Gingrich: A Michael Moore Lemming, Heading into History as a Byword

Newt Gingrich Schooling Audience

If Ronald Reagan were alive and in attendance at last night’s debate, he likely would have reacted to Mr. Gingrich’s condescending remarks with, “Now there you go again Newt!”

Seeing Gingrich spread his arms, drop his chin to his chest, look down his nose at everyone, and say something like, — “Bret, you should have phrased that question in a more intelligent way, you simpleton” - makes for some entertainment, nothing more; it certainly does not add to the national deliberation of critical issues.

The mainstream media (yes, including FOX) want Gingrich and the others to keep running to elongate the race for ratings (cash) and drama. The simple proof was the post debate grilling of Romney by Hannity and his fawning over Gingrich not three minutes later, all the while effusively patting themselves on the back, declaring that FOX debate “the best ever!” Whatever respect I had left for Hannity evaporated completely last night.

The relentless attacks on Romney revealed a side of Governor Romney the world had not seen much before last night. He was strong but not overbearing. He displayed a disciplined intensity by answering the attacks as a graceful, patient gentleman. His stature was that of a supremely confident leader, undeterred by petty slander. In a word, Governor Romney was presidential. All the others appeared as ankle biters by comparison.

Governor Romney cited Michael Moore (referring to Gingrich) as quoted in The New York Times yesterday,

“I wondered who they stole from my crew,” Mr. Moore said in a phone interview. “It was fun to hear what I have been saying for 20 years, not just by any Republican candidate, but Newt Gingrich.”

Newt Gingrich will undoubtedly be quoted many times by Mr. Moore in his future propaganda. Yes, Gingrich is sealing his legacy in conservative circles — he will forever be known for doing his level best to degrade long held conservative principles of free enterprise as he selfishly attempts to exact revenge on Governor Romney.

Marc Thiessen of The Washington Post wrote of Gingrich,

When they meet in the green room before Monday night’s debate in South Carolina, Mitt Romney should probably give Newt Gingrich a big thank you. In just a few days’ time, Gingrich has managed has to do something Romney has tried and failed to do for more than five years: rally conservatives behind Mitt Romney.

Rush Limbaugh has called Gingrich’s attacks on Romney’s record at Bain Capital “indefensible,” “sad,” “absurd,” and “the language of leftists like Michael Moore and Oliver Stone.” Club for Growth President Chris Chocola declared them “disgusting” and called on Gingrich to “apologize to Governor Romney.” The Wall Street Journal wrote that those like Gingrich attacking Romney’s business record “are embarrassing themselves” and “taking the Obama line.”

As I have said many times in this forum, I don’t believe Mr. Gingrich the professor, is really that bright, contrary to what he thinks of himself and what others say of him. Why? Probably one of the biggest reasons Gingrich is failing in South Carolina is because the state is one of the few states that has very strict gambling laws on the books, which restrict gaming of all kinds — a fact South Carolinians are proud of. The source of funding Gingrich’s PAC is a Las Vegas casino owner — a fact that is offensive to voters of South Carolina. How smart do you have to be to avoid such a rookie error in seeking wealth from a gambling man?

I never thought Gingrich believed he could be a serious contender for the Presidency of the United States. His motivation has always been speaking fees inflated by continued fame and enhanced by book sales. Make no mistake, Newt Gingrich is a very wealthy man.

Joseph Curl of The Washington Times says it best in this article he titled, Goodbye, Newt, and Good Riddance:

Anyone who knows Newt Gingrich knows that Newt Gingrich is — and always has been — all about Newt Gingrich. Newt Gingrich doesn’t give a damn about the Republican Party. And Newt Gingrich sure doesn’t care about ousting President Obama, unless he’s doing the ousting. If Newt Gingrich can’t be the nominee, then Newt Gingrich will burn the whole place to the ground.

And that’s just what he’s done since plunging in the polls. Furious over the TV ads the pro-Romney super PAC ran against him in Iowa, Mr. Gingrich abandoned his pledge not to speak ill of his fellow Republicans and struck out on a course to destroy the Republican front-runner.

In one of many odd utterances, the former House speaker acknowledged as much in the run-up to the New Hampshire primary: “My real goal was to make sure that Romney did not win here by a big enough margin to develop real momentum.” Simple: Take Mr. Romney down, even if it brings down the entire Republican Party.
Mr. Gingrich’s descent into the nasty should surprise no one; the corpulent, thrice-married former speaker is clearly a man who cannot control his appetites. His decision to split for a vacation in the Greek islands during the first days of his campaign prompted his campaign team to resign en masse, leaving the candidate so rudderless he couldn’t even get on the ballot for some state primaries.

Without a disciplined team of advisers around him, Mr. Gingrich’s true character has shone through. Newt’s facade as an avuncular, even-tempered man of moderation has given way to the true Newt: angry, impulsive, irrational, undisciplined.
Here’s the fallout of Mr. Gingrich’s scorched-earth campaign for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination: The former speaker has lost his position as de facto head of the Republican Party — forever . . .

Yes, Mr. Gingrich’s continued presence in the national limelight is entertainment at best. It is sad to witness a man of his previous stature being reduced to a byword before our eyes.

“I am in love with you’, I responded. He laughed the most beguiling and gentle laugh. ‘Of course you are,’ he replied. ‘I understand perfectly because I’m in love with myself. The fact that I’m not transfixed in front of the nearest mirror takes a great deal of self-control.’ It was my turn to laugh.” ― Anne Rice, Blackwood Farm

“When the healthy pursuit of self-interest and self-realization turns into self-absorption, other people can lose their intrinsic value in our eyes and become mere means to the fulfillment of our needs and desires.” ― P.M. Forni, The Civility Solution: What to Do When People Are Rude


Obama Voters Who May Vote for Governor Romney: Democrats and Independents

Recently, I extended the invitation to a fellow Californian who will again vote for President Obama. Her name is Pauline Kejmar and she lives in Redlands — she is a Democrat. Her grandson Drew is my son-in-law.

There are still ardent supporters of President Obama and Pauline is one. Through Drew, I asked her if she would give me a TOP 10 list of reasons she believes President Obama is superior to Governor Romney as POTUS and why she plans to support Obama again.

You may ask why I would post subject matter of this type in a grassroots forum such as MittRomneyCentral. My reasoning is that it provides a simple glimpse into the mind of one Democrat and if we are successful here at MRC, we should be able to appeal to the Blue Dog Democrat as well as to the Independent voter (Americans all). To do so, we need to understand their motivations and expectations. I presume that Pauline is far from being a disaffected Democrat as her views below seem to align well with the more liberal wing of the Democrat party.

Governor Huntsman’s likely endorsement of Governor Romney today is the first of four hopefully, which will shift the focus of the campaign away from the Republican competitors to President Obama. WELCOME to any and all supporters of Governor Huntsman and to any of the supporters of Gingrich, Santorum, and Perry who are hoping to join a winning, organized, strong movement to restore America’s standing! Welcome to you!

It is too early to predict of course, but Romney could be on course to beat Reagan’s 1980 win over Carter — impressive indeed. In that race, Reagan won 44 states and 489 electoral votes to Carter’s six states (plus DC) and 49 electoral votes, and America is in far worse shape today. I remember those days. Reagan entered office with a mandate, in part because of Democrats that crossed over to vote for him. By the way, are any of you as sick and tired as I am of hearing Mr. Gingrich invoke the name of Ronald Reagan at every turn? I wish I could ask President Reagan his candid opinion of Gingrich!

President Obama

REQUEST: For any of our readers that voted for Obama who became disillusioned with the direction his lack of leadership has taken America, and who is seriously considering a vote for Governor Romney this time (should he be the Republican nominee), please leave a comment as to why. I may contact you later to invite you to elaborate in a guest post — if you would like.

Following is one Democrat’s opinion as to why President Obama is the superior candidate for POTUS.

By Pauline Kejmar

Ten Reasons why I would vote for Obama over Romney

I. He is better able to bridge the increasing gap between the rich and the poor in this country.

2. He has been very successful in fighting terrorism with the killing of Bin Laden and many other top Al Qaeda leaders and operatives.

3. He fights for consumer financial protection such as regulating credit card fees.

4. He would be less likely to lead us into a armed conflict with Iran using sanctions and cooperation with other allies.

5. He was able to help get Gaddafi out of Libya without using U.S. ground troops.

6. He would be tougher on environmental protection because he believes in global warming.

7. Has a sensible approach to immigration. Illegal immigration numbers have decreased under Obama and deportation of illegal criminals has increased. He has a concern for those young people brought here at an early age to receive a path to legalization.

8. He has brought an end to the nine years of war in Iraq and sent our troops home. He is drawing down in Afghanistan after ten years.

2ND REQUEST: Please leave a comment to this post if you voted for Barack Obama in 2008 but are seriously considering a completely opposite approach by voting for Governor Romney, should he win the nomination. Also, let me know if you would be interested in expounding upon your views and opinions in a guest post to help other readers that have similar concerns. If so, I will contact you via email.

Texas Ranch Meeting: About Conservatism or Religion? The Obvious Truth

Over the last 10 days or so, much as been reported about a meeting or conference of evangelical leaders to be held at the ranch of a judge in Texas. That meeting happened yesterday. There have been literally dozens of newspaper and online articles published leading up to the meeting, and afterward, with all of the accompanying speculation and anticipation. Their goal? To decide upon the “conservative alternative” to Mitt Romney. Really? They must think all Americans are completely ignorant.

Senator Rick Santorum (Photo credit: AP)

Saturday in The Dallas Morning News, Robert Jeffress (yes, that one) was quoted:

“The fat lady hasn’t sung yet, but she’s in the green room warming up. It looks like Gov. Romney is going to win the nomination,” said Jeffress, who was not at the meeting but made headlines last year when he warned that Mormonism is a cult.

Jeffress cautioned that while some say evangelicals will have no choice but to vote for Romney, millions could stay home as they did in 2008 unless the former Massachusetts governor gives Christian conservatives a reason to turn out for him. He suggested that Romney, should he become the nominee, strongly promise that he will appoint anti-abortion judges to the U.S. Supreme Court.

From the many reports I read about the meeting of over 150 leaders, they cast votes (more than one time) to choose one of the “not-Mitt” candidates still remaining. Their selection was Rick Santorum, to the chagrin of Mr. Gingrich (I wonder why they decided against Newt? — a real head scratcher!).

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council says conservatives are looking for a candidate who will repeal the nation’s health care law, fight for pro family values and address the national debt.

Governor Romney was the first to declare he would seek to repeal ObamaCare — and forcefully. Which other candidate has better family values than Governor Romney?

This National Journal piece gives a good sense of the jockeying:

“We have been successful as the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney,” Santorum told reporters in Mount Pleasant, S.C. Later, he said in a statement that every candidate had “coveted” the endorsement. “It is time to coalesce behind the full spectrum conservative in this race who will fight for their values and won’t waiver when times get tough,” Santorum said. That was a reference to himself. The next sentence was a reference to Romney: “Now is the time to stop a moderate from becoming our party’s nominee.”

Newt Gingrich and his camp disputed Santorum’s interpretation of the results. Former congressman J.C. Watts, Gingrich’s national campaign co-chairman, said Santorum and Gingrich were separated by only nine votes on the first ballot. “It is clear that 100% of those attending are not for Governor Romney, but in fact are splintered in whether to support Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum,” Watts said in a statement. He called it “misleading” for the Santorum campaign to claim an endorsement from all 150 leaders at the meeting.

[emphasis added]


Facts First: Any person that does a small amount of research, and dives below the soundbite images painted by Gingrich, Perry, and Santorum regarding Governor Romney, discovers that he governed as a conservative in every way. One of the best examples is regarding his pro-life record. In every decision he made or action he took as governor, was always on the side of life. Proof ——> HERE. There are many examples of Governor Romney’s proven conservatism, not least of which are the numerous Tea Party leaders and organizations that have enthusiastically endorsed him over all other presidential candidates.

Now the Logic: Ask yourself this question — If Mitt Romney were an Evangelical, would that meeting have been convened? Take your time as you contemplate your answer to this simple question. Remember, Mr. Newt Gingrich was included as a possible choice by these evangelical leaders — a serial adulterer whose last affair lasted in secret for six years during the time Gingrich publicly scolded President Clinton for his extramarital relations. In fact, Mr. Gingrich came in second in the voting at this ranch meeting!

Again, would that meeting have been convened at all by 150+ evangelical leaders had Mitt Romney’s religion been Evangelical? The obvious answer is clearly “no” it would not have even been considered.

What if Mitt Romney were Evangelical and had won both Iowa and New Hampshire? I can tell you this: Had Governor Romney been Evangelical, he would have won Iowa by tens of thousands more votes than the 8-vote margin he received. Santorum only came close because of the clarion call “to preach Santorum” from the pulpits the Sunday prior (ala Huckabee 2008 surprise). Interesting, is it not, that the IRS let those instances alone?

Conclusion: If GMR were Evangelical, he would have won Iowa by a HUGE margin. If GMR were Evangelical, the Texas ranch meeting of 150+ evangelical leaders would never have happened. If GMR were Evangelical, the primary race would be effectively sealed after his winning two unprecedented states.

If this logic is anywhere near the truth, then what was yesterday’s meeting all about? These “leaders” traveled from all over the nation to meet out at the ranch, spending an enormous amount of time and money. They all reported that the meeting made no mention of Mitt Romney or his religion. Right.

That meeting had nothing to do with conservatism.

“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” — John Adams


An Independent Who Knows and Loves Mitt — and Not for the Mistletoe

Autumn McAlpin

“America’s Calling” was an event organized in June of 2007 in Boston for volunteers to make outbound calls to their contacts to raise funds for Governor Romney’s 2008 campaign. Meg Whitman (CEO, eBay) chartered a 737 for all volunteers from California wishing to travel to/from Boston to participate. My wife Cindy, our son Mitchell, and I took the day to make it happen.

With us was Autumn McAlpin, a friend and talented writer and author. Of course, one of the passengers up and back was Meg Whitman; the return flight included Ann Romney. At the time, I was writing for CommittedToRomney blog and decided to see if I might get an interview from Meg and Ann. Then I thought, Autumn had a lot more experience writing than I, and as a woman would likely connect with them better than I.

They both graciously accepted to give an interview to Autumn (I made the two photographs below on those flights). See Autumn’s bio at the end and the link to her weekly column — The Orange County Register has a tradition that slants libertarian (as a paperboy, I delivered The Register at age 12 in Anaheim).

Autumn accepted my invitation to provide this editorial to you; her thoughts on Governor Mitt Romney.

By Autumn McAlpin:

I recently came across an article by a fellow journalist who first met Mitt along the campaign of ’08. She recalled that while seated under a mistletoe at a coffee shop at Christmastime, Mitt extended a handshake rather than a peck. She claimed this platonic gesture from a happily married man disillusioned her, even costing him her vote.


The concept of politicians shaking hands and kissing babies is as cliche as the striped red tie. Such sentiments form the fodder for the “Presidents are merely puppets” ideology. But in our country’s current state of emergency, is another puppet what we want?

In 2008, the polls showed we did. It was edgy, even cool to pick a candidate who was the youthful minority, the underdog. But now, after four lackluster years of watching a puppet shake hands and kiss babies (all the while with a shell-shocked look on his face), this country is now ready to elevate our expectations of our commander in chief.

I first met GMR in 2008 as part of his grassroots campaign, but had actually known his son Josh since college. This personal connection drew me to the Romney camp, but my involvement in the campaign and eventual ballot choice was not predicated by it.

Autumn & Meg

As an independent voter, party lines are more of a blur to me, and I will always vote for who I feel is the best candidate. Just as in 2008, I have no doubt GMR is the best choice.

We’ve all done the research: GMR floats on a legacy of fixing things-from corporations to the Olympics, he’s the man who’s brought in in the eleventh hour to do remarkable things in dire circumstances. Well, the circumstances are dire, and the hour is here.

In Boston 2007, I had the privilege to sit down with Ann Romney as we discussed her family, health, and husband. By every account a gracious, intelligent force for good herself, she convinced me that GMR did not seek this position for his own hubris. We all know he has already humbly proven himself capable in his business world. Rather, he felt called to fulfill a position for which his life circumstances had trained and qualified him.

Ann & Autumn

Other conversations with friends and family who know the real Mitt reveal the same — business mogul (and former eBay C.E.O.) Meg Whitman told me the story of how GMR had shut down operations at Bain Capital once when an employee’s teenage daughter went missing, encouraging the large work family to support the search efforts. Friends have told me of times when he’s generously donated money to those in need, treated masses of teenagers to dinner, rolled up his sleeves in community clean-up efforts. He is by all accounts a man who is deeply allegiant to his wife, children, grandchildren, and country.

For reasons unbeknownst to me, GMR does not scheme for these glimpses to be splayed across the airwaves for those seeking their mistletoe kiss. Rather at the podium, he focuses on the real day-to-day issues facing the POTUS post — our economy, our military, education, and healthcare. He backs up his beliefs, and dominates the debates. I know he’s qualified and prepared to roll up his sleeves and get to work doing what he does best — fixing. And the thought of our country getting fixed thrills me.

2008 was not a complete political loss for us as it gave the media a chance to flush out their antics- the “flip floppery,” the religious persecution, the hair jokes. And now the groundwork is laid, the candidate well known, and really, there’s just not anything to dig.

When seeking an edge, we’ve got Lenny Kravitz. When seeking a presidential candidate, we need a fixer, a doer, a believer who will reinstate our allegiance to our Constitution and restore national pride — someone who is not running for his own personal gain, but who is willing to lend his talents and willingness to serve in the most difficult leadership role in the world.

If you are looking for someone to kiss under the mistletoe, Mitt may not be your guy. But if you are ready to FIX this mess we’re in, ready to support a candidate who will easily be the most productive, effective, and respected President since Reagan, it’s time to commit to Mitt.

Autumn McAlpin is an author and screenwriter who also pens the weekly “Cracking Up” column for the Orange County Register ( Autumn lives in southern California with her husband, Michael, and four children.

“If we mean to have heroes, statesmen and philosophers, we should have learned women.” — Abigail Adams

Exclusive (MR12): One Evangelical’s Journey to Promote Mitt Romney

Five years ago, I discovered the amazing resource Article VI Blog, founded by John Schroeder and Lowell Brown. Their reporting and Op-Ed writing, in my opinion, have proved an important contribution to this nation and to the American ideal of freedom. Their tireless research will continue to enlighten Americans who treasure the blessings of diversity.

John Schroeder

John and Lowell traveled to the Bush Library in Texas for Governor Romney’s historic Faith in America speech December 6, 2007. It was there we met and discussed their work and our hope of a Romney presidency.

Following is a candid view into John’s childhood, youth, and adulthood that I found most revealing – especially as relates to his arriving to understand Mitt Romney’s tremendous leadership skills and experience. I am grateful to him for this guest contribution to Mitt Romney Central.

From Protecting The Church To Electing A President — This Evangelical’s Story

By: John Schroeder

The story is now old about how Article VI Blog got started. We have grown from the original team of me, an evangelical Presbyterian, and my Mormon partner Lowell Brown to include John Mark Reynolds, notable Greek Orthodox academic and scholar. All three of us have our individual reasons to be there; let’s talk about mine.

When I started, I really did not care much for Mitt Romney, but I also hated bigotry. Frankly, one of Romney’s key talking points for the ’08 election was what has now come to be called “RomneyCare” and I was aghast. When Article VI Blog started I was in the process of losing about 200 pounds. That gave me a unique view of the health care system – the last thing I wanted was to give the government the power to tell me about my weight, and let’s face it, you put someone in charge of your healthcare, and that is where they are going. But again, I hate bigotry.

See, I am a son of the Deep South. I was born in 1957 in Oxford, Mississippi. My father soon finished law school and we left Mississippi, but my mother’s entire extended family was there so rarely a year has gone by in my life that I have not spent some time in the state. I grew up with “Whites Only” signs, and segregated water fountains. Most importantly, I saw the racial prejudices of the Deep South routinely turn some members of my loving and wonderful family suddenly ugly. We could be having the most wonderful evening in a household full of love and good cheer and the topic would come up and well, let’s just say I saw the good cheer leave the room.

So, on that fateful day when Hugh Hewitt introduced me to the idea that Evangelicals would oppose Romney, not because of something like RomneyCare, but because of his faith, I did not want to see the good cheer leave the “evangelical room” and decided to get involved. Right up until the day before Super Tuesday in the 2008 primary campaign, I worked hard to fight the religious bigotry that was so obviously aimed at Romney, but that did not mean he had my vote. He ended up with it, but he had to earn it.

So-called RomneyCare really was the only serious obstacle to his having my vote. John McCain was, well, not a team player with Republicans, and governance is a team game. Rudy Giuliani was waaaay too far left. Fred Thompson was a joke, and Mike Huckabee really did take the good cheer from the evangelical room. But….

In ’08 Romney ended up with my vote largely because as I studied the RomneyCare issue I came to discover that what was passed in Massachusetts was a far cry from what Romney proposed. What Romney proposed was a hybrid system between private enterprise and public health care. Most importantly it offered subsidies for people to get private healthcare; the government never became the provider. Not ideal from my perspective, but enough to make him far more palatable than the alternatives, particularly when you consider that the public, showing a lack of wisdom in my estimation, was demanding something. A reasonable politician has to act when the citizenry demand, even if the result is less than ideal. Those in elected office are, after all, servants of the people, not rulers.

Since ObamaCare has come to pass, RomneyCare is no longer an issue for me. There are many similarities in the Massachusetts healthcare system and that which ObamaCare shall bring to pass, but in the end there is no comparison. Many legal scholars think ObamaCare is unconstitutional – I am inclined to agree with them. States have a lot of power that the federal government does not. But more importantly to my mind Massachusetts healthcare now has little resemblance to what Mitt Romney originally proposed. He had some vetoes overridden and has been out of office for quite some time now, giving that heavily liberal legislature, and governor, plenty of time to fiddle about. What Mitt Romney wanted, and what Barack Obama shoved down our gullets is radically different. Romney has promised to minimize the impact of ObamaCare as much as the power of the presidency will allow and to make repeal of it a priority in his agenda. That’s all I can ask.

Let’s get back to my youthful sojourns to Mississippi and to bigotry. You cannot be about in Mississippi and not know African-Americans, lots of them. One of the reasons things seemed to turn so ugly in the family gatherings when it came up was because the blacks that I knew in Mississippi were certainly poor and generally undereducated but most of them were decent good people. As an infant, I was cared for by a woman (my mother worked while my father was in law school) who remained in service to the family her entire life, as did several of her children. Now my parents were dirt poor at the time. Mom made a pittance as a production assistant at a Memphis television station and Dad had the GI bill. That they could afford a caretaker for me explains a lot of the poverty in the African-American community of the time. Regardless, I saw that woman (Fannie was her name) on every visit I made to Mississippi until she passed away, which was about the time I graduated high school. She could not read or write, but she was a good woman – having cared not only for me, but for many of my generation. She was a decent person. But the things some of my family members would say when she was out of earshot…. Their words simply did not match the reality I witnessed, and it made some loving, beautiful people look very ugly.

Schroeder & Brown at Faith In America Speech

You cannot live in southern California, one end of the so-called “Jello Belt,” and not know Mormons – lots of them. When I contemplated my evangelical brethren discarding a candidate for POTUS because he was a Mormon, it just looked ugly to me. They were good, decent people. Politically most that I know stand right where I do. They are contributing members of the community, often leading on things that my brethren seemed too pre-occupied to tackle. As the African-Americans of the Mississippi of my youth were poor and under-educated, the Mormons of my adulthood were theologically misguided, but they were good people, even preferable as neighbors. To discard Romney on the basis of theological wrongness reflected very poorly on my evangelical brethren.

I am tempted at this point to go on about the proper relationship of theology and religious affiliation to our citizenship, but that is a scholarly topic, and this is a personal reflection. Besides, it’s getting too long anyway.

I grieve for all those that would discard Romney, or Jon Huntsman for that matter, on the basis of their Mormon faith. To do so, from my perspective, shows little faith in the God who saved me and whom I claim to serve. The New Testament is full of the message that Christ came to free us from the drudgery and ugliness of legalism. Such is not license for debauchery, but rather a reflection of the fact that Christ’s ministry transforms us. We are changed from people who obey the law out of obligation, fear and tenacity to people from whom behavior in compliance with the law flows as a natural consequence of who we are.

If we still operate out of a mindset that demands strict compliance in an obligatory and tenacious manner, then we have yet to experience the deep reality of what Jesus can do for us. Christ, it must be remembered, chose the company of sinners over the religious elite of his day. In plain speak, it is not about theology or membership, but character.

Martin Luther King Jr. spoke some of the most profound words of the last century:

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

The years since Article VI Blog started have been very interesting years in my life. Among the more interesting occurrences has been the opportunity to get to know Mitt Romney just a little and some of his extended family quite well. These are people, who when judged by the content of their character, deserve the same shot at the White House, or any other part of the American dream, that the rest of us enjoy.

I do not pretend to know what God thinks of Mormons or Mormon theology – I do not know what will happen to any individual Mormon in eternity, or anyone else for that matter – I am no where near that smart. I know what I believe and what my prayer and study has taught me, and yes, it is quite different than what they believe. But I also know that to deny them their place in our nation, based on that difference, reflects far more poorly on me than it does on them.

All said and done, that is why I started with Article VI Blog. I did not want the prejudices of some in the Evangelical community to reflect poorly on all of us. I wanted anybody that bothered to listen to know that we’re not all that way.

Some six years later the only thing that is different is that Mitt Romney is now unquestionably the best candidate qualified to steer our nation back in the proper direction. Economically, his skill is unrivalled. As an executive, his experience is unmatched. As a politician, his current victories speak for themselves – as does his character. This cycle Mitt Romney has more than earned my vote. I am proud to be behind him – 100%.

[Emphasis added by Lundquist]

If you read history you will find that the Christians who did most for the present world were precisely those who thought most of the next. It is since Christians have largely ceased to think of the other world that they have become so ineffective in this. — C. S. Lewis

…………………. Related Resources …………………….

Why Evangelicals Can Support Mitt Romney

Evangelicals for Mitt

JFK’s Amazing, Inspiring 1960 Speech to Houston Ministers, “I Believe in America”


The Truth About Massachusetts Health Care

Problem or Not?

Why RomneyCare Makes Mitt the Best Nominee to Face Obama

Bottomline: Romney Stands Strongly Against ObamaCare

Why Romney Care is Constitutional While ObamaCare is Not

Governor Mitt Romney: “Going 2 and O” — Integrity Matters

As a serious amateur photographer, I love this image below. Every photo tells a story. This photograph was made last night in Iowa prior to the Edith and Carolyn moment on CNN and when Santorum was still showing at number one — does it get any better than this? By the way, CNN blew the socks off FOX for professional coverage last night; FOX failed.

A note to Michele Bachmann: You fought a great fight and in my opinion, your work ethic and determination were second to none and certainly as impressive as Santorum’s. He edged you out by getting all the preachers to tell their members to support him. We welcome all your supporters here with big hugs. And congratulations to Senator Santorum!


Three days ago, Greg Stapley posted this editorial on MRC. Greg is a friend; he is a businessman from Orange County, California and he wrote the following, new guest post while on vacation today (writing about GMR is cathartic!):

To get to the White House, you have to win twice.

There’s an old saying in presidential politics. It holds that in order to win the party’s nomination, candidates must “run to the right” in the primaries (or to the left if you’re a Dem). But to then win the general, the candidate must make a self-contorting and often-implausible leap “to the center.”

It’s a tacit acknowledgment of the power of moderates, independents and other swing voters in determining the winner of the ultimate prize: the Presidency.

It’s also a fundamentally dishonest tactic, but one that many jaded voters on both sides seem to accept. The end justifies the means, they reason.

The Left has just re-learned it the hard way. Sure, in the last election a lot of the then-newly-invigorated liberal base took Savior Obama at his word when he said he’d do things like close Guantánamo and end waterboarding.