National Review says that although Sen. Rand Paul has not née asked to submit the paperwork that is part of the vetting process, his name is continually mentioned by Romney advisers as a potential vice presidential nominee.
Paul will be campaigning as a a surrogate for Romney. He also will get to speak during the Republican National Convention,
Let's hope that Romney is smart enough to give Paul a prime-time slot. As anyone who has ever heard Paul speak knows, that could be a break-out performance -- to surpass Obama's speech at the Democratic National Comvention I. 2004.
Showing posts with label Romney. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Romney. Show all posts
Thursday, June 21, 2012
Monday, June 4, 2012
Rand Paul Will Keep Romney From Going Wobbly
If Barack Obama is reelected, Sen. Rand Paul will declare his candidacy for president before the year is over. If Mitt Romney is elected, the spectre of a Rand Paul primary challenge may force Romney to govern like a conservative, rather than a Massachusetts moderate.
I take comfort in that thought when I see headlines like this: "Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare." That's the sort of headline that gives conservatives heart arrhythmia. It's a disingenuous headline, as it turns out, because the transition team member is implementing "exchanges," which could be done as a market reform to decrease the cost of health care. It is not as if Team Romney was arguing in favor of the individual mandate, for example
Sure, there are conservatives who oppose the state-run health insurance exchanges. The point here is not the merits of this part of Obamacare, but rather that conservatives will be closely monitoring how a President Romney governs. Many of us had doubts about him, but see him as out best chance of -- literally -- saving the country from the disastrous consequences of a second Obama term.
Romney has unified the base with the prospect of defeating Obama. If Romney then drifts to the center after elected, he will be risking a primary challenge. This is a real possibility -- one that Romney should keep in mind with each policy choice.
Conservatives are backing Romney now that he is the nominee. But unlike Sen. Paul, Romney is not in the Circle of Trust.
I take comfort in that thought when I see headlines like this: "Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare." That's the sort of headline that gives conservatives heart arrhythmia. It's a disingenuous headline, as it turns out, because the transition team member is implementing "exchanges," which could be done as a market reform to decrease the cost of health care. It is not as if Team Romney was arguing in favor of the individual mandate, for example
Sure, there are conservatives who oppose the state-run health insurance exchanges. The point here is not the merits of this part of Obamacare, but rather that conservatives will be closely monitoring how a President Romney governs. Many of us had doubts about him, but see him as out best chance of -- literally -- saving the country from the disastrous consequences of a second Obama term.
Romney has unified the base with the prospect of defeating Obama. If Romney then drifts to the center after elected, he will be risking a primary challenge. This is a real possibility -- one that Romney should keep in mind with each policy choice.
Conservatives are backing Romney now that he is the nominee. But unlike Sen. Paul, Romney is not in the Circle of Trust.
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
We Have a Nominee! Now We Need a Veep
Let the wild rumpus start: we have now entered the general election phase. What a relief that we won't have to suffer any more of those debates (how many of them were there?)
The good news is that the most electable of the bunch won. There is growing enthusiasm for Mitt Romney among those of us who wanted someone more conservative.
Team Obama is inadvertently helping Romney to solidify his base among conservatives by running a commercial that accuses Romney of being captured by the far right. Oh, if only that were true. And yet, the more the Obama campaign tries to paint Romney as a die-hard conservative, the better he sounds.
This peculiar tactic by the Obama campaign is undoubtedly aimed and moderates and independents. The problem for Obama, however, is that the narrative has no basis in reality. None. Romney is a New England Republican. The People's Republic of Massachusetts does not elect wing-nuts. Voters know this.
Now that Romney has secured the nomination, speculation on who he will select as his running mate grows more intense. Mike Huckabee's name was floated earlier this week. Not a bad choice, really. I opposed Huckabee when he ran for president; I found his comments on foreign policy frighteningly naive. Huckabee's talk show, however, has showcased him as something of a statesman. His presence on the ticket would perhaps help evangelicals who stil worry that Mormonism is a cult.
This is not to say that Huckabee is necessarily the best choice, only that he deserves a serious look.
The good news is that the most electable of the bunch won. There is growing enthusiasm for Mitt Romney among those of us who wanted someone more conservative.
Team Obama is inadvertently helping Romney to solidify his base among conservatives by running a commercial that accuses Romney of being captured by the far right. Oh, if only that were true. And yet, the more the Obama campaign tries to paint Romney as a die-hard conservative, the better he sounds.
This peculiar tactic by the Obama campaign is undoubtedly aimed and moderates and independents. The problem for Obama, however, is that the narrative has no basis in reality. None. Romney is a New England Republican. The People's Republic of Massachusetts does not elect wing-nuts. Voters know this.
Now that Romney has secured the nomination, speculation on who he will select as his running mate grows more intense. Mike Huckabee's name was floated earlier this week. Not a bad choice, really. I opposed Huckabee when he ran for president; I found his comments on foreign policy frighteningly naive. Huckabee's talk show, however, has showcased him as something of a statesman. His presence on the ticket would perhaps help evangelicals who stil worry that Mormonism is a cult.
This is not to say that Huckabee is necessarily the best choice, only that he deserves a serious look.
Thursday, April 19, 2012
Romney Visits Kentucky
Mitt Romney grows on you. That was apparent from the enthusiasm for his visit to Kentucky. He just wrapped up a fundraiser at the Anchorage home of John and Annette Schnatter. Even though the ticket price was steep -- $1000 a head minimum -- the turnout looked quite high.
More interesting was the buzz in the neighborhood. Children waved to the motorcade and even a few former Obama supporters drove by to see if they could catch a glimpse.
Many conservatives expressed regret that they could not go to this event, but seemed much more enthusiastic about Romney and his prospects than they did a few months ago.
This change in attitude about Romney cannot be attributed just to the implosion and withdrawal of his rivals.
There is something about Romney that makes one warm to him over time. After three years of Obama's petulance, Romney seems mature -- steady and optimistic. After Obama's class warfare, Romney refreshes with his refusal to be shamed for his success, for his consistent defense of hard work and free enterprise.
Maybe it's because Derby is drawing near; that puts Kentuckians in a good mood. Still, I sense a growing enthusiasm that Romney might win.
More interesting was the buzz in the neighborhood. Children waved to the motorcade and even a few former Obama supporters drove by to see if they could catch a glimpse.
Many conservatives expressed regret that they could not go to this event, but seemed much more enthusiastic about Romney and his prospects than they did a few months ago.
This change in attitude about Romney cannot be attributed just to the implosion and withdrawal of his rivals.
There is something about Romney that makes one warm to him over time. After three years of Obama's petulance, Romney seems mature -- steady and optimistic. After Obama's class warfare, Romney refreshes with his refusal to be shamed for his success, for his consistent defense of hard work and free enterprise.
Maybe it's because Derby is drawing near; that puts Kentuckians in a good mood. Still, I sense a growing enthusiasm that Romney might win.
Friday, December 2, 2011
Trying to Enthuse About Romney
The brilliant Charles Krauthammer has done what no one heretofore has been able to do: convince me that the Republican nominee must be Mitt Romney for the sake of our country.
Krauthammer compares the strengths and weaknesses of Romney against the latest non-Romney, Newt Gingrich, and concludes with evident reluctance that it must be Mitt -- and this without even mentioning Newt's personal baggage.
Listen to how Krauthammer distills the difference between the two front-runners:
Two ideologically problematic finalists: One is a man of center-right temperament who has of late adopted a conservative agenda. The other is a man more conservative by nature but possessed of an unbounded need for grand display that has already led him to unconservative places even he is at a loss to explain, and that as president would leave him in constant search of the out-of-box experience — the confoundedly brilliant Nixon-to-China flipperoo regarding his fancy of the day, be it health care, taxes, energy, foreign policy, whatever.
I recently spoke with someone who served in Congress with Gingrich who described Gingrich as a "high wire act." Even in the Republican caucus, members held their breath, not knowing what Gingrich would do next -- but certain that it would make for big headlines.
With Romney, on the other hand, we know what we are getting: a moderate Northeastern Republican a la Nelson Rockefeller. We might not like it, but we know what to expect.
As Krauthammer points out, it is Gingrich's "need for the grand display" based on his own certainty of his brilliance -- his narcissism -- that makes Gingrich a dangerous bet for conservatives. That's assuming he could get elected, which Krauthammer doubts given the stench of lobbying for Freddie Mae and Mac that accompanies Gingrich.
My sense of foreboding about Romney has nothing to do with his character, his intellect or his religion. I just fear that he will join the growing list of "moderates" that Republicans keep nominating in a vain attempt to appeal to independents: Gerald Ford; George H.W. Bush after we "read his lips"; Bob Dole; John McCain. Mitt Romney fits more comfortably in that list than he does in the much shorter list: George W. Bush; Ronald Reagan, who made no apologies about their adherence to conservatism and were rewarded with election.
It is unfortunate that the choice has come down to Mitt vs. Newt. Mitch Daniels could have won this election. He would have been a superb president. Perhaps he still will be, one day.
But here is the danger. Even if a Mitch Daniels or Paul Ryan gets elected in 2016, if Obama has been reelected, this country may no longer be recognizable in 2016. It will be too late.
You play the hand you’re dealt. This is a weak Republican field with two significantly flawed front-runners contesting an immensely important election. If Obama wins, he will take the country to a place from which it will not be able to return (which is precisely his own objective for a second term).
Every conservative has thus to ask himself two questions: Who is more likely to prevent that second term? And who, if elected, is less likely to unpleasantly surprise?
Krauthammer compares the strengths and weaknesses of Romney against the latest non-Romney, Newt Gingrich, and concludes with evident reluctance that it must be Mitt -- and this without even mentioning Newt's personal baggage.
Listen to how Krauthammer distills the difference between the two front-runners:
Two ideologically problematic finalists: One is a man of center-right temperament who has of late adopted a conservative agenda. The other is a man more conservative by nature but possessed of an unbounded need for grand display that has already led him to unconservative places even he is at a loss to explain, and that as president would leave him in constant search of the out-of-box experience — the confoundedly brilliant Nixon-to-China flipperoo regarding his fancy of the day, be it health care, taxes, energy, foreign policy, whatever.
I recently spoke with someone who served in Congress with Gingrich who described Gingrich as a "high wire act." Even in the Republican caucus, members held their breath, not knowing what Gingrich would do next -- but certain that it would make for big headlines.
With Romney, on the other hand, we know what we are getting: a moderate Northeastern Republican a la Nelson Rockefeller. We might not like it, but we know what to expect.
As Krauthammer points out, it is Gingrich's "need for the grand display" based on his own certainty of his brilliance -- his narcissism -- that makes Gingrich a dangerous bet for conservatives. That's assuming he could get elected, which Krauthammer doubts given the stench of lobbying for Freddie Mae and Mac that accompanies Gingrich.
My sense of foreboding about Romney has nothing to do with his character, his intellect or his religion. I just fear that he will join the growing list of "moderates" that Republicans keep nominating in a vain attempt to appeal to independents: Gerald Ford; George H.W. Bush after we "read his lips"; Bob Dole; John McCain. Mitt Romney fits more comfortably in that list than he does in the much shorter list: George W. Bush; Ronald Reagan, who made no apologies about their adherence to conservatism and were rewarded with election.
It is unfortunate that the choice has come down to Mitt vs. Newt. Mitch Daniels could have won this election. He would have been a superb president. Perhaps he still will be, one day.
But here is the danger. Even if a Mitch Daniels or Paul Ryan gets elected in 2016, if Obama has been reelected, this country may no longer be recognizable in 2016. It will be too late.
You play the hand you’re dealt. This is a weak Republican field with two significantly flawed front-runners contesting an immensely important election. If Obama wins, he will take the country to a place from which it will not be able to return (which is precisely his own objective for a second term).
Every conservative has thus to ask himself two questions: Who is more likely to prevent that second term? And who, if elected, is less likely to unpleasantly surprise?
Thursday, June 16, 2011
Al Gore Hearts Romney
For those who need another reason to pick a candidate, any candidate but Mitt Romney: Al Gore has complimented Romney for his wisdom on the environment.
According to the Daily Caller, Gore said of Romney,“While other Republicans are running from the truth, he is sticking to his guns in the face of the anti-science wing of the Republican Party.” Gore referred to a Washington Post story about how Romney believes that human activity is causing global warming.
To be sure, Romney would have made a much better president than Barack Obama. He would have made a much better nominee than John McCain. He is a decent, honorable and intelligent.
But if Romney is the Republican nominee -- and all the mainstream media tout polls that supposedly point that direction -- Republicans will lose. We might as well just renominate Bob Dole again. Or McCain. None of these candidates can appeal to Reagan Democrats because they are just not conservative enough.
This is a center-right country and Romney is not a center-right candidate. Obama modeled Obamacare after Romneycare. Al Gore thinks Romney gets it on the environment. And there has been a drumbeat of polls that keep telling us how electable Romney is. He is not.
If Romney wins the nomination, it is time for a third party.
According to the Daily Caller, Gore said of Romney,“While other Republicans are running from the truth, he is sticking to his guns in the face of the anti-science wing of the Republican Party.” Gore referred to a Washington Post story about how Romney believes that human activity is causing global warming.
To be sure, Romney would have made a much better president than Barack Obama. He would have made a much better nominee than John McCain. He is a decent, honorable and intelligent.
But if Romney is the Republican nominee -- and all the mainstream media tout polls that supposedly point that direction -- Republicans will lose. We might as well just renominate Bob Dole again. Or McCain. None of these candidates can appeal to Reagan Democrats because they are just not conservative enough.
This is a center-right country and Romney is not a center-right candidate. Obama modeled Obamacare after Romneycare. Al Gore thinks Romney gets it on the environment. And there has been a drumbeat of polls that keep telling us how electable Romney is. He is not.
If Romney wins the nomination, it is time for a third party.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Mitt: Bankruptcy, Not Billions, For Detroit
Former Mass. governor and presidential candidate Mitt Romney told Fox News that the U.S. auto industry should restructure pursuant to the bankruptcy code, rather than soaking up additional billions from a taxpayer bailout.
His perspective is worth noting for two reasons. First, as Hot Air points out, Romney's family made its money in Detroit's auto industry. Second, by profession, Romney is a turn-around guy. In fact, in discussing the need for outside faces to reform the auto industry, Romney sounds like he'd enjoy the challenge of making Detroit globally competitive. And I don't doubt that he could do it.
Romney makes the point that a bankruptcy is a restructuring, not a liquidation (essentially the difference between Chapter VII and Chapter XI of the bankruptcy code).
As a result, bankruptcy is an opportunity; it would give Detroit the chance to rewrite contracts -- including with labor -- to allow Detroit to reduce its costs. Those savings would be passed on to consumers, which is the only way that American auto makers can compete with Japan and company.
On the issue of executive compensation and perks, Romney sounds down-right populist. This could be a good issue for Romney while he waits for 2012. Recall Lee Iacoca; he saved Chrysler, wrote a book. Then everyone wanted him to run for president.
His perspective is worth noting for two reasons. First, as Hot Air points out, Romney's family made its money in Detroit's auto industry. Second, by profession, Romney is a turn-around guy. In fact, in discussing the need for outside faces to reform the auto industry, Romney sounds like he'd enjoy the challenge of making Detroit globally competitive. And I don't doubt that he could do it.
Romney makes the point that a bankruptcy is a restructuring, not a liquidation (essentially the difference between Chapter VII and Chapter XI of the bankruptcy code).
As a result, bankruptcy is an opportunity; it would give Detroit the chance to rewrite contracts -- including with labor -- to allow Detroit to reduce its costs. Those savings would be passed on to consumers, which is the only way that American auto makers can compete with Japan and company.
On the issue of executive compensation and perks, Romney sounds down-right populist. This could be a good issue for Romney while he waits for 2012. Recall Lee Iacoca; he saved Chrysler, wrote a book. Then everyone wanted him to run for president.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Mitt to Pitch for Mac Tonight
There's no question that any bad feelings from the primaries are forgotten. Unlike the Democratic National Convention, there have been no appeals to party "unity." The Republican party, from the grass roots to the former candidates is intent on unifying America by welcoming disaffected Democrats and Independents.
All of three of the major GOP candidates -- Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney -- are here working for John McCain. Each is scheduled to speak tonight.
Excerpts from Romney's prepared remarks to tonight's convention:
Flipping Barack Obama's change for the sake of change theme, Romney said,
"We need change all right - change from a liberal Washington to a conservative Washington! We have a prescription for every American who wants change in Washington - throw out the big government liberals and elect John McCain."
On the different political philosophies of the two men,
The right course is the one championed by Ronald Reagan 30 years ago, and by John McCain today. It is to rein in government spending and lower taxes, for taking a weed-whacker to excessive regulation and mandates, for putting a stop to tort windfalls, and to stand up to the Tyrannosaurus appetite of government unions. "
And at Saddleback, after Barack Obama dodged and ducked every direct question, John McCain hit the nail on the head: radical Islam is evil, and he will defeat it! Republicans prefer straight talk to politically correct talk!" . . . .
Liberals would replace opportunity with dependency on government largess. They would grow government and raise taxes to put more people on Medicaid, to work requirements out of welfare, and to grow the ranks of those who pay no taxes at all. Dependency is death to initiative, risk-taking and opportunity. It's time to stop the spread of government dependency to fight it like the poison it is! It's time for the party of big ideas, not the party of Big Brother!"
Sounding very Reaganesque, Romney's prepared remarks articulate a vision of America, that despite our challenges, the best days of our country are before us. It was an entirely different vision of our country than Obama-Biden, who daily tell us that we should be gloomy and worried. As Romney put it,
"Just like you, there has never been a day when I was not proud to be an American. We inherited the greatest nation in the history of the earth. It is our burden and privilege to preserve it, to renew its spirit so that its noble past is prologue to its glorious future. To this we are all dedicated and I firmly believe by the providence of the Almighty, that we will succeed. President McCain and Vice President Palin will keep America as it has always been - the hope of the world."
All of three of the major GOP candidates -- Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney -- are here working for John McCain. Each is scheduled to speak tonight.
Excerpts from Romney's prepared remarks to tonight's convention:
Flipping Barack Obama's change for the sake of change theme, Romney said,
"We need change all right - change from a liberal Washington to a conservative Washington! We have a prescription for every American who wants change in Washington - throw out the big government liberals and elect John McCain."
On the different political philosophies of the two men,
The right course is the one championed by Ronald Reagan 30 years ago, and by John McCain today. It is to rein in government spending and lower taxes, for taking a weed-whacker to excessive regulation and mandates, for putting a stop to tort windfalls, and to stand up to the Tyrannosaurus appetite of government unions. "
And at Saddleback, after Barack Obama dodged and ducked every direct question, John McCain hit the nail on the head: radical Islam is evil, and he will defeat it! Republicans prefer straight talk to politically correct talk!" . . . .
Liberals would replace opportunity with dependency on government largess. They would grow government and raise taxes to put more people on Medicaid, to work requirements out of welfare, and to grow the ranks of those who pay no taxes at all. Dependency is death to initiative, risk-taking and opportunity. It's time to stop the spread of government dependency to fight it like the poison it is! It's time for the party of big ideas, not the party of Big Brother!"
Sounding very Reaganesque, Romney's prepared remarks articulate a vision of America, that despite our challenges, the best days of our country are before us. It was an entirely different vision of our country than Obama-Biden, who daily tell us that we should be gloomy and worried. As Romney put it,
"Just like you, there has never been a day when I was not proud to be an American. We inherited the greatest nation in the history of the earth. It is our burden and privilege to preserve it, to renew its spirit so that its noble past is prologue to its glorious future. To this we are all dedicated and I firmly believe by the providence of the Almighty, that we will succeed. President McCain and Vice President Palin will keep America as it has always been - the hope of the world."
Celebrity Spotting: Romney or Fabio?
John claims this is Mitt Romney and his wife crossing the street after tonight's proccedings at the Convention. I say it's Fabio.
Monday, August 25, 2008
McCain Should Do The Math And Pick Romney
There are many reasons why Senator Joe Biden was a dumb pick. One is that he is not a Southerner. As Senator Barack Obama should know, for over fifty years this maxim has held true: no Democrat has won the presidency without a Southerner on the ticket.
Neither Delaware (where Biden now resides) nor Pennsylvania (where he was born) qualifies as part of the South. Granted, a portion of southern Pennsylvania was once controlled by the South, but that ended badly for the invaders in 1863.
Rather than choose a running mate from a blue State that he was already likely to win, Obama should have plucked someone from the red zone -- the Governor of Virginia, for example.
Obama's goof is a gift for Senator John McCain. McCain should choose a running mate with Northern roots who has a decent chance of turning a marginal blue State into a red one. Mitt Romney would provide that opportunity.
To be sure, it would be nothing short of a Massachusetts miracle were Romney to bring the Commonwealth where he served as governor into the Republican fold. But Romney might be able to swing another Northern, heretofore, blue, State McCain's way: Michigan -- where Romney grew up and his father was governor.
According to a poll released today by Detroit Free Press:
From his opposition to the Iraq war to the perception that he's an agent of change, Barack Obama goes into the Democratic National Convention this week with a lot of pluses for Michigan voters.
And one very noticeable challenge -- himself.
Because tucked in among questions from last week's Detroit Free Press-Local 4 Michigan Poll was one asking likely voters if they agreed with the statement, "There are some things about Barack Obama that I'm not that comfortable with."
Nearly two-thirds of the 600 people surveyed last week said they agreed with that statement -- perhaps suggesting that Obama's seven-point lead in the state over Republican John McCain rests on the support of many voters who aren't entirely sure about Obama.
The current projected Electoral College result is Obama 273, McCain 265, according to RealClearPolitics.com. As we know, it takes 270 to win. Romney's Michigan, which is in Obama's column by a slender two percent according the latest poll, has 17 electoral votes.
Unlike Obama, who appears challenged by the subject (law school graduates typically are), McCain should understand the importance of mathematics in choosing a running mate. That's just one of many reasons why Romney would be a great pick.
Please note: The postings of "G. Morris", written by John K. Bush and which end in 2016, stated his views as of the dates of posting and should not be understood as current assertions of his views. The postings, which have not been altered since they came to an end, remain on this blog to preserve the historical record. In 2017, Mr. Bush took a position that precludes further public political comments or endorsements. He will no longer be contributing to this blog.
Neither Delaware (where Biden now resides) nor Pennsylvania (where he was born) qualifies as part of the South. Granted, a portion of southern Pennsylvania was once controlled by the South, but that ended badly for the invaders in 1863.
Rather than choose a running mate from a blue State that he was already likely to win, Obama should have plucked someone from the red zone -- the Governor of Virginia, for example.
Obama's goof is a gift for Senator John McCain. McCain should choose a running mate with Northern roots who has a decent chance of turning a marginal blue State into a red one. Mitt Romney would provide that opportunity.
To be sure, it would be nothing short of a Massachusetts miracle were Romney to bring the Commonwealth where he served as governor into the Republican fold. But Romney might be able to swing another Northern, heretofore, blue, State McCain's way: Michigan -- where Romney grew up and his father was governor.
According to a poll released today by Detroit Free Press:
From his opposition to the Iraq war to the perception that he's an agent of change, Barack Obama goes into the Democratic National Convention this week with a lot of pluses for Michigan voters.
And one very noticeable challenge -- himself.
Because tucked in among questions from last week's Detroit Free Press-Local 4 Michigan Poll was one asking likely voters if they agreed with the statement, "There are some things about Barack Obama that I'm not that comfortable with."
Nearly two-thirds of the 600 people surveyed last week said they agreed with that statement -- perhaps suggesting that Obama's seven-point lead in the state over Republican John McCain rests on the support of many voters who aren't entirely sure about Obama.
The current projected Electoral College result is Obama 273, McCain 265, according to RealClearPolitics.com. As we know, it takes 270 to win. Romney's Michigan, which is in Obama's column by a slender two percent according the latest poll, has 17 electoral votes.
Unlike Obama, who appears challenged by the subject (law school graduates typically are), McCain should understand the importance of mathematics in choosing a running mate. That's just one of many reasons why Romney would be a great pick.
Please note: The postings of "G. Morris", written by John K. Bush and which end in 2016, stated his views as of the dates of posting and should not be understood as current assertions of his views. The postings, which have not been altered since they came to an end, remain on this blog to preserve the historical record. In 2017, Mr. Bush took a position that precludes further public political comments or endorsements. He will no longer be contributing to this blog.
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Republican Big Shots Coming To Town
You'd think the Republican National Convention had come early, judging by the slate of speakers expected for next week's National Rifle Association meeting in Louisville. USA Today reports:
The National Rifle Association says Republican presidential candidate John McCain is scheduled to give a speech during a forum at the N.R.A.'s annual meeting next week in Louisville.
N.R.A. spokesman Andrew Arulanandam says the U.S. senator and presumptive GOP presidential nominee will take part in the group's Celebration of American Values Leadership Forum on May 16, the first day of the three-day meeting. The meeting will be followed a few days later by Kentucky's primary election.
Also scheduled to speak at the forum are former GOP presidential candidates Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney, former White House political director Karl Rove, [and] Republican U.S. Senate Leader Mitch McConnell . . . .
Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama received no invitation to speak. Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear apparently will be the odd man out, as he looks to be the only Democrat scheduled to give an address.
Please note: The postings of "G. Morris", written by John K. Bush and which end in 2016, stated his views as of the dates of posting and should not be understood as current assertions of his views. The postings, which have not been altered since they came to an end, remain on this blog to preserve the historical record. In 2017, Mr. Bush took a position that precludes further public political comments or endorsements. He will no longer be contributing to this blog.
The National Rifle Association says Republican presidential candidate John McCain is scheduled to give a speech during a forum at the N.R.A.'s annual meeting next week in Louisville.
N.R.A. spokesman Andrew Arulanandam says the U.S. senator and presumptive GOP presidential nominee will take part in the group's Celebration of American Values Leadership Forum on May 16, the first day of the three-day meeting. The meeting will be followed a few days later by Kentucky's primary election.
Also scheduled to speak at the forum are former GOP presidential candidates Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney, former White House political director Karl Rove, [and] Republican U.S. Senate Leader Mitch McConnell . . . .
Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama received no invitation to speak. Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear apparently will be the odd man out, as he looks to be the only Democrat scheduled to give an address.
Please note: The postings of "G. Morris", written by John K. Bush and which end in 2016, stated his views as of the dates of posting and should not be understood as current assertions of his views. The postings, which have not been altered since they came to an end, remain on this blog to preserve the historical record. In 2017, Mr. Bush took a position that precludes further public political comments or endorsements. He will no longer be contributing to this blog.
Thursday, February 7, 2008
Romney's Out
Mitt Romney is reportedly going to suspend his campaign, for the good of the party. Two days ago, WHAS 11 had trouble finding anyone who would admit to being a McCain supporter. Now we're all McCain supporters.
We've just lost the only candidate who is even close to being a conservative. What a sad state of affairs when a candidate can't win because he is too handsome, too articulate, too successful, too decent and too rich. It seems that the politically correct movement to bolster our self-esteem didn't work.
We've just lost the only candidate who is even close to being a conservative. What a sad state of affairs when a candidate can't win because he is too handsome, too articulate, too successful, too decent and too rich. It seems that the politically correct movement to bolster our self-esteem didn't work.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
New York Times Endorses Romney (Sort Of)
Any time The New York Times vilifies a Republican, there's a good bet that the object of the Old Grey Lady's scorn is a true conservative with a chance of getting elected and maybe accomplishing something.
So I read with interest the New York Times' attempted character assassination of Mitt Romney:
TAMPA, Fla. — At the end of the Republican presidential debate in New Hampshire this month, when the Democrats joined the candidates on stage, Mitt Romney found himself momentarily alone as his counterparts mingled, looking around a bit stiffly for a companion.
The moment was emblematic of a broader reality that has helped shape the Republican contest and could take center stage again on Thursday at a debate in Florida. Within the small circle of contenders, Mr. Romney has become the most disliked.
The Times then characterized the other GOP candidates feelings' about Romney to include: "anger"; "visceral scorn"; "special animosity"; "ill will"; "resentment"; culminating in a "gang tackle."
Then the Times put in a plug for its favorite RINO, John McCain. "In stark contrast to Mr. Romney, Mr. McCain seems to be universally liked and respected by the other Republican contenders, even if they disagree with him."
If McCain were a real conservative, he would write a letter to the editor of the New York Times and demand that they retract that glowing compliment.
Ann Coulter said it best: "The candidate Republicans should be clamoring for is the one liberals are feverishly denouncing. That is Mitt Romney by a landslide. "
John McCain may well take the Times' praise and recycle it in campaign literature or ads. Conservatives will recognize that as akin to listing Satan as a character reference.
So I read with interest the New York Times' attempted character assassination of Mitt Romney:
TAMPA, Fla. — At the end of the Republican presidential debate in New Hampshire this month, when the Democrats joined the candidates on stage, Mitt Romney found himself momentarily alone as his counterparts mingled, looking around a bit stiffly for a companion.
The moment was emblematic of a broader reality that has helped shape the Republican contest and could take center stage again on Thursday at a debate in Florida. Within the small circle of contenders, Mr. Romney has become the most disliked.
The Times then characterized the other GOP candidates feelings' about Romney to include: "anger"; "visceral scorn"; "special animosity"; "ill will"; "resentment"; culminating in a "gang tackle."
Then the Times put in a plug for its favorite RINO, John McCain. "In stark contrast to Mr. Romney, Mr. McCain seems to be universally liked and respected by the other Republican contenders, even if they disagree with him."
If McCain were a real conservative, he would write a letter to the editor of the New York Times and demand that they retract that glowing compliment.
Ann Coulter said it best: "The candidate Republicans should be clamoring for is the one liberals are feverishly denouncing. That is Mitt Romney by a landslide. "
John McCain may well take the Times' praise and recycle it in campaign literature or ads. Conservatives will recognize that as akin to listing Satan as a character reference.
Monday, January 21, 2008
Horse Analogies (Cont.)
Former Solicitor General Ted Olson, a Rudy Guiliani supporter, has recently "likened the nomination process to a horse race," reports MSNBC.com's Vick Zast -- an analogy that was already noted by this blogger last November. Zast continues:
Olson, of course, has suggested that the former mayor of New York City is mimetic of a talented 3-year-old colt that hasn’t yet competed in a race that suits his running style. Scarborough and many other political observers believe the race goes to the candidates fastest from the starting gate. Recent history, both in politics and horse racing, illustrates that they both can be right.
Zast also explains the similarities of the upcoming primaries to the Derby prep races:
For all practical purposes, the late March/early April stakes races for Kentucky Derby candidates are the same as Super Tuesday is for presidential aspirants. Win or do well in one of them and running in the Derby is a foregone conclusion. Flop at the end, without benefit of a fast start, and you’ll find yourself sitting on the sidelines.
This last set of preps, not the preps we are watching now, determines the Kentucky Derby field. It includes the Florida Derby (Gr.1) on March 29, the Santa Anita Derby (Gr.1) and Wood Memorial (Gr.1) on April 5, and the Toyota Blue Grass Stakes (Gr.1) and Arkansas Derby (Gr.2) on April 12.
So, in other words, all we have seen thus far are caucuses and primaries that don't qualify as real races. What counts are the upcoming contests, such as the Florida Derby (where Giuliani will finally emerge from the starting gate), the California race (where John McCain, Mitt Romney and Giuliani will likely run neck-and-neck), the Arkansas Derby (which is Mike Huckabee's race to lose) . . . okay, the analogy breaks down eventually, but one gets the point.
Speaking of Huckabee (and also as predicted by this blogger last November), he remains well positioned to place at the Republican Convention -- that is, be named the Republican vice presidential nominee ("winning the silver", as Romney might say, but that would be mixing sports metaphors).
Doug Mead, writing at Newsmax.com, touts a potential Romney-Huckabee ticket as "a great team." Mead argues that "[t]here is no way either one will win in a general election without having the other one on the ticket. . . . Neither one can win without the other. They are joined at the hip. " Think of two horses that are both needed to pull the GOP wagon.
It might be worth placing an exacta bet on Romney-Huckabee, who may be ready to reconcile in order to win. But I'm not so confident in that prediction so as to rule out other exotic bets before the Republican nomination is decided.
Please note: The postings of "G. Morris", written by John K. Bush and which end in 2016, stated his views as of the dates of posting and should not be understood as current assertions of his views. The postings, which have not been altered since they came to an end, remain on this blog to preserve the historical record. In 2017, Mr. Bush took a position that precludes further public political comments or endorsements. He will no longer be contributing to this blog.
Olson, of course, has suggested that the former mayor of New York City is mimetic of a talented 3-year-old colt that hasn’t yet competed in a race that suits his running style. Scarborough and many other political observers believe the race goes to the candidates fastest from the starting gate. Recent history, both in politics and horse racing, illustrates that they both can be right.
Zast also explains the similarities of the upcoming primaries to the Derby prep races:
For all practical purposes, the late March/early April stakes races for Kentucky Derby candidates are the same as Super Tuesday is for presidential aspirants. Win or do well in one of them and running in the Derby is a foregone conclusion. Flop at the end, without benefit of a fast start, and you’ll find yourself sitting on the sidelines.
This last set of preps, not the preps we are watching now, determines the Kentucky Derby field. It includes the Florida Derby (Gr.1) on March 29, the Santa Anita Derby (Gr.1) and Wood Memorial (Gr.1) on April 5, and the Toyota Blue Grass Stakes (Gr.1) and Arkansas Derby (Gr.2) on April 12.
So, in other words, all we have seen thus far are caucuses and primaries that don't qualify as real races. What counts are the upcoming contests, such as the Florida Derby (where Giuliani will finally emerge from the starting gate), the California race (where John McCain, Mitt Romney and Giuliani will likely run neck-and-neck), the Arkansas Derby (which is Mike Huckabee's race to lose) . . . okay, the analogy breaks down eventually, but one gets the point.
Speaking of Huckabee (and also as predicted by this blogger last November), he remains well positioned to place at the Republican Convention -- that is, be named the Republican vice presidential nominee ("winning the silver", as Romney might say, but that would be mixing sports metaphors).
Doug Mead, writing at Newsmax.com, touts a potential Romney-Huckabee ticket as "a great team." Mead argues that "[t]here is no way either one will win in a general election without having the other one on the ticket. . . . Neither one can win without the other. They are joined at the hip. " Think of two horses that are both needed to pull the GOP wagon.
It might be worth placing an exacta bet on Romney-Huckabee, who may be ready to reconcile in order to win. But I'm not so confident in that prediction so as to rule out other exotic bets before the Republican nomination is decided.
Please note: The postings of "G. Morris", written by John K. Bush and which end in 2016, stated his views as of the dates of posting and should not be understood as current assertions of his views. The postings, which have not been altered since they came to an end, remain on this blog to preserve the historical record. In 2017, Mr. Bush took a position that precludes further public political comments or endorsements. He will no longer be contributing to this blog.
Monday, December 3, 2007
"Rose is a rose is a rose is a rose"
"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers." So said Shakespeare's King Henry VI, who never had to run for political office to rule his country. But for those who must be elected head of state, it can be a source of pride to tout the lawyers in your camp -- unless you're Hillary Clinton.
The magazine published by the American Bar Association, the ABA Journal, reports on rafts of high-powered attorneys and law school professors signed up to assist Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney, John Edwards and Barack Obama. All of these candidates also happen to be lawyers themselves, as is Hillary.
Hillary, however, "didn't get back to" the Slate.com reporter who compiled the lawyer information. Maybe she is still putting it together. Bill doesn't count, given that the Supreme Court unanimously revoked his bar license -- even his own nominees voted to disbar him.
But we don't need her list to make this safe prediction: If Hillary is elected, count on her being the only attorney with a regular view of the White House garden with any Rose Law Firm experience.
Please note: The postings of "G. Morris", written by John K. Bush and which end in 2016, stated his views as of the dates of posting and should not be understood as current assertions of his views. The postings, which have not been altered since they came to an end, remain on this blog to preserve the historical record. In 2017, Mr. Bush took a position that precludes further public political comments or endorsements. He will no longer be contributing to this blog.
The magazine published by the American Bar Association, the ABA Journal, reports on rafts of high-powered attorneys and law school professors signed up to assist Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney, John Edwards and Barack Obama. All of these candidates also happen to be lawyers themselves, as is Hillary.
Hillary, however, "didn't get back to" the Slate.com reporter who compiled the lawyer information. Maybe she is still putting it together. Bill doesn't count, given that the Supreme Court unanimously revoked his bar license -- even his own nominees voted to disbar him.
But we don't need her list to make this safe prediction: If Hillary is elected, count on her being the only attorney with a regular view of the White House garden with any Rose Law Firm experience.
Please note: The postings of "G. Morris", written by John K. Bush and which end in 2016, stated his views as of the dates of posting and should not be understood as current assertions of his views. The postings, which have not been altered since they came to an end, remain on this blog to preserve the historical record. In 2017, Mr. Bush took a position that precludes further public political comments or endorsements. He will no longer be contributing to this blog.
Friday, November 30, 2007
Are Giuliani's Friends Attacking The Wrong Man?
The Log Cabin Republicans and Republican Majority for Choice are taking one-two punches at Mitt Romney in new advertisements to be aired in New Hampshire. Giuliani's allies apparently believe they will help their candidate by going negative. Perhaps so, but by softening up Romney, they may be unwittingly aiding a potentially more formidable foe -- Mike Huckabee.
In radio ads the Log Cabin Republicans, a gay rights advocacy group, don't criticize Romney for what is their real beef -- his opposition to same-sex marriage -- but rather what they call "Mitt flops" on tax issues. In contrast, the Republican Majority for Choice does not hide its agenda. The pro-choice group criticizes Romney for changing his position on abortion -- which he again acknowledged in last Wednesday's CNN YouTube GOP debate -- thus continuing with the flip-flop theme.
The Log Cabin Republicans should consider what Huckabee had to say about them at the debate. When Anderson Cooper asked Huckabee whether he "would . . . allow support from the Log Cabin Republicans," Huckabee answered: "You know, in my position in this entire election, I need the support of anybody and everybody I can get. . . I disagree with them [i.e., the gay rights advocates], strongly disagree with them on the idea of same-sex marriage, but in a democracy we can have disagreements over some policies and still agree on the greater things that make us Republicans. So would I accept their support? Of course. Would I change my position on same-sex marriage? No, I wouldn't. But if they're willing to support me, I'll be their president. I'll be anybody's president, but I'll be true to my convictions, and I think that's what Americans look for -- not someone they're going to agree with on everything, but somebody who at least has some convictions, sticks with them, and explains them, and can at least have respect for people who have different ones."
As for his stand on abortion, Huckabee's commercial during the debate said it all: "Fair doesn't just influence me. It really defines me. I don't have to wake up every day wondering what do I need to believe? Let us never sacrifice our principles for anybody's politics. Not now, not ever. I believe life begins at conception. We believe in some things. We stand by those things. We live or die by those things."
Those are no-compromise yet adroitly articulated positions coming from a candidate who, according to John McIntyre of RealClearPolitics.com, "has a real shot to be the Republican nominee." Giuliani's friends may need to rethink their media buys.
Please note: The postings of "G. Morris", written by John K. Bush and which end in 2016, stated his views as of the dates of posting and should not be understood as current assertions of his views. The postings, which have not been altered since they came to an end, remain on this blog to preserve the historical record. In 2017, Mr. Bush took a position that precludes further public political comments or endorsements. He will no longer be contributing to this blog.
In radio ads the Log Cabin Republicans, a gay rights advocacy group, don't criticize Romney for what is their real beef -- his opposition to same-sex marriage -- but rather what they call "Mitt flops" on tax issues. In contrast, the Republican Majority for Choice does not hide its agenda. The pro-choice group criticizes Romney for changing his position on abortion -- which he again acknowledged in last Wednesday's CNN YouTube GOP debate -- thus continuing with the flip-flop theme.
The Log Cabin Republicans should consider what Huckabee had to say about them at the debate. When Anderson Cooper asked Huckabee whether he "would . . . allow support from the Log Cabin Republicans," Huckabee answered: "You know, in my position in this entire election, I need the support of anybody and everybody I can get. . . I disagree with them [i.e., the gay rights advocates], strongly disagree with them on the idea of same-sex marriage, but in a democracy we can have disagreements over some policies and still agree on the greater things that make us Republicans. So would I accept their support? Of course. Would I change my position on same-sex marriage? No, I wouldn't. But if they're willing to support me, I'll be their president. I'll be anybody's president, but I'll be true to my convictions, and I think that's what Americans look for -- not someone they're going to agree with on everything, but somebody who at least has some convictions, sticks with them, and explains them, and can at least have respect for people who have different ones."
As for his stand on abortion, Huckabee's commercial during the debate said it all: "Fair doesn't just influence me. It really defines me. I don't have to wake up every day wondering what do I need to believe? Let us never sacrifice our principles for anybody's politics. Not now, not ever. I believe life begins at conception. We believe in some things. We stand by those things. We live or die by those things."
Those are no-compromise yet adroitly articulated positions coming from a candidate who, according to John McIntyre of RealClearPolitics.com, "has a real shot to be the Republican nominee." Giuliani's friends may need to rethink their media buys.
Please note: The postings of "G. Morris", written by John K. Bush and which end in 2016, stated his views as of the dates of posting and should not be understood as current assertions of his views. The postings, which have not been altered since they came to an end, remain on this blog to preserve the historical record. In 2017, Mr. Bush took a position that precludes further public political comments or endorsements. He will no longer be contributing to this blog.
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Bet On Mike Huckabee To Place
With the Iowa Republican presidential caucus a little over a month away (January 3, 2008), the remaining campaign period resembles Derby week: a crowded field of entries; jockeying for the best post position; and fear and loathing of the favorite.
Here's a betting tip, based on the latest Iowa poll numbers: Mike Huckabee to place, and not just in Iowa. Look for Huckabee to be the Republican vice presidential nominee.
In the ABC/Washington Post poll of the Iowa Republican caucus, conducted November 14-18, Mitt Romney held onto first place with 28% -- virtually unchanged from the last poll. But the real news is that Huckabee has surged into second place, with an astounding 24%. Next was Fred Thompson, with 15%, followed by Rudy Giuliani, who remains in fourth with 13%.
These numbers suggest Huckabee's dark horse candidacy remains viable, but a more likely outcome would be for him to be picked as second on the Republican ticket.
Despite their recent campaign attacks, Romney and Huckabee remain on good terms. Though they may seem an unlikely exacta, these candidates became friends while Governors of Massachusetts and Arkansas, respectively, and worked together closely as members of the Republican Governors Association. They have more in common than their respective campaigns may let on, and at the end of the day, a Baptist Southerner would bring nice balance to a ticket headed by a Mormon Northeasterner.
A similar argument could be made for the pairing of Huckabee with Giuliani, a Roman Catholic New Yorker.
And what if Thompson, the Tennessee Presbyterian, were to win the Republican nomination? Though having a Protestant Arkansan and Tennessean on the same presidential ticket may seem redundant, recall that this combination worked well for the Democrats in 1992 and 1996.
But don't count on that scenario happening because Thompson, with sinking poll numbers, has faded even before the stretch. The same can be said for John McCain, who polled only 6% in the latest Iowa count.
The only Republican presidential candidate making a move is Huckabee, and though he remains a long shot for the presidential nomination, Huckabee may be best horse to ride if one wants to support a Republican presidential candidate with the best chance of being somewhere on the ballot in November 2008.
Please note: The postings of "G. Morris", written by John K. Bush and which end in 2016, stated his views as of the dates of posting and should not be understood as current assertions of his views. The postings, which have not been altered since they came to an end, remain on this blog to preserve the historical record. In 2017, Mr. Bush took a position that precludes further public political comments or endorsements. He will no longer be contributing to this blog.
Here's a betting tip, based on the latest Iowa poll numbers: Mike Huckabee to place, and not just in Iowa. Look for Huckabee to be the Republican vice presidential nominee.
In the ABC/Washington Post poll of the Iowa Republican caucus, conducted November 14-18, Mitt Romney held onto first place with 28% -- virtually unchanged from the last poll. But the real news is that Huckabee has surged into second place, with an astounding 24%. Next was Fred Thompson, with 15%, followed by Rudy Giuliani, who remains in fourth with 13%.
These numbers suggest Huckabee's dark horse candidacy remains viable, but a more likely outcome would be for him to be picked as second on the Republican ticket.
Despite their recent campaign attacks, Romney and Huckabee remain on good terms. Though they may seem an unlikely exacta, these candidates became friends while Governors of Massachusetts and Arkansas, respectively, and worked together closely as members of the Republican Governors Association. They have more in common than their respective campaigns may let on, and at the end of the day, a Baptist Southerner would bring nice balance to a ticket headed by a Mormon Northeasterner.
A similar argument could be made for the pairing of Huckabee with Giuliani, a Roman Catholic New Yorker.
And what if Thompson, the Tennessee Presbyterian, were to win the Republican nomination? Though having a Protestant Arkansan and Tennessean on the same presidential ticket may seem redundant, recall that this combination worked well for the Democrats in 1992 and 1996.
But don't count on that scenario happening because Thompson, with sinking poll numbers, has faded even before the stretch. The same can be said for John McCain, who polled only 6% in the latest Iowa count.
The only Republican presidential candidate making a move is Huckabee, and though he remains a long shot for the presidential nomination, Huckabee may be best horse to ride if one wants to support a Republican presidential candidate with the best chance of being somewhere on the ballot in November 2008.
Please note: The postings of "G. Morris", written by John K. Bush and which end in 2016, stated his views as of the dates of posting and should not be understood as current assertions of his views. The postings, which have not been altered since they came to an end, remain on this blog to preserve the historical record. In 2017, Mr. Bush took a position that precludes further public political comments or endorsements. He will no longer be contributing to this blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)