Yes, of course it is very early to place huge stock in such polls, but we can’t help but be drawn to any early indication of what might possibly happen in 2012. With that in mind I present the results of the Public Policy Polling’s survey of Florida Republican primary voters:
If the Republican candidates for President in 2012 were Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, and Mitt Romney who would you vote for?
52% Mitt Romney
21% Mike Huckabee
18% Sarah Palin
14% Undecided
I don’t think I need to remind our readers how important of state Florida in the primary schedules with it’s 57 winner-takes-all delegates. Cross-tabs from the survey show that results are basically the same whether the polled Republicans were of conservative, moderate, or liberal ideology.
Not to be excluded from the report is the great news that Romney also holds large lead in an identical poll Colorado. This one isn’t quite headline news as Romney overwhelmingly won Colorado in the 2008 primary caucus. The results for Colorado PPP poll:
Colorado:
44% Mitt Romney
25% Sarah Palin
17% Mike Huckabee
14% Undecided
For full results of the Florida and Colorado polls, including cross-tabs, click here.
Other recent polls: PPP Texas:
32% Mitt Romney
29% Mike Huckabee
23% Sarah Palin
15% Undecided
PPP New Mexico:
33% Mitt Romney
32% Sarah Palin
18% Mike Huckabee
17% Undecided
For full results of the Feb. 26 Texas and New Mexico polls, including cross-tabs, click here.
Magellan Strategies California,
31% Romney
18% Palin
13% Huckabee
12% Gingrich
08% Paul
03% Other
03% Pawlenty
12% Undecided
For full results of the March 4 California poll, including cross-tabs, click here.
Americans are riveted on Obamacare. With just seven days until the March 18th White House deadline for a vote on the Senate health care bill arrives, eyes are glued on Blue Dog Democrats. We are witnessing nearly hourly positioning on Capitol Hill and can almost hear the chest-poking, arm-twisting, and head thumping going on behind locked doors as Obama, Pelosi, and Reid shove and kick to pass their 2700 page health care confiscation scheme.
Hold on to your hospital gowns! We’ll slog through what’s happened in the last three days…
As of yesterday, the latest left-jab to the American people is aptly dubbed the “Slaughter Solution.”
The Slaughter Solution is a plan by Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY), the Democratic chair of the powerful House Rules Committee and a key ally of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), to get the health care legislation through the House without an actual vote on the Senate-passed health care bill. You see, Democratic leaders currently lack the votes needed to pass the Senate health care bill through the House. Under Slaughter’s scheme, Democratic leaders will overcome this problem by simply “deeming” the Senate bill passed in the House -- without an actual vote by members of the House.
(emphasis mine)
Two days ago (March 9th), Nancy Pelosi tipped her neck-wringing hand: “But we have to pass the [health care] bill so that you can find out what is in it.”
Taking his health care punches on the road, President Obama traveled to suburban St. Louis, Missouri yesterday. Assured of muscling high schoolers (ticketed with closed doors) at St. Charles High into cheering for his socialized plan as cameras rolled (how hard is that?) he was met outside by 2300 fired-up Tea Party protestors:
The Show Me State temporarily became the No-Show State on Wednesday as some prominent Missouri Democrats decided they’d rather be somewhere else when President Obama came to push his massive health care overhaul plan. […]
The same conspicuous absences occurred Monday [March 8th] in Pennsylvania, a state Mr. Obama won by 10 percentage points in 2008. While the president was accompanied by embattled Democratic Sen. Arlen Specter, Sen. Bob Casey and Rep. Chaka Fattah aboard Air Force One, several other Pennsylvania Democrats didn’t elect to join him there, including Reps. Patrick J. Murphy, Christopher Carney and Tim Holden, three incumbents facing tough re-election battles.
Speculation is volatile on whether Representative Bart Stupak and supposed 11 other reps who oppose abortion funding in the Senate bill will succumb to threats of non-cooperation black eyes:
News broke early yesterday morning [March 9th] announcing that Representative Bart Stupak thinks a “compromise” can be reached on the issue of abortion funding in the Democrats’ Senate version of the health care bill. “I’m more optimistic than I was a week ago,” Stupak said in an interview between meetings with constituents in his northern Michigan district.[...]
Stupak had an interview with The Weekly Standard yesterday, where he clarified what was really going on. “Obviously they don’t know me,” Stupak said in his interview. “If I didn’t cave in November, why would I do it now after all the crap I’ve been through? Everyone’s going around saying there’s a compromise — there’s no such thing,” Stupak said. What’s changed between this week and last, Stupak went on, is that he had his first real conversation with Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Congressman Henry Waxman about fixing the bill.
As if there isn’t enough padding in health care boxing gloves, we learned today that Democrat leadership is considering stuffing a student loan overhaul into the Obamacare bill:
Democratic leaders met for a second day Wednesday with administration officials, including White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, in the office of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), but reached no decision on the student loan measure. One participant said a consensus appeared to be emerging that it would be unwise to risk the health-care bill by including the education measure.
The projected cost of Obama’s plan to expand Pell Grants and diminish the role of the private sector in the student loan program has exploded over the past year as more people seek college loans in the weak economy. Meanwhile, the potential savings from knocking private lenders out of the system has diminished as one in five colleges has already turned to government lending.
Rather than saving $50 billion over the next decade, the student loan initiative is now projected to increase deficits by about $5 billion, according to preliminary estimates provided to Democratic lawmakers. Including it in the health-care package could wreck efforts to meet the deficit-reduction goals required under reconciliation, aides said.
Eyes glazed over yet? There’s more…
Meanwhile, Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) is staying in the ring by declaring yesterday that he’s going to change filibuster laws:
“The filibuster has been abused,” Sen. Harry Reid said at a reporter’s briefing this afternoon. “But next Congress, we are going to take a look at it. And we’re going to make some changes in it.”
For now, the process seems to be proceeding from the premise that Senate Democrats are fed up with the filibuster. “In baseball,” Reid said in a clipped tone, “they used to have the spitball. It originally was used with discretion. But then the ball got wetter and wetter and wetter. So soon, they outlawed the spitball.” The same, he said, had happened to the four-corner offense in basketball. “And just the way the spitball was abused in baseball and the four-corner offense was abused in basketball,” Reid said, “Republicans have abused the filibuster.”
Republicans will meet the Democrat’s reconciliation onslaught with a combat strategy of their own. Greta Van Susteren and Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ) ‘On The Record’ (FOX News) last night:
Senator Kyl: “If you [Dems] are going to use the reconciliation process, we’re going to hold you to the strict limits of reconciliation. And, if you go outside the lines and are not technically correct under reconciliation, we’re going to toss it out on a point of order. And, we have the votes to do that.”
“While the President is visiting America’s heartland today, I hope he will take the opportunity to finally listen to the American people, who are shouting, “stop” at the top of their lungs. They just don’t want out-of-touch Washington Democrats’ job-killing government takeover of health care. They don’t want more than $500 billion in tax hikes. They don’t want nearly $500 billion in Medicare cuts. They don’t want these outrageous kickbacks, payoffs, and sweetheart backroom deals.
The Tea Party Coalition is sounding the trumpet nationwide to take the battle to Washington D.C. this month. Here is video announcing the Take the Town Halls to Washington project. Michele Bachmann @ 1:49 :
We’ve got SEVEN days to put the squeeze on Blue Dog Democrats. Let’s not get trapped into the ‘knocked-out’ way of thinking that we can lounge around while someone else does our work for us. How much effort have you made to contact BDDs in the past week? Each of us must take personal responsibility to get a headlock on Obamacare NOW. For information on who to contact, click here.
Last week, I launched the national tour for my new book, No Apology: The Case for American Greatness, and I must admit — it feels good to be on the road again.
The tour has already taken me to cities in New York, Massachusetts, Georgia, Florida, and Michigan, as well as to Washington, DC. And by the time it’s over, I’ll have visited dozens of cities in 19 states.
It’s been great reconnecting with old friends and making new ones as I travel across the country talking about our shared conservative values — that a competitive America is one where taxes are low and government is small, that our military superiority must never be compromised, that our cultural values need to be cherished and that unleashing the power of the free market is key to our economic future.
I hope to see you at one of my upcoming book events so that you can join this important dialogue, but even if you can’t be there in person, I hope you will stand with me in helping to make our conservative message heard.
As you know, this is a crucial midterm election year. All 435 Congressional seats, one third of the U.S. Senate, 37 Governorships, and control of numerous state legislatures are at stake. With your generous financial support of $25, $50, $100, $250, $500, $1,000, $2,500, or even the maximum $5,000, to my PAC, we’ll have the resources to spread our message and elect conservative candidates throughout the country.
And, for a limited time, if you contribute at least $50, we’ll send you the official No Apology 2010 Book Tour t-shirt as a token of our appreciation (select your size below) . This much sought after, limited edition item is the same t-shirt worn by my staff and volunteers at our book events, and I’d be honored to have you wear it too as a key member of my team. And as an added bonus, the first 100 people who contribute at least $100 will receive their t-shirt signed.
I hope you will stand with me in these critical months ahead. With you by my side, I am sure that America will continue to be — as it always has been — a force for good like no other in this world. And for that, I make no apology.
Recent presidential candidate Mitt Romney charts a dramatic new course to confront the most critical issues of our nation’s time. With clear vision and a bold call to action, Governor Romney examines the roads that have led us to this critical moment in our history and incisively charts a course toward a better future.
Times are economically challenging for many of us, but now, more than ever, it’s critical that we do all we can to support Gov Romney’s hard work for conservative principles. He’s depending on US. GIVE to his Free and Strong America PAC and receive a No Apology t-shirt. Wear it proudly and you’ll be a walking billboard for a must-read book and a great American, Mitt Romney!
While Mitt Romney continues to impress Americans during the first week of his whirlwind book signing tour for No Apology: The Case for American Greatness, a date in April is worth noting. On April 9, 2010, Romney will address the Freedom Foundation of Minnesota and sign copies of his new book. Present on the same stage will be a Republican notable who some say could be a potential 2012 presidential rival and who has recently been critical of Romney’s Massachusetts health care plan. Neither men have declared intentions to run for the highest office in the land, but both are giving indications of that possibility. Will Gov Tim Pawlenty have a copy of Romney’s new book tucked under his arm? If so, I’m sure Gov Romney will be happy to cordially sign it for him.
Former Massachusetts Governor and 2008 presidential candidate Mitt Romney will visit the Twin Cities on April 9, 2010 to speak at a dinner sponsored by the Freedom Foundation of Minnesota (FFM) and sign copies of his newly released book. Joining Governor Romney for the event will be Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty. The title of Governor Romney’s book is also the topic of his remarks: No Apology: The Case for American Greatness.
“The Freedom Foundation of Minnesota is both honored and excited to host two of our country’s most influential and important conservative leaders,” said Annette Meeks, CEO of the Freedom Foundation. “Governor Romney has been and continues to be one of the most powerful voices advancing free market policy alternatives. We’re planning an exciting evening where Minnesotans will hear Romney’s public policy ideas first hand.
“We are equally excited that Governor Tim Pawlenty will be joining us on April 9th. While Pawlenty’s public policy leadership is no secret to Minnesota conservatives, this will be the first major event where these two American leaders will appear on the same stage – a spectacular opportunity for the Freedom Foundation to highlight two dynamic American leaders.”
The event will be held at the Hotel Sofitel in Bloomington, beginning with a private reception and dinner. A dessert reception will precede remarks by the two governors with a book signing by Governor Romney to occur at the end of the evening. Registration details can be found at www.freedomfoundationofminnesota.com and tickets must be purchased in advance for all events.
In an unusual foray into politics since leaving office, former 66th Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice endorsed Republican CA gubernatorial hopeful, Meg Whitman, today:
“California is my home and there is only one person running for Governor who can lead the way toward rebuilding our state.
“In my experiences in and out of government, I find the most effective leaders to be those who maintain a clear vision, mobilize diverse groups, and inspire them to work together in confronting the most pressing challenges. That is why I am supporting Meg Whitman.
“Meg will do what is needed to get California back on track.”
Rice has resisted efforts by voters to persuade her to run for offices ranging from governor to U.S. senator to president of the United States.
The primary election is June 8. The winner in the GOP primary will probably face Democrat Jerry Brown in November.
Brown, 71, previously served as governor of California, 1975-83, and waged three unsuccessful campaigns for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Meg Whitman: A Different Kind of Leader
“I will tell you there is a profound hunger for change, for leadership, and for authenticity.”
~ Meg Whitman
MittRomney is also supporting Meg Whitman. If we help elect Whitman, we can change California. A new California is vital for America! For information on how to help, go here.
24 hours have passed since news was released of Mitt Romney’s endorsement of John McCain for re-election to the United States Senate. Opinions vary as to why this decision was made. Looking at a broader view for America’s future, Romney weighed the potential outcome of the Arizona senatorial election. There were many considerations pro and con, but in the end, Romney chose strength for the United States military and a strong national security. The need for McCain’s gravitas and experienced, respected, powerful influence on national security matters point to Romney’s core belief that keeping Americans safe trumps all.
PHOENIX, AZ – U.S. Senator John McCain’s re-election campaign today announced that former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney has endorsed Senator John McCain for re-election to the United States Senate.
Governor Romney today issued the following statement:
“For years, I’ve been an admirer of John McCain. Then we became competitors. Today, I’m proud to call him my friend.
“In my view, it’s hard to imagine the United States Senate without John McCain, especially in the critical times we find ourselves in, with double-digit unemployment, a mountain of debt imperiling future generations and a global terrorist threat from jihadists bent on destroying our very way of life.
“It is times like these that we look to leaders of character. Senator McCain’s record of service and sacrifice for America is honored by all. But I believe that it is his core values of courage, faith and honor – forged in battle and confirmed by a lifetime of service to America – that make Senator McCain’s leadership in the United States Senate so necessary in these perilous times. Not only am I proud to call him a friend, but as an American I am constantly reassured by Senator McCain’s continued involvement in the affairs of our nation, and I am honored to support him.”
“Governor Romney is among the brightest and most dynamic leaders in our Party, and I am proud to have his support,” said Senator John McCain. “I look forward to working with him to advance our shared vision for a stronger, safer and more prosperous America.”
After gracefully exiting the presidential campaign, Romney became a cheerful warrior for McCain. He logged countless hours fundraising for his onetime opponent and appeared on the senator’s behalf almost anywhere the campaign asked, including at the Democratic National Convention. His competence and dedication won him begrudging fans among McCain’s senior staff, who later freely admitted they’d misjudged him. McCain himself was deeply appreciative of Romney’s work, and was won over personally after spending time with Romney and his gracious wife, Ann, at the senator’s Sedona ranch. Romney ended up in serious contention for McCain’s VP slot, and as the financial crisis took over the agenda, he became one of McCain’s valued go-to sources of advice and perspective on economic issues.
So perhaps the news of Romney’s endorsement isn’t all that surprising. It’s good for McCain to have someone with Romney’s financial expertise and centrist appeal come out in his favor. It also helps McCain to appear connected with someone considered part the GOP’s future. The question for Romney, who’s emerging as the GOP’s most serious contender for 2012, is, what’s in it for him? For starters, a friendship with McCain has lots of benefits. McCain is still an excellent drawing card for fundraisers, and although Romney has vast personal wealth, having a name like McCain on board makes a big difference. McCain could also lend a Romney candidacy some foreign-policy and national-security credibility, particularly with Republican voters. Romney lacks it; McCain has it in spades. And McCain has always been popular in New Hampshire, a critical early state.
The move fits nicely with Romney’s apparent strategy. My Gaggle pal Andrew Romano calls it the “adult in the room” approach. Unlike some of his potential opponents, Romney is incredibly strategic about his public appearances. He doesn’t weigh in on every news cycle. He gives selective interviews to drive home messages on the key issues facing the Obama administration: the economy, national security, the auto bailout, and health care. But we don’t see his perfect coif on TV every day, and he’s not racking up a litany of quotes he’ll later wish he never said. Instead, he’s using the George Costanza approach: end on a high note and leave them wanting more. Next week he begins a national tour for his new book, which is touted as a “blueprint for maintaining America’s global leadership.” Advisers say he’ll offer a serious, intellectual analysis of America’s place in the world.
I bet John McCain thought, when he won the 2008 Republican presidential nomination, he was playing the most pivotal role he would ever play in the party. Apparently that was not the case. He now has an even more pivotal role. McCain has become a walking conservative litmus test.
The conservative base at the moment is on a mission to rid the party of so-called RINOs, and McCain is the poster boy for their ire. This is not without some justification. McCain’s past support for free-speech-restricting campaign finance reform, his opposition to the Bush tax cuts and his blocking of a Republican attempt to end Senate filibusters against Bush judicial nominees deserved the criticism they received.
But if you’re a philosophical conservative, and your goal is to get policies enacted that are most crucial to the nation from the conservative point of view, it doesn’t necessarily stand to reason that the best way to do it is to toss out every RINO in a primary and replace him with a so-called “true conservative.”
Relax, ‘true conservatives’: There’s a good case to be made for Romney and Palin (and you) backing McCain:
On national security, McCain has always backed, and proposed during his presidential campaign, the very strategy most conservatives believe Obama has erred by not pursuing. If McCain were president, we would still be putting a missile shield in Eastern Europe. We would be taking a hard line on Iran. We would not be bending over to let the Taliban back into the political process in Afghanistan.
On health care, McCain has been a consistent and effective voice against Obama’s proposals throughout the past year, and his own proposals in 2008 would have moved the nation toward the sort of consumer-directed system we need, not the sort of top-down system we already have, and that Obama would make worse.
- Because of his seniority and standing with the media, McCain can be an effective voice for the conservative positions on the above-mentioned issues. Many conservatives have criticized McCain for making too nice with the media over the years, and not without some justification, but at this particular point in time his having done so can come in very handy. It’s precisely because they do regard him as something other than a blustering partisan that his criticisms of Obama carry weight and get air time.
- J.D. Hayworth shows signs of not being a serious person. His big-spending, earmarking track record, we’ve already covered. His past ties to disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff should give any one concerned about ideological principle serious pause.
Surely there are plenty of reasons for conservatives to be upset with McCain about his past track record. But no election held in 2010 is for the purpose of repeating the past. It’s to put the best people in place to make the best decisions for the nation going forward.
Whatever his faults on other issues, McCain is for the right things on spending, health care and national security. His seniority and bipartisan credibility put him in a good position to advocate effectively for these things. And it just might be that, while Hayworth could make the case that he is the “true conservative,” Palin and Romney recognize the results for the nation – from a conservative point of view – might very well be better if McCain is the guy Arizona sends back to the Senate to get them done.
What good does it do to elect a “true conservative” if he can’t achieve what conservatives think is important?
The definition of “RINO” is not “any politician who deviates in any material respect from conservative principles.” A RINO is someone who deviates in virtually every material respect. In fact, when it comes to national security, most social issues, most economic issues, judges, and many other areas, McCain is one of us. I’m not sure that our goal as a conservative community is to simply support the most conservative candidate in any given primary. There’s a lot more to effective leadership than ideology, and such a mindset encourages the rather unpleasant ideological puritans in our midst.
Now that I’ve recovered somewhat from sleep deprivation and finally feel comfortable with the overwhelming environment of CPAC – with its multiple events and appearances by conservative leaders – I’m feeling I can relax, sit down, and focus on some blogging. Unfortunately, I’ve got a whole day’s worth to catch up, while juggling all of today’s events.
For a newcomer, having various politicians constantly present throughout the day is exhilarating. The day began with Jim DeMint introducing Marco Rubio. After Rubio’s speech, DeMint also gave follow-up comments. I was greatly anticipating hearing Rubio but was detained in the long line to obtain credentials. I’ve heard that his speech was great. I certainly enjoyed Demint’s follow-up comments. DeMint clarified his controversial statement (which he took a lot of fire for): “I would rather have 30 Republicans in the Senate who really believe in principles of limited government, free markets, free people, than to have 60 that don’t have a set of beliefs.” DeMint stated that he would rather have 30 Marco Rubios than 60 Arlen Specters.
A short while later, I recognized Mike Lee (from my home county) who is running against Bob Bennett (R-Utah) for his senate seat. I was eager to see someone from my home state, so I introduced myself and chatted for a bit with Lee and two of his staff. While I was still pondering the oddity of seeing someone from back home, I walked into the hall and saw Utah Rep. Rob Bishop (1st) being interviewed by Moe Lane of RedState. I waited. After his interview, I introduced myself and we talked as he and a staffer found their way back to the main floor. Bishop mentioned that Utah should be getting a 4th seat in the House soon. I asked him about the process of drawing the boundary lines for the districts and about what we might do to win the 2nd back for the Republicans. He seemed optimistic that Utah might soon have four GOP Reps.
Doug Hoffman, from the narrowly lost NY-23 race, was also in the hall (he was to speak later in the evening during the dinner ball). He will be running again for the seat in November (the special election was only to finish out the term). He will be running on the Conservative party ticket, but is very likely to earn the backing of much of the Republican party as well. He’s a very genuine and ’smiley’ guy. Hoffman seemed quite pleased that I recognized him.
In the afternoon, we were enlightened with Leader Boehner (who I thought did quite well), and Wayne LaPierre from the NRA. LaPierre had an extremely well prepared presentation which included lots of video showing liberal attacks against gun owners and their rights.
I took some time later to walk through the co-sponsors’ Exhibition Hall, walked by ‘Radio Row’, and generally strolled the grounds. This hotel is HUGE and has numerous conference room, ballrooms, halls, etc. Spread over several floors, it’s quite a maze!
Later in the evening, I went to the XPAC lounge for the free food (insert smiley face!) and stayed to see Stephen Baldwin moderate a little Q&A with Andrea Tantaros and Sarah Huckabee, daughter of, and campaign manager for, Governor Mike Huckabee. The prepared questions for them were very odd: How has sexism affected your career? What effect would a potential Sarah Palin race vs. Hillary Clinton in 2012 have on women’s role in politics? I think the second question wasn’t a very fair question to ask Sarah H. given the possibility of her Dad running in 2012. One funny thing – I was standing near a small table, finishing my food (before the Q&A), when Sarah H. walked up, set down her bag, and joined me at the table – while she was prepping. Surprised to suddenly see her and recognize her, I congratulated her on her upcoming wedding in the Virgin Islands. Surprise lit up her face as she replied, “Wow, news spreads fast.”
Besides Governor Romney’s speech, the clear highlight of the day was the surprise appearance of Vice-President Dick Cheney. While typing away, I was vaguely listening to Liz Cheney’s speech when suddenly the lounge BURST into cheers. Some folks got up and ran out of the lounge onto the balcony of the main ballroom. Cheney entered to thunderous applause, to which he warmly responded, “A welcome like that almost makes me feel like running for office again… But I’m notta gonna do it.”
But Nate, what about Romney’s speech? It was awesome. So awesome that I’m going to write more about it in a separate post (hopefully later tonight). Just a pre-cap: It was second best speech I’ve ever heard him give; second only to his Faith in America speech. They are very different speeches -given under different circumstances – and comparing them is akin to analyzing remarks given in a class reunion setting as opposed to a court room setting.
Now, with multiple interruptions, I’ve finally finished my rough draft and I’m just going to publish. I will re-read and add photos as I’m able. Otherwise, I’ll never get this post off. So much for being able to focus!
Mitt Romney’s speech brought viewers to their feet many times this afternoon at CPAC. It was truly inspirational. Divided into four segments, the video footage of Mitt’s speech is posted below. Included is a short introduction by Senator Scott Brown (he had very kind words to say about Mitt).
Be sure you bookmark this, as it will be neat to come back often and refresh your memory of why this man needs to be the next President of the United States:
Scott Brown Introduces Mitt Romney at CPAC
Mitt Romney’s Speech at CPAC 2/18/2010 (PART 1)
Mitt Romney’s Speech at CPAC 2/18/2010 (PART 2)
Mitt Romney’s Speech at CPAC 2/18/2010 (PART 3)
Governor Romney’s Remarks to CPAC 2010
Feb 18, 2010
Thank you to Jay and to Scott for those generous introductions. Both these men have made real contributions to our nation. It’s good to be back at CPAC. I can’t think of an audience I’d rather be addressing today.
I spent the weekend in Vancouver. As always, the Olympic Games were inspiring. But in case you didn’t hear the late-breaking news, the gold medal in the downhill was taken away from American Lindsey Vonn. It was determined that President Obama is going downhill faster than she is.
I’m not telling you something you don’t know when I say that our conservative movement took a real hit in the 2008 elections. The victors were not exactly gracious in their big win: Media legs were tingling. Time Magazine’s cover pictured the Republican elephant and declared it an endangered species. The new president himself promised change of biblical proportion. And given his filibuster-proof Senate and lopsided House, he had everything he needed to deliver it.
They won, we lost. But you know, you learn a lot about people when you see how they react to losing. We didn’t serve up excuses or blame our fellow citizens. Instead, we listened to the American people, we sharpened our thinking and our arguments, we spoke with greater persuasiveness, we took our message to more journals and airwaves, and in the American tradition, some even brought attention to our cause with rallies and Tea parties.
I know that most of you have watched intently as the conservative comeback began in Virginia and exploded onto the scene in New Jersey. But as a Massachusetts man, who, like my fellow Bay-staters, has over the years, been understandably regarded somewhat suspiciously in gatherings like this, let me take just a moment to exalt in a Scott Brown victory!
For that victory that stopped Obama–care and turned back the Reid-Pelosi liberal tide, we have something to that you’d never think you’d hear at CPAC, “Thank you Massachusetts!”
2009 was the President’s turn to suffer losses, and not just at the ballot box, but also in bill after bill in Congress, and most importantly, in his failure to reignite the economy. In how he has responded to these defeats, too, we have learned a great about him and about his team.
He began by claiming that he had not failed at all. Remember the B+ grade he gave himself for his first year? Tell that to the 4 million Americans who lost their jobs last year, and to the millions more who stopped looking. Explain that to the world’s financial markets who gaped at trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see. Square that with the absence of any meaningful sanctions against Iran even as it funds terror and races to become a nuclear nation. President Obama’s self-proclaimed B+ will go down in history as the biggest exaggeration since Al Gore’s invention of the internet!
Unable to convince us that his failure was a success, he turned to the second dodge of losing teams: try to pin the blame on someone else. Did you see his State of the Union address? First, he took on the one group in the room that was restrained from responding—the Supreme Court. The President found it inexplicable that the first amendment right of free speech should be guaranteed not just to labor union corporations and media corporations, but equally to all corporations, big and small. When it was all over, I think most Americans felt as I did: his noisy critique and bombast did not register as clear and convincingly as Justice Alito’s silent lips forming these words: “Not true!”
Next he blamed the Republicans in the room, condescending to lecture them on the workings of the budget process, a process many of them had in fact mastered while he was still at Harvard Law School. He blamed Republicans for the gridlock that has blocked his favorite legislation; but he knows as well as we do that he did not need one single solitary Republican vote in either house to pass his legislation. It was Democrats who blocked him, Democrats who said “no” to his liberal agenda after they had been home to their districts and heard from the American people. As Everett Dirksen used to say, “When they felt the heat, they saw the light.” God bless every American who said no!
Of course, the President accuses us of being the party of “no.” It’s as if he thinks that saying “no” is by definition a bad thing. In fact, it is right and praiseworthy to say no to bad things. It is right to say no to cap and trade, no to card check, no to government healthcare, and no to higher taxes. My party should never be a rubber stamp for rubber check spending.
But before we move away from this “no” epithet the Democrats are fond of applying to us, let’s ask the Obama folks why they say “no” --no to a balanced budget, no to reforming entitlements, no to malpractice reform, no to missile defense In Eastern Europe, no to prosecuting Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a military tribunal, and no to tax cuts that create new jobs. You see, we conservatives don’t have a corner on saying no; we’re just the ones who say it when that’s the right thing to do!
And that leads us to who he has most recently charged with culpability for his failures: the American people. It seems that we have failed to understand his wise plans for us. If he just slows down, he reasons, and makes a concerted effort to explain Obama-care in a way even we can understand, if we just listen better, then we will get it.
Actually, Americans have been listening quite attentively. And they have been watching. When he barred CSPAN from covering the healthcare deliberations, they saw President Obama break his promise of transparency. When the Democrat leadership was empowered to bribe Nebraska’s Senator Nelson, they saw President Obama break his promise of a new kind of politics in Washington. And when he cut a special and certainly unconstitutional healthcare deal with the unions, they saw him not just break his promise, they saw the most blatant and reprehensible manifestation of political payoff in modern memory. No, Mr. President, the American people didn’t hear and see too little, they saw too much!
Here again, with all due respect, President Obama fails to understand America. He said: “With all the lobbying and horse-trading, the process left most Americans wondering, ‘What’s in it for me?’” That’s not at all what they were asking. They were asking: “What’s in it for America?”
America will not endure government run healthcare, a new and expansive entitlement, an inexplicable and surely vanishing cut in Medicare and an even greater burden of taxes. Americans said no because Obama-care is bad care for America!
When it comes to shifting responsibility for failure, however, no one is a more frequent object of President Obama’s reproach than President Bush. It’s wearing so thin that even the late night shows make fun of it. I am convinced that history will judge President Bush far more kindly—he pulled us from a deepening recession following the attack of 9-11, he overcame teachers unions to test school children and evaluate schools, he took down the Taliban, waged a war against the jihadists and was not afraid to call it what it is—a war, and he kept us safe. I respect his silence even in the face of the assaults on his record that come from this administration. But at the same time, I also respect the loyalty and indefatigable defense of truth that comes from our “I don’t give a damn” Vice President Dick Cheney!
I’m afraid that after all the finger pointing is finished, it has become clear who is responsible for President Obama’s lost year, the 10% unemployment year—President Obama and his fellow Democrats. So when it comes to pinning blame, pin the tail on the donkeys.
There’s a good deal of conjecture about the cause of President Obama’s failures. As he frequently reminds us, he assumed the presidency at a difficult time. That’s the reason we argued during the campaign that these were not the times for on the job training. Had he or his advisors spent even a few years in the real economy, they would have learned that the number one cause of failure in the private sector is lack of focus, and that the first rule of turning around any troubled enterprise is focus, focus, focus. And so, when he assumed the presidency, his energy should have been focused on fixing the economy and creating jobs, and to succeeding in our fight against radical violent jihad in Iraq and Afghanistan. Instead, he applied his time and political capital to his ill-conceived healthcare takeover and to building his personal popularity in foreign countries. He failed to focus, and so he failed.
But there was an even bigger problem than lack of focus. Ronald Reagan used to say this about liberals: “It’s not that they’re ignorant, it’s that what they know is wrong.” Too often, when it came to what President Obama knew, he was wrong.
He correctly acknowledged that the government doesn’t create jobs, that only the private sector can do that. He said that the government can create the conditions, the environment, which leads the private sector to add employment. But consider not what he said, but what he did last year, and ask whether it helped or hurt the environment for investment, growth, and new jobs.
Announcing 2011 tax increases for individuals and businesses and for capital gains, hurt.
Passing cap and trade, hurt.
Giving trial lawyers a free pass, hurt.
Proposing card check to eliminate secret ballots in union elections, hurt.
Holding on to GM stock and insisting on calling the shots there, hurt.
Making a grab for healthcare, almost 1/5th of our economy, hurt.
Budgeting government deficits in the trillions, hurt.
And scapegoating and demonizing businesspeople, hurt.
President Obama instituted the most anti-growth, anti-investment, anti-jobs measures we’ve seen in our lifetimes. He called his agenda ambitious. I call it reckless. He scared employers, so jobs were scarce. His nearly trillion dollar stimulus created not one net new job in the private sector, but it saved and grew jobs in the government sector-- the one place we should have shed jobs. And even today, because he has been unwilling or unable to define the road ahead, uncertainty and lack of predictability permeate the private economy, and prolongs its stall. America is not better off than it was 1.8 trillion dollars ago.
Will the economy and unemployment recover? Of course. Thanks to a vibrant and innovative citizenry, they always do. But this president will not deserve the credit he will undoubtedly claim. He has prolonged the recession, expanded the pain of unemployment, and added to the burden of debt we will leave future generations. President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and their team have failed the American people, and that is why their majority will be out the door. Isn’t it fitting that so many of those who have contempt for the private sector will soon find themselves back in it?
The people of America are looking to conservatives for leadership, and we must not fail them.
Conservatism has had from its inception a vigorously positive, intellectually rigorous agenda. That agenda should have three pillars: strengthen the economy, strengthen our security, and strengthen our families.
We will strengthen the economy by simplifying and lowering taxes, by replacing outmoded regulation with modern, dynamic regulation, by opening markets to American goods, by strengthening our currency and our capital markets, and by investing in research and basic science. Instead of leading the world in how much we borrow, we will make sure that we lead the world in how much we build and create and invest.
We will strengthen our security by building missile defense, restoring our military might, and standing-by and strengthening our intelligence officers. And conservatives believe in providing constitutional rights to our citizens, not to enemy combatants like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed!
On our watch, the conversation with a would-be suicide bomber will not begin with the words, “You have the right to remain silent!”
Our conservative agenda strengthens our families in part by putting our schools on track to be the best in the world. Because great schools start with great teachers, we will insist on hiring teachers from the top third of college graduates, and we will give better teachers better pay. School accountability, school choice and cyber schools will be priorities. We will put parents and teachers back in charge of education, not the fat cat CEO’s of the teachers unions!
Strong families will have excellent healthcare. Getting healthcare coverage for the uninsured should be accomplished at the state level, not a one-size-fits all Pelosi plan. The right way to rein-in healthcare cost is not by making it more like the Post Office, it’s by making it more like a consumer-driven market. The answer for healthcare is market incentives not healthcare by a Godzilla-size government bureaucracy!
When it comes to our role in the world, our conservative agenda hews to the principles that have defined our nation’s foreign policy for over six decades: we will promote and defend the American ideals of political freedom, free enterprise, and human rights. We will stand with our allies, and confront those who threaten peace and destroy liberty.
There’s much more on our positive, intellectually rigorous conservative agenda. Not all of it is popular. But the American people have shown that they are ready for truth to trump hope. The truth is that government is not the solution to all our problems.
This year, I have taken the time to write a book that tells the truth about the challenges our nation faces, and about the conservative solutions needed to overcome them. I have titled it: No Apology: The Case for American Greatness. I’ve set up a booth outside so that you can buy a few hundred copies each. Well, maybe one or two.
Sometimes I wonder whether Washington’s liberal politicians understand the greatness of America. Let me explain why I say that.
At Christmas-time, I was in Wal-Mart to buy some toys for my grandkids. As I waited in the check-out line, I took a good look around the store. I thought to myself of the impact Sam Walton had on his company. Sam Walton was all about good value on everything the customer might want. And so is Wal-Mart: rock bottom prices and tens of thousands of items.
The impact that founders like Sam Walton have on their enterprises is actually quite remarkable. In many ways, Microsoft is a reflection of Bill Gates, just as Apple is of Steve Jobs. Disneyland is a permanent tribute to Walt Disney himself—imaginative and whimsical. Virgin Airlines is as irreverent and edgy as its founder. As you look around you, you see that people shape enterprises, sometimes for many years even after they are gone.
People shape businesses.
People shape countries.
America reflects the values of the people who first landed here, those who founded the nation, those who won our freedom, and those who made America the leader of the world.
America was discovered and settled by pioneers. Later, the founders launched an entirely new concept of nation, one where the people would be sovereign, not the king, not the state. And this would apply not just to government, but also to the American economy: the individual would pursue his or her happiness in freedom, independent from government dictate. Every American was free to be an inventor, an innovator, a founder. America became the land of opportunity and a nation of pioneers.
We attracted people of pioneering spirit from around the world. They came here for freedom and opportunity, knowing that the cost was incredibly high: leaving behind family and the familiar, learning a new language, often living at first in poverty, sometimes facing prejudice, working long and hard hours.
All of these pioneers built a nation of incomparable prosperity and unrivaled security.
After its founding, our national economy grew thanks to more pioneers—people like Alexander Graham Bell and Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, William Procter and Robert Wood Johnson, Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard and Thomas Watson. These are names we know—but the less well known are just as vital American innovators, and they number in the millions.
That American pioneering spirit is what propelled us to master the industrial age just as today we marshal the information age.
This course for America, chosen by the founders, has been settled for over 200 years. Ours is the creed of the pioneers, the innovators, the strivers who expect no guarantee of success, but ask only to live and work in freedom. This creed is under assault in Washington today. Liberals are convinced that government knows better than the people how to run our businesses, how to choose winning technologies, how to manage healthcare, how to grow an economy, and how to order our very lives. They want to gain through government takeover what they could never achieve in the competitive economy—power and control over the people of America. If these liberal neo-monarchists succeed, they will kill the very spirit that has built the nation—the innovating, inventing, creating, independent current that runs from coast to coast.
This is the liberal agenda for government. It does not encourage pioneers, inventors and investors—it suffocates them.
In a world where others have lost their liberty by trading it away for the false promises of the state, we choose to hold to our founding principles. We will stop these power-seekers where they stand. We will keep America, America, by retaining its character as the land of opportunity. We welcome the entrepreneur, the inventor, the innovator. We will insist on greatness from every one of our citizens, and rather than apologizing for who we are or for what we have accomplished, we will celebrate our nation’s strength and goodness. American patriots have defeated tyrants, liberated the oppressed, and rescued the afflicted. America’s model of innovation, capitalism and free enterprise has lifted literally billons of the world’s people out of poverty. America has been a force for good like no other in this world, and for that we make no apology.
Described as ‘Mardi Gras for the Right’, CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) opened this morning at the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel in Washington D.C. Excited GOP power players, power player makers, and everyday citizens concerned about the abuse of political power are streaming through the doors. The three-day conference will be filled with speeches, exhibits, forums, panel discussions, book signings, networking, hospitality suites, banquets, and entertainment.
Among official bloggers attending is our own Nate Gunderson. He will be posting blog updates and sending live tweets. We’ve already received several tweets today from Nate, including one received this morning: “Governor Romney just dropped by to tell some jokes.” Tonight, Nate will be tying on his bowling shoes as he joins Romney’s ‘bowling for bucks’ to support Romney’s PAC. We eagerly anticipate more of Nate’s coverage of CPAC goings-on and especially, Mitt Romney!
As CPAC director, De Pasquale spends all year planning and organizing the annual three-day conference that is the largest gathering of its kind in the country. The event has become so huge that it was moved this year from its longtime home at the Omni Shoreham Hotel to the larger Marriott Wardman Park, just off Connecticut Avenue near the Woodley Park Metro station.
“We’re at a larger facility this year, but it looks like we’re already going to be bursting at the seams,” said De Pasquale. “Right now, we’re about 20 percent above pre-registration for last year. So we’re expecting between 9,000 and 10,000, if on-site registration is on pace with last year.”
Not only will this be the biggest CPAC ever, but it is likely to be the most energized conference in several years. This year’s conference will bring the added enthusiasm of hundreds of new attendees who have been active in the Tea Party movement. In fact, one of the movement’s first events took place during last year’s conference, when about 200 CPAC attendees gathered for a rally in front of the White House that featured Michelle Malkin.
That February 2009 LaFayette Park rally was mocked by liberal bloggers — “puny,” sniffed the Village Voice — but the grassroots movement swelled into a force that made a real political impact. Tea Party activism helped conservatives score big wins in last fall’s Virginia and New Jersey gubernatorial elections, as well as Republican Scott Brown’s stunning victory in Massachusetts, capturing the Senate seat held for nearly four decades by Ted Kennedy.
The Tea Party movement will be represented by speakers and panelists on this year’s CPAC agenda, including Jenny Beth Martin of the Tea Party Patriots and Dana Loesch of the St. Louis Tea Party. And the final keynote speech on Saturday will be given by Glenn Beck, who helped spur on the movement with his 9-12 Project.
“I think he’s someone who’s going to energize the conference,” De Pasquale said of Beck. “I expect him to give a call to action that will help our attendees take the energy from CPAC into the 2010 mid-term election.”
This will be the first-ever CPAC appearance for Beck. Also making their CPAC speaking debuts at this year’s event will be Allen West, an Iraq war hero and congressional candidate, and Marco Rubio, whose Florida Senate campaign has ignited a grassroots uprising against the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which backed Gov. Charlie Crist in the GOP primary.
Liz Cheney and Michigan Rep. Thaddeus McCotter will make their first CPAC speaking appearances this year, said De Pasquale, while Internet news entrepreneur Andrew Breitbart (who has previously participated in panel discusses at the conference) will give a main-stage speech Saturday. Breitbart will be introduced by Hannah Giles, who became famous in a series of videos exposing the community organizing group ACORN. Giles will also be a participant in XPAC, a series of events for younger conference attendees — and there will be lots of them.
“As in years past, we’re expecting that more than 50 percent of our attendance will be college students,” De Pasquale said. “It bodes well for the movement that there are so many young people who are energized about attending CPAC.”
Attendees young and old will hear from a stellar list of conservative speakers, including South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint, House members Steve King, Mike Pence, Jason Chaffetz, Darrell Issa, Scott Garrett, Eric Cantor, Dan Lungren and Ron Paul, and numerous commentators including Andrew Napolitano, John Fund, George F. Will and Ann Coulter.
Beyond the speeches and panel discussions, the conference features numerous book signings, receptions and an enormous exhibition hall.
“The official schedule is just one part of the CPAC experience,” De Pasquale said, adding that the chance to meet with fellow conservatives is a major attraction of the annual conference.
Governor Romney will fire up the crowd tomorrow (2/18/10) when he speaks at 1:30 PM Eastern Standard Time in the Marriott Ballroom. Dr. Jay Sekulow, (American Center for Law and Justice) will introduce him.
Romney, who has won the last 3 CPAC straw polls, has a crucial leg up on other contenders, according to many who think he will win a fourth. His team’s ability to organize around the event in previous years is likely to give him some residual good will among attendees.
“Everyone knows how good his organization was in the lead-up to the 08 primaries, but not everyone realizes how sneaky-good that organization remains,” said one respondent. Added another: “Mitt bears the high expectations of having won CPAC three years in a row. While this establishes him as the clear favorite of mainstream conservatives, it also keeps the pressure on for him to win every time he shows up.”
I have a hunch this new ad from Senate Republicans will be shown at CPAC:
CPAC runs today through Saturday when it will adjourn at 6:45 PM EST. We’ll keep you informed on the latest from CPAC and news from Nate Gunderson.
Update: CPAC coverage for 2/18/10:
Townhall.com -- UStream live stream click here.
C-Span online stream click here.
C-Span network TV coverage of CPAC begins at 9:45 – 4:30 PM EST. TV schedule here.
Good news for the California gubernatorial race today! A Rasmussen poll taken yesterday reveals that Romney-endorsed Meg Whitman and probable Democrat nominee Jerry Brown (currently serving as CA attorney general) are tied at 43% approval. Just a month ago, liberal Brown held a four-point lead over Whitman.
Republican Meg Whitman, the former eBay chief executive, is running neck-and-neck with Attorney General Jerry Brown in a California gubernatorial matchup, with each drawing 43 percent of voters, according to a Rasmussen Reports poll conducted Feb. 15. Six percent prefer someone else and 8 percent are undecided. The margin of error is 4.5 points.
If State Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner managed to get the GOP nomination, Brown would be leading him 46 percent to 34 percent with 7 percent preferring another candidate and 13 percent undecided.
The San Francisco Chronicle reported in late January that some California state legislators were thinking of pressing three-term Sen. Dianne Feinstein to jump into the race because they believe she could break through legislative gridlock and achieve reforms necessary to deal with the state’s financial crisis.
If that happened, Feinstein does not fare much better than Brown. She leads Whitman by a statistically insignificant 45 percent to 43 percent with 2 percent preferring some other candidate and 9 percent undecided. Like Brown, she easily beats Poizner, 48 percent to 36 percent with 5 percent preferring another candidate and 11 percent undecided.
Whitman and Brown get about the same level of support from members of their own parties, but Whitman has a modest edge of 49 percent to 42 percent among unaffiliated voters.
“Let’s say what we mean, and mean what we say – and let’s get the job done.” ~ Meg Whitman
As you probably already know, my good friend Meg Whitman is running for governor of California. I want you to know that she has my strongest support. Click here to see why I hold her in the highest esteem personally and professionally, and why she is exactly the leader your state needs to restore the California dream.
Meg and I were colleagues at Bain & Company, and she proved herself to be a tremendously smart, dedicated leader with a remarkable understanding of business and what it takes to grow an economy to create jobs and wealth.
Meg was an early and tireless supporter of my presidential campaign. I consider her a loyal friend and one of the first people I would turn to for advice. In February, it was my pleasure to attend the California Republican Party Convention with Meg and officially announce my support of her candidacy for Governor of California. I am convinced that she is the only candidate who can get California back on the right track.
Please join me today in supporting Meg. Meg has a bold vision of how to meet the extraordinary challenges facing California today and to secure a bright and prosperous future. It’s inspiring and I know that she can make it happen. With her at the helm, there is no dream beyond California’s reach. Be sure to click here now and help Meg work to restore the greatness of California.
The United States needs a fiscally vibrant California. California desperately needs Meg Whitman. Let’s roll up our sleeves and do all we can to elect her!
MittRomneyCentral.com is a pure grassroots website. It is not paid for, endorsed by, or affiliated in any way with Governor Mitt Romney or the Free and Strong America PAC.
Americans are riveted on Obamacare. With just seven days until the March 18th White House deadline for a vote on the Senate health care bill arrives, eyes are glued on Blue Dog Democrats. We are witnessing nearly hourly positioning on Capitol Hill and can almost hear the chest-poking, arm-twisting, and head thumping going on behind locked doors as Obama, Pelosi, and Reid shove and kick to pass their 2700 page health care confiscation scheme. 
Last week, I launched the national tour for my new book, No Apology: The Case for American Greatness, and I must admit — it feels good to be on the road again.
And, for a limited time, if you 
While Mitt Romney continues to impress Americans during the first week of his whirlwind book signing tour for 
The move fits nicely with Romney’s apparent strategy. My Gaggle pal Andrew Romano calls it the “adult in the room” approach. Unlike some of his potential opponents, Romney is incredibly strategic about his public appearances. He doesn’t weigh in on every news cycle. He gives selective interviews to drive home messages on the key issues facing the Obama administration: the economy, national security, the auto bailout, and health care. But we don’t see his perfect coif on TV every day, and he’s not racking up a litany of quotes he’ll later wish he never said. Instead, he’s using the 
Now that I’ve recovered somewhat from sleep deprivation and finally feel comfortable with the overwhelming environment of CPAC – with its multiple events and appearances by conservative leaders – I’m feeling I can relax, sit down, and focus on some blogging. Unfortunately, I’ve got a whole day’s worth to catch up, while juggling all of today’s events. 
Doug Hoffman, from the narrowly lost NY-23 race, was also in the hall (he was to speak later in the evening during the dinner ball). He will be running again for the seat in November (the special election was only to finish out the term). He will be running on the Conservative party ticket, but is very likely to earn the backing of much of the Republican party as well. He’s a very genuine and ’smiley’ guy. Hoffman seemed quite pleased that I recognized him.
Later in the evening, I went to the XPAC lounge for the free food (insert smiley face!) and stayed to see Stephen Baldwin moderate a little Q&A with Andrea Tantaros and Sarah Huckabee, daughter of, and campaign manager for, Governor Mike Huckabee. The prepared questions for them were very odd: How has sexism affected your career? What effect would a potential Sarah Palin race vs. Hillary Clinton in 2012 have on women’s role in politics? I think the second question wasn’t a very fair question to ask Sarah H. given the possibility of her Dad running in 2012. One funny thing – I was standing near a small table, finishing my food (before the Q&A), when Sarah H. walked up, set down her bag, and joined me at the table – while she was prepping. Surprised to suddenly see her and recognize her, I congratulated her on her upcoming wedding in the Virgin Islands. Surprise lit up her face as she replied, “Wow, news spreads fast.”
Described as ‘Mardi Gras for the Right’, 
Recent Comments