? Fellow Mittiots, this Mittiot is betting "close but no cigar."

At any rate, one thing seems to have become a far gone conclusion, Mitt will be solidly in the top-tier come New Hampshire (and he's lookin' good in MITT-CHIGAN, as well). The question then, is the impact after. . .

The National Review has a good "enter the spin" article here - check it out.

5 Days To VICTORY!

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

6 DAYS 'TIL IOWA

2007-12-28T18:08:00.000-05:00

ON THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN:

In and out, in and out, I KNOW! Your Mittiot feels a bit like the Ross Perot of bloggers. But, I finally got some time. . .

Some of the lax bloggin' is that your Mittiot has found it hard not to lead with the negatives about the rest of field. . . Ronnie R. would be proud that I've taken his 11th commandment to heart. Much of the lax bloggin' comes from the pensiveness of a race too fricken close to call!

But, I'll buck up and tell it like it is. . . this race is Mitt's to lose AND EVERY DEMOCRAT, HUFFICRAT, HUFFICAN, LIBERAL NEWSPAPER, AND SOCIALIST BLOGGER KNOWS IT! And, they are piling on. I especially loved what Bryon York [which I read via Townhall] reported regarding the "anti-endorsement" of Mitt.

After the extraordinary beating it took from the Concord, N.H. Monitor – which a few days ago went out of its way to publish an anti-endorsement of Mitt Romney – the Romney campaign is sending around an email pointing out that the Monitor took some whacks at Ronald Reagan in 1980. From the paper on February 21, 1980:
"Ronald Reagan – The former California governor is simply too old (69), too doctrinaire, too inexperienced in the intricacies of the federal government. We gravely question his capability to withstand the daily physical and emotional battering that the nation's chief executive must endure."

If a rational individual pondered this fact, they might come to the conclusion that "If the Democrats hate him. . . he must be good for the GOP (and the nation for that matter)." The problem: Only 20 percent of voters are what we would call "rational voters." Lets hope in a field of 7 (or so, pending how you count Paul) 20% is enough.

And speaking of the field - why the light coverage over Tancredo's endorsement of Romney? At least Congressman Tancredo knows a winner when he sees one!

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

Now if you'll excuse me, your Mittiot has to go and replace another Romney 4x8 as someone spray-painted an anti-Mormon slur on it before tearing half of it down. . . real nice. . . I'd like to know who that individual is supporting so we could all know the caliber of voter supporting the candidate. . .

THE GOP FLORIDA DEBATE

2007-11-28T23:23:00.001-05:00

ON THE DEBATE:

Your Mittiot will take a stab at deconstructing the debate tomorrow. But, as I know the spin will be zipping through cyberspace come morning, let me toss out the first bias twist:

WHAT THEY'RE REALLY SAYING ABOUT GOVERNOR

MITT ROMNEY AT THE ST. PETERSBURG, FL GOP DEBATE

The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder: "Romney had a strong night, seemed raring to go, seemed to be willing to take on everybody, anybody, all comers, seemed to want to pick every fight possible." (Marc Ambinder, "The Debate In Review," The Atlantic Online Blog, http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/, 11/28/07)

National Review's Seth Leibsohn: "This Is Mitt's Night." (Seth Leibsohn, "This Is Mitt's Night," National Review's The Corner, http://corner.nationalreview.com, Posted 11/28/07)

Bill Bennett: "I think that Romney stood out tonight. I think he was loud and clear. Conservative. He was 'all-in' as you'd say in Texas Hold 'Em." (CNN's Post-Debate Coverage, 11/28/07)

Bill Bennett: "I thought he came across very strong. I think you guys are absolutely right. That opening debate between Romney and Giuliani was, I think, the pivotal point of the evening. And I think points to Romney. Giuliani came across badly." (CNN's Post-Debate Coverage, 11/28/07)

ABC News Live Blog: "Romney is engaging very, very directly -- and dare I say he's getting the better of Giuliani in this exchange, funny accents and all." ("Live-Blogging During GOP Debate," ABC News' Political Radar, http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar, Posted 11/28/07)

· ABC News Live Blog: "And Romney gets the first applause by noting that illegal immigrants already broke the law." ("Live-Blogging During GOP Debate," ABC News' Political Radar, http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar, Posted 11/28/07)

National Review's Kathryn Jean Lopez: "[T]his is Romney's best debate performance yet. He reminds us he has experience and outside of Washington, he's tackled difficult issues, and does not let his temper get the best of him with a New York bully (something that will come in handy)." (Kathryn Jean Lopez, "So Far," National Review's The Corner, http://corner.nationalreview.com, Posted 11/28/07)

CNN's Bill Schneider: "A clever answer from former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney on farming. He says we need food independence like we need energy independence — keep the farmers on the farm. His reasoning: We need to be able to compete with other countries that support their farmers." (Bill Schneider, "Schneider: Romney Scores Points On Farming Answer," CNN's Political Ticker, http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com, Posted 11/28/07)

MSNBC's Domenico Montanaro: "While the sanctuary mansion line got good laughs, Romney's explanation and questions left Giuliani without an answer." (Domenico Montanaro, "Giuliani Flustered?" MSNBC's First Read, http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com, Posted 11/28/07)

National Review's Rich Lowry: "Rudy let his temper get the best of him—clear winner of the exchange: Romney." (Rich Lowry, "Mitt V. Rudy," National Review's The Corner, http://corner.nationalreview.com, Posted 11/28/07)

National Review's Seth Leibsohn: "I'd be surprised after this debate if Mitt doesn't see national numbers looking more like his Iowa or NH numbers after tonight's performance. Brilliant response to the black on black crime questions." (Seth Leibsohn, "Changing Times," National Review's The Corner, http://corner.nationalreview.com, Posted 11/28/07)

The New York Times' Katharine Q. Seelye: "But finally, a father-son team, from Atlanta, want the candidates to talk about black-on-black crime, and while Mr. Romney gets in a nice line about mothers and fathers and family values, none of the candidates really address the issue that the young son raised." (Katharine Q. Seelye, "Live-Blogging the YouTube Debate," The New York Times' The Caucus Blog, http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/, Posted 11/28/07)

National Review's Ramesh Ponnuru: "So Romney did pretty well in the debate, and won the immigration exchange." (Ramesh Ponnuru, "A Good Day for Giuliani," The Corner Blog, corner.nationalreview.com, Posted 11/28/07)

Townhall's Mary Katharine Ham: "Mitt makes a good point that homeowners should not be required to check papers of workers hired for their and connects it to regular Americans by suggesting that that's what Rudy wants them to do." (Townhall, www.townhall.com, Accessed, 11/28/07)

The Plank's Isaac Chotiner: "Romney definitely got the best of Giuliani on their early immigration skirmish (which actually got rather heated). Rudy's line about Romney's mansion was cheap and silly. And Romney is more appealing when going negative than any of the other candidates." (The New Republic's "The Plank," http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/default.aspx, Accessed, 11/28/07)

National Review's Kate O'Beirne: "Romney's reference point about how MA liberals reason is effective. Reminds us that he gets them and fought them." (National Review's "The Corner," http://corner.nationalreview.com, Accessed 11/28/07)

Captain's Quarters' Ed Morrissey: Romney and Huckabee had a good spar over giving better benefits to illegals for school than to citizens. Romney is absolutely 100% right on this issue. I hope Iowans realize that Huckabee may very well be worse than Bush on illegal immigration." (Heading Right," www.headingright.com, Accessed 11/28/07)

~ so sayeth. . . well, a lot smarter people than your Mittiot.

UPDATE: PRIMARY ON?

2007-11-28T11:15:00.001-05:00

ON THE MICHIGAN PRIMARY:

Turns out the dems have voted to support the ballot "as is". . . without Biden, Richardson, Obama, or Edwards on the ballot. See below from our GOP Chair, Saul Anuzis:

MORNING UPDATE: January 15th primary settled…AV applications have been mailed, ballots are being printed…let the games begin!
Republicans are negotiating for a second debate…discussions are on their way with two major networks to hold a debate following the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries. Keep your fingers crossed!
The Democrats foiled a last minute attempt to insure all their candidates would be on the ballot. Senator Clinton is the only major candidate on the Michigan ballot, now the question is will the Obama and Edwards people play in the Democrat primary to embarrass Hillary?
Michigan Democrats Executive Committee then voted last night to go with the January 15th primary as is. So we’ll all make the best of what we have…boy are the Dems screwed up!

So the dems will allow their delegate support to be chosen by primary - without any of the other top-tier candidates on the ballot, AND - because of the DNC rules will only get half the allotted delegates as "punishment" for going early. I just cannot see this going forward. . . but, hey, I'm a Republican. . . we do things a bit differently.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

HOLD ON - PRIMARY IN FLUX

2007-11-28T10:14:00.000-05:00

ON THE MICHIGAN PRIMARY:

CORRECTION: I found out today (well late last night) that the Senate has not - NOT - voted for immediate effect to ad the names of the four dems who filed the paperwork necessary to take their names off the dem ballot (Biden, Richardson, Obama, and Edwards). Without those individuals on the ballot, the dems will have a choice between Hillary. . . and. . . well, that's about it. Your Mittiot cannot see how the state dems will sign off on this - look for a caucus declaration by the end of this week.

If the dems go caucus, the GOP will, MUST, go to a nominating convention.

Michigan weather and Michigan politics. . . never predictable.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

MICHIGAN PRIMARY TO BE HELD

2007-11-27T20:57:00.000-05:00

ON THE MICHIGAN "JOINT" PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY:

Alright. Alright. Your Mittiot knows when he's spittin' into the wind and must admit, begrudgingly, that it looks like the joint Michigan Primary will go - as planned - January 15th. In my humble lil' opinion, there is still a slight chance that another court battle may be brought up in terms of "who's" paying for the re-printing of ballots (explained below) now that the legislature has passed the "primary fix" putting the four dem candidates back on the ballot. However, though anything can happen - as most noted that the chances of the MI Supreme Court reversing both the initial court ruling and the appellate court ruling on the "constitutionality" of original primary legislation were very slim - it appears now all but certain the January 15th primary will go forward. Your Mittiot lost a few bets on this one, as I was certain the dems would prefer to caucus behind closed doors to choose their candidate, while enjoying the privilege of voting in the GOP primary to "help us" choose our candidate. BUT, I believe we will get a true, competitive, primary election. . . which is a good thing.

Here's the run down if your head is spinning. Both the state dems and GOP wanted to move Michigan up to have a little more prominence in the process of bumping candidates forward in the election process. This brings not only political advantages to the state, but also some economic plums. Iowa and NH, of course, wish to retain their prominence - which I can't blame them for - and applied pressure to the RNC and the DNC to reconcile the leap frogging, encroachment. On top of that - in an effort to appease the "first in the nation" states - Democrats (unwisely) promised to not campaign in Michigan (or Florida) as punishment. On top of this, four candidates (Biden, Richards, Obama, and Edwards) went as far as to file paperwork to have their names removed from the Michigan primary ballot all together - which left Clinton as the only top-tier candidate on the ballot.

earlier this month, as noted in previous blogs, a dem operative and data broker named Mark Grebner filed a lawsuit questioning the legality of the original January 15th primary legislation which gave the ballot preference data only to the dem party and the GOP. In other words, when a voter requests either a GOP ballot or a dem ballot - that recorded info would only be handed over to the respective parties.

Grebner was successful in persuading the lower court that the law was unconstitutional and the primary was off. On behalf of the SOS, the AG asked for an emergency appeal and the appellate court took a gander at the case. The MI Court of Appeals concurred with the lower court finding that the January 15th primary was, indeed, unconstitutional. An appeal was made to the state Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, legislation was already working its way through Lansing to put the four candidates back on the ballot - so a full, competitive slate of candidates appeared on the dem ballot. The legislation passed the Senate, but failed to get the necessary votes for "immediate effect" - which meant the names would be put back on the ballot (given the House concurred) but AFTER the election took place. Regardless, the vehicle was in place to legislatively address the issues noted by the court regarding the ballot preference data. However, the dems refused to take up the legislation. And this is where we sat just prior to Thanksgiving.

The Wednesday before Thanksgiving, I got email after email noting the the MI Supreme Court reviewed the case and reversed the decisions of the two lower courts. The primary was back on. . . BUT, we still have the dem names off the ballot, the need for the state party to sign off on the plan, AND, now we were getting some grumblings from the MI Clerks Association that there was not enough time to get the ballots printed and out to - among others - the military absentee voters.

On Monday, the legislation adding the four dems back to the ballot was taken up and passed - but, again, DEMOCRATS would not give the bill immediate affect. So on Monday, I was holding my bet that the primary would not go on. Among the things listed above as road bumps, I was also certain, the REPUBLICANS would not allow a defacto repeat of 2000 (dems caucus, GOP holds "open" primary - only this time, dems only have Hillary on the ballot and the GOP holds an "open" primary).

Today, I got word that the legislature has put the four candidates back on the ballot - with immediate effect - and ballots will be printed this weekend (if not sooner). The primary appears to be on. AND, thanks to a late showing by Obama in Iowa, the election could actually be competitive - meaning the dems will stay on the dem side. . .

What might derail the process? The dems may still conclude that they're going to caucus to decide whom their candidate will be (though at this point, I doubt it). Someone may file a lawsuit that stops the process again, on the grounds that the primary will disenfranchise the absentee voters. OR, the cost of reprinting ballots with the four names will become a point of contention. Possibly, one of the candidates whose name was added back on the ballot might sue, though I'm not sure why you'd want to do that - other than to get a boost in Iowa or NH (look for Obama to sniff that one). But all in all, weighing the possible outcomes, I am ready to pay my dollar to my good friend whom I bet regarding the viability of the MI January primary. . . I hate you, Steve.

And, that's where we're at. . . though - like the Michigan weather - if you don't like it, wait a minute. . . it'll change.

ON THE HUCKABEE "SURGE":

Yeah, right. . . .

~so sayeth the Mitiot.

PS. Kudos to Megyn Kelly for refusing to allow Billy O the ability to drop the very, very, poor decision of a Mass. judge at the feet of former governor Mitt Romney. That's BS Bill, and you know it.

AWOL

2007-11-12T22:53:00.000-05:00

ON BEING ABSENT THE LAST 2 WEEKS:

Howdy fellow Mittiots - for those readers (and there can't be many of you) that have been twitchin' for your daily dose of the Mittiot - well, mia culpa.

As you may or may not be aware, as reported again , and again, and again. . . by your Mittiot, Michigan is looking more and more like the Dems will screw up the joint primary scheduled for the 15th of January. The latest: A judge in Ingham county declared the law that structured the joint primary UNCONSTITUTIONAL in deference to a "list broker (and dem operative)" named Mark Grebner. The suit had to deal with whether or not the parties could have sole access to the "open" primary voters ballot choices. To be truthful, that kinda struck me as odd when the legislation was proposed, too, BUT the timing of all this is very suspect. We have less than a week until the deadline for pulling out of the primary passes. IF the corrective legislation does not make it to the gov's desk ASAP, I guarantee the dems will use the cover to caucus. Once again, the dem's have the ball in their court. We'll see if they back the/their gov, or back their party bosses who seem to prefer the caucus model. . . time will tell - SOON.

Interesting week, both McCain and Ann Romney found their way to the "Birthplace of the Republican Party" - JACKSON. As a good Republican, I made sure to verbally support the John McCain event which had a pretty good turnout (though his appearance was up in the air until the day of the event). As a good Republican Mittiot, however, I spent a lot of time and effort in assistance to ensure the Ann Romney/Jackson Coffee House Event was a success - which it was!

Mrs. Romney arrived on a Friday morning (8 am) and spent a couple of hours with a strong Jackson cross section. By the by, everything positive you believe of Mrs. Romney is absolutely true. She was/is the epitome of what a first lady should be: Kind, honest, approachable, self assured. . . in short a true "Lady." We hope she finds her way back to Jackson as often as possible (she might even want to bring her husband by. . .)

A Saturday prior, we had the Michigan v. Michigan State game - and Mitt was there, surrounded by some 400 of his closest "tailgating" (coffee donuts and soda pop) friends. Great game - crappy outcome. . .

Throw on top of those major events the duties of a husband, father, instructor, political operative (local elections) and community supporter (we're working on securing a SmartZone designation) - and AWOL is the outcome. . . Hey, I'm trying.

Lastly, for those who were never AWOL (I'm speaking of our military vets) WE HONOR YOU ON VETERANS DAY. MAY GOD BLESS EACH OF YOU. My family and I appreciate your sacrifice for our freedoms EVERYDAY.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

ROMNEY: LOOKIN' GOOD

2007-10-29T18:00:00.000-05:00

ON ROMNEY "DOING IT THE RIGHT WAY:"

Your Mittiot just got back to his computer after a weekend of hunting wood chickens (grouse, for you non-hunting types) and closing the family shack down for the long Spartan state winter. As the primary gets close here in Mitt-chigan, your Mittiot is getting more and more antsy. When I picked up my pop to head North, I felt "good" about our campaign and the effort being put forth by - most importantly - our man Mitt, but when I got the chance today to get caught up regarding the weekend's headlines: YOUR HAPPY MITTIOT FEELS GREAT!

It started with this little gem:

Keene: Romney in Best Position for GOP Nomination NEWSMAX By: Ronald Kessler Monday, October 29, 2007 10:35 AM http://www.newsmax.com//kessler/Keene_on_Romney_Giuliani/2007/10/29/44799.html Mitt Romney is in the best position to win the Republican nomination, Dave Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union, tells Newsmax.
While Rudy Giuliani leads in the polls, Keene says most people have not begun to focus on the election. Once they do, they will recognize how liberal Giuliani is on some social issues like abortion and gay rights, and Republicans overall will tilt against him. Then Romney’s strategy of focusing on key states like Iowa and New Hampshire could propel him to the nomination, Keene says.
“Romney’s doing it the right way, in my view,” Keene says over lunch at the Palm. “My view’s colored by history, and these other guys seem to be betting that history doesn’t matter, and I’m not sure that’s true. If you win the first contest, and they’re close enough to the second contest, you get an enormous boost. And the idea that the onrush of big primaries makes those early contests unimportant may be 180 degrees wrong.”
[Full Article Here]

Had a sprinkle of this (after reading the 140th email - it would be nice if everything stopped when you went on vacay. . .):

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: GOVERNOR ROMNEY ON CNBC'S "MAD MONEY"
Governor Mitt RomneyCNBC's "Mad Money"October 26, 2007
Governor Romney On The Democrats' Massive Tax Increase Proposals:
CNBC's Jim Cramer: "One of the things that you have been noted for, you've been a great tax cutter, which has worked. Are there situations where you could see it on some vice, perhaps, or it's some way to be able to help the energy situation, that you would actually favor a tax or a higher tax than we currently have?" Governor Romney: "You know, when you open that door, you end up saying, 'Katie, bar the door.' The Democrats, like Hillary Clinton, want to put in place a new Social Security tax, they want higher income taxes, higher taxes on capital gains, dividends and interest. Charlie Rangel just came out this week saying he wants to put a surcharge on taxes, largest increase in the history of America. Look, more taxes are what the Democrats have in mind to fund many of Hillary Clinton's million good ideas. We can't afford that. It would slow down the economy. It would kill job creation in this country. The right answer is always to keep taxes down. Don't add new taxes, but instead allow the American people and the entrepreneurial spirit to grow our economy. That's the best way to get revenues for government and the best ways to get good jobs for our people." To watch Governor Romney, please see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_0p6T2ui4A
Governor Romney: "We're Tired Of All The Talk, We Want To Get Somebody Who Can Get The Job Done":
Cramer: "You're running as a business president. I've seen something – I do this college tour, and I've seen something that's pretty amazing about it. The people in their 20s and their 30s in this country, now revere business, respect what business people do, and I think are inclined to want to talk openly about making money and I think would embrace a candidate like you because you've made a lot of money. Are you seeing the same thing on your campaign trail?" Governor Romney: "You know, I do think people want to have individuals who are not lifelong politicians, but folks that know how to solve tough problems. And you know, if you've been in the consulting world or the investment world, you learn how to look at a tough situation, get people to come together, analyze it, take it apart, figure out the right direction. And frankly, our country needs to have some smart people with private sector experience, business experience, to look at the problems we have here and around the world and solve them, to get the job done. We're tired of all the talk, we want to get somebody who can get the job done." To watch Governor Romney, please see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJsYBgCCqCI
Cramer On Being Interviewed By Governor Romney:
Cramer: "And then there was the second man, the man I'm about to bring on, who perhaps more than any recruiter I ever met influenced me toward a new career. That man's name is Mitt Romney. He was working at Bain at the time, the top consulting company in the country. And he sat down with me, not that he would ever remember, and grilled me about what I could bring to the Bain party. He quizzed me about going around the globe fixing companies worldwide and about how I could assess companies on returns, on equity returns on investments, present value of the earnings stream, how earnings could be augmented. Synergy. I listened as he asked in his intense, eye-piercing way, rattling off questions like a Gatling gun, asked me perhaps the most difficult inquiries I've ever been grilled about. At the end of the meeting, I'd made up my mind. The guy was just too darn smart and demanding, too way ahead of me, too rigorous a businessman for Cramer! I was, in a word, intimidated!
"I'm trying to think about another time in my life that I've ever had that experience. Anyway, he made my mind up. I was going, not to Bain, but to Goldman. That's why I had no problem when I was on Chris Matthews’ show recently and called him perhaps the best businessman in the country. It was personal experience. Now, the quote's been enshrined in the businessman's ads, caused me some grief, and I must add amusement, because I didn't mean it as an endorsement for anyone for president. I just meant to tell the truth about his rigor, acumen and ability." To watch Governor Romney, please see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5JZCvLGQMc

And finished with this:

Election 2008:

New Hampshire Republican Primary New Hampshire: Romney 28% Giuliani 19% McCain 16% RASMUSSEN REPORTS Friday, October 26, 2007 [SEE POLL HERE]
Mitt Romney has re-asserted his lead in the New Hampshire Republican Presidential Primary. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey shows that Romney holds a nine-point advantage over Rudy Giuliani in the Granite State. That’s up from a three-point lead in September. .
Romney is also ahead in Iowa where Fred Thompson and Mike Huckabee are in a virtual tie for second. In Iowa, six-out—ten voters said they might change their mind before the caucus and vote for someone else. The current New Hampshire poll finds that roughly half of the potential voters for this first-in-the-nation primary are open to changing their mind. Giuliani is viewed favorably by 77% of Likely Primary voters, Romney by 75%. Positive reviews for McCain come from 69% while only 51% say the same about Thompson. Forty-five percent (45%) have a positive impression of Huckabee who remains an unknown to 19% of the state’s voters. Thompson has accomplished something once thought impossible—he now has higher negative ratings among Republican Primary Voters than McCain. Thirty-eight percent (38%) of those likely to vote in New Hampshire’s primary have an unfavorable opinion of the former Tennessee Senator.

WHAT A WEEKEND!

~so sayeth the Mittiot

SOMETHING DIFFERENT. . .

2007-10-23T21:09:00.001-05:00

ON MITT'S BUSINESS EXPERIENCE:

I guess as your typical GOP primary voter, your Mittiot has gotten all caught up in the struggle for the Social Conservatives like most of the bloggers, etc. Your main Mittiot, here, pronounced his trust in Mitt (having met him and listened to the guy, personally, in small group settings - which, I dare say, if you do once, you'll not need to do again. . . Mitt Romney radiates optimism, confidence, and capability), and I want others to trust him, as well, as the pro-family guy he obviously is. BUT, I was reminded today while searching the web for all things Romney that Mitt's truest strength is his business experience.

When you get right down to it, government is first and foremost a business. The central government's "Mission Statement" rests atop the Constitution, as in: "We the people. . more perfect union. . . justice, domestic tranquillity, common defense, GENERAL welfare, liberty, etc, etc." In essence, there are "shareholders" (you and I), a Board of Directors (Congress), a Chief Executive (the Chief Executive), and the minions necessary (or not) to carry out the "Mission."

Ideas are certainly important, but not more important than an understanding of leadership and organizational structure and incentive and watching the bottom-line. All things absolutely necessary in the corporate world, but often found lacking in the public/political world. In short, D.C. government is the largest business of all.

Now, you may some how doubt Mitt's support for the unborn (I do not). You may some how doubt Mitt's stance regarding gay marriage (I do not). BUT, THERE IS NO DOUBTING THAT MITT ROMNEY HAS THE CORPORATE BACKGROUND NECESSARY TO RUN THE BUSINESS THAT IS GOVERNMENT. No other candidate (republican or democrat) comes close.

There was a "typical" article your Mittiot came across at the Campaigns&Elections website (I've linked to it via TeamRomney.com). Now, I say typical, because I've read the same thing many times re: Mitt at various Economic Club luncheons and Chamber get togethers. Your Mittiot has blogged about it before, in fact, and that's Mitt's absolute comfort in discussing the tenants of macro and micro economics. Formally degreed in business coupled with "real world" experience, Romney shines.

This is Romney's truest strength. And at the federal level this matters immensely - whether executing the steps necessary to protect our borders, our families, or our economy.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot

CHRIS MATTHEWS IS A PUTZ

2007-10-22T21:09:00.000-05:00

ON CATCHING HARDBALL. . .

. . . while flipping through the channels - Your Mittiot doesn't waste his time on the second class "news" channels like MSNBC. . . when sportscasters become "learned pundits" by changing the countdown from football and tennis to foreign affairs and economic policy - then the bottom of the barrel has truly been scraped. Chris Matthews, on the other hand, I've always thought a pretty descent guy (in spite of his liberal leanings). But his unabashed, single-minded, hunt to bring Mitt Romney down is beneath even the title of "newsman," and has sucked any "respect" from the soul of this lil' political science professor.

A quest for all you Mittiots and non-Mittiots alike: Find me ONE thing, ONE THING, that Chris Matthews has said positive about Romney. Show me where he has given Mitt credit for being a success by anyone's standards. Show me just an inkling of the respect that Mitt Romney has MOST DEFINATELY earned. Until your Mittiot sees the notated quote, he will - from this day forward - continue to refer to the subject at hand as "Putz Matthews." AND, referring to Mitt's "chiseled looks," doesn't count - especially when it's followed up by, "he seems fake. . ."

By the by, the part I caught was Matthews on the proverbial high horse giving Romney a dressing down about his answer to the "28% not voting for a Mormon." First, is Matthews really so stupid as to believe that many if not all those 28% are actually considering the Mormon issue, and NOT the fact that the ONLY candidate in the race who is Mormon is the REPUBLICAN, Mitt Romney. Do you think for a minute, that maybe, just maybe, this media driven "issue" is more about partisan politics and Romney getting elected than a Mormon in the Oval Office. Could that be? Is that possible, Chris, or ahhh, "Putz"?

Romney's line about 28% actually referring to Harry Reid and his being a Mormon was a good answer, that Putz fell right into. The fact that, "most Americans do not know Harry Reid is a Mormon. . ." as Putz so aptly put it, is exactly why being a Mormon is not an issue except to the Media, and Hufficrats. If being a Mormon were so high on the list of issues that voters cannot seem to get past, why is it that "NO ONE KNOWS HARRY REID IS A MORMON?" If it's so on the minds of us common folk, just how could the highest ranking Senator have "snuck" through. . . Answer us all that one.

For just a teaser, here's a fine example of Matthews in action:

JOHN MCCAIN: I'm sorry you brought it up, because I have to quickly say, what I said about the flag in South Carolina was an act of cowardice on my part.
MATTHEWS: Well, what's he doing? What's Romney doing? He has flipped on everything. Well, I don't want to put the words in my mouth [you just did, Chris.] If he's pro-choice in Massachusetts to get elected, now he's pro-life to win a national Republican referendum, what is he?
MCCAIN: I think that's for the voters to determine, but think we all run on our record. I am a proud, conservative Republican. There are other conservative Republicans in the race. I don't lay claim to the mantle. I do lay claim to the strength of my credentials and knowledge and background on national security issues which I think is the transcendent challenge of our time. Radical Islamic extremism. I'm the most prepared. I believe at least my qualifications I hope have earned me the voters' consideration.

[Complete Story Here]

NO, I'm not really going to continue to refer to Chris matthews as Putz Matthews - but the point has been made. And, the challenge is still there.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

MITTIOT SPECIAL EDITION

2007-10-22T13:18:00.001-05:00

ON DR. WILLKE'S ENDORSEMENT:

Just a quick one to, again, slam the Media who keep noting "Romney cannot get the support of Christian/Social Conservatives, blah, blah, blah. . ." well, HA! you're wrong. Now, who's got the cojones to admit it?

Dr. John Willke Endorses Mitt Romney

Monday, October 22, 2007 11:28 AM

By: Newsmax Staff

The doctor known as the founder of the pro-life movement has endorsed former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney in his bid for the Republican presidential nomination.
Dr. John Wilke, an original member of Senator Sam Brownback's Exploratory Committee, has thrown his support to Romney in the wake of Senator Brownback's withdrawal from the race.
"Unlike other candidates who only speak to the importance of confronting the major social issues of the day, Governor Romney has a record of action in defending life," Dr. Willke said. "Every decision he made as governor was on the side of life. I know he will be the strong pro-life president we need in the White House, Governor Romney is the only candidate who can lead our pro-life and pro-family conservative movement to victory in 2008."
Dr. Willke's fervent support should help erase doubts about Romney's commitment to the pro-life cause, which has been questioned due to his former position in support of abortion when he was governor of Massachusetts.

[READ COMPLETE ARTICLE HERE]

~ so "told you so" the Mittiot

THE HUFFICRATS ARE IN DENIAL - NOT A REPEAT. . .

2007-10-21T20:07:00.000-05:00

. . . it's the same ol' same ol', but not a repeat!

ON WINNING THE VALUES VOTERS SUMMIT STRAW POLL:

Once again, Romney proves he is the principled choice for the GOP. And, once again, the Media refuses to give him the credit due. Here's the headline from CNN: Romney wins straw poll at Values Voters Summit. And, here's the analysis:

"It's hard to gauge how big a victory this is for Romney because we're not entirely sure whether these voters represent the larger Christian conservative constituency," CNN senior political analyst Bill Schneider said.

"Romney won the Ames, Iowa, straw poll in August by spending a lot of money. We don't know how much of an organizational effort was behind this victory," he said.

"Romney's true acceptability to Christian conservatives will not become clear until we see how he does in January in the Iowa Republican caucuses and the South Carolina Republican Primary.

"But the results suggest that being a Mormon may be a barrier for winning the support of Christian conservatives," Schneider said. [emphasis, mine]

What the? Romney wins the straw poll, but the "results suggest that being a Mormon will be a barrier. . ." You're joking, right? What the heck kind of analysis is that?

And, your Mittiot would be remiss if he didn't report the "FOX KNOX". Your Mittiot was watching thee FOX today and the setup by the anchor to the panel was something along the lines of: "Mitt Romney won the Values Voters Straw Poll, AND RECEIVED THE ENDORSEMENTS OF BOB JONES III AND DON WILTON (see blog below), it seems Mitt Romney is quickly becoming the Social Conservative's choice. . . (I'm paraphrasing)". And the response from the panel was: "Nope, no way - these were just Internet votes - Huckabee is the real choice. . . They'll never support a Mormon. . . He's well organized, but he's not the conservatives choice. . ." something like that. . . which is just a bunch of HOOEEE. Not one of the "panelists" took into consideration the FACT that Bob Jones and Don Wilton have each ALREADY ENDORSED MITT. No Internet cloak, no Mormon question still out there. These guys - REAL LIFE SOUTHERN CONSERVATIVES - have endorsed our man Mitt. . . it sure is becoming the same 'ol, same 'ol. . .

~so sayeth the Mittiot, what say you FOX?

THE HUFFICRATS ARE IN DENIAL!

2007-10-19T15:15:00.000-05:00

ON YET ANOTHER KEY SOCIAL CONSERVATIVE ENDORSEMENT:

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 TeamRomney.com, 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. . .

ON THE CONNIE MACK ENDORSEMENT:

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]

ROMNEY'S GOING TO BE OUR NOMINATION AND OUR PRESIDENT!

~ so sayeth the Mittiot!

RERUN OF THE ROMNEY?HUTCHISON DREAM TEAM:

THE DREAM TEAM:

ON MITT'S RUNNING-MATE:

Your Mittiot was just picking through a "UltiMitt.org" 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 UltiMitt.org 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?

ROSE TINTED GLASSES?

2007-10-16T18:24:00.000-05:00

ON THE RECENT FAMILY DISCUSSION:

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.

ON THE FORTHCOMING BOB JONES UNIV. ENDORSEMENT:

"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]

ON THE "ANTI-VALUES" VOTER:

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

THE SPARTAN STATE GOP DEBATE

2007-10-10T21:33:00.001-05:00

ON YESTERDAY'S DEBATE:

Well, your Mittiot has seen the debate two and one half times now, and in my very bias opinion - as a Michiganian - Sheffield couldn't have knocked it out of the park any further Mitt Tuesday night.

Just between you and me, fellow Michiganians - the choice is clear - the Spartan State cannot afford to pass up a Romney Presidency. Mitt knows manufacturing, Mitt knows the auto industry, Mitt knows Michigan. I don't give a flyin' rat what you say about any other candidate - when it comes to Michigan, there's none better than Mitt Romney. PERIOD (and, yes I spelled out the punctuation).

My good friend Jason McBride (who is doing a bang up job as Michigan Campaign Director) sent me the following run down of "What They're Saying About Romney:"

The Street.com's John Fout: "Former Mass. Gov. Mitt Romney, who I think won the debate, was best prepared to answer the question. He suggested everyone had to pitch in to help the economy, including business and government. He recognized the need to fix schools, invest in technology, encourage free trade and keep taxes down. He took a shot at Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, a Democrat, by jokingly suggesting he was 'nervous she would put a tax on the debate.'" (John Fout, "Middle Class Can't Read GOP's Lips In Debate," The Street.com, http://www.thestreet.com/markets/marketfeatures/10383621.html, Posted 10/9/07)
The New York Times' Adam Nagourney And Marc Santora: "Mr. Romney was sharpest in attacking Mr. Giuliani for efforts against the line-item veto. 'Mayor Giuliani took the line-item that the president had all the way to the Supreme Court and took it away from the president of the United States,' he said. 'I think that was a mistake.'" (Adam Nagourney and Marc Santora, "Romney and Giuliani Spar as New Guy Looks On," The New York Times, 10/10/07)
Detroit News Editorial: "All get the connection between lower taxes and higher economic growth, but only former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney brought it home to Michigan, slamming Gov. Jennifer Granholm for the recent budget-balancing tax hikes." (Editorial, "GOP debate validates state's primary decision," Detroit News, 10/10/07)
ABC's Brett Hovell And Christine Byun: "Romney delivered the line of the debate with his analysis of the actor's entry onto the stage. 'Is this our sixth debate, I think, something like that?' Romney began. 'This is a lot like "Law & Order," Senator. It has a huge cast, the series seems to go on forever, and Fred Thompson shows up at the end.'" (Brett Hovell and Christine Byun, "Romney Vs. Giuliani On Taxes," ABC News, http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3709996&page=1, 10/9/07)
The New York Sun's Seth Gitell: "The former Massachusetts governor also scored early in the debate by bringing up the tax increase supported by Governor Granholm of Michigan, an issue of intense interest to Republicans in the Great Lake State, where Mr. Romney's father, George Romney, once served as governor." (Seth Gitell, "Giuliani, Romney Outshine Thompson In GOP Debate," The New York Sun, 10/10/07)
The National Review Jim Geraghty: "Romney: Overall, prepared and seemed sharp… ." (Jim Geraghty, "The Republican Debate In Michigan: The Wrap-up," The Campaign Spot Blog On The National Review, http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZWM3OTU2MTM3ZTEzYjI2MmUyNjQ4MDg2ODNlZWM5NjQ, Posted 10/9/07)
Detroit Free Press' Joe Guy Collier & Justin Hyde: "Michigan native and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney offered the most extensive comments on the industry's plight, saying the next president should have an open door to industry executives and boost spending on research into new energy-saving technology." (Justin Hyde And Joe Guy Collier, "Candidates Touch On Auto Industry," Detroit Free Press, 10/9/07)
Columnist Matt Towery: "Best Performances: Romney… Most 'Presidential': Romney…" (Matt Towery, "Thompson Becomes Real - Now He Has To Get Better," Insider Advantage Georgia, http://www.insideradvantagegeorgia.com/restricted/2007/October-202007/10-10-07/Instant_Analysis101019633.php, Posted 10/9/07)
The Politico's Jonathan Martin: "Romney was at his best in citing his native's state economic troubles and explaining to appreciative Michigan Republicans in the audience what he thought part of the problem was. 'Jennifer Granholm has made a big mistake by raising taxes,' Romney said of the Democratic governor Wolverine State Republicans love to hate." (Jonathan Martin, "Rudy-Romney Dust-Up Overshadows Fred Debut," Politico.com, http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1007/6276.html, Posted 10/9/07)
Time's Mark Halperin: "Mitt Romney: Frequent references to Michigan — where he grew up and where the debate w as held — were clever and well received in the hall." (Mark Halperin, "The October 9 Republican Debate," Time Website, http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,
1669812_1669813_1669814,00.html, Posted 10/9/07)
Robert Bluey At Bluey Blog: "Mitt Romney had the best line during today's Republican presidential debate." (Robert Bluey, "Making Fun Of Fred," Bluey Blog, http://robertbluey.com/blog/2007/10/09/making-fun-of-fred/, Posted 10/9/07)
The Politico's Mike Allen: "The former Massachusetts governor showed backbone by saying he 'can't wait' to debate Hillary Clinton, who was the 10th albeit invisible candidate on the stage." (Mike Allen, "Head Or Gut?" Politico Playbook, 10/10/07)
Detroit News' Henry Payne: "Romney made a sharp joke at the outset about Governor Granholm's tax reflex, but for Democrats it's not funny. With a hugely unpopular- not to mention cruel - income tax on voters struggling under soaring home foreclosure and unemployment rates, Democrats have changed the subject in Michigan from war to taxes." (Henry Payne, "Thompson Loses, GOP Gains," Detroit News Blog, http://info.detnews.com/weblog/index.cfm?blogid=10730, Posted 10/9/07)
McClatchy's Steven Thomma: "In perhaps the best line of the evening, Romney likened Thompson's late entry into the debates to his often-late appearances in his TV series. 'This is a lot like Law & Order,' Romney said. 'It has a huge cast, the series seems to go on forever and Fred Thompson shows up at the end.'" (Steven Thomma, "Thompson's Debate Debut A Dud," McClatchy Newspapers, 10/10/07)
Fox News' Steve Doocy: "Former Governor Mitt Romney got the line of the day as he welcomed Fred." (FOX News' "Fox & Friends," 10/10/07)
Michigan State News' Ashley A. Smith: "One of the major candidates who seemed the most comfortable addressing Michigan's issues was Mitt Romney, said Bill Ballenger, editor and publisher of Inside Michigan Politics." (Ashley A. Smith, "GOP Comes To Mich," Michigan State News, 10/10/07)

As for the other candidates - God love 'em - it can't be easy coming into some one's own backyard and trying to out shine them. Your Mittiot gives 'em credit for trying, however.

Lastly, how 'bout that line item veto(LIV) debate? The question for Rudy is if it had been Libby Dole's current LIV proposal that went through and the president - regardless of who it was - struck out the same line item New York City "deserved" would Rudy have fought that all the way to the Supreme Court? The fact is the Supreme Court cannot act without a trigger - Giuliani was the trigger that killed the LIV.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

WE'LL COVER THE DEBATE TOMORROW

2007-10-09T20:34:00.000-05:00

ON THE DEARBORN DEBATE:

"I was afraid Granholm was going to tax the debate. . ." - Mitt Romney. Priceless.

We'll hit the debate tomorrow. Your Mittiot was on the road from ol' Jack-town to Dearborn during most of it to join Mitt and Ann in Dearborn after the debate and missed everything but Mitt's opener. I'm hoping CNBC replays it late night. By the by, don't get the wrong impression, your Mittiot was with about 200 of "his closest friends" waiting to cheer Gov. & Mrs. Romney as they came to a local eatery - not just hanging out at the Ford estate sipping tea with our next president. . . At any rate, we'll do a breakdown of the debate tomorrow. If I had to sum up what I've read, heard, and pretty much know: "This is becoming a Rudy/Romney Race."

ON THE RUDY/ROMNEY RACE:

Speaking of that, did anyone out there in the Zone catch Hannity and Combs last night? I'm speaking specifically of the Dr. James Dobson interview.

"HANNITY: Let me run through this a different way, because I think if we believe the polls — and sometimes they can be wrong — but I think right as of now the candidate for the Republicans will either be Rudy Giuliani, Senator Fred Thompson, or Mitt Romney — Governor Romney. And in the case of John McCain, he's still doing fairly well in the polls. You have now said publicly you will not support Rudy, you will not support Fred Thompson, you will not support John McCain. . ."

Which leaves "Governor Romney" as the only top-tier candidate "supportable" by Focus on the Family. . . COME ON SEAN, JOIN THE ROMNEY TRAIN. Hmmmmmmm, why won't the Media, Hufficrats and Hufficans acknowledge Mitt is the guy the GOP can/must support? [Read transcript - Watch video]

ON THE DEMOCRATS PULLING OUT OF THE MICHIGAN PRIMARY:

THIS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTABLE. Chairman Anuzis, we cannot - WILL NOT - have a repeat of 2000. The result was detrimental to our state and to our party. We have, quite frankly, been ignored by Washington ever since. Saul, call the Convention - forget the Primary ASAP (which means as soon as we know Hillary will be the only top tier candidate on the ballot - oh, it looks like we know this already). See story below:

Five Democrats Withdraw From Michigan Primary Tuesday , October 09, 2007
Five Democratic presidential candidates said Tuesday they would remove their names from primary ballots in Michigan, hoping to deal a blow to those who are pushing to elevate their home state's heft in the election process by front-loading the primary calendar.
Barack Obama and John Edwards, who trail only Hillary Clinton in the polls, as well as Bill Richardson and Dennis Kucinich filed paperwork to officially withdraw from the Jan. 15 contest, and Joe Biden said he would be following suit shortly.
Clinton's campaign said Tuesday she would remain in the Michigan race as did Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd. In the most recent national polls, Clinton is leading her closest opponent — Obama — by 20 points or more, and could be breaking the three-way dead heat in Iowa among her, Obama and Edwards.

[See Complete Story Here]

It may be too early for I told you so. . . but I'm erasing the pencil and inking in the January 29th date - I recommend you do the same. Stay tuned Mittiots.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot

ROMNEY'S UP IN SOUTH CAROLINA!

2007-10-07T18:56:00.001-05:00

ON THE RECENT S.C. POLL:

Holy Cow! Mitt Romney is in the lead in South Carolina according to the most recent poll. [Check it out here]

Sept. 2007.. Aug. 2007.. Jul. 2007

Mitt Romney.......... 26%..... 9%..... 7%

Rudy Giuliani ..........23% .....26% .....28%

John McCain ..........15%..... 12% .....10%

Fred Thompson ........10% .....21% .....27%

Newt Gingrich

(not running) .....,......7% .....6% .....7%

Undecided ...............13% .....12% .....13%

I know, I know polls-shmolls, but trends, my friends are valuable. For instance, your Mittiot wonders if the Media will finally acknowledge that "even those Southern Baptists could support Mitt" ("those" being how the Media and Hufficrats refer to the great conservatives of the South) instead of constantly beating the "they would never support a Mormon" drum. Another way to put it is: see Bob Novak, you're wrong - this is Media/Hufficrat hype. I've said it a dozens times, "Republicans want a man who share's their values regardless of how they come by those values. . . even "those" Southern Baptists Republicans.

ON FOX(?):

That's the question, isn't it? Will FOX acknowledge Mitt's lead in IOWA, NEW HAMPSHIRE, MICHIGAN, NEVADA, and now SOUTH CAROLINA? I guess we'll see.

The fact that MSNBC or the Hufficrats and other Media refuse to mention that Mitt's in the driver's seat is fine - it's expected, but ol' "fair and balanced" missing the point that where Mitt campaigns, Mitt wins? COME ON!

ON THE ISLAND:

For the Michiganians (or others looking to take a trip to the Great Lakes State), attached is the link to Mitt's Mackinac Conference album - where, by the by, Mitt took 39% of the straw-poll. . . which FOX. . . oh, never mind.

ON THE RE-RUN:

Your Mittiot's running a blog we ran a couple of weeks ago - it's not de'ja vu, just a damn fine blog I want to make sure is read! The Mittiot here is still stickin' to his suspicion about the January 15th "joint" primary. If Hillary becomes all but a done deal, as Gore was in 2000, look for the dems to go "Caucus" and shenanigans to happen in the "GOP" primary. If the DNC continues to play hardball, the Granholm and crew have the perfect cover.

RE-RUN - ECHOING YOUR MITTIOT:

ON THE FULL OUT ASSAULT ON THE TRUE GOP FRONT-RUNNER:

Alex Gage, Strategist for the Romney Campaign, sent out a memo to Team Romney giving a thumbnail of where we are and what to expect. No real revelations, just sound, "gut-check time," advice. [The full memo can be read here.] The bottom line: NOW IS THE TIME we have less than 100 days before Iowa and if you were looking to get involved, well, WE NEED YOU. Contributions are great, but what your Mittiot truly needs is the commitment to get yourself to the Michigan primary - to answer the calls when the pollsters ring - to become a VOCAL advocate for Mitt Romney - to talk to your neighbors and write into the paper. NOW IS THE TIME.

Listen, here's how it's gonna play out. Your Mittiot is still not convinced there will be a joint primary with the dems this January 15th. As such, going it alone - and allowing the dems and left-leaners to dink around in our GOP primary - is not on the table. If the dems pull-out, and I believe there's a better than 50/50 chance they will, we need to be ready to go with a GOP State Nominating Convention January 29th (so hold that date). We're in good shape if we do go to the convention back-up, as highlighted by the Mackinac Conference. HOWEVER, we need to collectively keep working the delegates.

Now, your Mittiot knows not all GOP faithful are as enlightened as we Mitt-backers, BUT your Mittiot also knows that Giuliani is the least favorite choice of the tried and true conservative. The second, item in the "play out" scenario is that this race is shaping up to be one between Romney and Giuliani (and Paul. . . no not really). Hear me out: Thompson never should have entered the race and his "I'm in now" bump has all but evaporated in the EP states, the fact that Newt is looking to get in should be an indication of Thompson chances. Leaving McCain and Giuliani and the rest of the guys.

McCain has had a "surge" according to the Media but the truth is he's nearly out of cash and individuals aren't popping open their pocket books, again, or "this time" with the looming, large, shadow of doubt cast upon the chance of a McCain victory. As one former McCain-backer said to me, "we're looking to jump, we're just not sure where to land." Glad to say, he's now on the Romney Train.

Newt may get in, but he faces a similar problem Thompson witnessed. If he does jump in, it better be real soon to take advantage of Fred's disappointment and McCain's sinking ship. He's looking to have pledged 30 million, and I believe Gingrich won't try to fool himself into thinking he has a chance unless he actually does have 30 million lined up.

Though the Media might like to see Huckabee be more of a player, 100 days out is not enough time to really mount a campaign to victory (which is also a disincentive for Newt). Hey, you can come in a strong second in Iowa and New Hampshire and Michigan and South Carolina and at the end of the day. . . your still not any state's first choice. Your Mittiot understands Huckabee is looking for a Dobson bump (as is Brownback) but Mr. Dobson, too, has to recognize how near we are to the big dance and the time to be corting a candidate that needs to cover ground was back in August. In addition, we are getting dangerously close to ensuring a Giuliani win by dividing the conservative vote. I am certain Mr. Dobson and GOP leaning interests groups are getting a little antsy. The NRA, for one, has already indicated they'd like to have a say in the primary - I'm thinkin' Rudy's not "in their sights" so to speak. Is Mitt? He should be, it'll be one or the other representing the GOP come November.

A bit back The Daily Mittiot ran a blog that gave the "insiders" projection. They smartly identified then this would be a Romney/Rudy race and that's exactly how it is shaping up to be. The question is, which of those individuals do YOU want to be our candidate? Your Mittiot can tell you who the Media wants - who the left-leaners want - who the Hufficrats want: It's Rudy Giuliani, for obvious reasons. I can also tell you who the dems, Media, and Hufficrats fear most: Mitt Romney.

For your Mittiot, it's been mostly anecdotal that Romney is being piled on at every given turn. However, within the Gage Memo what your Mittiot figured to be true has been substantiated:

"So what can we expect to see over the final stretch? To start, we know that Gov. Romney will continue to be attacked from all sides. Some of our GOP rivals began their attacks in the run-up to the Ames straw poll in Iowa; the Democrats also have not waited to begin their assault on Gov. Romney. Since the start of this year, the DNC has put out 81 releases attacking Gov. Romney, 22 more than any other Republican candidate. The attacks will only intensify over the next few months, but we continue to be prepared to respond." -Alex Gage

Mitt Romney has the experience, the record, the message, the charisma, the family, the financial backing, the TEAM, and the strategy to become President of the United States. Sometimes its worth judging the strength of a candidate by how hard the OPPOSITION seeks to weaken them.

Mitt Romney is the candidate and NOW IS THE TIME.

[MAKE A CONTRIBUTION] [SIGN UP TO HELP]

~so asketh the Mittiot

THIS IS A BIG DEAL. . .

2007-10-06T18:54:00.000-05:00

"I support the line item veto. . . so the president must account to the entire nation." - Ronald Reagan

ON GIULIANI'S CHALLEGE TO THE LINE-ITEM VETO:

This is a big deal to your Mittiot, and it really should be a big deal to you as well.

Your Mittiot first stepped to the right while in junior high school. I had a friend - Jason Dewland - who's parents were fairly liberal, and as is often the case so was he. It was about in 6th grade when Jake and I became friends and he asked me one day if I was democrat or republican. To be honest, I hadn't thought about it - my father always voted (as did my mother, when my father reminded her) but politics wasn't focused on at the ol' dinner table - so I said, "I don't know, what are you?" "I'm a democrat." Jake responded. "Good enough." Then and there I was a democrat. (If I recall, we had a republican running for governor about that time named "Richard Headlee" - Now, when your in junior high you're not making your political decisions based on "personal responsibility," "states' rights," or "taxes and spending," so when someone gives to you a newspaper clipping that say's "Dick Headlee" this or that, it's kinda tough to align yourself with the victory cry, "Go Dick Headlee" - petty, I know, but so goes junior high). That lasted two weeks - and your Mittiot has never looked back. I cut my teeth on Reagan - supported Bush, Sr. - pert near cried when Clinton carried Michigan - and reveled in jubilation when the GOP took the US House (which had been held by the dems for the 40 - THAT'S FOUR ZERO - years prior) and Senate in 1994. I worked in the State Senate at the time and I remember the "Contract with America" coming to the capitol steps pre election - and credit the simple message (led by Newt Gingrich) of 10 common sense doable items as a big contributor to the sweeping GOP victory.

To me and many others, the KEY ITEM OF THE CONTRACT WITH AMERICA WAS THE LINE ITEM VETO. Legislators are going to do what legislators are going to do - but the President of the United States has to consider the nation as a whole (as noted by Reagan). The same power is exercised by most State Governors to curbe pork barrel spending and earmarks - AND IT WORKS. Congressional "term limits" didn't pass, the balanced budget amendment didn't pass, but the line-item veto that individuals in the GOP had wanted since the Judiciary has stripped the "impoundment power" from the President did. . . AND THE "REPUBLICAN" RUDY GIULIANI SUED THE UNITED STATES THE FIRST TIME IT WAS USED.

I had known since the power was opined to be unconstitutional that it was an ear-mark for New York that got nixed - I thought it was New York State who sued, and I could see a state objecting. . . but it was New York CITY - a city that didn't get it's pork and sued. . . and it turns out "Republican" Rudy was at the helm.

''What I'm concerned about is that New York City is being treated fairly and that we get the money we are entitled to,'' - Mr. Giuliani

I'm a Mittiot - maybe thee Mittiot - but more so, I'm a Republican. To me this is unconscionable and raises grave questions as to the idea of whether Giuliani would push for the reformed line item veto requested by G. W. Bush and currently being kicked around. This should really give the true conservative pause. . . how can Rudy support our push to restore a line item veto?

For some time now your Mittiot's been bothered by a Giuliani candidacy (and having to support it should the capitulating fools make it so) but I couldn't really put my finger on it until now. Now, personally, as an individual, I don't have any problem with Giuliani - I really respect that he says what he means. . . the problem is, I don't like what he says.

As I pondered Rudy as our GOP candidate it dawned on me that what gnawed was that he reminds me so much of Clinton. WAIT - hold your fire. Not Hillary Clinton, he reminds me of Bill Clinton. I'm seeing stark similarities between Bill Clinton and Rudy Giuliani: Both are lawyers, both lack any real business experience, both are pro-abortion, both are anti-2nd Amendment, both come up a bit wanting in the area of "family values," both are the kinda guy you could have a beer with (as long as your wife didn't find out), etc. etc. and this is buggin' your ol' Mittiot. BUT, as of today I can now say, "AT LEAST Bill Clinton supports the line item veto!" And in that regard, your Mittiot would be hard pressed to choose Rudy over Bill if those two were running head-to-head.

The Republian Contract With America
On the first day of the 104th Congress, the new Republican majority will immediately pass the following major reforms, aimed at restoring the faith and trust of the American people in their government. . .
Thereafter, within the first 100 days of the 104th Congress, we shall bring to the House Floor the following bills, each to be given full and open debate, each to be given a clear and fair vote and each to be immediately available this day for public inspection and scrutiny.
1. THE FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT: A balanced budget/tax limitation amendment and a legislative line-item veto to restore fiscal responsibility to an out- of-control Congress, requiring them to live under the same budget constraints as families and businesses. (Bill Text) (Description)

. . .

"Joining the city as plaintiffs in the suit are 1199 National Health and Human Service Employees Union, District Council 37, the largest union of New York City's municipal workers, and the Greater New York Hospital Association." - New York Times

Background on City of New York v. United States [Giuliani Plans To Challenge Line-Item Veto]

. . .

"I line-item-vetoed hundreds of items as governor of Massachusetts, hundreds, and that vehicle is the most powerful tool a president of the United States could have to rein in unnecessary pork barrel, earmarked spending." - Mitt Romney

Romney's position on the line-item veto v. Rudy's [Romney Hits Giuliani on Line-Item Veto]

[Mittiot's Note: To be fair, within the two articles listed above, Mr. Giuliani does state he supports the line-item veto (article 1) and it reported to support it if President (article 2). In my opinion, you're a day late and a dollar short as your actions speak loudly.]

~ so sayeth the Mittiot

RELIGION, AGAIN?

2007-10-03T13:42:00.000-05:00

ON THE NEWSWEEK MAGAZINE ARTICLE:

Fellow Mittiots I, for one, like to consider the bottom line of a man's faith - as in, "does he have it?" - rather than the particulars of a religion - BUT, the MEDIA, including the Hufficrats, searching for any way to derail the all-but-certain Romney nomination, just keep tweakin' the issue.

Case in point: From the Boston Globe [Magazine has Good/Bad News for Romney]

". . . But the survey also suggests that Romney's Mormon faith remains an issue. While 72 percent of Republicans and 63 percent of Democrats said they themselves would be willing to vote for a Mormon, only 45 percent of Republicans and 33 percent of Democrats said they think America is ready to elect a Mormon as president."

Hmmm. Does everyone - including the democrats - know that Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader - yes, Harry Reid A#1 top dog democrat - is himself a devout MORMON! Say it isn't so! How could we have allowed this to happen???? (That's sarcasm for the context-challenged).

[Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid, exhibiting his strategy for exiting Iraq]

Do you really think THE DEMOCRATS, with their top dog member of the Church of Latter Day Saints, will attack Mitt on his being a Mormon Christian.

Not to mention the dems are well aware the only candidate running for president who happens to be Mormon is REPUBLICAN Mitt Romney. Your Mittiot's surprised any percent of DEMOCRATS would condiser the country ready for a Romney Administration.

Get real - and get off the religion angle, it's Media-made hype that just is not taking hold.

~so Sayeth the Mittiot

IT'S ABOUT TIME

2007-10-02T21:03:00.000-05:00

ON ANN ROMNEY'S WEBSITE:

[ANN'S WEBSITE]

One of the greatest assets to GWB's image while running for Prez was his absolutely enchanting wife, Laura. I can't think of a single individual who has ever said a mean-spirited thing about our First Lady (the same cannot be said about the former First Lady. . . you know, the one seeking to run the country). So, your Mittiot joins the minions in stating the obvious, "our next First Lady, Ann Romney, will only help Mitt distinguish himself in the GOP race and the race for the White House." Yet one more reason to become a Mittiot.

ON MITT ROMNEY AND ENTREPRENEURS:

Many "Thanks" to fellow Mittiot Doug Campbell (Romney Chair, Branch Co) for sending me the following article from NEWSMAX:

Entrepreneurs Like Romney — and Hate Hillary

Republican Mitt Romney is the preferred presidential candidate among small-business owners — while Democrat Hillary Clinton is by far their least-favored White House hopeful, a poll reveals.

Asked to choose their favored candidate, 21 percent of respondents chose Romney, 19 percent selected John Edwards, and 13 percent opted for Rudy Giuliani.

In the Zogby e-mail poll of nearly 2,000 small-business owners/operators, 9 percent named Clinton as their favorite, 9 percent chose Barack Obama, and just 1 percent named John McCain. But the biggest vote getter was “not sure,” with 28 percent.
While Clinton got as many or more votes than Obama and McCain, she was chosen as the entrepreneurs’ “least favorite” candidate, with 36 percent of respondents naming her. That was twice the number of votes tallied by the second-place finisher, Giuliani with 18 percent. Romney was named “least favorite” by 15 percent, Edwards by 12 percent, McCain by 6 percent, and Obama by 5 percent, with 9 percent not sure.
In a somewhat surprising result, health insurance was cited by the most entrepreneurs as the key issue they want the next president to tackle, according to the poll results reported by Fortune Small Business magazine.

When asked to name the two most significant issues, 47 percent of respondents cited health insurance in first or second place, followed by income taxes at 40 percent, immigration reform at 32 percent, and rising energy costs at 28 percent. A similar poll in 2004 found that income tax was then the most cited issue, at 49 percent, followed by health insurance at 42 percent.
The poll also disclosed that while President Bush remains more popular among entrepreneurs than among the general population, his support has dropped sharply since a 2004 poll. Today 57 percent of small-business owners give Bush an unfavorable rating, compared to 46 percent in 2004.

Your Mittiot just watched a commentator on CNBC choke his way through stating the "fact" that "businesses like Hillary Clinton." KUDO's for keeping the straight face. The "FACT" is businesses may like Hillary over the other dem candidates BUT THEY DO NOT FAVOR A DEM IN THE WHITE HOUSE.

From Open Secrets [http://www.opensecrets.org/]:

All PRO-GOP BUSINESS SECTORS. You know who likes the DEMS though?

So, WHY would the GOP want to nominate a LAWYER for President?

ON THE RECENT MICHIGAN DEBACLE:

Our state is crumbling and to hold it together Democrats (and a couple Hufficans) voted to raise the income tax - and even worse - extend sales tax to "certain" services.

"Let's see, I could graduate from college and be a, let's say, financial consultant anywhere in the U.S. Oh, let's look at Michigan. . . NOPE, I'll be put at disadvantage to the those brokers, insurance salesmen, and mutual fund companies doing the same thing but not subject to the 6% sales tax. I guess I better move. . . I hope I can rent a moving van - I hear you have to reserve them way ahead of time. . . "

As the saying goes (and grows): "Don't blame me, I voted for DeVos!"

OH, and by the way who else is exempt from the "service tax?" LAWYERS. Looks like it pays to pay the Governor.

~so sayeth the Mittiot

The List To Remember Come '08:

[My good friend, and future fellow Mittiot, Nick of RightMichigan.com has posted a Tax-Hikers Hall of Shame at his blog - check it out]

House Bill 5194: Increasing income tax This bill would allow the state to increase the income tax from 3.9 percent to 4.35 percent, effective Oct. 1, 2007.

Michigan House Vote: 57 YES; 52 NO; 1 NOT VOTING Voting YES Frank Accavitti Jr., D-Eastpointe Kathy Angerer, D-Dundee Joan Bauer, D-Lansing Doug Bennett, D-Muskegon Steve Bieda, D-Warren Terry Brown, D-Pigeon Pam Byrnes, D-Lyndon Township Barb Byrum, D-Onondaga Marsha Cheeks, D-Detroit Brenda Clack, D-Flint Ed Clemente, D-Lincoln Park Paul Condino, D-Southfield Bob Constan, D-Dearborn Heights Marc Corriveau, D-Northville Andy Coulouris, D-Saginaw George Cushingberry, D-Detroit Robert Dean, D-Grand Rapids Andy Dillon, D-Redford Township Marie Donigan, D-Royal Oak Kate Ebli, D-Monroe John Espinoza, D-Croswell Barbara Farrah, D-Southgate Ed Gaffney, R-Grosse Pointe Farms Matthew Gillard, D-Alpena Lee Gonzales, D-Flint Township Richard Hammel, D-Mt. Morris Township Ted Hammon, D-Burton Morris Hood III, D-Detroit Hoon-Yung Hopgood, D-Taylor Shanelle Jackson, D-Detroit Bert Johnson, D-Detroit Robert Jones, D-Kalamazoo Michael Lahti, D-Hancock Kathleen Law, D-Gibraltar Richard LeBlanc, D-Westland Gabe Leland, D-Detroit LaMar Lemmons Jr., D-Detroit Steven Lindberg, D-Marquette Jeff Mayes, D-Bay City Gary McDowell, D-Rudyard Mark Meadows, D-East Lansing Andy Meisner, D-Ferndale Tim Melton, D-Pontiac Fred Miller, D-Mount Clemens Gino Polidori, D-Dearborn Michael Sak, D-Grand Rapids Bettie Scott, D-Detroit Joel Sheltrown, D-West Branch Alma Smith, D-Ypsilanti Virgil Smith Jr., D-Detroit Dudley Spade, D-Tipton Steve Tobocman, D-Detroit Aldo Vagnozzi, D-Farmington Mary Valentine, D-Norton Shores Chris Ward, R-Brighton Rebekah Warren, D-Ann Arbor Coleman Young, D-Detroit Voting NO Daniel Acciavatti, R-Chesterfield Township Fran Amos, R-Waterford Richard J. Ball, R-Bennington Township Darwin Booher, R-Evart Jack Brandenburg, R-Harrison Township Brian Calley, R-Portland Tom Casperson, R-Escanaba Bruce Caswell, R-Pittsford Bill Caul, R-Mt. Pleasant Craig DeRoche, R-Novi Kevin A. Elsenheimer, R-Bellaire Judy Emmons, R-Sheridan John Garfield, R-Rochester Hills Kevin Green, R-Wyoming Martin Griffin, D-Jackson Goeff Hansen, R-Hart Dave Hildenbrand, R-Lowell Jacob Hoogendyk Jr., R-Texas Township Kenneth Horn, R-Frankenmuth Bill Huizenga, R-Zeeland Joe Hune, R-Hamburg Township Rick Jones, R-Oneida Township Marty Knollenberg, R-Troy Philip LaJoy, R-Canton Township David Law, R-West Bloomfield Jim Marleau, R-Lake Orion Arlan Meekhof, R-Olive Kimberly Meltzer, R-Clinton Township John Moolenaar, R-Midland Tim Moore, R-Farwell Chuck Moss, R-Birmingham Neal Nitz, R-Baroda Mike Nofs, R-Battle Creek Paul Opsommer, R-DeWitt Brian Palmer, R-Romeo David Palsrok, R-Maninstee John Pastor, R-Livonia Phil Pavlov, R-St. Clair Township Tom Pearce, R-Rockford John Proos IV, R-St. Joseph David Robertson, R-Grand Blanc Tory Rocca, R-Sterling Heights Tonya Schuitmaker, R-Lawton Rick Shaffer, R-Three Rivers Fulton Sheen, R-Plainwell Mike Simpson, D-Liberty Township John Stahl, R-North Branch John Stakoe, R-Highland Township Glenn Steil Jr., R-Cascade Howard Walker, R-Traverse City Lorence Wenke, R-Richland Lisa Wojno, D-Warren NOT VOTING David Agema, R-Grandville

Michigan Senate Vote: 19 YES; 19 NO; 1 TIE BREAKER Voting YES Jim Barcia, D-Bay City Ray Basham, D-Taylor Patricia Birkholz, R-Saugatuck Liz Brater, D-Ann Arbor Deb Cherry, D-Burton Irma Clark-Coleman, D-Detroit Hansen Clarke, D-Detroit Tom George, R-Kalazmazoo John Gleason, D-Flushing Tupac Hunter, D-Detroit Gilda Jacobs, D-Huntington Woods Ron Jelinek, R-Three Oaks Mike Prusi, D-Ishpeming Mark Schauer, D-Battle Creek Martha Scott, D-Highland Park Mickey Switalski, D-Roseville Buzz Thomas, D-Detroit Gerald VanWoerkem, R-Muskegon Gretchen Whitmer, D-East Lansing Voting NO Jason Allen, R-Traverse City Glenn Anderson, D-Westland Mike Bishop, R-Rochester Cameron Brown, R-Fawn River Township Nancy Cassis, R-Novi Alan Cropsey, R-DeWitt Valde Garcia, R-Howell Jud Gilbert, R-Algonac Bill Hardiman, R-Kentwood Mark Jansen, R-Gaines Township Roger Kahn, R-Saginaw Wayne Kuipers, R-Holland Michelle McManus, R-Lake Leelanau Dennis Olshove, D-Warren John Pappageorge, R-Troy Bruce Patterson, R-Canton Township Randy Richardville, R-Grandville Alan Sanborn, R-Richmond Tony Stamas, R-Midland TIE-BREAKER VOTE Lt. Gov. John Cherry

House Bill 5198: Imposing sales tax on services

This bill would impose a 6 percent sales tax on a wide variety of services, including various personal services and a number of services used primarily by businesses

Michigan House Vote: 56 YES; 53 NO; 1 NOT VOTING Voting YES Frank Accavitti Jr., D-Eastpointe Kathy Angerer, D-Dundee Joan Bauer, D-Lansing Doug Bennett, D-Muskegon Steve Bieda, D-Warren Terry Brown, D-Pigeon Pam Byrnes, D-Lyndon Township Barb Byrum, D-Onondaga Marsha Cheeks, D-Detroit Brenda Clack, D-Flint Ed Clemente, D-Lincoln Park Paul Condino, D-Southfield Bob Constan, D-Dearborn Heights Andy Coulouris, D-Saginaw George Cushingberry, D-Detroit Robert Dean, D-Grand Rapids Andy Dillon, D-Redford Township Marie Donigan, D-Royal Oak John Espinoza, D-Croswell Barbara Farrah, D-Southgate Matthew Gillard, D-Alpena Lee Gonzales, D-Flint Township Martin Griffin, D-Jackson Richard Hammel, D-Mt. Morris Township Ted Hammon, D-Burton Morris Hood III, D-Detroit Hoon-Yung Hopgood, D-Taylor Shanelle Jackson, D-Detroit Bert Johnson, D-Detroit Robert Jones, D-Kalamazoo Michael Lahti, D-Hancock Kathleen Law, D-Gibraltar Richard LeBlanc, D-Westland Gabe Leland, D-Detroit LaMar Lemmons Jr., D-Detroit Steven Lindberg, D-Marquette Jeff Mayes, D-Bay City Gary McDowell, D-Rudyard Mark Meadows, D-East Lansing Andy Meisner, D-Ferndale Tim Melton, D-Pontiac Fred Miller, D-Mount Clemens Gino Polidori, D-Dearborn Michael Sak, D-Grand Rapids Bettie Scott, D-Detroit Joel Sheltrown, D-West Branch Mike Simpson, D-Liberty Township Alma Smith, D-Ypsilanti Virgil Smith Jr., D-Detroit Dudley Spade, D-Tipton Steve Tobocman, D-Detroit Aldo Vagnozzi, D-Farmington Mary Valentine, D-Norton Shores Rebekah Warren, D-Ann Arbor Lisa Wojno, D-Warren Coleman Young, D-Detroit Voting NO Daniel Acciavatti, R-Chesterfield Township Fran Amos, R-Waterford Richard J. Ball, R-Bennington Township Darwin Booher, R-Evart Jack Brandenburg, R-Harrison Township Brian Calley, R-Portland Tom Casperson, R-Escanaba Bruce Caswell, R-Pittsford Bill Caul, R-Mt. Pleasant Marc Corriveau, D-Northville Craig DeRoche, R-Novi Kate Ebli, D-Monroe Kevin A. Elsenheimer, R-Bellaire Judy Emmons, R-Sheridan Ed Gaffney, R-Grosse Pointe Farms John Garfield, R-Rochester Hills Kevin Green, R-Wyoming Goeff Hansen, R-Hart Dave Hildenbrand, R-Lowell Jacob Hoogendyk Jr., R-Texas Township Kenneth Horn, R-Frankenmuth Bill Huizenga, R-Zeeland Joe Hune, R-Hamburg Township Rick Jones, R-Oneida Township Marty Knollenberg, R-Troy Philip LaJoy, R-Canton Township David Law, R-West Bloomfield Jim Marleau, R-Lake Orion Arlan Meekhof, R-Olive Kimberly Meltzer, R-Clinton Township John Moolenaar, R-Midland Tim Moore, R-Farwell Chuck Moss, R-Birmingham Neal Nitz, R-Baroda Mike Nofs, R-Battle Creek Paul Opsommer, R-DeWitt Brian Palmer, R-Romeo David Palsrok, R-Maninstee John Pastor, R-Livonia Phil Pavlov, R-St. Clair Township Tom Pearce, R-Rockford John Proos IV, R-St. Joseph David Robertson, R-Grand Blanc Tory Rocca, R-Sterling Heights Tonya Schuitmaker, R-Lawton Rick Shaffer, R-Three Rivers Fulton Sheen, R-Plainwell John Stahl, R-North Branch John Stakoe, R-Highland Township Glenn Steil Jr., R-Cascade Howard Walker, R-Traverse City Chris Ward, R-Brighton Lorence Wenke, R-Richland NOT VOTING David Agema, R-Grandville

Michigan Senate Vote: 19 YES; 19 NO; 1 TIE BREAKER Voting YES Jim Barcia, D-Bay City Ray Basham, D-Taylor Patricia Birkholz, R-Saugatuck Liz Brater, D-Ann Arbor Deb Cherry, D-Burton Irma Clark-Coleman, D-Detroit Hansen Clarke, D-Detroit Tupac Hunter, D-Detroit Valde Garcia, R-Howell John Gleason, D-Flushing Gilda Jacobs, D-Huntington Woods Ron Jelinek, R-Three Oaks Wayne Kuipers, R-Holland Mike Prusi, D-Ishpeming Mark Schauer, D-Battle Creek Martha Scott, D-Highland Park Mickey Switalski, D-Roseville Buzz Thomas, D-Detroit Gretchen Whitmer, D-East Lansing Voting NO Jason Allen, R-Traverse City Glenn Anderson, D-Westland Mike Bishop, R-Rochester Cameron Brown, R-Fawn River Township Nancy Cassis, R-Novi Alan Cropsey, R-DeWitt Tom George, R-Kalazmazoo Jud Gilbert, R-Algonac Bill Hardiman, R-Kentwood Mark Jansen, R-Gaines Township Roger Kahn, R-Saginaw Michelle McManus, R-Lake Leelanau Dennis Olshove, D-Warren John Pappageorge, R-Troy Bruce Patterson, R-Canton Township Randy Richardville, R-Grandville Alan Sanborn, R-Richmond Tony Stamas, R-Midland Gerald VanWoerkem, R-Muskegon TIE-BREAKER VOTE Lt. Gov. John Cherry

THE BIG "MO"

2007-09-30T19:54:00.000-05:00

ON KEEPING THE MOMENTUM GOING:

Mitt continues to attract the financial support necessary to keep on running at a front-runner's pace. A fifty dollar gift (or more) by hitting the Romney "Contribute" link on the right of this blog will ensure our fight to bring change to Washington (and our party) continues. COME ON - CLICK THAT BUTTON! Do it for your Mittiot, and I'll do it, too. In fact, I'm going to put $100.00 in the kitty right now. . . and I'm a Michigan public education employee.

ON THE RECENT NH POLL:

Your Mittiot tips the ol' chapeau to those doing phone-polling - it ain't easy. But the recent CNN-WMUR NH GOP poll is a bit light on statistical significance. Though CNN reported a poll of 307 "likely" GOP Primary voters there were actually 324 survey (according to the poll-data from the SOLID University of New Hampshire). My question is, guys, "why not survey another 76 people?"

Less than 400 respondents will give you a pretty large sampling error - as in 5.5%. This fact, of course, when spread over 6 or so individual variables (candidates) gives some pretty flexible data. For example, much has been made over Mitt and Rudy getting tight in NH - 25% to 24%, respectively. However, with 5.5% sampling error, the poll could have just as easily been 30.5% for Romney and 18.5% for Giuliani. OR, 29.5% for Rudy and 19.5% for Mitt. Or some combination where, say, McCain gains 3.5%, Giuliani losses 5.5% and Romney gains 2%. The point is, another 76 respondents and the poll would have been a lot less flexible - as in 2.5% sample error. All in all, your Mittiot's not complaining and nobody should concede New Hampshire. . . Iowa, on the other hand. . . but those out there making a big deal over this one poll might want to catch a breath.

AND, in case you missed it - CNN did a great job reporting (enter the sarcasm) that those of the GOP in New Hampshire are, indeed, satisfied with their candidates. . . but then again, that type of news doesn't fit CNN's idea of a "good headline."

ON FOX WATCH:

God knows your Mittiot loves FOX News, it is at least balanced. But, your Mittiot's not lovin' the Romney diss. I understand the Fred factor (Kristol's daughter is working Fred's campaign) and the "Giuliani is a New Yorker" angle, but COME ON you'd need more than a tanker truck of lipstick to gussy up this pig of a campaign. Maybe, maybe, $8 million in this quarter of campaigning? What the heck was he doing while he was "testin' the waters?" You mean he wasn't lining up donors? Your Mittiot knows a spin when he sees one, FOX, you might want to let O'Reilly edit your wire.

"WASHINGTON — Fred Thompson's fundraising in his first go-round as a declared presidential candidate could offer some surprisingly strong numbers (? emphasis mine) as the entire field of 2008 candidates gets down to counting up their booties in the third-quarter money chase.
FOX News has learned that Thompson, the former Tennessee senator, will report having raised in excess of $8 million dollars in this quarter of the fiscal year. That's in addition to $3.5 million he raised in June."

Wow. . .

[Full article here]

~ so sayeth the Mittiot

ECHOING YOUR MITTIOT

2007-09-27T21:17:00.001-05:00

ON THE FULL OUT ASSAULT ON THE TRUE GOP FRONT-RUNNER:

Alex Gage, Strategist for the Romney Campaign, sent out a memo to Team Romney giving a thumbnail of where we are and what to expect. No real revelations, just sound, "gut-check time," advice. [The full memo can be read here.] The bottom line: NOW IS THE TIME we have less than 100 days before Iowa and if you were looking to get involved, well, WE NEED YOU. Contributions are great, but what your Mittiot truly needs is the commitment to get yourself to the Michigan primary - to answer the calls when the pollsters ring - to become a VOCAL advocate for Mitt Romney - to talk to your neighbors and write into the paper. NOW IS THE TIME.

Listen, here's how it's gonna play out. Your Mittiot is still not convinced there will be a joint primary with the dems this January 15th. As such, going it alone - and allowing the dems and left-leaners to dink around in our GOP primary - is not on the table. If the dems pull-out, and I believe there's a better than 50/50 chance they will, we need to be ready to go with a GOP State Nominating Convention January 29th (so hold that date). We're in good shape if we do go to the convention back-up, as highlighted by the Mackinac Conference. HOWEVER, we need to collectively keep working the delegates.

Now, your Mittiot knows not all GOP faithful are as enlightened as we Mitt-backers, BUT your Mittiot also knows that Giuliani is the least favorite choice of the tried and true conservative. The second, item in the "play out" scenario is that this race is shaping up to be one between Romney and Giuliani (and Paul. . . no not really). Hear me out: Thompson never should have entered the race and his "I'm in now" bump has all but evaporated in the EP states, the fact that Newt is looking to get in should be an indication of Thompson chances. Leaving McCain and Giuliani and the rest of the guys.

Though the Media might like to see Huckabee be more of a player, 100 days out is not enough time to really mount a campaign to victory (which is also a disincentive for Newt). Hey, you can come in a strong second in Iowa and New Hampshire and Michigan and South Carolina and at the end of the day. . . your still not any state's first choice. Your Mittiot understands Huckabee is looking for a Dobson bump (as is Brownback) but Mr. Dobson, too, has to recognize how near we are to the big dance and the time to be corting a candidate that needs to cover ground was back in August. In addition, we are getting dangerously close to ensuring a Giuliani win by dividing the conservative vote. I am certain Mr. Dobson and GOP leaning interests groups are getting a little antsy. The NRA, for one, has already indicated they'd like to have a say in the primary - I'm thinkin' Rudy's not "in their sights" so to speak. Is Mitt? He should be, it'll be one or the other representing the GOP come November.

Your Mittiot can tell you who the Media wants - who the left-leaners want - who the Hufficrats want: It's Rudy Giuliani, for obvious reasons. I can also tell you who the dems, Media, and Hufficrats fear most: Mitt Romney.

For your Mittiot, it's been mostly anecdotal that Romney is being piled on at every given turn. However, within the Gage Memo what your Mittiot figured to be true has been substantiated:

"So what can we expect to see over the final stretch? To start, we know that Gov. Romney will continue to be attacked from all sides. Some of our GOP rivals began their attacks in the run-up to the Ames straw poll in Iowa; the Democrats also have not waited to begin their assault on Gov. Romney. Since the start of this year, the DNC has put out 81 releases attacking Gov. Romney, 22 more than any other Republican candidate. The attacks will only intensify over the next few months, but we continue to be prepared to respond." -Alex Gage

Mitt Romney has the experience, the record, the message, the charisma, the family, the financial backing, the TEAM, and the strategy to become President of the United States. Sometimes its worth judging the strength of a candidate by how hard the OPPOSITION seeks to weaken them.

Mitt Romney is the candidate and NOW IS THE TIME.

[MAKE A CONTRIBUTION] [SIGN UP TO HELP]

~so asketh the Mittiot

RALLY FOR ROMNEY. . .

2007-09-26T20:17:00.000-05:00

. . . AND OTHER NOTABLES

ON THE RALLY FOR ROMNEY:

Michigan's Rally for Romney will be in Detroit TOMORROW from 5-9pm. Get signed up by clicking the link below. Your Mittiot would love to be there, but the Mackinac Conference (of which Mitt won the accompanying straw-poll with 39% of the SURE to be Republican primary voters) has put Michigan at a bit of a disadvantage. All efforts were on the conference, but hey, if we're going to take the "Spartan State" we'll need to buck up. . . your Mittiot will try to get over there.

[RALLY FOR ROMNEY IN DEARBORN]

ON JOINING THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL:

Man this seems like a very cool opportunity! Join the trail with the big guy himself, hitting meetings, doing fundraisers, bouncing ideas off one another. . . check out the link below!

[HIT THE TRAIL WITH MITT]

ON THE CREATING MITT'S COMMERCIAL:

A las, your Cecil B. De'Mittiot didn't make the top 9 cut of the Romney Campaign Commercial competition - that's alright. . . I'm more of a policy guy than the Hollywood type. Wait a second, so is Mitt, I guess I'm in good company.

In all seriousness, KUDOS to the 9 who made the grade - this will be a tough choice. Check out the link below to cast your vote.

[VOTE FOR THE NEXT ROMNEY COMMERCIAL]

ON BILL CLINTON'S "JERK" SIDE:

A little secret for ya, your Mittiot always kinda liked Bill Clinton even though I couldn't really respect him (certainly respected that he was my president, however), but if you got a chance to see him on CNN for an upcoming interview with with Anderson Cooper. . . wow, what a Jerk - with a capital "J." Check the transcript of the "upcoming" interview at the link below:

[CNN WITH MR. JERKY JERK CLINTON]

~so sayeth the Mittiot

INGNORANCE IS THE OPPOSITE OF KNOWING

2007-09-25T16:31:00.000-05:00

ON THE CONSISTENT "ERROR" OF MAINSTREAM MEDIA:

Another day another snub by FOX to mention Romney's win in Mackinac. . . Your Mittiot wouldn't hold his breath as the window has passed.

On the topic at hand (though the above "update" is related), pollsters and pundits worth their trade should honestly analyze the national polls - to do less leaves one to believe those doing the reporting are idiots or liars (as in the breed of Hufficrats that have an agenda). Case in point:

Poll Sheds Some Light On America's Feeling On Mitt Romney

An excerpt from the article linked above highlights the latter of the two outcomes of faulty analysis:

"Nonetheless, for some reason, he is not impressive enough to meet the requirements of the American public. The results of a recent poll indicated that only 16% of Americans say they will vote for him if he became the Republican nominee. Just below half, 46%, say they will not vote for him: 1/3 of those polled are not sure. When this issue was presented to the Republican Party's political committee, the news was still not good: 1/3 would vote for him, three in ten would not cast their vote for Mitt Romney and another third are not sure."

What the? If you actually go to the Harris Interactive Poll it spells out that the NATIONAL polls reflect a nation who has yet to get to know Mitt. The poll actually says this point blank and for some reason (Cough - HUFFICRAT - Cough) the information written - in rather benign terms seeking to leave one to believe "we're just reporting the facts here. . ." - fails to report the obvious. And, by the by - nowhere does it say the "Republican Party's Political Committee" would not vote for Mitt.

So, for those who know what your Mittiot is about to peck out with feverish twitches of angst: skip down. For those who can't get enough of the logic, or just don't get it: please, read on.

NATIONAL POLLS REFLECT THE NATURAL IGNORANCE OF AN ELECTORATE WHO CANNOT POSSIBLY KNOW ALL THE CANDIDATES, THEIR STANCES, THEIR CHARISMA, THEIR QUALIFICATIONS. (which is why we actually have an Electoral College) BUT, Those republican individuals who get to know Mitt Romney - Those true fence-sitters who actually meet the guy - BECOME MITTIOTS! Time and time again, they like what they see. As such (and this isn't faulty analysis), Mitt Romney will win the national nomination, and he'll do it state by state (as the process was intended.)

ON ACTUALLY BEING THERE:

Here's another example of the "Mittiot Effect" (this is what we're going to start calling the above theme. . . the Mittiot Effect. . . sounds good): Read the San Jose Mercury account of Mitt's recent campaign stop here.

Kinda, "milk toast" eh? Now checkout what someone - non-Media - had to say:

"I was there. This article makes it seem like all of the questions were "soft balls" but that is not the case. While some questions were easy fruit to pick for Romney, other questions were more pointed (specifically related to education and immigration). The fact that Romney answered these questions thoughtfully, without missing a beat, integrating his prior experience as governor made the questions seem easy. However, if Thompson were tossed these questions, he would likely give a generic answer or a simple "I'm not aware of that" as he did when asked about the Jena 6. I walked away convinced that Romney would actually leave Washington better than he found it if he were elected. We are in dire need of change, but I want someone to change Washington for the better. Romney actually has a plan that makes me believe things will be better when he is done. Other candidates may have me convinced that change will happen, but not that the change will necessarily be good for the USA. On a side note, I found Romney to be a warmer speaker than I expected. He seemed very comfortable, not afraid to try out new material and laugh at himself a bit. I enjoyed the sincerity." - Posted by Shane

Shane has himself, become a Mittiot. Your "original" Mittiot (now I have to distinguish myself) would like to backup Shane's observation with one of my own from the recent GOP event in Northern Michigan.

One thing that struck me as BS from some of the reporting (OK. . . the New York Times) of the Mackinac Conference was that the applause for Mitt wasn't strong when he keynoted the Saturday lunch, that Mitt's speech wasn't received the way Rudy's or McCain's (though the consensus does seem to be that Thompson was a bit flat and needs to get his feet under him - bet that "testing the waters for 6 months" doesn't seem like all that great an idea after all. . .), or the packed LUNCH (not dinner) crowd at the Grand somehow didn't appreciate the address. Again, this analysis is either idiotic or agenda laden. Your Mittiot was there. Mitt Romney commanded the room. Every eye that could see him was watching, individuals were locked in on his words intently - intensely - listening (he is, after all Michigan's son). I didn't have a great seat for the event (Zimms, we'll talk about this later) and as such, I was able to look around the room trying to catch a glimpse of Mitt and turning back to the closed circuit televisions distributed around the sprawling facility. I saw the faces, and what I say is true, Mitt Romney had captured the crowd.

One of the articles mentions that when Romney correctly noted we (the GOP) "must put our own house in order" awkward clapping followed. That's not true. I know, because I literally led the applause - which was strong. Directly following the end of that strong round of applause, Romney made another remark that elicited a few to applaud again - but it was out of cadence - and didn't catch. IT WASN'T that Romney was off the mark - Mitt received much applause throughout the address. And, lastly, the standing ovation following Romney's address was very long and very, very, genuine. It just kept going and going and . . .

No, Media. No, no, Hufficrats. Don't come into OUR house - into the state that bore Mitt - and tell us that we are anything less than ready to send Mitt to the White House.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot

THE DEAFENING SILENCE. . .

2007-09-24T21:53:00.000-05:00

ON FOX NEWS "NO STRAW POLL REPORT":

Here ya go, fellow Mittiots, two days after the Mackinac Straw-Poll of which the top GOP contenders participated, are the Fox News Headlines:

The Promise Of PalmettoFOX News - 1 hour agoThis year, as former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney maintains leads in Iowa and New Hampshire, several other Republicans are hoping that South Carolina ...

Black Forum Forges Forward as Republicans Continue to Bail OutFOX News - 1 hour agoMitt Romney, and actor and former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson. US Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., sent a letter to Republican National Committee leaders on ...

Romney Withholds Comment on KillingsFOX News - 2 hours agoRepublican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said Monday he was troubled that private security guards working in Iraq for his top counterterrorism adviser ...

Ahmadinejad's Visit Becomes Talking Point on the Campaign TrailFOX News - 5 hours agoSeparately, Republican Mitt Romney began running radio ads in South Carolina and Iowa urging the United Nations to withdraw its invitation to Ahmadinejad to ...

Romney Touts His Business ExperienceFOX News - Sep 23, 2007Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney cast himself as more businessman than politician Sunday, as the one-time venture capitalist tried to ...

Hillary Clinton Defends Health Care PlanFOX News - Sep 23, 2007Republican challenger Mitt Romney responded by saying her refusal to denounce the Ivy League school's decision "demonstrates weakness. ...

Analysis: Bush Unwelcome on the TrailFOX News - Sep 23, 2007Competing to succeed him, top GOP candidates Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson and John McCain barely utter Bush's name. They essentially ignore the ...

Democrats: Party of Detail So Far in '08FOX News - Sep 22, 2007Mitt Romney has his "Strategy for a Stronger America." John McCain still serves up his "straight talk." But, whether by design or default, they leave far ...

Romney Issues Challenge to GOPFOX News - Sep 22, 2007Republican Mitt Romney bluntly challenged his own party while John McCain and Rudy Giuliani assailed Democratic rivals as the GOP presidential hopefuls ...

Romney Scolds GOP in Ad, Open LetterFOX News - Sep 21, 2007By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Pre Writer WASHINGTON — Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney is scolding his party in a nationally broadcast ad Sunday ...

Notta one mentions the Michigan's Straw-Poll, AMAZING.

Take for example the "Democrats: Party of Detail" article. What the? Romney has a 67 page Strategy for Strengthening America - deep on detail. [you can read it here]

Now, your Mittiot understands that a lot of these articles are AP - and not from the guys of Fox News channel we love (Chris Wallace, not withstanding). But come on. . . no mention of the January 15th Primary State's leanings???? I guess it'll take a lead in Florida (which is coming) to get noticed. . . or would that even help?

ON AHMADINEJAD AND COLUMBIA:

Thank You, Mitt! For leading the stand against allowing a terrorist "free speech" in NYC. I suppose that's what the jets flying into the twin towers, Pentagon, and Pennsylvania country side were. . . Political Speech. [Good articel by the Washington Times, RE: Romney on Ahmadinejad]

Here's your Mittiot's (and the rest of the thinking world's) prediction: IRAN NEWS:

"AHMADINEJAD GETS STANDING OVATION IN U.S. FOR REMARKS REGARDING ISRAEL, CALLING BUSH A COWARD, AND PROMISING TO FIGHT AMERICAN AGGRESSION WITH NUCLEAR WEAPONS"

Why not make him use the NYTIMES for his baseless, hateful, rhetoric, he'd get that "liberal discount" we've all been hearing about. . .

ON RALLY FOR ROMNEY:

Calling ALL Mittiots, we need you to sign up and keep the mo-MITT-enum rolling! Click the link below to join the September Push.

~so sayeth the Mittiot

MITT TOPS IN MICHIGAN

2007-09-23T19:19:00.000-05:00

ON THE MACKINAC CONFERENCE: Our man Mitt, once again, shows why he's in the "poll"-position for the race to become the nominee of the GOP. Blowin' the doors of Team McCain and literally laping Giuliani and Thompson, Romney scorched the field taking 39% of the nearly 1000 SURE-TO-BE primary voters. Which, by the by, mirrors the latest Michigan polling of "likely primary voters."

Full Mackinac Straw-Poll Results: Romney 39% (383 votes); McCain 27 (260); Paul 11 (106); Giulaini 11 (104); Thompson 7 (70); Huckabee 3 (25); Hunter 1 (12); Brownback >1 (3); Tancredo 0 (0); Uncommitted 2 (16)

A good article here, or choose a related article to gather the buzz:

"Romney Wins Mackinac Poll" "In Michigan, Romney Works the House" "Romney Wins Straw Poll"

"What's your Mittiot's take?" you ask. Amazed at the level of organization of the Romney Team (of which I am a volunteer - not an employee), but not amazed at the results. As your Mittiot has said time and time and time again. . . ad nauseum - Once you hear Mitt Romney - Once you witnessed that so-called "Romney-Experience" - you cannot help but to become a Mittiot. The dems know it, the Hufficrats know it, the liberal media knows it and the other campaigns know it - and they will work tirelessly to derail Romney's campaign before Feb. 5th - because once he becomes the nominee, my fellow Mittiots, he will be the next President of the United States.

Your Mittiot had the pleasure, once again, of listening to Mitt - and he is dead on in understanding America's true needs and the role of the Central Government in fulfilling those needs. He is also dead on in calling on the GOP in DC to act a little more like the GOP of the states that the sent them there. He is dead on in reminding everybody - whether you agree with GW's positions or not - that President George Bush has restored personal integrity to the White House, which is extremely important to the American psyche in believing in the legitimacy of our leaders. Indeed, as Mr. Romney so pointedly notes, it does not serve us well to have a punch-line in the Oval Office. I could go on, but the bottom line is this: Mitt Romney will secure the GOP nomination. [read full Mackinac Conference speech below]

ON CONTINUOUSLY IGNORING SUCCESS:

Maybe it's just a bit early after the straw-poll results, but I am perplexed that with all the GOP nominees involved (or hoping to be involved) in the Mackinac Conference that FOX would not at least mention the straw-poll in its updated political news. Maybe they're "toughening" Romney up for the big dance by beating him around like gnats at the BBQ. I guess your Mittiot should be thankful, HOWEVER, it's a bit hard to believe that while Brit Hume asks the question, "Why hasn't Romney caught on" FOX continues to ignore Romney's successes and strong lead in most of the Early Primary States.

ON THOMPSON'S 7% OF THE VOTES

Kinda speaks for it self. . .

ON CHUCK YOB'S CRITICISM OF MI GOP CHAIR, SAUL ANUZIS:

Chuck, it's one thing when you support a candidate as the state's GOP National Committeeman because of what that candidate will do for our state and the nation, it's another thing to support a candidate from which your son is collecting a paycheck.

I will not say that Chuck Yob has not given a lot to the MIGOP cause (pardon the double negative) and will not second guess Mr. Yob's candidate choices in the past - but his actions regarding this presidential race must be looked at with a jaundiced eye - and the party cannot afford to be distracted by distrust. Mr. Yob has made a fine choice NOT so seek another term as Michigan's GOP National Committeeman.

ON MICHIGAN'S LEGISLATIVE FIGHT:

To my GOP brethren (and sisteren?) standing firm on fighting a tax increase from the dems and the worse governor of all time, Jennifer Granholm, keep up the good fight! Your Mittiot - your Michiganian Public College Employee - would rather have the Government "shut-down" then to give in to the baseless "need" for a tax increase. . . and my job will be directly affected (as in a loss in pay and/or benefits) if the GOP reforms are passed - BUT IN THE LONG RUN, the state I wish to raise my son in will be better for it. STAY STRONG - DO NOT RAISE TAXES! (Take a page from Mitt's book and what he was able to for Mass.)

[democrats, all together now] "Oh, but we've had five years of cuts in Michigan and it hasn't worked. . ." BS! Here are the last five years of budget EXPENDITURES (not recommendations) from the gov's office and her latest RECOMMENDATION:

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/FY07ExecutiveBudget_151966_7.pdf (page 136 - good luck trying to read it!)

2003: 39.297 Billion Dollars (an INCREASE of 22o Million Dollars over the '02 Expenditure)

2004: 39.388 Billion Dollars (an INCREASE of 91 Million Dollars)

2005: 40.334 Billion Dollars (an INCREASE of 946 Million Dollars)

2006: 41.526 Billion Dollars (an INCREASE of 1 BILLION 192 Million Dollars)

AND, for 2007 the governor has recommended a budget of 42.585 Billion Dollars, which is AN INCREASE OF 1 BILLION 59 MILLION DOLLARS.

CAN SOMEONE PLEASE SHOW ME WHERE THE CUTS HAVE BEEN?

Since the gov has been in office - expenditures have gone UP nearly 2.5 Billion Dollars. And, just so you don't think that I'm turning a blind eye to the Republicans controlling the purse strings - had we put a stop to the spending early. . . GOP. . . we wouldn't facing the same 'ol, same 'ol, today.

Another little tidbit for my Michigan readers: In the last 10 years - from 1997 - 2007 (if the governor gets her recommendation) what we spend on government will have INCREASED nearly 12 BILLION DOLLARS ~ a 25% increase in the cost of government.

HOLD FIRM GOP.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot. . . and every true Republican in the State.

MITT'S SPEECH FROM MACKINAC:

“It’s good to be back home in Mackinac. One of the things I like best is that there are no cars on the island. Unfortunately, that’s Al Gore’s vision for all of America.“I spent a few great summers here – up in that big white home on the hill. We need to get a Republican family back in there again. And we need to keep a Republican family in the White House in Washington as well!

“I don’t have to tell you that my Dad made a mark on Michigan. And he made a mark on me. And I guess that is at the heart of things; he’s a big part of why I’m running for President today. In 1957, when he was the President of American Motors, he gave a speech in which he reported the following conversation:“‘My nine year old son’ – that would be me – ‘came home from school and said “Mom, we really build the best cars, don’t we?”

‘“She said, ‘Why Mitt, of course we do. Why do you ask?’“‘Well, if we build the best cars, why is it that less than three percent of the people agree with us?’“After my Dad heard of this conversation, he took me aside and said, ‘Look, Mitt, size doesn’t always indicate strength and popularity doesn’t always indicate truth, and sales volume doesn’t always indicate value.’“And then he added: ‘Right always prevails.’“Quite a Dad, teaching lessons like that to his nine year old son. Lessons I have taken to heart.

“Now, a few years older, as I have looked at the history of this nation, I have become convinced that right does indeed prevail. America has faced and overcome great challenges. These have become defining moments, inflection points, where the course of our history has changed.

“I believe that we are at an inflection point today. Forces of globalization, the emergence of new economic powerhouses like China and India, and the spread of radical violent Jihad have created a perfect storm that will change the course of our nation. And, we face unprecedented challenges in securing our borders, protecting the family, creating new jobs and achieving energy security.“The people of this great nation have always taken a hand in shaping our own destiny. I believe the American people will rise to the occasion once again, as we have always done before. But at this critical time in our nation’s history, Washington is failing us.

“I think we’d have to admit that the blame doesn’t all belong to the Democrats. We Republicans have to put our own house in order. We can’t be like Democrats – a party of big spenders. We can’t pretend our borders are secure from illegal immigration. We can’t have ethical standards that are a punch line for Jay Leno. When Republicans act like Democrats, America loses.“We’ve got to start acting like Republicans, not earmarking Republicans, not big government Republicans, but like Reagan Republicans and Teddy Roosevelt Republicans. They led us along the right course.“It’s time for us to show the confidence my Dad had that right will always prevail.“It’s time for change in Washington and change begins with us.

“Republicans for Change believe in small government. Governments should be restrained so that the freedoms and vitality of individuals and enterprises can be unleashed. Compared to free markets and free enterprises, government is slow to act, wasteful, duplicative, bureaucratic, inefficient, ineffective, and unresponsive. Have I left anything out? Other than that, government isn’t all bad. “Hillary Clinton fundamentally doesn’t trust the private sector. Of course not, she’s never worked in the private sector, except to sue people. So when she sees a problem in the marketplace, she naturally thinks more government and higher taxes are the solution. She sees the problems in healthcare, for example, and proposes more government. With her plan, patients would have to get used to hearing these words: ‘The bureaucrat will see you now.’ The right answer is less government, less regulation, more individual responsibility, and more of the market dynamics that propel the rest of our economy. This is why I predict that HillaryCare version 2.0 will meet the same fate as version one: ignominious defeat.Republicans for Change like small government.

“Republicans for Change are also fiscally responsible. We refuse to charge our children and grandchildren for our excessive spending. Even in Massachusetts facing a nearly $3 billion budget gap, the legislature and I balanced the budget every year and replenished the rainy day fund, without raising taxes and without raising our borrowing cap. Now it’s Washington’s turn to do the same. If I am elected President, I will cap non-military discretionary spending at inflation less one percent. If I get appropriations above that amount, I will veto them. And I like vetoes. I’ve vetoed hundreds of items already. Let’s put some fresh ink in the Presidential veto pen! “Here in Michigan, Governor Granholm has taken this state to the brink. By not restructuring state programs and by not shrinking government, she has precipitated a Hobbesian choice – raise taxes or shut down government. If you like what Governor Granholm has done to Michigan, you’ll love what a President Hillary Clinton would do to America. Let’s make sure America doesn’t make the same mistake Michigan made last November!

“Republicans for Change believe in strength. We know that the best foe against tyrants and the best ally peace has ever known is a strong America. We will strengthen the military with more troops, better armament, and better care for our veterans. We will also strengthen our economy with lower taxes and energy security. And we will strengthen the American family. There is no work more important to the future of America than the work that goes on within the four walls of the American home. The American family is the foundation upon which this country’s greatness has been built, but it is a foundation in need of shoring up.

“Republicans for Change know how to run a tight ship. The Katrina clean-up didn’t look like Republicans were in charge. We need to bring more accountability back to Washington. You have heard of the sub-prime credit crisis. Well, there’s a government agency that’s supposed to prevent problems like that from occurring, warning consumers, warning lenders. But they didn’t do their job. And do you know what will happen? Congress will give them more money. Do you know what should happen? Heads should roll.

“Republicans for Change have high ethical standards. I’m tired of hearing Washington officials remind us that everyone makes mistakes. Yes, but not everyone is a Congressman or a Senator or a President. They asked for this job and asked for our trust. They represent the American people. They are held up before our children. We expect higher standards of ethical conduct from Washington. We expect our elected officials to be good role models, not bad examples – thank you President Bush for restoring personal integrity and dignity to the White House. And I can guarantee you, Ann and I will do nothing that would embarrass the people of America! “Presidents lead by example. And so, if I’m elected President, one of my first acts will be to issue an Executive Order prohibiting the immediate family of my Cabinet and Senior Staff from lobbying the Executive Branch. The standard for high ethical conduct has to be set at the top.

"Republicans for Change are respectful and civil. We will work with good Democrats, Democrats who also love America, to change Washington and confront the new generation of challenges we face. The political atmosphere in Washington has become so toxic, we are in danger of weakening ourselves from within. America needs unifying leadership. I’ve found that we can find common ground with Democrats from time to time. I love what Ronald Reagan said ‘It’s not that liberals are ignorant, it’s just that what they know is wrong!’“Well, we can teach them now and then, and when we do, America wins.

“Republicans for Change aren’t afraid to tackle big problems. None is greater than the spread of radical, violent Jihadism. John Edwards says there is no War on Terror – it’s just a bumper sticker. Tell that to the people of Indonesia, Malaysia and Bali. Tell that to the people of Tanzania, Kenya and Spain. Tell that to the people of London, Washington and New York City. There is a war being waged against us by the terrorists for the future of our civilization, and if I am president, the war against the terrorists will be won!“Let’s not forget that our President has kept us safe these last six years. And it has not been easy. He fought for the Patriot Act. He listened when al-Qaeda was plotting. He interrogated terrorists. When Khalid Sheik Mohammad, the so-called mastermind of 9/11 was captured, he told his captors, ‘I’ll see you in New York with my lawyers.’ That didn’t happen. Instead, he saw GI’s and CIA interrogators at Guantanamo, and that’s just the way it ought to be!

“Republicans for Change fight to protect the family. The family is under attack. Our children need to be taught that before they have babies, they need to get married. Out-of-wedlock childbirth should once again be out of fashion.“There are different kinds of families, many doing a heroic job under difficult circumstances. The ideal setting for raising a child is and will always be where there is a mother and a father. Some liberal judges don’t see it that way. That is why it is time for a federal amendment that defines marriage as the union of a man and a Woman! “After the Columbine school shooting, Peggy Noonan wrote that our kids are swimming in an ocean of filth – pornography, sex, violence, perversion. The boys who did the shooting, she said, had drunk too deep of the polluted water. It’s time to clean up the water our kids are swimming in. I will make sure every home computer has an easy to engage filter to keep filth out of our homes. I want to enforce our obscenity laws. And for those who use the internet to find children for their perverted abuse, I say, ‘One Strike and You’re Ours!’ You’ll be facing a long prison sentence, and when you get out, a GPS tracking device for the rest of your life.

"Republicans for Change aren’t afraid to talk about faith. We recognize the hand of the Creator in the founding of our nation. We will fight to keep the words ‘under God’ in the Pledge of Allegiance. Have you seen the new dollar coin? ‘In God We Trust’ has been moved. It’s not on the face of the coin anymore, it’s on the edge – virtually invisible, just like the ACLU wants Him to be. I will go to work to get God back on the front of our coin!“I will fight to make sure our future is not defined by the letters ‘ACLU,’ but by the letters ‘USA.’

“Republicans for Change are patriotic. We love the flag. We say the pledge. We tell soldiers in the airport, ‘Thank you for your service, for your sacrifice.’ And when a Republican says ‘We support our troops,’ it comes from the heart.“Have you noticed what happens at the Olympics when someone wins the gold medal? Athletes from other countries ascend the medal stand, and they high-five and celebrate while their country’s anthem is played. But Americans place their hand on their heart and they sing the words to the Star Spangled Banner.“I don’t know where our tradition of placing our hand over our heart during the national anthem came from. I imagine that it is a sign of love – for our flag, for America, for freedom. And it is something more – our hand covers our heart to show our appreciation for the patriots who have shed their blood for our freedom.

‘O beautiful for heroes proved in liberating strife, who more than self their country loved and mercy more than life.’

“American patriotism is why I am convinced this nation will always prevail as the greatest hope of the earth.“America faces unprecedented challenges, a virtual perfect storm buffeting the pillars of our strength. The course of our history will change. And for America to remain the great nation it has always been, it will look to Republicans for leadership.

“At the beginning of my remarks, I told you about that speech my Dad gave a half-century ago. In it, he quoted Ralph Waldo Emerson, one of the great American philosophers, who said, ‘There is no weakness except from within, and the only unsurmountable barrier is our own inherent weakness of purpose.’“That was true then, and it’s true now. It’s why change must begin with us.

“Now is the time, this is the place, for Republicans to stand together – to stand for Republican principles.

“Now is the time, this is the place, for the campaign of change to move boldly forward.

“Now is the time, this is the place for Republicans to lead America in strength, in faith, in family, in what is right. For right will always prevail.

“Thank you, and God bless you.”

ROMNEY ON FIRE. . .

2007-09-19T20:50:00.001-05:00

ON MITT'S PUSH TO SECURE EARLY PRIMARY VICTORIES:

Thanks to the true-blue (or "red" as the case may be) Mittiots out there, Mitt is on fire in securing the leads in the EP States. As this Mittiot has said all along, Mitt sells himself. Lets face it, Mitt hasn't had the media attention of a former top-tier 2000 presidential candidate, nor the benefit of a Hollywood career, nor the pleasure of running a city which includes the New York Times, CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX all downtown and central. Mitt has had to earn his name recognition by personally publicizing his qualifications and successes. BUT, when people get to know Mitt they become, well, Mittiots.

Not "too bad" of article from the Boston Globe on Mitt's 67 page plan for America's Future. I say "not too bad," because you can't expect the media to glow over a conservative plan, but a Mittiot or two might appreciate the following quote:

"Lesperance said Romney appears to be trying to appeal to the GOP's conservative base by painting a stark picture of a very difficult world and presenting himself as the solution. Romney, he added, might have decided to issue the booklet just after Fred Thompson entered the race to shore up his own credentials among conservatives, whom Thompson is also courting. The depth and breadth of the document contrasts sharply with Thompson's stump speech, which has been panned by pundits as vague and underwhelming."

[Read Full Article Here] [Read Mitt's Policy Positions Here]

ON ROMNEY'S CALL FOR CHANGE:

It's about time the GOP took serious the calls from the base to change their ways or become obsolete! Mitt is seeking to address the real reason Republicans lost in '06: Corruption, over-spending, failing to relinquish federal power back to the states. In the new ad slated to be broadcast in NH soon, our man Mitt conveys the following:

"If we're going to change Washington, Republicans have to put our own house in order," Romney says, speaking directly to the camera. "We can't be like Democrats a party of big spending. We can't pretend our borders are secure from illegal immigration. We can't have ethical standards that are a punch line for Jay Leno."

Allow me to say it again, "it is about time!" Your Mittiot hopes ALL national Republicans (not just Ted Stevens) take notice.

ON THE IRANIAN TERRORIST VISITING GROUND ZERO:

In two words (three if you'll allow me to throw in an expletive): HELL NO! That is propaganda waiting to happen! How 'bout this, Ahmadinejad, you get Syria to let a group of US soldiers "visit" the site where the Iranian Weapons Engineers died via that chemical scud-warhead accident and maybe we'll consider your photo-op request.

Your Mittiot's calling on all candidates - reps and dems - to stand firm on not letting that little jerk (and I'm being kind) desecrate that sacred ground. AND, by the by I suppose every democrat who drives a car is supporting Iran as well, DNC. Your comments of "disingenuous" ring hollow. . .

LASTLY, "FRED" OR "FREDDIE"?

There's been much "to do" over candidate Thompson's given name, "Freddie." A wikipedia editing war has developed between the pro-"Fred" crowd and the pro-"Freddie" antagonists. Guys, guys, guys, a rose by any other name would still smell so sweet. . . how 'bout we focus on Mr. Thompson's "long on detail" policy positions. . . that might be easier to wikipidia edit.

~so sayeth the Mittiot.

PS. See you in Mackinac

ROMNEY SPOT . . .

2007-09-17T15:11:00.000-05:00

ON THE MITT ROMNEY CAMPAIGN COMMERCIAL:

Your Mittiot's no Oliver Stone, but he gave it the ol' college try. . .

. . . you'll even see a cameo of the Mrs. Mittiot and, of course, my boy - Lil' Mittiot (and our dog Riley - who by the way likes to stick his head out the window when I drive, funny what dogs like - funnier still how stupid Hufficrats can be).

The Romney Campaign Contest ends today - if you want to check out the entries click the following link:

ON THE MACKINAC CONFERENCE:

Best make your plans ASAP! All the big guns are going to be there including Mitt on Saturday.

Click the following link for info:

ON KEEPING THE MO-MITT-UM GOING:

If you're a fellow Mittiot you may be draggin' a bit - heck we started in earnest 9 months ago and were "plowing the field" prior to that! Now, however, is not the time to relax. Thompson and McCain are seeing some new life (though neither will win Michigan), and we all know how the Media and Hufficrats like to stir the pot (read my post on the FOX Debate titled: Jello, Jello, J E L L O, for clear example). SO, take a deep breath. . . hold it. . . . hold it. . . let it out slowly, and renew your com-MITT-ment to keeping the mo-MITT-um going in MITT-chigan!

~ so sayeth the Mittiot

THANK YOU. . .

2007-09-11T19:43:00.001-05:00

ON REMEMBERING 9/11:

"On this day, radical Islamists brought terror to our shores. It is hard for our minds to contemplate a human darkness so vile that it celebrates murder and the destruction of innocent lives. But we can honor the bright memories of the fallen. Each person, whether taken in unknowing sacrifice or resigned to death after heroic struggle, stands in our mind's eye in the brilliant light of faith and patriotism. In the years since 9/11, the spreading evil of radical Jihad has been visited on other cities around the world. Yet, our resolve remains strong. From soldiers guarding our liberty on foreign shores to those of us living under the umbrella of the protection they provide, we are united in remembering loved ones lost on that day and in our determination to protect our homeland from future attacks."

- Governor Mitt Romney

ON THANKING THOSE WHO SERVE:

We never say it enough - we can never say it enough - but if you're reading this blog and your job and/or passion is keeping America and its citizens safe - from the soldier to fire-fighter, police officer to the politician - I want to Thank You. Please believe that from my heart my family and I appreciate your service and "walking the line" so my son and wife can live free from the fear of another 9/11.

Your Mittiot has no time for politics today - in the scheme of things there is only one issue of importance for all of America on this day: Remembering the attach of 9/11 and the pure heartache of watching fellow Americans - Republican, Democrat, men, women and children, pained to their very core as they waited to hear if loved ones were OK.

For the families and friends of nearly 4000 innocent Fire-Fighters, Port Authority, Police Officers, Service men and women, and beloved friends and neighbors - the muffled answer came. . . followed by a thousand tears.

I relived the events of 6 years ago with my students today. I couldn't make it through the discussion. . . I still can't think about it with out feeling the anguish and welling up. I still pray for justice and peace and know God will see that each is achieved.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

A QUICK NOTE

2007-09-10T21:36:00.000-05:00

ON THE DAY'S EVENTS:

Still waiting for the media to acknowledge Mitt's leading by double digits in the first of the pres-primary states. . .

ON A DIFFERENT NOTE:

Michigan's Governor and Democrat House members refuse to look at spending cuts to balance the budget. . . Republicans are in a good position, however, if nothing is done - "government will shut down." Liberals are getting desperate.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

POLL WATCHING? NOT ME. . . BUT. . .

2007-09-09T20:23:00.000-05:00

ON EARLY PRIMARY STATES: First off if you have yet to hear it, the daughter of Bill Kristol (Fox News Sunday and the Weekly Standard) is working for Fred Thompson - though according to Bill she has yet to be paid. I have great respect for William Kristol (and Fred Barnes, for that matter) but I wonder - just wonder - if the cold shoulder to Mitt by the Fox conservatives has something to do with blood being thicker than water. They call him a front runner - and then don't mention "why." Today Brit Hume said something that struck me as funny. He said, "I wonder why Romney hasn't caught on. . ." NOTE TO BRIT: LOOK AT THE FRICKIN' POLLS. Everywhere Romney campaigns - Save South Carolina. . . YET - people love him. Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, Michigan and I'm watching him rise-up in the Great State of Florida. Seems the only individuals to "not catch on" are those of the Media. . . including Fox. ~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

PS. Those 11 indited public officials from New Jersey. . . ALL DEMOCRATS.

Lawmakers Accused in Bribery Sting Poised to Quit

By ROBERT D. McFADDEN and DAVID W. CHEN

Published: September 9, 2007

Under pressure by Gov. Jon S. Corzine and other Democratic leaders in New Jersey, two assemblymen, the highest ranking of 11 current or former public officials charged with taking bribes in a federal sting investigation, signaled yesterday that they would resign from the Legislature tomorrow.The assemblymen, Mims Hackett Jr., 65, of Essex County, and Alfred E. Steele, 53, of Passaic County, will step down four days after they and others were rounded up and accused of taking thousands of dollars in bribes for promises to steer government contracts to undercover operatives posing as insurance brokers.

The two men made no formal announcements, but several state Democratic officials, who asked not to be named because they were not authorized to speak, confirmed that their resignations would take place tomorrow and that both would be replaced by other Democratic candidates in the November elections. But another prominent official caught up in the corruption sting, Mayor Samuel Rivera of Passaic, told party officials that he had no intention of resigning.

On Friday, a day after being charged with accepting a $5,000 bribe, he distributed copies of an agenda for a City Council meeting on Tuesday. Governor Corzine welcomed word that the accused assemblymen would step down. “It’s a good step,” he told reporters at the Democratic State Committee’s annual conference, winding up yesterday in Atlantic City. “I think, based on my reading of the situation, that they should all resign.” The governor and a group of Democratic officials attending the conference — Senate President Richard J. Codey; Assembly Speaker Joseph J. Roberts Jr., and the (DEMOCRAT - I added that one DM) state party chairman, Assemblyman Joseph Cryan, among others — had issued a joint statement on Friday calling for the resignation of the public officials snared in the sting, but emphasizing that they had only been accused, not convicted.

Like many public servants in New Jersey, the two assemblymen also hold other public jobs, Mr. Hackett as the mayor of Orange and Mr. Steele as a Passaic County undersheriff. Mr. Steele resigned from that job on Thursday, but there was no word yesterday whether Mr. Hackett intended to step down as mayor. Neither man returned phone calls seeking comment.

The two assemblymen, Mayor Rivera and eight other current and former public officials and one associate of a former public official were arrested on Thursday by investigators for the United States attorney for New Jersey, Christopher J. Christie, after an 18-month operation in which the officials were videotaped and audiotaped accepting bribes from undercover agents and cooperating witnesses.

All 11 were released Thursday after brief court appearances and will enter pleas later, their lawyers said.The federal complaint in the case offered vivid details. In a meeting with an undercover agent on May 24, the complaint said, Mr. Hackett was asked if a $5,000 payment up front and $25,000 more when the City of Orange approved a contract for insurance business “worked” for him. “Oh yeah,” Mr. Hackett responded. And, it said, at the end of lunch at an Orange restaurant on Aug. 14, when an undercover agent handed him $5,000 in cash folded inside an insurance benefits packet, Mr. Hackett’s recorded reaction was “O.K.”

Mr. Steele, the complaint said, promised at a Newark restaurant meeting with an undercover agent on March 14 to provide his “personal touch” in interceding for insurance contracts. Later, in cars, restaurants and other places, Mr. Steele accepted bribes totaling $14,000 for arranging matters, the complaint said. “We gonna do that,” he promised. Word that resignations were imminent began emerging late Friday.

Mr. Hackett, chairman of the State Government Committee, which is responsible for rules, oversight and ethics legislation, left a voice mail message at the home of a Newark Star-Ledger reporter. “I resigned from the Assembly,” Mr. Hackett said, according to The Star-Ledger. He also said he would write a letter to Christopher J. Durkin, the Essex County clerk, asking him to remove his name from the Nov. 6 ballot. The election will cover all seats in the General Assembly and state Senate. Several Democratic officials confirmed that Mr. Hackett would submit paperwork to resign tomorrow.

The resignation of Mr. Steele, who lives in Paterson and is a minister at Seminary Baptist Church there, was confirmed by Julie Roginsky, a spokeswoman for the Passaic County Democratic Committee. “Assemblyman Steele has told chairman John Currie that he will be resigning on Monday,” she said.

The resignations will mark an abrupt fall from grace for both assemblymen. Mr. Steele, a graduateof Northeastern Bible College, had long been active in the community through his ministry, various charities, youth programs and family activities with his wife and three daughters. He entered politics in the early 1990s as a Paterson councilman, was elected to the Assembly in 1995 and has been deputy speaker since 2002.

Mr. Hackett, who entered politics after a career as a teacher in Union City, was elected mayor of Orange in 1996. In 2002 he won an Assembly seat, and has been criticized, even by Democratic colleagues, for using his office to hire his wife, sister-in-law and at least two of his six children.

[COMPLETE NYT ARTICLE HERE]

Seems the "Culture of Corruption" has more to do with "government" and less to do with party. . . and the dems want "GOVERNMENT TO CONTROL MY HEALTH CARE." ~ so addeth the Mittiot.

OH FOR THE LOVE OF PETE. . . DO YOUR HOMEWORK.

2007-09-07T08:43:00.001-05:00

THE LAST WORD ON ROMNEY'S SONS AND SERVICE TO THIS COUNTRY:

Alright, your Mittiot has been frank when it comes to calling out the Media, Hufficrat, BS when it comes to the unfounded attacks on Mitt. There's no doubt, I believe Mitt Romney will be the President and no doubt that he's the right man for the job. I understand others would like to see that not happen - "Them's Politics." But my faith in Mitt shouldn't be confused with employee loyalty - I don't work for the Romney campaign - I have volunteered my time for THE GOOD OF THE COUNTRY. In other words, I am sacrificing my time to support a better path for the US of A. Is it the same as joining the military? No. Is it close? No. It's totally different - but it IS SUPPORTING THE COUNTRY. Put it another way: You drive to work, I walk to work. Is driving the same as walking? No. Is it even close? No. It's totally different - but in the end we are both traveling to work. Romney does not owe an apology - it's easier then a clarification - and the emotion blinds individuals into denial - but what Romney said, is indeed correct.

"NO! No it is not!" You say. Let me ask you this: "Do you actually know when and where that comment was made? Have you done your homework? (asks the PoliSci instructor)" I bet you haven't. Did you know that Romney has been asked that question before by individuals not curious but hostile to a Romney Presidency. It's a rhetorical dig.

"NO! No you're wrong! It was a legitimate question!" You say. NOPE, it was a rhetorical dig posed by ". . . a reputed war protester while Romney was discussing Iraq. The presidential hopeful continued his answer by calling for a “surge of support” for those enlisted and their families. According to The Associated Press, the woman is a member of Quad City Progressive Action for the Common Good . . ." [CNN]

Here's the scripted question as asked, and Romney's ACTUAL response:

QUESTION: "Hi, my name's Rachel Griffiths, thank you so much for being here and asking for our comments. And I appreciate your recognizing the Iraq War veteran. My question is how many of your five sons are currently serving in the U.S. military and if none of them are, how do they plan to support this War on Terrorism by enlisting in our U.S. military?"
GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "Well, the good news is that we have a volunteer army and that's the way we're going to keep it. My sons are all adults and they've made their decisions about their careers and they've chosen not to serve in the military and active duty. I respect their decision in that regard. I also respect and value very highly those who make a decision to serve in the military. I think we ought to show an outpouring of support just as I suggested. A surge of support for those families and those individuals who are serving. My niece, for instance, just to tell you what a neighborhood can do and how touching it can be.
"My niece, Misha, living out West, her husband I think he got a call on a Tuesday. He's in the National Guard. He got a call on a Tuesday that he was going to be called up and shipped overseas on a Thursday. And they just bought a home -– they hadn’t landscaped it -– but the rules in the neighborhood were that unless you got your home landscaped within a year of the time that you bought your home, they began fining you, because they didn’t want people having mud holes in front of their homes. And she was very worried and just before the year expired, she woke up one morning and looked out the window and all the neighbors were out there, rolling down sod, putting up trees, getting it all done."
"It’s remarkable how we can show our support for our nation and ONE of the ways my sons are showing support for our nation is helping to get me elected, because they think I’d be a great president. My son, Josh, bought the family Winnebago and has visited 99 counties, most of them with his three kids and his wife. And I respect that and respect all of those IN THE WAY they serve this great country." [emphasis added]

"Why aren't your sons on the front-line?" Is a rhetorical smear of campaign blather! This topic will be brought up again and again - but you're Mittiot has said all that needs to be said, "involving yourself in the democratic process - to get competent people elected to lead this country - is, indeed, ONE WAY to show support for this country." If not, why is Rachel Griffiths a committed war protester?

~ so sayeth & asketh the Mittiot.

JELLO, JELLO, J-E-L-L-O, JELLO

2007-09-06T18:08:00.000-05:00

ON THE DEBATE LAST NIGHT:

Just a follow up to the ridiculous conclusion that McCain "won" the debate last night. If anything (as stated below) - McCain's second tier status saved him from the brutality of the Fox panel. I don't have a problem with tough questions - the campaign will be full of them - but you can't beat the heck out of guy (or guys. . . Giuliani was pummeled, too), hug and kiss another, and declare that the person gettin' all the love "won" the debate. Many bloggers are pitching the same - the standard quip seems to be "McCain helped himself." I guess that's accurate. He helped himself. . . to the JELLO they were tossing at him.

Here's the breakdown of the GOP New Hampshire debate [Full Debate Transcript Here]:

THE ASSAULT ON MITT:

Question Number 1 (after Thompson roast):

MR. WALLACE: Thank you, Brit. Good evening, gentlemen. Let’s talk about illegal immigration. Governor Romney, in recent weeks, you have gone after Mayor Giuliani for running what you say was a sanctuary city for illegals. But as governor of Massachusetts, you did nothing to stop Cambridge, Somerville or Orleans, all of which proclaim themselves to be sanctuaries. In fact, you didn’t even catch the illegals who were mowing your front lawn. (Laughter.) So the question is -- so the question is, why should we believe that you would be any tougher on illegal immigration than Mayor Giuliani? [Romney Responds]

Mittiot's Comment: 'You did nothing. . .' That's a lot like the ol' "Are you still beating your wife" "question." Isn't it? And Romney gets a slew of them - find me a similar question asked of McCain.

***

Question 2:

MR. GOLER: Thank you, Congressman. Governor Romney, your aides say you see ending abortion as a two- step process -- rolling back Roe v. Wade, which would leave it legal in some states and then a constitutional amendment to ban it nationwide. If abortion is murder, how can you live it with being legal in some parts of the country, and for how long can you do so? [Romney Responds]
[MR. GOLER: Governor Huckabee, do you see any real difference -- (interrupted by applause) -- between Governor Romney’s willingness to allow legalized abortion in some states and Mayor Giuliani’s support -- effective support for a woman’s right to choose?]

Mittiot: Another Push-Pull question. To rephrase the question, "How long are you going to continue to allow babies to be murdered, Romney?"

***

Question 3:

MR. GOLER: Governor Romney, you have suggested that U.S. troops in Iraq move to a support phase after the surge, which pretty much has to end in the spring, and a standby phase after that in Kuwait and Qatar. Correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems even Hillary Clinton is willing to commit troops to Iraq longer than that, sir. [Romney Responds]

The Mittiot: WTF? A kidney punch disguised as a question. . .

***

Question 4 (Let's set up the ambush. . .:

MR. CAMERON: Hi, Brit. During part of this exchange, I sort of asked our group gathered here what they thought of what was going on. And the consensus was that there was a lot of skirting of the issues and not a great degree of clarity. New Hampshire, in fact, our hosts here at UNH have all had sacrifices. There was a UNH grad, Ben Keating, who was the head of the College Republicans, who gave up his life in Iraq for this mission. And we want to talk now with Mark and Deb Riss. Mr. Riss is a deputy sheriff here in Strafford County, and their son Dan comes back after his second tour in just two weeks. You’ve heard a great deal about this. Tell us what it is that you are most interested in. And there’s a question, I guess, for Mr. Romney about the timing of all this.

. . . allow the sucker punch.)

MARK RISS: Yes, what I’m obviously most interested in is how we can bring an endgame to the war in Iraq and yet still do it so that it’s a victory for us and a victory for the people of Iraq. And my question is to Governor Romney. And that is, I’ve heard the other people up there articulate themselves a little bit better. But in your answer, I didn’t hear how you would end it. I didn’t hear an endgame plan from you and I would like a response on that. And also along those same lines, sir, a comment. I don’t think you fully understand how offended my wife and I were and probably the rest of the people who have sons, daughters, husbands and wives serving in the war on terror to compare your son’s attempts to get you elected my son’s service in Iraq. (Cheers, applause.) I know you apologized a couple days later up there, a firestorm started. But it was wrong, sir, and you never should have said it. [Romney responds]

(And, for good measure, poke him a bit)

MR. HUME: Governor, let me follow up on one point. MR. ROMNEY: Yeah. MR. HUME: You again said it looks successful. Senator McCain disagreed with you on that. MR. ROMNEY: I’m going to wait -- MR. HUME: Is it or isn’t it? MR. ROMNEY: Well, you know, we haven’t heard from General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker. I believe it’s successful -- MR. HUME: Okay.

The Mittiot: A couple of things. One, read my last blog, Mitt does not owe anyone an apology for his remarks about his sons and their service to this country. Secondly, a large block of NH veterans have already endorsed John McCain in this race like in April. I contend the veteran, Mark Riss,' mind was made up long before Mitt answered the loaded question about his "able bodied" boys not joining the military. Lastly, it becomes clear, Mitt isn't in a debate with the other GOP candidates on the platform, but the commentators on the floor.

***

Question 5:

MR. GOLER: I want to talk, gentlemen, about presidential power and the war on terror here at home. And Governor Romney, I’ll start with you. You have said that the government should wiretap some mosques to keep tabs on Islamic extremists. Would you do this even without a judge’s approval, sir? [Romney Responds]

Mittiot: Probably the fairest, straight forward question asked of Romney though it was the only religious-like question posed. It could have gotten interesting if Mitt said, "If necessary." He'd be in good company - The President that most often is on the list as A-Number One, "Bestest President," Abraham Lincoln, suspended habeus corpus during the "Civil War" for the good of the country.

***

Question 6:

MR. WALLACE: Governor Romney, you have taken the pledge. You like to say that you don’t just talk about budgets, but in fact you actually had to operate one as governor of Massachusetts. But according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, in your first year as governor you raised fees and fines by half a billion dollars, including fees paid by the blind, by gun owners, by those seeking training against domestic violence and even by used car shoppers. In fact, the Associated Press says you earned a nickname back then in Massachusetts, it was FeFe. (Laughter.) How do you respond, sir? [Romney Responds by calling Wallace a dork. . . not really, but he should have.]

Mittiot: Yet another swipe disguised as a "question." See the McCain related question below.

***

Last Stone:

MR. HUME: Governor Romney, your thoughts. [To the Hypothetical Scenario with IRAN] [Romney responds, Hume interrupts] MR. HUME: What if they don’t?

Mittiot: Hmmmm. A hypothetical question that changes as the candidate answers it. . . ? All in all, Hume seemed to offer the most fair questions of the group - I guess that's why he's the SENIOR politico on Fox, and the rest of the "All Stars" pale in comparison. . . in Wallace's case, disappear altogether.

***

NOW FOR THE MCCAIN JELLO-FEST

Question Number 1:

MR. WALLACE: Mr. Mayor, time. (Applause.) Senator McCain, when you were backing comprehensive immigration reform this spring, you accused Governor Romney of flip-flopping on this issue. In fact, you said maybe his solution will be to get his small varmint gun and run the Guatemalans off his lawn. (Laughter.)

Mittiot: Jello with a side of "stick Romney"

***

Question 2:

MR. CAMERON: So we’re going to spin this one back to both John McCain and Rudy Giuliani, and ask them Lieutenant’s question: How can you not call it amnesty? MR. GIULIANI: Well, I think. . . [gives answer] MR. HUME: Senator McCain, the same question to you. How do you not call the circumstances the officer described as an amnesty?

Mittiot: A little tougher Jello - softened to the consistency of plain ol' Jello by making Rudy chew it first.

***

Question 3:

MR. GOLER: Senator McCain, Mayor Giuliani says his leadership after the 9/11 attacks shows he is the best candidate for national security, and you say nothing he has done shows any real experience in foreign policy or national security affairs. Tell me why, sir.

Mittiot: Jello. . . actually wait, that wasn't "Jello" that wasn't even a question, that was an opportunity to punch Giuliani.

***

McCain Questions Romney???:

[SEN. MCCAIN:] Chris. MR. WALLACE: Senator McCain. SEN. MCCAIN: [To Mitt] Governor, the surge is working. The surge is working, sir. It is working. MR. ROMNEY: That’s just what I said. SEN. MCCAIN: No, not apparently -- it’s working.

Mittiot: Not Jello. . . but then again, that wasn;t a question for McCain.

***

Jello Shot Number 4:

MR. GOLER: Senator McCain, what do you think about what Congressman Tancredo just said? And more broadly, do you feel President Bush may have overreached his constitutional authority in some actions after the 9/11 attacks, sir?

Mittiot: Again, huggy, huggy kiss-kiss, here's some Jello.

***

Question 5:

MR. WALLACE: Gentlemen, let’s talk about taxes and spending. As you all well know, pledges not to raise income taxes are a big deal here in New Hampshire. Six of you on this stage -- (interrupted by cheers, applause) -- six of you on this stage have signed the pledge of the Americans for Tax Reform to oppose any increase in marginal tax rates, while two of you have not. Senator McCain, why have you refused to sign? And why do you feel that six of your seven colleagues here on this stage are mistaken in deciding to take that pledge?

And, 6:

MR. WALLACE: Senator McCain, if I can follow up for 30 seconds, those tax cuts that you talked about that have given us so much revenue, in fact, you voted against those. And why not, if you are determined to not raise taxes, why not sign the pledge?

Mittiot: Alright, this was a good question (nasty Jello. . . like pistachio. . . in the end it's still Jello) BUT lets put it in context: "Senator, you didn't support the Bush tax-cuts? Oh that's right you wouldn't support the tax cuts without cuts in spending (Shouldn't someone ask why he'd support them now, given that we still aren't cutting spending? But this isn't the point), however Mr. Romney, you're worse, because. . ." [reference the unfounded "FeFe" jab at Romney above.]

***

And the last, "question:"

MR. HUME: All right. Senator McCain, you have the last word here, sir. [To the Hypothetical Scenario]

Mittiot: Jello chewed by every other candidate first. If you couldn't swallow that lob by then. . .

Yep, beat the crap out of the guy running to the top, Romney - toss healthy heaps of Jello on the guy falling fasted to the bottom and then proclaim that individual "VICTORIOUS." Seems in the end, media is media no matter what channel it's on. . .

- so sayeth the Mittiot and Chris Cillizza of The Fix

WE'RE BACK IN BUSINESS, BAY-BEE!

2007-09-05T22:24:00.001-05:00

ON TAKING AUGUST OFF:

HELLO, Fellow Mittiots. August was brutal on your happy-go-lucky Mittiot. So, I thought I'd pull a Thompson and see if I could be a blogger without actually blogging. . . I figured what I would do was I'd tell everybody I was a blogger but not actually post anything. . . and that way I wouldn't have to work. . . you know, bloggin' ain't easy, it takes commitment and an original thought or two. . . this is much better. . . I'm a blogger, but I don't have to actually write anything. . . I wonder if the college will buy that argument: "I'm an instructor, but I'm not going to actually instruct anybody." Thank God for tenure. . . it seems to me a lot like Hollywood syndication.

Joking aside, for all those bloggers out there (like Nick at RightMichigan.com) who post every single day come hell or high water, the Mittiot chapeau goes off - it really isn't easy. However, if an explanation is needed, just know that Michigan's economy sucks (the Governor has been INVISIBLE) and if you're in the field of public supported higher education, the uncertainty is almost debilitating. I spent August negotiating our faculty contract. Our negotiating team took the position of recognizing the reality of Michigan's economy, negotiated a good contract for the STUDENTS (no 17% tuition increases), the faculty and by extension the institution and - TA DA - our faculty rejected it. . . way to go guys! Needless to say, the negotiating team has gladly "stepped aside." So, GOOD NEWS, unless you're a Hufficrat or Chris Wallace (which may just be the same damn thing), your Mittiot's back Bay-Bee!

ON THE FOX DEBATE TONIGHT:

I understand now why the dems are afraid of holding a debate hosted by Fox News - sock puppets are clearly easier to handle than the real people of New Hampshire. The questions were really frickin' tough and some down right ugly. I think the field did great overall - and Mitt, who clearly had a target the size of Texas on his forehead, handled himself very, very, well. He and Giuliani were getting the brunt of the no win questions - a clear indication of their front-runner status (Mitt, the front runner of the front runners) - and McCain? Well, he was getting the softballs. . . Hell, that's even a stretch, McCain was getting Jel-lo tossed at him. All in all, however, a pretty good debate.

And by the way, let me say this about Mitt's boys not joining the military. . . For the last 5 years during this war on terror, semester in and semester out, I've taught young men and women a thing or two about the political process and this great country. And, one thing is certain, it takes a lot more than the military to support and protect the freedom we hold so dear. It takes men and women "to do" and it takes men and women "to lead." Running for public office is no frickin' cake walk, and an individual who puts them self in the "arena" (as T. Roosevelt called it) makes a HUGE sacrifice for this great country. . . and for what? So some asshole can point a hypocritical finger at your sons and question whether they're giving enough because they haven't volunteered to put on a uniform? So some drop-shot can question your religion and faith in God? So some lowlife muckraker can put you and your family and your business and your education and every decision you've ever made under a microscope to sell some sensational, out of context, headline for the Dan Rather "Gotcha Affect"? Running for office, RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT, is indeed a sacrifice and the fact that a man's sons would put their lives on hold and join in that sacrifice speaks as much about that man as it does the sons. Mitt, nor his son's, owe anyone an apology. Some of us, many of us, recognize that the honor of participating in our democratic process is, indeed, a sacrifice.

And while I'm on a rant, chew on this. . . there is no comparison to the soldier who puts their life on the line, (or the fire fighter or police officer, for that matter) but statistically, you have a greater chance being killed as president (nearly 10%*) than you do fighting in Iraq (just under 3%**). I know it ain't apples to apples but if you want some out of context, BS, headline. . . chew on that. . . its absolutely true.

ON MICHIGAN'S EARLY PRIMARY:

I took a wait-n-see on Fred Thompson (he still isn't in as of this post by the way) and, I'm going to take a wait-n-see on Michigan's January 15th Primary. I'll bet a buck the dems back out and the GOP runs a Convention on January 28-29th to pick our nominee. Either way, Mitt is in the driver's seat here at home. Some might think the Convention would slow down his post Iowa/NH momentum going later in January, but your Mittiot would rather go AFTER South Carolina anyway. SC seems poised to offer Fred a squeaker maybe even Giuliani . . though I'm told Romney is on the rise in SC. The way I figure, Iowa, NH, Nevada will go solidly Romney, Florida is looking good, SC is iffy, but a late January victory in Michigan will give the Governor the last bounce before Tsunami Tuesday - from there, it's a horse race to the White House!

ON HUMAN/ANIMAL EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH:

UK authorises human/animal cell research

British authorities have given the green light to controversial research involving implanting human DNA in animal cells. The aim is to create hybrid embryos from which stem cells can be extracted. Experts say such research is critical to unlocking treatments for genetic diseases.
Embryo Scientist Professor Lyle Armstrong said: "In one day we can easily get 200 cow eggs from a local slaughter house, the same applies to rabbits or perhaps pigs that we may be able to use. So it offers us a chance to make embryonic stem cell technology more accessible to everyone,"But Britain's Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority ruled that research projects should be considered on a case-by-case basis. That reflects ethical concerns by opponents who claim the procedure violates the rights of human embryos.

THIS IS EXACTLY THE PATH REALISTS KNEW WAS COMING. . . Man-Bear-Pig is just around the corner. Needless to say Mitt Romney and the Pro-Life community were right!

~ so sayeth the Mittiot

* 43 Presidents (42 if you don't count Cleveland twice) with 4 assassinated while in office (Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, Kennedy) ** 130,000 troops in Iraq with 3,738 tragic, TRAGIC, casualties.

SOCK IT TO 'EM MITT!

2007-08-06T21:32:00.000-05:00

ON MITT "UNPLUGGED". . .

Fellow Mittiots, if you have yet to see our man Mitt defend his faith in the proper American context. . . well, you need to! [Click Here - to watch the whole YouTube video - free of Snowmen, but long on disc-jerky]

As noted via the post above, the radio station's web cam continued to record after Mitt was "off the air" from his radio interview with Jan "let me tell you about your faith" Mickelson. Mickelson. . . hmmmmm, a bit frustrating to watch.

At any rate, your Mittiot remembers fondly when in 2000, I and thousands of my closest GOP friends congregated along the railroad stations as GW and Cheney made their way across the state via an old fashion locomotive campaign rally. Now, I don't believe it was in East Lansing (just off the Mitt-chigan State campus. . . that's right, I said "Mitt-chigan") where I was straining to get a glimpse of the next president of the united States, but on the news there was a candid moment along the Mitt-chigan rally when, waiving and smiling from the podium, GW leans over to Cheney - still smiling, still waiving - and says something like: "There's so and so from the New York Times." And, Cheney leans over - still smiling, still waiving - and says something to the effect of: "Yeah, what an A%# Hole. . ." I'm sure I wasn't alone in my cheers when the media outlets played and replayed the look-see as to real person running president. The NYT was - and to this day still is - pulling a hack job on the candidates. Hey, say what you want about his/their policies, but the team has remained real. In the end, GW didn't carry Michigan, but it sure helped to set the tenor of the race and Michigan was in definite play that year.

Which brings me to Romney. The Hufficrats (lacking any real criticism) keep calling Mitt too polished - actually they call him "smooth talker" (after four years of blaming GW for butchering the English language, now their criticism weighs on being too articulate. . . keep grasping) - it was great to see our man Mitt defend - PASSIONATELY - his beliefs! Whether they're of his faith or of his optimism for this country, it is good to know with confidence that Romney will fight for those foundational values that make a person want to conserve our current American culture.

No wonder Mitt's winning in Iowa, NH, and Mitt-chigan. When people get to know Mitt Romney they, too, are pulled into the Mittiot column.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot. . .

PS. . . A little something sent to me about Mitt's run in Iowa. [Click the Pic - to see the trailer]

MITT-CHIGAN. . .

2007-08-05T10:33:00.000-05:00

ON MICHIGAN ISSUES:

Howdee Feller Mittiots (seems the Southern drawl is a draw for some in the netwonk-o-sphere) just want to blog a bit about the latest goings on in Michigan. First off, for those in-state Mittiots, tomorrow is Sign Up Michigan Day and we need your help if able:

ROMNEY FOR PRESIDENT SIGN UP MICHIGAN DAY

MONDAY, AUGUST 6, 2007 12:00 Noon – 8:00 PM

Come join Congressmen Joe Knollenberg and Pete Hoekstra, along with Scott Romney and others for Sign Up Michigan !

Sign Up Michigan is a phone bank day where Elected Officials, Grassroots Leaders and Volunteers, spend the day calling their friends, families, co-workers, and neighbors to recruit new Mitt Romney for President supporters.

Please join us and bring a friend to this exciting event.

Refreshments will be provided at the event.

Monday, August 6, 2007: 12:00 pm EDT

Detroit/East Michigan Area:

Michigan Romney for President Headquarters

28800 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 210

Farmington Hills, MI

The Great "Up North:"

Grand Traverse Republican Action Center

121 East Front Street

Traverse City, MI

West Side:

Kent County GOP Headquarters

264 Leonard NW

Grand Rapids, MI

Central and all points South:

The Sterling Corporation

112 E. Allegan Suite 210

Lansing , MI

RSVP at 248-254-6530

Secondly, here's my belief on what will be Michigan's Primary situation. As you may or may not remember, Michigan moved the primary up into Feb. sometime in 1999 prior to the 2000 election. The half-butt job got us into a "closed" primary open to anyone in the state. The result, McCain carried Michigan after an enormous number of "independent voters" voted in the GOP Primary. Regardless, our fearless State Chair, Saul Anuzis, and the State Committee have at least learned the following: Early Primaries draw attention (which is a good thing) AND stand alone primaries draw shenanigans (which ain't so good to the concept of a PARTY primary). As such, we have legislation pending that will move the GOP Primary up, again, IF coupled with the Dem Primary.

My take? We're going in January. . . with or without the Dems. If we go without, we'll truly close our "GOP Primary" by having a mega caucus at the State Convention. Which is the way it should be, anyway. In short, your Mittiot's bettin' we'll be doing a State Convention. Now, Mittiots, this is where it gets good!

If/when we do a State Convention to choose OUR candidate, Mitt Romney finishes first. . . by a shed-load. And, McCainiacs, John McCain will be in the running (though, without the "Indy's," his chances are severely diminished). Who fares poorly? Giuliani. Why? No organization. [see, Rudy's State Chair, Candice Miller's Objection]. Who else fares poorly? Thompson. Why? No organization. [see, Thompson Not Ready for Takeoff?] While Fred and his on again off again campaign team dink around with "when best to become official," real candidates are securing key endorsements (ie. Romney's steller grab of Former Lt. Gov., Dick Posthumus and Michigan's favorite Sheriff, Mike Bouchard).

Romney has Michigan tied-up, even with Spence Abraham (a good catch, by the way) heading up Thompson's "campaign." AND, speaking of Thompson's "campaign" - seems now the best time for Fred to "get real" is sometime in September - for those keeping score that's:

June - not June; July - not July; August - not August; September. . .I guess I'll continue to believe it only when I see it. Good to see such decisiveness from a potential presidential candidate.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

JUST A LITTLE SOMETHING TO BE AWARE OF. . .

2007-07-29T12:01:00.001-05:00

ON THE ASSAULT ON FOX:

Fellow Mittiots, McCainiacs, Giuliani-itzian-ians, & Freds, please be advised of the following from http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8QL52780&show_article=1

Liberals Going After Fox Advertisers

Jul 27 04:08 PM US/Eastern

By DAVID BAUDER

AP Television Writer

NEW YORK (AP) - Liberal activists are stepping up their campaign against Fox News Channel by pressuring advertisers not to patronize the network. MoveOn.org, the Campaign for America's Future and liberal blogs like DailyKos.com are asking thousands of supporters to monitor who is advertising on the network. Once a database is gathered, an organized phone-calling campaign will begin, said Jim Gilliam, vice president of media strategy for Brave New Films, a company that has made anti-Fox videos.

The groups have successfully pressured Democratic presidential candidates not to appear at any debate sponsored by Fox, and are also trying to get Home Depot Inc. to stop advertising there.

At least 5,000 people nationwide have signed up to compile logs on who is running commercials on Fox, Gilliam said. The groups want to first concentrate on businesses running local ads, as opposed to national commercials.

"It's a lot more effective for Sam's Diner to get calls from 10 people in his town than going to the consumer complaint department of some pharmaceutical company," Gilliam said.

Some of videos produced by Gilliam's company compile statements made by Fox anchors and guests that the activists consider misleading, such as those that question global warming.

Representatives for Fox News Channel, which is owned by News Corp., did not immediately return calls for comment.

Home Depot has not had an unusual number of calls, said spokesman Jerry Shields, and the home improvement chain will not change its advertising strategy.

"We're not in the business of censoring media," Shields said. "We need to reach our customer base through all mediums available."

Groups like the Sierra Club have targeted Home Depot because they believe it's inconsistent for the company to promote environmentally friendly products while advertising on a network that has questioned global warming.

The groups seem particularly angry at Fox's Bill O'Reilly, who has done critical reports on left-wing bloggers. On July 16, O'Reilly said the DailyKos.com Web site is "hate of the worst order," and sent a reporter to question JetBlue Airways Corp. CEO Dave Barger about the airline's sponsorship of a gathering run by DailyKos.

He'll never ride on JetBlue again, O'Reilly said.

MoveOn.org is campaigning against Fox because it says the network characterizes itself as a fair news network when it consistently favors a conservative point of view, said Adam Green, the organization's spokesman.

"We're not trying to silence anybody," Green said. "Rush Limbaugh has a right to be on the air—he admits his point of view. Fox doesn't."

Note the relation to DEMS calling the GOP candidates skipping the CNN debate "scaredy cats."

~ so hmmmmmmeth the Mittiot

WHAT A JOKE. . .

2007-07-28T19:49:00.001-05:00

ON CNN YOUTUBE DEBATE:

What an absolute joke. First, you have ALL the dems refusing to debate on FOX, then they kowtow to this ridiculous YouTube based debate where the CNN muckity-mucks put forth a bunch of Second City skits masquerading as "questions" to be answered - which they did. . . Now, excluding a couple second-tier candidates, the Republicans are skipping the side-show circus. I say good job! <Read Article Here>

Though Mitt had the cojones to call into question the format - most of the candidates skipping the CNN boondoggle (including the Romney campaign) point out that 3rd quarter campaign statements are due out at the time of the CNN scheduled de-excuse me while I laugh-bate. For the record, your Mittiot would skip the crap all together even if it's rescheduled. . . not because "real citizens" are asking the questions, BUT because the network chose goofy theatrics where a good question could just as easily be posed without all the falderal. Call you Mittiot ol' fashion, but answering a sock puppet on national television - during a debate for the future of the US (and, in reality the free-world) - isn't just beneath the candidates, it is beneath CNN and the rest of us who don't see the campaign as "entertainment," but as the extremely important exercise in the democratic process it is. . .

As a professor of political science, I have no time for the individual (or student for that matter) who has to be "entertained" to pay attention to problems our country needs to have addressed and the successes that need to be protected. In the end - though the Hufficrats will spin this as "Republicans too scared to answer real life citizens" the fault rests at the feet of CNN for cheapening the process for ratings. Here's a format for you: Ask a substantive question of one candidate and ask the next candidate to comment on that answer and give their own answer - in other words, lets have a real debate.

Call me ol' fashion, but the dem debate will most likely be the last time in our American experience where a sock puppet "deserves" to be addressed by someone wishing to sit in the oval office.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

BACK TO BUSINESS

2007-07-27T16:03:00.000-05:00

ON THE FLORIDA TRIP:

Outside of the campaign effort for a moment. As told, your Mittiot took the fam to sunny Florida for a wedding and to visit the town Walt built. Funny thing, Disney, you'd think it's the happiest place on earth, but if you look at the park patrons for any length of time you'll note that not many people are smiling. . . And, I found I was in the same boat, until I thought about it. Disney has to be one of the most diverse places in the world (and not just Epcot). All languages, all colors, all ages - what a privilege it is to live in this country. It was that rediscovered revelation that put the smile back on your Mittiot's face. I danced in hour long lines and laughed out loud at tired jokes, not because I was at Disney - but BECAUSE I was at Disney. . . in Florida. . . 1100 miles from Michigan. . . in the great US of A. Now, let me ask you this reader: doesn't every individual on this planet deserve a chance at the freedom we too often take for granted here? Don't the Iraqis and those held hostage by the Jihadists deserve that chance?

Ohhhh, I hear you, Hufficrats, "How privileged I must be to be able to take my family on a vacation like that. . ." Not really. And, this is the second revelation regarding Disney. Stand in the middle of the Magic Kingdom and look around - you'll see what I saw, that so-called "poverty" is not color specific (name the skin tone and I saw it in abundance), nor age specific (from newbies to centenarians), nor region of the US (from Alabama to Wyoming), nor tied to a continent (I saw all manner of dress and heard a plethora of tongues). Poverty, my friends, is something we all may face - and, as such, ALL MAY OVERCOME! Hence the importance of "Equal Opportunity supported by Government" - NOT "Hufficrat Forced Equality BY Government."

ON THE NEED TO CALL A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION: Once again your Mittiot calls - nay, BEGS - Newt Gingrich, the Ben Franklin of the modern era, to use his pulpit and call upon the States to send delegates to a Constitutional Convention. The latest of a never ceasing number of outrageous acts? Read the following:

Illegal-immigrant laws struck down Pennsylvania city passed strict statute last year after two illegal immigrants were charged in a fatal shooting. Michael Rubinkam / Associated Press
HAZLETON, Pa. -- A federal judge Thursday struck down Hazleton's tough anti-illegal immigration law, ruling unconstitutional a measure that has been copied around the country.The city's Illegal Immigration Relief Act sought to impose fines on landlords who rent to illegal immigrants and deny business permits to companies that give them jobs. Another measure would have required tenants to register with City Hall and pay for a rental permit. U.S. District Judge James Munley voided the law Thursday based on testimony from a trial held in March.

Hazleton Mayor Lou Barletta called the decision bizarre and said he intends to file an appeal. "This was a case where a federal judge protected the rights of anonymous illegal aliens," he told the Associated Press in a phone interview. "This fight's far from over."

The Republican mayor pushed for the strict laws last summer after two illegal immigrants were charged in a fatal shooting.
Barletta argued that illegal immigrants brought drugs, crime and gangs to the city of more than 30,000, overwhelming police and schools.
Immigrant groups sued, saying the laws usurp the federal government's exclusive power to regulate immigration, deprive residents of their constitutional rights to equal protection, and violate state and federal housing law.
In a 206-page opinion, Munley said the act was pre-empted by federal law and would violate immigrants' due process rights.

(Federally defined, "Illegal" immigrants have due process rights that pre-empt the State's - and Citizen's - right to protect itself?)

PLEASE NEWT, IT IS TIME TO CALL THE CONVENTION ~ the public will be there to support the process, I guarantee it! (The Democrat controlled Congress has lower approval ratings than our media pummeled president)

ON ROMNEY'S INEVITABLE VICTORY: Thank the good Lord, TIME has another reporter other than Ana Marie Cox. . . From the recent TIME article on Fred Thompson:

Like McCain, Mitt Romney is a prodigious spender of campaign cash. Unlike McCain, Romney can dip into a huge personal fortune to supplement his fund-raising — and has done so. The former Massachusetts Governor is also the only Republican candidate in the top tier whose poll numbers have been inching upward since the beginning of the year. This is especially true in the lead-off states of Iowa and New Hampshire, where he currently tops the field, a fact that causes some strategists to declare Romney the race's "real front-runner." It is not an unreasonable claim if you consider national polls more or less irrelevant. "You have to accept that Iowa and New Hampshire are still going to have an impact," says Romney spokesman Kevin Madden. "We're far ahead of anybody... in terms of organizing in those states."

Your Mittiot asked Fred - a loooooong time ago - to "poop or get off the pot." Well, he seems to be poopin' - the problem is, he doesn't know when to quit. . . case in point, from the same Time article:

"The next Republican debate takes place Aug. 5 in Des Moines, to be followed six days later by the Iowa straw poll in Ames. . . Thompson advisers decided that the risk of underperforming at either of these high-profile events was too great. . ."

Hmmmmm. Maybe everybody should just "undeclare" until next June - that way no one has to risk anything. . . FRIENDLY NOTE OF ADVICE TO FRED: You will continue to shed doubt on your campaign if you continue to postpone your entry - in the mean time, you are a distraction to the party. It might just be time to flush, air-freshen, wash, dry and declare.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

VACAY FOR THE MITTIOT

2007-07-18T21:04:00.001-05:00

ON THE HUFFICRAT & HUFFICAN REPRIEVE:

Hey there fellow Mittiots, the often-times-daily, Daily Mittiot will be shooting to the GREAT STATE OF FLORIDA over the next few days to help secure that state for Mitt (and get my my cousin, "Cousin Mittiot," married off in the process!) . We're even going to spend some lint in Disney World to make sure "Mickey Mittiot" and "Minnie Mittiot" are on the Romney Train (we'll leave Goofy to the dems - he'll be right at home - Ooo Zinger!)

At any rate just a thought to ponder for my Michigan Brethren: Mitt is leading in Michigan - by a long shot [read the article] - it's time to get on board! Take a moment (if you haven't yet) to go to our Michigan site: http://www.teamromney.com/ and "Join the Team!" Shop the Gear, and maybe if you really want to help pull Michigan out of our one-state recession, make a contribution to the committee of the next President of the United States - our man Mitt Romney!

Mitt's going to win and you're going to make it happen!

~ so sayeth the Mittiot!

OH, And by the way you bunch of Yellow Journalists: "Don't know" is not the same as "None of the Above" - I actually groaned when I heard the story - [linked below] - keep graspin' Hufficrats, keep graspin'.

Republicans backing 'None of the above'

Excerpt: ". . .In comparison, "Other," "none" and "don't know" -- in other words, "none of the above" -- drew a total of 25 percent. . ." (in FL, 60% still don't know enough about Mitt Romney to give an opinion). Once again the Media proves its true value, the bunch of friggin' idiots - so sayeth (with an expletive or two) the Mittiot.

THE MEANS TO GO THE DISTANCE. . .

2007-07-17T10:14:00.000-05:00

ON THE RECENT ROMNEY CATCHY CRITIQUE:

"Romney Spends It Faster Than He Gets It." Is the headline de'jure regarding Mitt's campaign. Believe it or not, your happy Mittiot has a thought on that.

Some time in the middle of last year, as Chairman of the Jackson County GOP, I (and a few interested members of the 7th Congressional Dist.) had the opportunity to do a small group meeting with the Gov. I was already a "Mittiot," committed to the Romney cause primarily for Michigan's sake (and now for the Country and World for that matter), but couldn't help to be aw struck, again, by Mitt Romney's fingertip command of the numbers regarding the state of Massachusetts and his policy positions. One of the members of the motley group asked Mitt about the bio-medical industry and Massachusetts' success in attracting such firms to the state and its tech-corridor. The Governor, grinned, drew in a split-second breath, and exhaled something that was so to the point and tailored to the heart of the member's question, my jaw dropped. Mitt gave the exact dollar amount the tech industry had brought to Mass, and then compared it to the tourist industry. The difference was millions to billions. This was so poignant to those of us sitting around the Governor because Michigan (like Massachusetts) is - or one was - a major tourist destination and we have forgotten this - as we fall to the bottom of the heap (thank you, Granholm) - in pursuit of the uncertain, relatively minimal, tech dollars out there. "Invest in your tourism and it will pay huge dividends." Romney ended the answer.

In all my studies as a PoliSci professor, I have but a few times come across a leader who could so methodically and precisely assess the situation, identify the issue, and present the logical explanation and solution. And, my dear reader this is just one example, Romney does it again, and again, and. . .

Later that same day, I attended another meeting with the Governor (my father was with me - and I only mention this because he and I stuck out like sorely under-dressed thumbs, of which he'll not let me forget. . . State Conventions are always "casual business attire," I assured him. . . my bad) at any rate, we were there as potential members of Mitt's Michigan Steering Committee - mostly it was state elected officials, Mitt's brother, Scott, and family, and a few other well dressed attendees packed in the small but plush room. The meeting started out with Mitt's "pondering" to run for president. After the obligatory back slapping and cheers of encouragement, Mitt sat down as the room fell silent, inched to the edge of his chair, leaned forward, placed his elbows on his knees, clasped his hands and said, "Here's the bottom line, I'll be one of the few candidates that has the capability to stay in it until the end and has the means necessary to ensure the voters get to know me and our campaign. . ." Again, moving right to the heart of the this-time-silent question on everybody's mind: "You're a great guy Mitt, but besides us who knows it? McCain has got so much name recognition. Giuliani is 'America's Mayor.' Newt is on Fox nearly every night. We love you, but. . ." Questions aside, it has become obvious [see the Hugh Hewitt piece, here], from Iowa to New Hampshire to Michigan: When people get to know Mitt they become, well, Mittiots.

Which brings your Uber-Mittiot to the topic at hand, the "headline de'jure." You see, Lefty Media, Hufficrats and Hufficans, Mitt doesn't "Spend It Faster Than He Gets It," Mitt's already got it. If Mitt raised 14 thousand rather than 14 million last quarter - he'd still have 20.5 million on his ledger. Mitt Romney is going to win - and if you haven't figured it out for yourself then allow me to explain why: He's a phenomenal candidate, both principled and qualified. AND, he has the means - as dollars come in from the outside, or from his family portfolio - to make sure the majority of voters know it. Our job, as Mittiots, is to ensure that we raise the dollars necessary so when Mitt really taps into his personal coffers we don't just out-invest our competition, we bury them under the weight of their own campaign debt.

Apples to apples, Mitt Romney will be the next President of the United States.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.