Newt Gingrich has taken a bit of heat for his comments on immigration the other night. More than a few have equated his comments with amnesty.
I would normally leave this topic alone, except that Newt Gingrich has decided to hit back against Romney by tweeting the following:
@Newt Gingrich: .@MittRomney Here’s a trip down memory lane: http://t.co/lFaAQrFz So what’s your position on citizenship for illegals again? (I oppose it.)
The video takes you to a 14 second youtube clip that makes it appear like Romney supports amnesty for illegal citizens. The problem is the video is clipped mid-sentence and is taken entirely out of context.
Here is a transcript of the Romney answer on immigration – the bolded part is what the clip left out:
My own view is consistent with what you saw in the Lowell Sun, that those people who had come here illegally and are in this country–the 12 million or so that are here illegally–should be able to stay sign up for permanent residency or citizenship, but they should not be given a special pathway, a special guarantee that all of them get to say here for the rest of their lives merely by virtue of having come here illegally. And that, I think, is the great flaw in the final bill that came forward from the Senate.
AND here’s video that shows both the deceptively trimmed portion plus the rest of the answer (more than what was quoted above) for the entire context:
So to answer Newt’s question on what is Romney’s stance on citizenship for illegals… he is against it, and you knew that Mr. Gingrich. Your trip down selective memory lane is nothing but a false attempt to tag Romney as something he is not in order to promote your own candidacy.
Unfortunately the shortened clip of that make it appear that Romney supports amnesty has racked up 10,000 views in the last 24 hours since it has replayed on a number of news sites. It will be the duty of Romney fans to share the correct information with those who continue to try to cast Romney as pro-amnesty.
As Rick Perry doubles down on his illegal immigration stances, Romney for President has released a new video…
Boston, MA – Today, Romney for President released a new web video, “Thank You Governor Perry.” The video highlights Governor Perry’s support for in-state tuition benefits for illegal immigrants. This position is shared by Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Harry Reid, and President Obama, and in 2003, former Mexico President Vicente Fox praised Governor Perry for supporting in-state tuition for illegal immigrants.
VIDEO TEXT: “Who Supports Governor Perry’s Decision To Give In-State Tuition To Illegal Immigrants?”
VOICE: “Who Supports Governor Perry’s Decision To Give In-State Tuition To Illegal Immigrants?”
VIDEO TEXT: “Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid”
• While serving in the Illinois Senate, President Obama sponsored legislation to “allow undocumented immigrant students to pay in-state tuition at public colleges and universities.” “[T]he Senate voted 55-1 to allow undocumented immigrant students to pay in-state tuition at public colleges and universities. Currently, the undocumented students are required to pay out-of-state tuition even if they spend their entire education in Illinois schools. House Bill 60 would change that, allowing in-state tuition rates for undocumented students who have attended school in Illinois for at least three years and graduated high school in the state.” (Rich Frederick, “Senate OKs In-State Tuition Bill,” The State Journal-Register, 5/8/03; Illinois General Assembly Website, www.ilga.gov, 9/29/11)
Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, and Harry Reid support in-state tuition discounts for illegals.
• In 2007, Senator Harry Reid supported a bill that “would have allowed illegal immigrants to become legal residents and qualify for lower in-state tuition rates at state universities.” “In late 2007, the Senate rejected an attempt to pass the Dream Act which would have allow illegal immigrants under age 30 to gain legal status if they attended college or joined the military. Fairness demanded action, said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, arguing that ‘children should not be penalized for the actions of their parents’ who brought them to the United States. But the bill would have allowed illegal immigrants to become legal residents and qualify for lower in-state tuition rates at state universities.” (Tom Curry, “Immigration Impasse Long In The Making,” NBC News, 7/29/10)
• “The Dream Act would allow students who have lived in the country since age 15 to apply for conditional legal residence… They would then be able to work and pay in-state college tuition rates. .” (Eddy Ramirez, “College Board Backs Bill To Legalize Undocumented Students,” USNews.com, 4/22/09)
• Reid: “Children should not be penalized for the actions of their parents.” (Tom Curry, “An Immigration Impasse Long In The Making,” MSNBC.com, 7/29/10)
• House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi supports in-state tuition discounts for illegal immigrants, saying “Our country does not benefit by depriving our young people of an education.” “Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi stopped in Tempe on Monday to tout congressional Democrats’ push to make college more affordable for young people, including those without legal residency. … Pelosi made reference to the effect of Proposition 300, an Arizona initiative passed by voters in November that requires illegal immigrants to pay out-of-state tuition to attend public universities and community colleges. Pelosi said she met with a young woman Monday who wants to attend college but lacks documentation proving legal residency. ‘Our country does not benefit by our depriving young people of an education,’ Pelosi said.” (Josh Kelley, “Pelosi Addresses College Cost,” The Arizona Republic, 2/20/07)
VIDEO TEXT: “Even”
Former President of Mexico Vincente Fox appreciates Rick Perry's in-state tuition discount for illegals.
FORMER PRESIDENT OF MEXICO VICENTE FOX: “I Want To Publicly Recognize Governor Perry And The State Of Texas By Having Taken That Step Forward”
• Vicente Fox: “I want to publicly recognize Governor Perry and the state of Texas by having taken that step forward.” (Vicente Fox, Remarks, Austin, TX, 11/6/03)
• Houston Chronicle: “Fox Praised Perry For Texas’ Policy Of Allowing Qualified Undocumented Migrants To … Pay The Same Tuition As Citizens And Legal Residents.” “Fox, Perry and their aides met behind closed doors Thursday morning to discuss policy issues and appeared at a joint news conference. Perry hosted Fox at a luncheon … Fox praised Perry for Texas’ policy of allowing qualified undocumented migrants to attend state universities and pay the same tuition as citizens and legal residents.” (Dudley Althaus and Armando Villafranca, “Fox, Perry Square Off Over Immigration, Water Issues,” The Houston Chronicle, 11/7/03)
FOX: “When You Decided To Give Access To Mexican Migrants To Universities In Texas”
• Vicente Fox: “When you decided to give access to Mexican migrants to universities in Texas.” (Vicente Fox, Remarks, Austin, TX, 11/6/03)
RICK PERRY: “If you say that we should not educate children who have come into our state for no other reason than they’ve been brought there by no fault of their own, I don’t think you have a heart.”
• Rick Perry: “If you say that we should not educate children who have come into our state for no other reason than they’ve been brought there by no fault of their own, I don’t think you have a heart.” (Republican Presidential Candidates Debate, Orlando, FL, 9/22/11)
VIDEO TEXT: “Mitt Romney Has A Different View”
MITT ROMNEY: “Four years of college, you’re almost $100,000 discount if you are an illegal alien to go to the University of Texas. If you are a United States citizen from any one of the other 49 states, you have to pay $100,000 more. That doesn’t make sense to me.”
• Mitt Romney: “Four years of college, you’re almost $100,000 discount if you are an illegal alien to go to the University of Texas. If you are a United States citizen from any one of the other 49 states, you have to pay $100,000 more. That doesn’t make sense to me.” (Republican Presidential Candidates Debate, Orlando, FL, 9/22/11) (emphasis added )
(Other sessions of the conference may be viewed here.)
UPDATE: It looks like Mitt Romney has opened up a new TOUT account. I’m not even sure what TOUT is but it appears to be short video sharing in a Twitter-esque format. There is a short clip of Romney behind the scenes of his speech today: http://www.tout.com/u/mittromney
Mitt Romney’s full remarks as prepared for delivery:
It’s a privilege to be addressing the veterans who defended our liberty in the past, and who defend the memory and dignity of every veteran today.
I was born in 1947 – a quintessential baby boomer. I grew up in the shadow of World War II, and then came the wars in Korea and Vietnam. As a boy, I knew that it was American soldiers and sailors and Marines and airmen who had saved us from German Fascism, and who protected us from Soviet Communism. You were our heroes then, and you are today.
You know better than most that the world is still infected with purveyors of hate and oppression. Some are jihadists, some are communists, and some are simply tyrants who clothe themselves in any convenient political manifesto. And so once again, American heroes are called upon to defend liberty.
We rightly call our fathers and mothers the Greatest Generation, but every man and woman who has or now defends American liberty – from the beaches of Normandy, to the Mekong Delta, to the valleys of the Hindu Kush – shares in their heritage of greatness. Every veteran is the greatest of his generation.
The quiet heroes who have fought for our country come from the most diverse backgrounds imaginable: from farmers and subway riders, Ph.D.’s and high school graduates, and from every ethnic background of the American melting pot. But they are united by far more than what divides them. Read more…
Governor Romney was a guest today during the first hour of the Hughniverse (Hugh Hewitt’s radio program). Romney was asked about Obama’s foreign policy in Libya, the future of nuclear power, and his presidential plans for 2012:
Monday, March 21, 2011
HH: Joined now by former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney. Governor, always a pleasure, welcome back. MR: Thank you. Good to be with you today.
HH: What is your reaction to President Obama’s announcement of air strikes on Libya? MR: Well, first, I support military action in Libya. I support our troops there and the mission that they’ve been given. But let me also note that thus far, the President has been unable to construct a foreign policy, any foreign policy. I think it’s fair to ask, you know, what is it that explains the absence of any discernable foreign policy from the president of the United States? And I believe that it flows from his fundamental disbelief in American exceptionalism. In the President’s world, all nations have common interests, the lines between good an evil are blurred, America’s history merits apology. And without a compass to guide him in our increasingly turbulent world, he’s tentative, indecisive, timid and nuanced. And as a result, I think, he says, for instance, he’s committed to our success in Afghanistan unless it means commitment beyond 2011. He stands with our ally, Israel, but condemns its settlement policy even more forcefully than he condemns Hamas’ rockets. And he calls for the removal of Muammar Gaddafi, but then conditions our action on the directions we get from the Arab League and the United Nations.
HH: Did he wait too long, Governor Romney, to strike against Libya? MR: There’s no question but that his inability to have a clear and convincing foreign policy made him delegate to the United Nations and the Arab League a decision about our involvement there. And I happen to have a very personal concern. I mean, 270 people were killed as a result of that tragedy over Lockerbie. We now know that that was ordered directly by Muammar Gaddafi. One of my colleagues at Bain & Co, and a friend, named Nicholas Bright, was killed in that flight. And the President had every piece of information he needed to be able to take action in America’s interest.
HH: Does he appear weak? MR: You know, I think one of the comments I’ve heard from individuals abroad is that in the past, America has been feared sometimes, has been respected, but today, that America is seen as being weak. We’re following the French into Libya. I appreciate the fact that others are participating in this effort, but I think we look to America to be the leader of the world. You know, the cause of liberty can endure the mistakes that are inevitable consequences of human fallibility. But liberty’s standard can’t prevail if it’s not proudly, decisively and consistently held aloft.
[...]
At the end of the interview, Hewitt mentioned Tim Pawlenty’s exploratory announcement today and asked Romney about his plans:
HH: [...] Last question, Governor Romney, we’ve got about 45 seconds. Former Governor Pawlenty announced his exploratory committee today. Do you have any idea when you’ll be deciding whether or not to do the same thing? MR: I have an idea, Hugh, but I’d tell you quietly, but I’m afraid you’d let your listeners know, so I’ll have to be giving that some thought, but no definitive plans right now.
HH: Are you going to the Reagan Library debate that Politico wants to hold in May? MR: Well, that depends on when we get things organized, and that’s not something I’m ready to come out with right now. But I can tell you that I’m doing what I’ve got to do to make sure that if we decide to go ahead, that we’ll have a successful effort.
HH: Mitt Romney, always a pleasure, Governor, thank you for joining us.
Due to a late bus (grrrrr) I arrived just in time to catch the back end of Mitt’s speech. The blogger lounge has a balcony and I went out onto it to catch a glimpse of the crowd but found it was completely full with overflow seating. The crowd was very energetic, supportive, and just plain…(what’s the word?) … HUGE. From what I understand team MRC members were near to the front and Luke & Aaron were responsible for the crowd chants that broke out afterwords.
The Twitter reviews, and from what I’ve heard from the gaggles of Romney supporters who seem to be everywhere, indicate that the speech was a knock-out. I am intrigued by few things which make me think we are witnessing the inauguration of the official slogan for Mitt’s 2012 campaign (if he runs of course, wink…wink).
Believe In America Sticker
First, the subtitle of Romney’s book No Apology was officially change to “Believe in America”. On a national conference call with fundraisers a couple weeks ago Meg Whitman asked Romney if we were indeed seeing a potential slogan for his 2012 campaign (Mitt did not say yes or no to that). Before the speech Romney asked via Twitter that attendees use the #BelieveInUSA hashtag when tweeting about the speech. Then, when I arrived here and I see the PAC is giving out “Believe in America” stickers that are everywhere. And lastly, of course, the speech itself is actually entitled “Believe in America”. Is this the 2012 camapign slogan? What do you think folks – am I wrong in my guess? I suspect we will know in less than two months…
So… I want to watch this speech as much as you, so I will cease with the banter. Here is Mitt Romney’s 2011 CPAC Speech (from his official YouTube Channel): Believe in America
Two weeks ago we linked to an interview I did with conservative blogger Tim Knight of Jumping in Pools. After giving time for it to be read there I am posting it here in it’s entirety since some may not have clicked through to it and because I’d like to preserve it here on our site as well.
Tim Knight – Mr.Gunderson, what would be the difference between a President Romney and a President Obama?
Nate Gunderson – Well the differences would be vast and numerous. Perhaps the two most noticeable differences are their approaches to foreign policy and to the economy. Obama’s policy with foreign nations is to kiss-up to our enemies while snubbing our allies. Just this last weekend he snubbed Israel’s Prime Minister, fortunately he received a bipartisan rebuke from congress for doing so. He’s full of concessions and appeasements for our enemies, actions that have not been reciprocated, and all the while he offers our friends a stiff arm. Romney on the other hand believes in peace through strength. He often quotes Reagan when he says that of all the wars that came about in his lifetime, none of them were because the U.S. was too strong. Romney believes that our nation’s interests and the safety of our children depend on having a strong military and he suggests raising our annual output for military spending to 4% of our GDP, as he has outlined in his new book No Apology. That’s a great read by the way, if you haven’t read it. I’m two-thirds through it.
Anyway, the other item of difference is the economy. You can be certain that if Romney were President now our domestic agenda would be entirely different. This health care debacle certainly would not have passed. We wouldn’t be entertaining ill-conceived ideas like Cap and Trade, Cash for Clunkers, and government control of the auto industry. We would not have utter misuse and lack of accountability with the TARP funds and stimulus money. A stimulus package under a Romney administration would be designed to bring short-term, instant stimulus to the economy through creating incentives for employers to hire. The current stimulus is nothing more than a big payback to those who supported Obama in his run to the White House and is drawn over many years. It has virtually nothing to with jobs, just vast amounts of pork-barrel spending. Romney criticizes Obama for trying to do too much, when he should be focusing on the economy. With millions of people out of jobs and millions of families suffering because of it, I’m certain a President Romney would have done much better to focus on the economy and his policies would have been wiser and better implemented.
Sorry such a long answer on that one but your question hit a hot spot for me.
Tim Knight – Mr.Gunderson, what is the purpose of Mitt Romney Central, and what do you hope to achieve?
Nate Gunderson – MittRomneyCentral.com is a grassroots website designed to promote Mitt Romney for President in 2012, and we’ll certainly promote a lot of conservative candidates and causes along the way. Our goal is to inform the masses, via the internet, regarding Governor Romney and his potential run for the White House. We are currently a team of about 10 people, each with roles to help develop the site in one way or another, whether it be through promoting the site through social-networking websites, or writing page content, or blogging. We launched just six months ago so we are rather new. We currently have about 1000 daily visitors to our site and are growing very rapidly. Very soon we hope to gather some who are quite dedicated to Romney in 2012 and we’ll do training to make a coordinated on-line effort to promote Romney, and to work on correcting much of the misinformation there is out there about him.
Let me add too, just for clarification, that we have absolutely no ties to Romney or his PAC. I’ve shaken Romney’s hand five times, but I’ve never talked to him. We are strictly grassroots and are not supported nor approved by his PAC in anyway.
Tim Knight – Mr.Gunderson, what can you tell us about Mr.Romney’s just-released book?
Nate Gunderson – It’s great. I read his first book “Turnaround”, which I loved, but this one is still much better. As I mentioned already I’m two-thirds through “No Apology”. I just read the chapter today about education and I found it very insightful and well-written. In the book Romney takes on a number of issues and with each one he discusses how its affects America. He has a process how he analyzes each policy and decides whether it will strengthen America or hurt America. The beginning is heavy on foreign policy, but makes one extremely proud to be an American at the same time. He talks about how to create environments for innovation and productivity to flourish in free markets. He discusses the backwards policies we have in regards to immigration. He dedicated a chapter to education and our failing schools. And not least important is his chapter on health care. There is so much to be understood on this subject, especially with the passage of ObamaCare and everyone trying to link it to Romney and Massachusetts. If everyone could read this chapter on health care they would see the great difference between Obama and Romney in solving the problem.
In all, the book is well written, every bit written by the Governor himself. He may not say it, but I certainly will: this is a campaign platform for 2012. If you want to know what Romney is all about, it is in the book. It’s much more informative than 30 second TV spots and 140 character Twitter encapsulations.
Tim Knight – Mr.Gunderson, according to some recent polling data, Romney would win in Texas, New Mexico, Colorado and Florida if the 2012 Republican Primaries were held today, what is your reaction?
Nate Gunderson – Polls are fun, especially when they bring good news. I’ll be the first to admit that they mean very little this far out. But I must say that I’m very pleased with the results of the Florida poll. That’s a very good sign.
Tim Knight – Mr.Gunderson, would a “Mitt Romney” campaign fracture the Republican base as much as some Cultural Conservatives predict it will?
Nate Gunderson – My opinion is that no it won’t. People may be divided, even passionately in a primary, but no matter who wins I have a feeling we will quickly band together for the good of the party, and ultimately for the good of the nation as we make ousting President Obama a top priority. Romney was an excellent example of this kind of unifying quality as he full-heartedly and quickly endorsed, campaigned for, and otherwise promoted McCain,even after a brutal primary. Even so, I think the candidates will have learned a lesson from 2008, even Romney. I expect the debate to be a lot more calm and civil as we all have a common target.
Tim Knight – Mr.Gunderson, give me three reasons to support Romney for the Republican nomination in 2012.
Nate Gunderson – One, economy. No matter what point the economy is at in 2012, it can and could have been better under a President Romney. Romney has advised, operated, consulted, managed, and launched hundreds of businesses. These include businesses from all sectors of the economy from manufacturers, food chains, retailers, pharmaceuticals, hospitals, hotels… you name it – not to mention the 2002 Winter Olympics. He understands why jobs and businesses come and go. He knows the great impact, both positive and negative, that policies have on businesses. And he knows all too well that businesses make jobs and stimulate the economy, not government.
Two, size of government and government waste. There is so much waste in our government. We have far too many agencies that perform the exact same tasks. So much of government intrudes into our liberties and wastes our hard-earned tax dollars. We have extremely burdensome and unfunded liabilities in our entitlement programs. We have a congress that spends like a runaway train. Romney points out very clearly in his book that if these habits don’t change, if our entitlements are not reformed, if fiscal sanity is not returned to Washington, we are on a steady course for disaster. It will take more than a “good person with their heart in the right place” in the presidency to change these enormous and complex problems. Romney is the turnaround champion. He has on numerous occasions jumped into imminent disasters, rallied the troops, wrought great change, and brought hope and competency to the respective institution. Did I just use the words “change” and “hope” in the same sentence?
Three, he is in it for the right reasons. No one who reads Romney’s book can doubt his patriotism. He loves his country and he loves his children and grandchildren. Romney’s foray into politics has nothing to do with money due to his successful career in business. In fact he hasn’t taken a paycheck since he left Bain Capitol in 1999 to become CEO of the Olympics. He donated his salary from the Olympics to charity, he did not take a salary as Governor, he is donated all his proceeds from his book to charity, as well as his speaking fees, and in 2008 had promised he would do the same as president. Romney has no ties to special interest groups or lobbyists – no one to pay back favors from the White House. His only motivation is to help make America a better place because it is the land he loves and he wants to leave it well intact for his grandchildren. He feels he has the skills and the know-how to effectuate meaningful change in Washington, and so do I.
History remembers her… a wee Irish lass. With her two younger brothers, Anthony and Philip in tow, young Annie Moore from County Cork, Ireland, courageously stepped onto the Isle of Hope on New Year’s Day 1892 – her 15th birthday, and became the first immigrant to be processed through the newly opened Ellis Island Processing Centre.
On this St. Patrick’s Day, we take a brief breather from the contentious, ever-changing health care debate to remember the courage and fortitude of Annie Moore and the more than 17 million immigrants from many nations who, seeking freedom and opportunities to work, passed through the portals of Ellis Island to become… Americans:
It is estimated that over half of all Americans have an ancestor that passed through Ellis Island. Legal immigration is the rainbow that leads to America’s pot o’ golden opportunities. Inspired by his first visit to Ellis Island and the Statue of Liberty, Dustin James presents America:
“America, sweet land of liberty, I hear you calling me. I’m on my way.”
Now, on to the party! Sure and begorrah, on this day of shamrocks, shillelaghs, and shenanigans, in our nation of immigrants, everybody is Irish!Celtic Thunder – a rousing group consisting of four Irish lads and one Scot, kick things off. Launching their family-style entertainment three years ago performing at the St. Patrick’s Day parade in New York City, these five male vocalists are currently promoting their new show ‘That’s Entertainment’ on PBS. Celtic Thunder was named Billboard’s Top World Album/Artist in 2009. The group consists of George Donaldson, Paul Byrom, Ryan Kelly, Keith Harkin, and young Damian McGinty. At the time of their debut, McGinty was just 14 years old. In this video, while singing a solo line, on the last note, he playfully motions downward – signaling that his voice has changed. Turn up the volume and try substituting ‘Romney’ or ‘America’ for ‘Ireland’ and you’ll feel like marching all the way Capitol Hill! Here is Ireland’s Call:
“Hearts of steel and heads unbowing, vowing never to be broken… We will fight until we can fight no more, ’til our final requiem is spoken.”
While Obama, Pelosi, and Reid spread their blarney this week, today is the time for the wearin’ o’ the green! How thankful we are for ALL who sacrificed so greatly to immigrate to America and for their work ethic, talents, and traditions. Here’s hoping for some of that Irish leprechaun magic… Now, back to work to defeat Obamacare!
Governor Romney is at the top of his game in this interview that is well worth the time to listen. Romney interviews with the hosts of the show and takes several questions from callers. The interview is part of his No Apology Tour, more info at NoApology.com, and http://bit.ly/RomneyBook. A full transcript of his portion of the interview is available below the fold.
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.
Gallup: Just off the top of your head, which Republican would you most like to see as the party’s candidate for president in the 2012 election?
Republicans and Republican-leaning independents: Romney!
OK, so everyone didn’t shout ‘Romney!’ in unison, but he did win the largest percentage. It is interesting to me that this was an open-ended question and no answers were suggested to respondents. One commenter at Race42012 makes an excellent observation:
This is best a measurement of the awareness of registered voters, where almost 2/3rds either don’t know or don’t have a clue. Of the 1/3rd who “may” be listening, Romney receives 44% and Palin 34%. No one else garners as much as 10%.
Also of note from the Gallup report is a little tidbit that speaks volumes of Romney’s electability in both the primary and general elections:
Whereas conservative (15%) and moderate or liberal (14%) Republicans are about equally likely to mention Romney as their preferred nominee, Palin is much more likely to be mentioned by conservatives (14%) than by moderates and liberals (3%). Conservatives generally outnumber moderates and liberals by about 2 to 1 within the Republican Party.
And lastly:
At this point, Romney and Palin can be considered the early front-runners for the GOP nomination, a position that has proven advantageous in most past Republican nomination campaigns.
My last thought: Did anyone notice Scott Brown’s name up there in 4th place above some who may actually run for office. This brings two thoughts to mind. One, very little people are actually paying attention this early in the game as Scott Brown will certainly not be running in 2012, nor will McCain (#3) for that matter. Two, as much as I like Scott Brown, isn’t it extremely premature to judge his qualification for the top office? Don’t many of us Republicans complain that Obama was an unknown entity when he began to run just two years into his first term as Senator? Let’s give him some time to prove his meddle, and not give into the mania of the day.
Disclaimer: MittRomneyCentral.com is a pure grassroots website. It is not paid for, endorsed by, or affiliated in any way with Governor Mitt Romney or his official campaign.
Newt Gingrich has taken a bit of heat for his comments on immigration the other night. More than a few have equated his comments with amnesty.
Two weeks ago we linked to an interview I did with conservative blogger Tim Knight of 
History remembers her… a wee Irish lass. With her two younger brothers, Anthony and Philip in tow, young 
Gallup: Just off the top of your head, which Republican would you most like to see as the party’s candidate for president in the 2012 election?
Recent Comments