Mitt Romney has said that jihadism is this century’s nightmare. What do you think?

Reasons to disagree

  1. More people die from alcohol than terrorism. 85,000 people die each year because of alcohol Link
    1. 5% of all deaths from diseases of the circulatory system are attributed to alcohol.
    2. 15% of all deaths from diseases of the respiratory system are attributed to alcohol.
    3. 30% of all deaths from accidents caused by fire and flames are attributed to alcohol.
    4. 30% of all accidental drownings are attributed to alcohol.
    5. 30% of all suicides are attributed to alcohol.
    6. 40% of all deaths due to accidental falls are attributed to alcohol.
    7. 45% of all deaths in automobile accidents are attributed to alcohol.
    8. 60% of all homicides are attributed to alcohol.
    9. 100,000 deaths. That's more than a statistic. That is 100,000 individuals with faces. 100,000 individuals with lives not fully lived. 100,000 individuals grieved by mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, and children. Every year.
  2. An aggressive China that is willing to kill thousands of people in order to expand, would be this century's nightmare.

Reasons to agree
  1. Jihadist are the only people who would use a nuclear weapon.
  2. A nuclear weapon would destroy men, women, children. It would destroy homes, and make property un-usable for thousands of years.
  3. Some of the people who die from Alcohol, are just killing themselves. Those who would be killed from a nuclear bomb, would be mostly innocent.
  4. There can be more than one nightmare. China could go bad, but Jihadism is more likely to.

Below you will see an e-mail I recieved, along with my response:


4.      False. Obama turns 47 on August 4, and if elected would be the 5th youngest person to be president. In fact he will be over 4 years older than Teddy Roosevelt was when he was sworn in after McKinley's assassination, and older than JFK, Clinton, and Grant were when elected. Where are you getting your facts?

Obama would be tied for the 2nd youngest person to be elected president.

Reasons to agree

  1. Teddy Roosevelt is the youngest person ever to become President, but he became President at age 42 after the assassination of President McKinley. He was not elected president. People never said, we are comfortable with someone this young being president.
  2. JFK was 44. Clinton was 47. Obama would be 47.

Teddy Roosevelt, JFK, and Clinton were more experienced than Obama.

Reasons to agree

  1. Harry Truman was right when he said that JFK was too young.
  2. Barak's only jobs before becoming elected to the senate were an associate attorney for 3 years, a lecturer of constitutional law for 11 years and a state senator 8 years
  3. Teddy Roosevelt was Vice President before he became President.
  4. Before TR became Vice President, he served as (1) Governor or New York, (2) Assistant Secretary of the Navy, (3) an Army Lieutenant Colonel and Colonel who organized and led his "Rough Riders" during the Spanish-American War, (4) president of the Board of New York City Police Commissioners, (5) a United States Civil Service Commissioner and (6) a New York State Assemblyman who wrote more bills than any other New York state legislator.
  5. Wikipedia: "Roosevelt became president of the board of New York City Police Commissioners in 1895. During the two years he held this post, Roosevelt radically reformed the police department. The police force was reputed as one of the most corrupt in America. NYPD's history division records Roosevelt was, 'an iron-willed leader of unimpeachable honesty, (who) brought a reforming zeal to the New York City Police Commission in 1895.'Roosevelt and his fellow commissioners established new disciplinary rules, created a bicycle squad to police New York's traffic problems and standardized the use of pistols by officers. Roosevelt implemented regular inspections of firearms, annual physical exams, appointed 1,600 new recruits based on their physical and mental qualifications and not on political affiliation, opened the department to ethnic minorities and women, established meritorious service medals, and shut down corrupt police hostelries."

Barack's no TR, JFK, or even BC

Michael Gaynor Michael Gaynor
January 29, 2008

When Ted Kennedy enthusiastically endorsed Barack Hussein Obama for President of the United States, Ted (1) chided Harry Truman for saying that JFK was too young in 1960 and (2) proclaimed that Barack is a bit older than Teddy Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy and Bill Clinton, when they became President.

What Ted (and the media) ignored is that Harry Truman had a point. The Cuban Missile Crisis resulted from Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev's impression, as a result of the Bay of Pigs fiasco and a personal meeting with JFK in Vienna, that JFK would not be strong enough to keep the Soviet Union from installing long-range nuclear missiles in Cuba. Yes, JFK got those missiles out, after taking the world to the brink of nuclear war, and only gave up some American missiles in Turkey in the bargain. But the truth is that JFK was NOT ready to be President on Day One, as the Bay of Pigs fiasco itself conclusively demonstrated. Instead of a successful operation, or no operation, JFK bungled the long-planned liberation of Cuba from the dictatorship of Fidel Castro as badly as possible: by allowing the attack to begin and then denying air cover to the would-be Cuban liberators.

In addition, Barack is no TR, or JFK, or even Bill Clinton.

Barack was an associate attorney with Miner, Barnhill & Galland (three years), a lecturer of constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School (eleven years) and an Illinois state senator (eight years) before being elected to the United States Senate in 2004.

Teddy Roosevelt is the youngest person ever to become President. He became President at age 42 after the assassination of President McKinley.

Right, TR was Vice President before he became President.

Before TR became Vice President, he served as (1) Governor or New York, (2) Assistant Secretary of the Navy, (3) an Army Lieutenant Colonel and Colonel who organized and led his "Rough Riders" during the Spanish-American War, (4) president of the Board of New York City Police Commissioners, (5) a United States Civil Service Commissioner and (6) a New York State Assemblyman who wrote more bills than any other New York state legislator.

Wikipedia: "Roosevelt became president of the board of New York City Police Commissioners in 1895. During the two years he held this post, Roosevelt radically reformed the police department. The police force was reputed as one of the most corrupt in America. NYPD's history division records Roosevelt was, 'an iron-willed leader of unimpeachable honesty, (who) brought a reforming zeal to the New York City Police Commission in 1895.'Roosevelt and his fellow commissioners established new disciplinary rules, created a bicycle squad to police New York's traffic problems and standardized the use of pistols by officers. Roosevelt implemented regular inspections of firearms, annual physical exams, appointed 1,600 new recruits based on their physical and mental qualifications and not on political affiliation, opened the department to ethnic minorities and women, established meritorious service medals, and shut down corrupt police hostelries."

Barack surely is no TR!

Like TR, JFK was the second son of Joseph P. Kennedy and, as such, very well prepared for the Presidency, especially after his older brother, Joseph, died in World War II. A war hero himself, JFK served after the war as a Congressman (six years) and a United States Senator (eight years) before being elected America's second youngest President.

Barack is no JFK.

Bill Clinton, America's third youngest President, served as a University of Arkansas law professor, Attorney General (two years) and Governor of Arkansas (twelve years) before being elected President in 1992.

Barack is no Bill Clinton either.

5.      "Obama has never accomplished anything outside of the classroom." What is this supposed to mean? He has state senator, US senator, a successful attorney, director of a successful community development program in chicago, and held several different non-academic positions prior to going to Law School. He is a father, and a husband. How can you possibly say he has never accomplished anything outside of the classroom. Please back up your statement.

I assumed you would understand that I mean Obama has never accomplished anything NOTWORTHY outside of the classroom. Of course obama has accomplished somethings. All human beings have become potty trained, and done all sorts of crap. My point was, and I think you will have to agree, that Obama has never done anything noteworthy. You mention that Obama was a state senator? Is this noteworthy? If it is, then every senator should run for president. You know how many state senators there are? Small states like Idaho have perhaps a hundred of them... I bet there are thousands of state senators...

6.      "Obama has never had a job in the marketplace." See above. He worked at Eldridge Hayne's Business International Corporation, and it was not an internship.  If Romney can use his time in France as experience that contributes to his candidacy, why can't Obama use a post-collegiate job?

Good point. The point I was thinking of is that Obama has never done anything useful. I do not consider being a civil rights attorney useful. I do not think lawyers contribute to society, but that is a personal opinion. I think most people would agree with you that working as a lawyer prepares you for president about as much as Romney's experience overseas, but come on...your angers is not worth this SMALL, SMALL, SMALL point. You have to agree with me, if you have any credabilty, that working for a law firm does not qualify you to be president. 

7.      "Obama has never run an organization." He was president of the Harvard Law Review, which is pretty much like being the head of a major magazine, only held to a higher standard. He ran Developing Communities Project in Chicago. If you know anything about how government offices work you would know that running a Senate office is pretty much like running a business. There is a staff, there is a budget, you hire, you fire. And of course a presidential campaign is an incredible organization.

Senators have staff of 2 to 6 people, as far as I know. Obama does not run his presidential campaign. He has a campaign manager. Does everyone who runs for president, automatically have the experience you need to run for president, because running for president, qualifies you to be president. You really are an idiot.

8-12 See above. Senator is the boss. Director is the boss. President is the boss.
13-14. I love that your supporting "facts" for why Obama isn't experienced is "Obama just isn't experienced".  This is brilliant logic.

I am not a Bill Maher fan either, but not all experience is equal.  So Bush had 8 years of political experience, at the state level.  Obama had 7 years at the state level in the Illinois senate (also a very populous state, representing part of the 3rd largest city in the country), plus will have had 4 years in the US Senate.  Bush had 8 years of executive branch experience, Barack 0.  

A governor is not in the executive branch.
Barack has 4 years of foreign policy experience, Bush 0 at that time (same as Romney).

?
 I think the point that Maher is making (poorly, I admit) is that there is no broad brush of "experience" than can be painted onto candidates.  There are no specific pre-req's for the presidency (other than age, citizenship and US Birth), so to say one candidate is more experienced than another is not a simple issue of addition.  If that were the case then we would all just vote for the most "experienced" candidate, McCain

Romney is more experienced than Barak Obama. Romney balanced the budget in Massachusetts, without raising taxes. Romney turned around the Olympics, when they were in debt, just a few months after September 11th. Romney has experience in the marketplace. He made companies give him money, in order for Romney to tell them what to do, in order to fix themselves. Obama worked with a criminal, who ran slum housing in Chicago. What good did Obama accomplish? How many people did he get houses for? What did he accomplish?

Obama is naïve

Obama quotes JFK that we should never negotiate out of fear, but that we should never fear to negotiate. He then says that he would have one on one meetings with the president of Iran. Like a lot of things Barak says, this is very idealist and naïve.

It is not fear that keeps us from negotiating with the president of Iran, but honor. The president of Iran kills intellectuals, tortures political opponents, crushes anyone who writes something in a newspaper or blog that is seen as criticizing him.  You don't sit down for a photo-opportunity and coffee with THE GUY who supports Hezbollah, funds insurgents in Iraq, denies the old holocaust, but promises a brand new holocaust.  

It is honor for the dead that he has killed and wants to kill that keeps us from speaking to the president of Iran. It is respect for the political prisoners that have been silenced that keeps us from having a photo-op with the president of Iran. It is respect for a free press that keeps us from having coffee with the president of Iran. It is HOPE for a future that is not dominated by religious extremest, that keeps us from meeting with the president of Iran. It is not fear.

Has Mitt Paid His Dues?

By stepping down at CPAC, Romney demonstrated that he is willing to sacrifice his own personal glory for the good of the cause. I believe that, at that moment, he became a real conservative in the eyes of his skeptics.


Read the whole article here.

Ann Romney's Not at CPAC, CPAC Speech

This is a must watch speech for conservatives and Mitt Romney fans.

http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/b9769a28-f1fa-4ee9-af17-c9955af1a2e5

More Backroom Deals

In an agreement first reported by West Virginia television station WSAZ, the three Ron Paul delegates were secured through an agreement with the Mike Huckabee campaign.

Ron Paul delegates to the state convention swung their support to Huckabee – putting Huckabee over the top – after Congressman Paul was eliminated in the first round of voting. With three national delegates, Ron Paul secured 17 percent of the 18 delegates that were decided at the State Convention.


http://ronpaul2008.typepad.com/ron_paul_2008/2008/02/ron-paul-secure.html

McCain Throws Support to Huckabee

In a shocking turn of events McCain throws his support in West Virginia to Huckabee pushing Huckabee slightly over the top to win West Virginia's caucus. Romney lead with 41% of the initial vote, but when McCain's camp saw they couldn't win they threw their support behind Huckabee in the second round pushing him over the halfway mark necessary to win.

Politics as usual if you ask me.

Putting the Pressure on for Mitt in Illinois!

A Super Day for Mitt

Numbers USA Strategy

NumbersUSA is advocating an anti-amnesty strategy for Feb 5th.

WHICH STRATEGY FOR IMMIGRATION VOTING TODAY?


Those voting in the Democratic Primaries face no significant difference between Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton on immigration issues.

But those of you voting in the Republican Primaries are telling me of the following ways you plan to vote:
No. 1 -- THE PRINCIPLED OPTION: No matter what your candidate's chances are of winning your own state, you tell me you will vote for your favorite among the anti-amnesty Paul, Huckabee and Romney. You will vote on principle for the candidate who best represents all of your concerns, even if that helps the pro-amnesty McCain win your state.


No. 2 -- THE PRACTICAL OPTION TO HELP ONE CANDIDATE DEFEAT McCAIN: Because Romney is ahead of Huckabee and Paul in the national polls, and is far ahead in delegates won and in money available to continue to fight, many of you recommend that all anti-amnesty voters choose Romney -- even if he is in third place in the polls of your state. The idea is to stop splitting delegates among more than one anti-amnesty candidate and enable one to truly challenge McCain at the convention.


No. 3 -- THE PRACTICAL OPTION TO DENY THE PRO-AMNESTY McCAIN AS MANY DELEGATES AS POSSIBLE: Those of you advocating this option are interested in shifting enough votes from the third and fourth place candidates in any state to the highest ranking anti-amnesty candidate. Your goal is to help the anti-amnesty candidate who is best poised to take delegates away from McCain in your state.


In Illinois this would mean voting for Mitt Romney. There's a lot at stake today; we can win this thing, but its going to take a huge turnout on our side.

Don't let this happen--vote Mitt!

The brilliant Michael Ramirez.

Come on Illinois!!!

California is going for Mitt---come on Illinois!!

The Trend is Real: Conservatives Rally

Influential Evangelical: No to Huck, McCain

McCain, Huckabee Worst Picks for Evangelicals

Contact: Rev. Schenck, 703-447-7686

MEDIA ADVISORY, Feb. 4 /Christian Newswire/ -- The Reverend Rob Schenck (pronounced SHANK), in his capacity as a private citizen, today released this statement regarding tomorrow's primary votes:

"I have spent the last 33 years as an active evangelical Christian. I am an ordained evangelical minister. I graduated from an evangelical Bible college and an evangelical seminary. I serve on the board of America's oldest association of evangelical church leaders, and I head one of the most active evangelical ministries in Washington, DC.

"I have thought long and hard about the upcoming elections. I have prayed earnestly about them, and I have met many of the candidates and their top campaign people and I have studied their platforms and policy proposals.

"After careful and prayerful consideration, I have concluded that an evangelical vote for Mike Huckabee is a vote for John McCain, and a vote for John McCain will be a disaster for this country.

"Let me explain. It's clear to me and many others that Mike Huckabee is not broadening his appeal enough to win the primary. Therefore, his only contribution is to siphon off votes, giving McCain a clear path to victory. It's very possible Huckabee is being positioned to be John McCain's pick for vice president. In order to win, McCain needs Mike Huckabee and the evangelical votes he brings with him. The specter of a McCain-Huckabee ticket is bad for evangelicals.

"McCain is proud of his signature accomplishment, the McCain-Feingold law co-authored with liberal Democrat senator Russ Feingold. McCain-Feingold severely limits the First Amendment rights of evangelicals. McCain will use this law as the litmus test for his Supreme Court nominees. If a judge is likely to be against McCain's unconstitutional law, McCain will not nominate him. Make no mistake about it, constitutional originalist judges will be against McCain-Feingold. These same judges will also be pro-life, for traditional marriage and for the public acknowledgment of God.

"Only liberal judges will support McCain-Feingold. They will also be pro-abortion, anti-traditional marriage and against the public acknowledgement of God. So, with a McCain-Huckabee administration, or with a McCain-anyone administration, we get the wrong judges. Most distressing, we get the wrong justices on the U.S. Supreme Court.

"Evangelicals must consider both the stakes and the realities in this election. Mike Huckabee's continuation only helps John McCain. The consequences are just too great to take this risk. A McCain victory will hurt this country because of the long-term damage of the wrong judges and justices. Worse, McCain's court legacy will continue to hurt our children and our grandchildren, perhaps even our great grandchildren.

"Evangelicals must choose wisely from among candidates other than Mike Huckabee and John McCain as they vote tomorrow, February 5."

For identification purposes only, the Reverend Rob Schenck (pronounced SHANK) is president of Faith and Action in the Nation's Capital, chairman of the Committee on Church and Society for the Evangelical Church Alliance and co-founder of the annual National Memorial for the Pre-born and their Mothers and Fathers, the only pro-life worship service held inside the U.S. Capitol complex in Washington, DC

Very Close

Today, Romney for President launched its newest web ad, "Very Close."
In 2008, the Republican Party needs a nominee who can debate Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) on the important issues confronting our nation today.  "Very Close" highlights how Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and Sen. Clinton actually agree on more issues than not.  We need "a full-spectrum conservative" like Governor Mitt Romney who can provide a clear conservative contrast with Sen. Clinton.
Script For "Very Close" (WEB:30):
ANNOUNCER:  "Is John McCain really the heart and soul of the Republican Party?
"Imagine a debate between McCain and Hillary Clinton.
"On amnesty for illegal immigrants, they agree.
"On voting against President Bush's tax cuts, they agree.
"On imposing an additional 50 cents a gallon cost on gasoline, they agree.
"On blocking conservative judges, they agree.
"Even Bill Clinton says…"
FORMER PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON:  " 'She and John McCain are very close.'"
ANNOUNCER:  "Don't we need a leader who agrees with conservatives?"
GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: "I'm Mitt Romney and I approved this message."
AD FACTS For "Very Close" (WEB:30):
ANNOUNCER:  "Is John McCain really the heart and soul of the Republican Party?  Imagine a debate between McCain and Hillary Clinton.  On amnesty for illegal immigrants, they agree."

Sen. McCain And Sen. Clinton Both Voted For The 2006 Senate Amnesty Bill. "Passage of the bill that would overhaul U.S. immigration policies and offer a path to citizenship for most illegal immigrants in the country. It would subdivide illegal immigrants into three groups based on how long they had been in the United States. Illegal immigrants in the country more than five years would be able to stay and earn citizenship; those here between two and five years would have three years to file paperwork for a temporary work visa, after which they would be eligible for permanent legal residency; and those here less than two years would have to return to their native country and go through normal channels if they want to return. It would create a guest worker program that could accommodate an additional 200,000 immigrants a year. It also would authorize increased border security and enforcement provisions, including a requirement for businesses to verify documents of all prospective employees through an electronic system managed by the Department of Homeland Security." (S. 2611, CQ Vote #157: Passed 62-36: R 23-32; D 38-4; I 1-0, 5/25/06, McCain And Clinton Voted Yea)

Sen. Clinton: Immigration Legislation Must Have A "Path To Legalization" For The 12 Million Illegal Immigrants Here.  "Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York said she was disappointed that the Senate did not move forward with its immigration bill and that the cornerstone of any future measure must be a 'path to legalization' for the 12 million undocumented immigrants already here." (Eunice Moscoso, "Democrats Promise Immigration Reform," Cox News Service, 6/30/07)

Sen. McCain Still Supports His Immigration Plan For A "Path To Citizenship." QUESTION: "But fundamentally, I'm wondering, don't you still have the same plan for a path to citizenship that you fundamentally held months ago?" MCCAIN: "Sure." (ABC/WMUR, Republican Presidential Candidate Debate, Manchester, NH, 1/5/08; www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LbTSe6uLqI)
ANNOUNCER:  "On voting against President Bush's tax cuts, they agree."

In 2001, Sen. McCain And Sen. Clinton Both Voted Against The $1.35 Trillion Tax Cut. The bill lowered marginal rates, eliminated the marriage penalty, and doubled the child tax credit. (H.R. 1836, CQ Vote #170: Adopted 58-33: R 46-2; D 12-31; I 0-0, 5/26/01, McCain And Clinton Voted Nay)

In 2003, Sen. McCain And Sen. Clinton Each Cast Two Votes Against The $350 Billion Tax Cut. The comprehensive bill lowered taxes by $350 billion over 11 years – including increasing the child tax credit and eliminated the marriage penalty. (H.R. 2, CQ Vote #179: Passed 51-49: R 48-3; D 3-45; I 0-1, 5/15/03, McCain And Clinton Voted Nay; H.R. 2, CQ Vote #196: Adopted 50-50: R 48-3; D 2-46; I 0-1, 5/23/03, McCain And Clinton Voted Nay)

ANNOUNCER:  "On imposing an additional 50 cents a gallon cost on gasoline, they agree."

McCain-Lieberman Would Dramatically Raise Taxes On All Carbon-Based Fuels, Like Gas For Your Car And Home Heating Oil. "What is not widely understood is that [Sen. McCain] is currently sponsoring legislation that, in the name of fighting global warming, would dramatically raise the tax on all carbon-based fuels, including gasoline, home heating oil, coal, and to a lesser extent, natural gas." (Roy Cordato, "McCain's Costly Tax On Energy," National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)

American Council For Capital Formation Study: McCain-Lieberman Could Hike Gasoline Prices By 50 Cents Per Gallon.  "A study by an economic research institute, the American Council for Capital Formation, underscored these findings, estimating that under S. 139: … By 2020, gasoline prices would increase 30 to 50 cents per gallon."  (H. Sterling Burnett, "Regulating Greenhouse Gas Emissions," National Center For Policy Analysis, 11/18/04)

Sen. Hillary Clinton Has Co-Sponsored McCain-Lieberman. CLINTON: "And we were debating the McCain-Lieberman Bill, which I'm a proud co-sponsor, to try and do something with CO2." (Sen. Hillary Clinton, Remarks At The 17th Annual Energy Efficiency Forum, Washington, DC, 6/14/06)
 
ANNOUNCER:  "On blocking conservative judges, they agree."

Sen. McCain Joined Democrats In The Gang Of 14 And Stopped Sen. Bill Frist From Banning Filibusters. "An effort that started as little more than hallway talk and phone conversations led to a last-minute deal May 23 that stopped Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist's plans to engineer a ruling the next day to bar filibusters of judicial nominations. A group that became known as the 'gang of 14' – seven Republicans and seven Democrats promised to vote against any such change as long as Democrats swore off future judicial filibusters in all but extraordinary cases. That unified promise had the effect of denying Frist the votes he needed to ban the practice altogether." (David Nather, "Senate Races Against The Nuclear Clock On Judges," Congressional Quarterly Weekly, 5/28/05)

Sen. Clinton Was "Certainly Supportive" Of The Gang Of 14. CNN'S JUDY WOODRUFF: "Some people have noted that you chose not to be part of the group that announced the compromise, that worked on the compromise. The Gang of 14. Should somebody make anything of that?" CLINTON: "No. I think that this was a process that a couple of my colleagues started, you know, some weeks ago after Senator Reid could not reach any understanding with Senator Frist. And I thought they were pursuing a noble effort. I didn't know whether they would be successful or not, but I was, you know, certainly supportive of their efforts to try." (CNN's "Inside Politics," 5/26/05)

ANNOUNCER:  "Even Bill Clinton says…"  FORMER PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON:  "'She and John McCain are very close.'"  ANNOUNCER:  "Don't we need a leader who agrees with conservatives?"  GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: "I'm Mitt Romney and I approved this message."

Former President Clinton: Sens. Clinton And McCain "Are Very Close." "'She and John McCain are very close,' [President Bill] Clinton said. 'They always laugh that if they wound up being the nominees of their party, it would be the most civilized election in American history, and they're afraid they'd put the voters to sleep because they like and respect each other.'" (Alexander Mooney, "Bill Clinton: John McCain And Hillary Are 'Very Close'," CNN's Political Ticker, http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com, Posted 1/25/08)

Mitt on the Move!

FredHeads for Romney

Half Of The Proposed Kerry-McCain '04 Ticket Campaigns In Boston

ABC's Charles Gibson: "But, let me, let me, let me imagine it. If he asked you, if he came across the aisle and asked you, would you even entertain the idea? Or will you rule it out for good and all and ever right now?"
Sen. John McCain: "John Kerry is a very close friend of mine. We've been friends for years. Obviously, I would entertain it." (ABC's "Good Morning America," 3/10/04; www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkcVXIhssCI)
Kerry-McCain 2004? Sen. John Kerry Says Sen. McCain Wanted It:
Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) Says That Sen. John McCain Approached him About Being His 2004 Running Mate. FOX NEWS' BRIT HUME: "The struggling presidential campaign of John McCain is now involved in a controversy with John Kerry over who approached whom about a possible McCain spot on the Democratic ticket in 2004. The Politico newspaper reports Kerry maintains that McCain's people made overtures to him about a vice presidential nod. But McCain says no, it was Kerry's idea, and that he rejected it each time it was raised. This of course, follows a similar story that came out last week in which Senate Democrats where saying McCain was in serious negotiations with them about switching parties following his loss to George W. Bush in the 2000 presidential primaries. McCain says that also is a mischaracterization, and that he was never serious about leaving the Republican Party." (Fox News' "Special Report With Brit Hume," 4/4/07; www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX37Jrw_dMM)
Sen. Kerry: "[McCain's] People Similarly Approached Me To Engage In A Discussion About His Potentially Being On The Ticket As Vice President." JONATHAN SINGER: "And I was wondering if you could talk a little bit about what your discussions were with him [McCain] in 2004, how far it went, who approached whom... if there was any 'there' there." SEN. JOHN KERRY: "I don't know all the details of it. I know that Tom, from a conversation with him, was in conversation with a number of Republicans back then. It doesn't surprise me completely because his people similarly approached me to engage in a discussion about his potentially being on the ticket as Vice President. So his people were active -- let's put it that way." SINGER: "Okay. And just to confirm, you said it, but this is something they approached you rather than..." KERRY: "Absolutely correct. John Weaver of his shop approached..." (My DD Website, http://www.mydd.com/images/admin/McCain.mp3, Accessed 4/3/07)
Sen. McCain Publicly Said He'd Entertain The Idea Of Running With Kerry:
In 2004, When First Questioned If He'd Run With Kerry, McCain Said He "Would Entertain It." ABC's CHARLES GIBSON: "But, let me, let me, let me imagine it. If he asked you, if he came across the aisle and asked you, would you even entertain the idea? Or will you rule it out for good and all and ever right now?" SEN. JOHN MCCAIN: "John Kerry is a very close friend of mine. We've been friends for years. Obviously, I would entertain it." (ABC's "Good Morning America," 3/10/04; www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkcVXIhssCI)
Sen. McCain Also Considered Leaving The Republican Party In 2001:
The Hill: Sen. McCain Considered Leaving The GOP In 2001. "Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was close to leaving the Republican Party in 2001, weeks before then-Sen. Jim Jeffords (Vt.) famously announced his decision to become an Independent, according to former Democratic lawmakers who say they were involved in the discussions." (Bob Cusack, "Democrats Say McCain Nearly Abandoned GOP," The Hill, 3/29/07)
Sen. McCain's Top Political Strategist John Weaver Recently Acknowledged That McCain Spoke To Democrats About Leaving The Party. "McCain consistently shot down the rumors, though Weaver acknowledged this week that the senator did talk to Democrats about leaving the GOP." (Bob Cusack, "Democrats Say McCain Nearly Abandoned GOP," The Hill, 3/29/07)
One McCain Loyalist Said His Chances Of Leaving The Party Were "50-50." "In one article, Marshall Wittman, a McCain loyalist and strategist six years ago, put the odds of McCain leaving the Republican Party at '50-50.'" (Bob Cusack, "Democrats Say McCain Nearly Abandoned GOP," The Hill, 3/29/07)
Sen. McCain Reached Out To Democrats:
In 2001, McCain Aide John Weaver Approached Prominent Democrats About McCain Switching Parties. "Democrats had contacted Jeffords and then-Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I.) in the early months of 2001 about switching parties, but in McCain's case, they said, it was McCain's top strategist who came to them." (Bob Cusack, "Democrats Say McCain Nearly Abandoned GOP," The Hill, 3/29/07)
Weaver Met With Lobbyist Tom Downey To Float The Idea Of A McCain Switch. "At the end of their March 31, 2001 lunch at a Chinese restaurant in Bethesda, Md., Downey said Weaver asked why Democrats hadn't asked McCain to switch parties." (Bob Cusack, "Democrats Say McCain Nearly Abandoned GOP," The Hill, 3/29/07)
Weaver: "Well, If The Right People Asked Him." (Bob Cusack, "Democrats Say McCain Nearly Abandoned GOP," The Hill, 3/29/07)
Calls Were Immediately Placed To Powerful Democrats. "Within seconds' of arriving home from his lunch with Weaver, Downey said he was on the phone to the most powerful Democrats in town. One of the first calls he made was to then-Senate Minority Leader Daschle." (Bob Cusack, "Democrats Say McCain Nearly Abandoned GOP," The Hill, 3/29/07)
Sen. Tom Daschle (D-SD) Confirmed He Spoke To Downey. "I did take the call from Tom [Downey],' Daschle said in an interview. 'It was Weaver's comment' to Downey that started the McCain talks, he added." (Bob Cusack, "Democrats Say McCain Nearly Abandoned GOP," The Hill, 3/29/07)
Downey And Weaver Spoke Weekly. "Downey said he talked to Weaver at least once a week during McCain's discussions with Democrats, asking him questions like, 'What is the state of play?' and 'Where are we?'" (Bob Cusack, "Democrats Say McCain Nearly Abandoned GOP," The Hill, 3/29/07)
Downey: "I Actually Thought During The Initial Stages Of This That [McCain Leaving The Republican Party] Was Almost A Certain Deal." (Bob Cusack, "Democrats Say McCain Nearly Abandoned GOP," The Hill, 3/29/07)
Downey: "Weaver Was Very Active In This." (Bob Cusack, "Democrats Say McCain Nearly Abandoned GOP," The Hill, 3/29/07)
Downey: "None Of This Happens Without Weaver." (Bob Cusack, "Democrats Say McCain Nearly Abandoned GOP," The Hill, 3/29/07)
Influential Democrats Talked To McCain About Defecting:
Leading Democrats Talked With Sen. McCain For Months About Leaving The Party. "In interviews with The Hill this month, former Sen. Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) and ex-Rep. Tom Downey (D-N.Y.) said there were nearly two months of talks with the maverick lawmaker following an approach by John Weaver, McCain's chief political strategist." (Bob Cusack, "Democrats Say McCain Nearly Abandoned GOP," The Hill, 3/29/07)
Sens. McCain And Daschle Met. "Daschle said that throughout April and May of 2001, he and McCain 'had meetings and conversations on the floor and in his office, I think in mine as well, about how we would do it, what the conditions would be. We talked about committees and his seniority … [A lot of issues] were on the table.'" (Bob Cusack, "Democrats Say McCain Nearly Abandoned GOP," The Hill, 3/29/07)
Sens. John Edwards, Teddy Kennedy And Harry Reid All Attempted To Recruit Sen. McCain. "Other senators who played major roles in the intense recruiting effort, according to Democrats, were then-Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) as well as Sens. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Harry Reid (D-Nev.)." (Bob Cusack, "Democrats Say McCain Nearly Abandoned GOP," The Hill, 3/29/07)
Edwards Thought He Might Be Able To Convince McCain To Defect. '"John [Edwards] at that time was working with McCain on a couple things and there was a sense that because of his relationship that he might be a good person to talk to him,' Daschle said. 'He was clearly one of those that we thought could be helpful.''' (Bob Cusack, "Democrats Say McCain Nearly Abandoned GOP," The Hill, 3/29/07)
Daschle Thought Sen. McCain Was The Democrats' "Best Opportunity." "Daschle, however, said the talks went much further, claiming that there were times that he and Democratic leaders thought McCain 'might be our best opportunity.'" (Bob Cusack, "Democrats Say McCain Nearly Abandoned GOP," The Hill, 3/29/07)

Romney Wins Maine - 5 Delegates Behind McCain

Romney Wins Maine - 5 Delegates Behind McCain

Romney encourages supporters with an win in Maine.

Governor Mitt Romney won the Maine Caucus this past weekend. He takes all 19 of the state's delegates to the Republican Convention. For the most part the MSM in their infinite wisdom ignored the last vote before Tempestuous Tuesday.


This win puts Romney a mere five delegates behind Senator John McCain. McCain has 97 delegates and Romney has amassed 92 delegates. Heading into Tempestuous Tuesday, McCain, the media darling, hardly has the commanding lead that the MSM has awarded him. Only time will tell whether the people will buy in to this new McCain.

John McCain; "There will be more wars"

"It's a tough war we're in. It's not going to be over right away. There's going to be other wars." Offering more of his increasingly bleak "straight talk," he repeated the claim: "I'm sorry to tell you, there's going to be other wars. We will never surrender but there will be other wars."

"It's a tough war we're in. It's not going to be over right away. There's going to be other wars." Offering more of his increasingly bleak "straight talk," he repeated the claim: "I'm sorry to tell you, there's going to be other wars. We will never surrender but there will be other wars."

- John McCain, February 3rd 2008

I would love a commercial by Mitt Romney saying that he is going to do the same thing that Bush did, and try every diplomatic option with-in reason, and that it is irresponsible to say "there will be more wars". This goes to the heart of why I don't want to vote for John McCain. He is not putting forth an intelligent argument trying to predict that there will be more wars; he is trying to position himself as the know-it all tough-guy. "Yep, there is going to be more wars, but don't you worry there little missy, I'll take care of you."

David Petraeus doesn't say, "there are going to be more wars." President Bush doesn't say, "there are going to be more wars". The Defense Department and State Department don't tell us there are going to be more wars. But John McCain knows more than them all put together. Do you see what a train wreck this is going to be? John McCain has spent 25 years in congress out positioning people politically. Saying the right thing to get elected. If he wins he will go from having a staff of 2 to 6 people, to running the largest organization on the planet.  His job will be to collect the brightest people on the planet and trying to prevent more wars. That's what he is going to do right?

Right?

Power

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/02/019710.php

One excerpt:

But voting on the basis of electability is often a fool's errand. Right now, Romney looks like a long-shot in November. He should be an attractive candidate -- smart, knowledgeable, good looking, extremely articulate -- but he's run into voter resistance even among conservatives because of his flip-flops, possibly his religion, and a general failure to connect. If he overcomes these problems and defeats McCain the rest of the way, then he'll have done enough to establish his potential electability to my satisfaction. If he doesn't, the issue will be moot.

Meanwhile, Republicans should not take too much comfort from McCain's performance in polls against Clinton and Obama this far from November. The McCain I saw in the California debate last week didn't look particularly electable. With the economy emerging as the overwhelmingly central issue in the campaign, with McCain's nasty streak increasingly on display, and with his reputation for straight-talk diminishing before our eyes, I'm not prepared to base a vote for the Senator on electability.

The decision thus comes down to policy and effectiveness. I give Romney the edge on both counts.

Mitt in Chicagoland!


Romney Rally in Illinois!

POTUS Leadership Index

[Leadership+Index0001.jpg]

From Havs

Did you guys catch the Townhall blog about this, by Novak?  http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/RobertDNovak/2008/02/02/bush_against_romney  This is something we need to push far and wide.  Bush says he isn't happy with Romney because he's too tough on the border.  One of the commentors at Michelle Malkin's blog said that Romney should say this in response:

"I found out today that President Bush may not support my candidacy, and the reason specifically is because I don't share his liberal views on immigration amnesty. He wants to make it easy on illegal immigrants to stay in the this country, as does Senator McCain who proved it with his amnesty bill in the senate, and I'm a strict reconstructionist on the issue of this country's sovereignty and right to keep its borders secure."

This would be huge if we could get this out.  For people who hate the illegal immigration plan that Bush, McCain, and Kennedy tried to shove down our throats this summer (which was a full 70% of the population of the US) this is as good as it gets.  Bush doesn't like him because he was against granting amnesty to millions?  Hallelujah, I want him!

Havs

Don't let them tell you Main was uncontested!

JOHN MCCAIN 2008 MAINE LEADERSHIP TEAM

Honorary Chair

Former Governor John R. McKernan

Co-Chairs
United Senator Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine)
United States Senator Susan M. Collins (R-Maine)

Vice Chair
State Representative Josh Tardy (R-Newport)

Legislative Team
Representative James Annis (R-Dover-Foxcroft)
Representative Rich Cebra (R-Naples)
Representative Kathy Chase (R-Wells)
Representative Dean Cray (R-Palmyra)
Representative Phil Curtis (R-Madison)
Representative Harold Ian Emery (R-Cutler)
Representative Stacey Fitts (R-Pittsfield)
Representative Ken Fletcher (R-Winslow)
Representative Jeff Gifford (R-Lincoln)
Representative John McDonough (R-Scarborough)
Representative Everett McLeod (R-Lee)
Representative H. Sawin Millett (R-Waterford)
Representative Gary Moore (R-Standish)
Representative Kerri Prescott (R-Topsham)
Representative John Robinson (R-Raymond)
Representative David Richardson (R-Carmel)
Representative Wes Richardson (R-Warren)
Representative David Savage (R-Falmouth)
Representative Thomas Saviello (U-Wilton)
Representative Joseph Tibbetts (R-Columbia)
Representative Windol Weaver (R-York)

http://www.johnmccain.com/informing/news/PressReleases/25da61b1-7b70-4732-901a-642c966e1077.htm

Romney Won Maine

Romney won Maine today by a huge margin. With 57 percent of precincts reporting Romney leads with 52% of the vote.

“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.”

Race is Tightening--New Movement!!!

GOP Dead Heat

Huckabee's Boy

The media’s so fond of Huckabee, that I completely missed this one. How much credibility is Mike Huckabee going to have on national security issues, when his own son was caught trying to sneak a loaded glock onto an airplane inside his briefcase? Yes, this is the same son that tortured and killed a dog as a boy scout. The jury is still out on how much Mike Huckabee did to prevent his son from being prosecuted.

At the time, under pressure from animal rights groups, a local prosecuting attorney wrote the Arkansas state police seeking help investigating David. The state police ignored the request. No charges were filed. But, Mike Huckabee’s chief of staff (and personal lawyer) did pressure John Bailey the director of Arkansas’s state police to write an official letter denying the prosecuting attorney’s request. Bailey viewed the lawyer’s intervention as improper and terminated the conversation… Seven months later, he was called into Huckabee’s office and fired.

Huckabee co-chair: "He believes that Jesus Christ is Satan’s brother—are you kidding me?"

Janet Folger, outspoken anti-Mormon, and co-chair of Mike Huckabee’s Faith and Values Coalition has now formed a 527 to act as a front for Huckabee’s attacks on other candidates. Recently they’ve released a dishonest attack ad on Mitt which begs the questions; should Huckabee have someone so bigoted against “Mormons” on his campaign? Is Huckabee breaking campaign finance laws by having the leader of a 527 as a co-chair of his Faith and Values Coaolition?

If there’s any doubt as to Janet Folger’s motivation:

Janet Folger, the founder of Faith2Action.org who helped organize a recent Values Voter Debate in Florida, says she has spoken to many other Christian leaders who fear that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will exploit a Romney candidacy. "They are using it as a recruitment tool right now," she said.

In Max Blumenthal’s entertaining video report on the Values Voter Summit, Huckabee booster Janet Folger is heard excitedly denouncing Romney: “I mean take a look at really what he believes. He believes that Jesus Christ is Satan’s brother—are you kidding me?”

The Reverend Cecil “Chip” Murray: Romney faces more prejudice than Obama

Posted by: Lowell Brown at 02:35 pm, February 1st 2008      &mdash      2 Comments »

chipmurray.jpg

Chip Murray is a Senior Fellow in the Center for Religion and Civic Culture at the University of Southern California, where he holds the Tanzy Chair in Christian Ethics. For 27 years he has been nationally known as the leader and Senior Pastor of the influential Los Angeles First African Methodist Episcopal Church (FAME). Murray's leadership increased church membership from several hundred to more than 18,000. He is also credited with helping to build FAME Renaissance, the church's economic-development nonprofit arm, which brings corporate interests, jobs-training programs, affordable-housing development, homeowner loans and small-business incubation into the church's low-income neighborhood.

"In 2008 whose candidacy will face the most opposition, Barack Obama or Mitt Romney? Who do you think will face the most opposition or the most prejudice today?"
Reverend Murray: "The Mormon. Because America is still growing."

Sonja Eddings Brown interviewed Dr. Murray on November 6, 2007, and made the video available to Article VI Blog. Excerpts from the video are posted at the upper right of our home page, and are available here.

_________________________

A6: In the past year or so, several polls have been conducted suggesting that as many as 37% of Americans might not consider a member of the Mormon Church to be fit for the office of President. What is your view of the possibility of a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints being elected to the presidency?

Reverend Murray: To me this seems an antiquated question. Would a Mormon be fit to serve as President? It was really antiquated when we asked the question about John Kennedy and whether a Catholic would be fit to serve as president. About Barack Obama and whether a Black would be fit to serve as president. About Hilary Clinton, whether a woman would be fit to serve as president.

If you want to, you can categorize anyone who is running. You could ask whether a White, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant, male is fit to run for president when that's all we've ever had. It's time to change. There can be arguments if you go by labels, but if you see that this is a country in pursuit of liberty and justice for all, if you perceive that in a democracy as opposed to a fascist form of government we must have liberty and equity in the process. If you can see that we are in the 21st Century, where people will soon be crossing the country in 30 minutes, where we will be vacationing on Mars, if you can see the new world then you accommodate yourself to it and stop living in the past.

People's labels, as long as they are not labeled as a criminal mentality, or defined as someone not FOR the people, then you can judge the merits of that platform and what they stand for, not where they are standing.

A6: But there are some in your own Christian community that fundamentally reject the theology of the Mormon Church and fear validating it by supporting Mitt Romney. They in essence, reject him, because they reject his beliefs.

Reverend Murray: If a candidate says my belief system is this…and someone who says, "Well my belief system is this…and we do not accept you because of your belief system." Anyone who is fair would look at this and say "Who appointed you judge?" I say, "When did God die and appoint you judge?" There's a constant challenge to grow and few churches can point the finger at another. Few people of one belief system can point a finger at another … particularly when you look at how the Mormons were treated in their trek West. They were coming West to escape the brutality of Christian people who were opposed to their way of thinking.

And now, if you would find a church as socially conscious as the Mormon Church, you would have done well. The outreach, the worldwide missionary outreach, young adults, youth, volunteering their time, everyone is a minister in a ministry of outreach, that would be a wonderful model for all of our churches to adopt.

A6: As a respected long-time member of the Christian ministry, how do you feel we are doing as a country when it comes to the actual separation of Church and State?

Reverend Murray: I think the separation of Church and State is a basic policy that we simply must follow. Not to follow that separation, that line in the sand separating church and state is to flirt with danger. Now of course when you separate church and state that doesn't mean that you weed religion out of those who are in politics, not that you weed politics out of those in religion, but you can't customize it, you can't structure it, so that you have the bully pulpit dictating to Congress. You can't give God a stick and you be God's agent and you are whipping people into line in your religious context.

You have your religion, your religion is personal. And even though religion is personal but never private, it cannot be public to the extent that it's "my way or the highway."

It isn't American and it isn't sensible to make the bully pulpit the bully. The bully pulpit at best deals with conscience and conscientiousness. Not consensus and not control. People have the right to believe as they believe. The Pure Charity Trust says that 87% of Americans believe in God but now when we look at how these Americans look at God, you have the Abrahamic faiths. Judaism, Christianity and Islam. You have the faith that comes out of the Mormon Church, you have Bhuddist and Daoist. These people have the right to their individual beliefs, but no one has the right to a collective belief that sweeps and demands and says you believe as we believe … or you get hurt.

A6: One of the most commonly-heard criticisms of the LDS Church is that Mormons are not considered to be authentically "Christian." Reverend, what is your definition of a Christian?

Reverend Murray: The definition of Christian would start with the definition of religion from French Latin: "religare." It means the pieces fit. Just as with Shalom, the Jewish term, it means "the pieces fit." As long as the pieces collide, you probably have some struggles with your authenticity in religion. But once the pieces fit, "I love God, I love my neighbor, I have an ear for my neighbor as well as a tongue, I have patience with my neighbor as he has patience with me, I have dialogue with my neighbor who will have dialogue with me. I have differences with my neighbor and he has differences with me," then the pieces fit. Our greatest challenge? Different folks with differences … not allowing their differences to matter.

A6: In 2008 whose candidacy will face the most opposition, Barack Obama ? Who do you think will face the most opposition or the most prejudice today?

Reverend Murray: The Mormon. Because America is still growing. The question, "Do we want a Mormon?" The ultra conservatives will start reaching into history and try to paint them as a radical sect, try to show that their belief system is alien to what perhaps a majority of Americans believe. Because that's where we are now. Prayerfully, that's not where we'll be in 20, 30 or 40 years. We don't know. I would say Barack would have the advantage. And anytime you say a black candidate would have an advantage running for President of the United States of America, great day in the morning! After four centuries of bad thinking about Blacks, then you know we still have LONG way to go.

I think Governor Romney must see himself as a symbol. Symbol of the underdog, who must run a good race, fight a good fight, and if and when he loses, walk with his head high because the victory was not in the victory, but in the struggle.

A6: It is not unusual, it is customary even, to see intermingling of church and politics in this present campaign. We have seen Jesse Jackson in the past, or today Barack Obama going into churches with his messages, or even a declared minister like Mike Huckabee campaigning as a man of faith and in places of faith. Are these candidates walking a thin line?

Reverend Murray: Jesse Jackson is a good example of what we're talking about, because he comes out of the Black community, also out of black ministry. The black ministry knows that if the church is not involved in politics, the black people will get lost. The voting rights movement there in the Black church, getting the black vote out, the church must be involved. But you walk a chalk line interpreting involvement. You are free to endorse a candidate, because much can ride on your endorsement. But if you were to talk to any gathering of 10 blacks, I think nine out of ten, nine and a half out of ten, would say "Jesse is free to say who he wants to endorse, but I endorse who I want."

Because we are living in a century or better of understanding … that you don't boss the church with politics.

A6: Considering the questions that continue to follow Governor's Romney campaign, what do you see as the biggest challenge facing Mitt Romney in his bid for the presidency?

[Romney] may see himself as a door opener, because 4 years from now he might run again and find a whole new chemistry. Or forty years from now another Mormon will run . . . .

Reverend Murray: I think Governor Romney must see himself as a symbol. Symbol of the underdog, who must run a good race, fight a good fight, and if and when he loses, walk with his head high because the victory was not in the victory, but in the struggle. He must hold America to its highest, he must have an agenda with bullet points that are clear to understand so that people can see what he stands for even as some will see as what he stand on … Mormonism. And thus be led to make choices. He may see himself as a door opener, because 4 years from now he might run again and find a whole new chemistry. Or forty years from now another Mormon will run, and they will see, just as Jesse ran for President and Al Sharpton ran for president. There was not a chance that they would win. Blacks knew it very well. They themselves knew it. But they were door openers for such as Barack Obama.

A6: And as a member of the clergy, how do you view the scrutiny that the Mormon Church as a whole is facing this year?

Reverend Murray: It isn't that Americans are ignorant of the Mormon Church, it is that they want to be ignorant of the Mormon Church because they are different, and we think different "from" means different "bad." So what is our hope? I think we have a chauffeur when it comes to fairness. We will be driven towards fairness by necessity. You cannot live in this country putting down people of this Church. Of that faith. Of people who are different. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has done miracles of transformation. So the mentality of those who behave ignorant of it, and ignorance is bliss for them, they will take some educating. But it can be done and it must be done. So the Mormon Church has to continue to hold tight to high principles, market its product and its people continue to serve beyond themselves, knowing occasionally they're going to take the hit. But within whatever period of time, people will come to see that the pieces fit.

Some people might say, "Is that a black man over there telling us that it just takes time?"

That's just common reasoning. It takes time.

I've been saying for a while now that McCain takes positions that make himself look good at the expense of the Republican party. I didn't realize that the surge was a perfect example.

California Yankee at RedState provides some insight:

I also have a problem with Senator McCain pinning the perceived lack of instant success in Iraq on Rumsfeld. He has come up with a very simplistic story that Rumsfeld was bad and Petreaus is good. But successful counterinsurgency campaigns take time. A lot of time. More than a year. Everyone, including Senator McCain is willing to credit General Petraeus with the success of the surge. But maybe we should look at the General's first two tours in Iraq for the secrets of his success, and maybe we should consider who promoted General Petraeus, more than once, and who recommended General Petraeus to be the Iraq commander--the very same Donald Rumsfeld that McCain vilifies.

I could go on here, but I think I've made my point, which is that McCain takes too much credit for the surge, especially since I'm not sure he was as involved in the strategy shift as he says he was. This makes me wonder about how he will behave as Commander in Chief. Will the military appreciate his eagerness to grab the limelight and denigrate the long, difficult and frequently unpopular work that leads to success in a mission like Iraq?


To put this in perspective, McCain was running around in 2002 saying the war in Iraq would be "easy". Then when it wasn't the cake walk that was promised McCain turned the blame on Donald Rumsfeld for not meeting the outlandish expectations McCain had set forward.

YET ANOTHER CONSERVATIVE VOTE FOR GOVERNOR ROMNEY

Laura Ingraham:  "All right, I'm going to see your endorsement and raise you an announcement: February 12th is the big D.C. primary, I'm pulling the lever for Mitt Romney. No doubt about it.  No hesitation."  ("The Laura Ingraham Show," 2/1/08)
 
To listen to Laura Ingraham, please see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnXDJHUE_VQ