Tea Party, newbies or what?

Since the craziness of Democratic' Socialistic Policies have come down the pike, there have been many people decide to take a bigger stake in the election and governing processes of the land. In many cases they are like the teenager that gets a little information and runs with it. Running out into traffic without really paying any attention at all. The result is you will get hurt, or you will get killed. They rarely miss when they have no idea which direction you are going, any better than you do.

Rhetoric is always the path for the newbie. They find people who play on their emotions and angers and bow down at the throne of "knowledge". Or is it really knowledge or someone satisfying their aggravations. Pretty soon their list of purism is in place. They have the Constitution up there as a saving grace. Yet in the midst of all of this, they do not realize the Constitution is merely a social contract between the States. Its not a cure all. A strict Constitutionalist is not necessarily a problem solver. Just someone who adheres to the guidelines of the social contract.

These people, once they have their list, scrutinize people with standards that grow every day. Its' just a good thing no one is watching them daily. They would be called flip floppers, Rino's, Cino's, Neocons and whatever else that you could come up with.

It is sad. But that is just how it is. Instead of intellectual  honesty. They just believe what is said. Instead of understanding that their representatives can not always do as they or the representative would like....they are like piranhas waiting to swoop in.

Here in Florida, Alan West is under scrutiny. He isn't perfect. Of course this is the same Alan West that when he bashes Obama, he is loved and looked upon as Presidential for some reason.

Now, because he votes a certain way, explains why....the grand ol' Tea Party is talking of putting someone up to run against him. Alan West, one of the rising stars. All because these idiots disagree with him. All because he realized what he voted for was not perfect, but in the circumstances it was probably the best that he could get. He is smart. They are idiots. Yes, Idiots. I am frankly over them. I am a conservative, not an idiot. I take the time to find out whats' what.

Here in Florida we have what I consider the best Governor in America. Rick Scott. Scott Walker of Wisconsin gets kudos' from America. Walker balanced his 400 million deficit. He took on the Teachers Unions. Well, Rick Scott balanced a 4 Billion deficit in our budget. By my last count he had wooed 11 new international businesses and brought in 84,000 new Jobs. The Charlie Crist debacle that took us from 3% unemployment to 12% is going down.

He stopped the high speed rail which would have been a huge boondoggle to Florida. He has had to fight against the Republicans, or else things would be even much better. He is doing everything he promised he would do. With change, its like a little child crying all the way. He also took on the teachers unions. Many Teachers jobs were formed with dried up stimulus money. He tried to get the Teachers to pay 5% into their retirement, like every other state. That would have solved the debt spending in education. His GOP in the state only went to 3%. He then cut $615 million in Dem and GOP projects to try and save more teachers jobs. They do not even understand what he did. Its'amazing how much they lie, but that is what socialists do.

So I ask, where is the Tea Party? What are they thinking? Or do they think at all. These types of actions are exactly why they have no credibility at all in my book. They should be rallying around this man...if indeed they were worth a hill of beans. If they really were as informed as they think they are. But they are nowhere to be found. <missing in action! These are the same people who claim they are ready for civil disobedience and a revolution? What a joke.

They do all of this word speak about Reagan, Conservativism and the Constitution, but they do not follow Ronald Reagan's 80/20 rule. Reagan didn't preach perfection. He spoke of the greatness of America. He spoke of no new 3rd Party, just fixing the GOP. Hard task? Nothing worth while is easy.

Wow, hard work, doing the best you can; and understanding that everything, and everyone is not perfect. Who would have thunk it huh? I don't need a Tea Party. I have the GOP with all of its imperfections. Gee, that's just like me. A third Party would not face the same issues with corruption here and there? If you do not think so, I know of a bridge in Brooklyn. But I do know one thing, sitting out voting; and going third party only helps the Socialist Democratic Party win and do more of the same.

Romney Supporters getting off track..and it could hurt Mitt badly

Mitt Romney is a good  man. Great family man. His record in  the private sector as a businessman and problem solver are unmatched by anyone in the Oval office now, or any candidate that  is running or considering running.

Mitt is ahead right now because he is doing what Ronald Reagan did when he spanked Jimmy Carter. He made it about the issues. He went after that. There was no need for anything else. The same is true today. Mitt is making it about the loss of Jobs in America. He can easily points to the fact as Governor in a state with great adversity that was found in an 85% liberal legislature; he took his state from  50th in unemployment to 11th in his one term.

The second issue is that he downsized government by cutting 341 social programs, with no new taxes to balance a 3 billion a year spending deficit. With the insane spending of Obama and the Democrats. If the Tea Party was half as smart as they think they are, they would be looking at this aspect and Sarah Palin would not be their Sweetheart, Mitt Romney would be their King instead.

Alaska ran just as well before Sarah, and has not missed a beat without her. So where is greatness, when there is no point of distinction?

Mitt keeps his personal beliefs personal. he respects others, and in that, the Mormonism is not an issue to me. It is too bad the Mormon people are not leaving well enough alone. Mitt's family for several generations have been Mormon, so i understand why he took this path.

Mitt won me over in 2007 based on his abilities, his track record, and his ability to teach and explain about things. I find him an excellent leader. I look at his 844 vetoes and the fact he was vetoed 700 times by the Massachusetts legislature. I take the time to  find the whys and why nots' of things. He is as conservative as any person who has run for the Presidency.

His record will always be an asset, no matter how many people misinterpret the Health Care in that state.

His Mormonism is not going to be his downfall if he has one. The downfall is going to be from other Mormons. Why would I say this? Well lets be honest, the background of violence, and more than one wife in the History of Mormonism is never going to be forgotten. Just those two things a lone will never set right in the minds of most people. If I bring up the magic underwear then we will even go to another level. Let alone, teaching that one day you will be a little God.

That does not fly!

 What is hurting Mitt Romney in his religious beliefs are the Mormons sidetracking his candidacy by making it about Mormonism. We have people out there trying to say Mormonism is Christian. I am sorry, but it is not. Its Mormonism. I have no issue with a persons individual beliefs. However when they try and pass it off as Christianity, when it clearly is not; then I am offended. Then it becomes an issue. It becomes a place of contention for many many people. The Mormons themselves that do this, are hurting Mitt.

The focus should be on the issues, and what Mitt brings to the table. That is what wins. This is not the time to try and defend your religious beliefs or to promote them. Now we have stories linking Mitt to JFK and how he had to overcome Catholicism, and some so called persecution. Lets face it, with strange beliefs comes scrutiny. Thats'  just how it is.

Doesn't it make sense to stick to the issues? The issues are not ones religion. The issues are the economy, spending and the protection of the country. Yes, Mormons your faith is important. But now is not the time or the podium to be pushing it.  Choose wisely. Mitt does.

ObamaCare vs RomneyCare: Ready for the Facts?

ObamaCare vs RomneyCare: Ready for the Facts?

taken from here

14 Jul

ObamaCare vs RomneyCare: The Ultimate Comparison Chart

By popular demand, the ObamaCare vs RomneyCare comparison chart is back, this time, annotated with footnotes referencing the credible sources of all the facts contained therein. Are there other credible sources available, and other interpretations of the data? Of course there are. This is not an exhaustive list of all known sources of information on the two health care reform laws. It’s simply a list of the sources I used to put this comparison chart together. Use it as a starting point, and do your own homework. If you’re depending on the Obama administration and the snarky Democrats for your information about the two health care reform plans (and most people are, whether they know it or not) then you deserve whatever you end up with.

Footnotes:

1. House bill was 1,990 pages, Senate bill was 2,074 pages. http://www.politico.com/livepulse/1109/Senate_bill_weighs_in_at_2074_pages.html
2. Chapter 58, MA House 4479, Amended: formatted to 8.5″ x 11″ – 68 pages. http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/SessionLaws/Acts/2006/Chapter58 . Note: Washington Post claims 907 pages, which any dope with a printer can prove incorrect: http://thinkprogress.org/health/2011/06/02/234594/romney-misrepresents-length-of-massachusetts-health-law/
3. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/24348.html
4. The entire bill can be read in less than an hour: http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/SessionLaws/Acts/2006/Chapter58
5. http://healthcare-coalition.org/ObamaCare%20Primer.pdf
6. http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/SessionLaws/Acts/2006/Chapter58
7. Higher Medicare taxes, and fees on the healthcare industry: http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2010/0321/Health-care-reform-bill-101-Who-will-pay-for-reform; Also, see CBO letter to Sen. Sessions: http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/110xx/doc11005/01-22-HI_Fund.pdf; Also Americans for tax Reform: http://www.atr.org/obamacare-numbers-a4664
8. The ACA cuts Medicare by $575 billion, sets arbitrary caps, and appoints a 15-member board which can further cut Medicare without congressional oversight or approval. http://hayworth.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=86&parentid=6&sectiontree=6,86&itemid=285
9. http://healthcare-coalition.org/ObamaCare%20Primer.pdf
10. The passage of the ACA extends Medicaid to all people up to 133% of the Federal poverty level, beginning in 2014 http://www.usich.gov/funding_programs/programs/medicaid/ and will subsidize some families making up to $64,000/year (400% of FPL)
11. http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2010/March/22/consumers-guide-health-reform.aspx, see also: http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/03/25/health.care.law.basics/index.html
12. http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/SessionLaws/Acts/2006/Chapter58
13. http://healthcare-coalition.org/ObamaCare%20Primer.pdf
14. http://www.rollcall.com/news/44347-1.html
15. Americans for Tax Reform: http://www.atr.org/obamacare-numbers-a4664
16. PPACA passed the Senate on Dec 24, 2009, by a fillibuster-proof vote of 60–39 with all Democrats and Independents voting for, and all Republicans voting against.
17. The PPACA passed theSenate on December 24, 2009, by a filibuster-proof vote of 60–39 with all Democrats and Independents voting for, and all Republicans voting against. It passed the House of Representatives on March 21, 2010, by a vote of 219–212, with 178 Republicans and 34 Democrats voting against the bill. “Defending the Affordable Care Act”. United States Department of Justice. Retrieved 2011-02-24.
18. In fall 2005 the House and Senate each passed health care insurance reform bills. The legislature made a number of changes to Governor Romney’s original proposal, including expanding MassHealth (Medicaid and SCHIP) coverage to low-income children and restoring funding for public health programs.
19. http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act/Title_IX ; See also O’Reilly interview with Rep. Weiner: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,589996,00.html
20. Chapter 58 of the Acts of 2006, An Act Providing Access to Affordable, Quality Accountable Health Care
21. USA Today, “Number of Uninsured Americans Rises to 50.7 Million”, 9/17/2010: “50.7 million, or 16.7%” of the population. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-09-17-uninsured17_ST_N.htm
22. 98.2% of MA residents insured: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/45224333/DHCFP-Publications-and-Analyses-Excel%5B469%5D
23. Kaiser Commission on Key Facts, Nov. 2008, 8.9 million, or 11% of US children uninsured. http://www.kff.org/uninsured/upload/7698_02.pdf
24. Boston Globe: “Romneycare – A Revolution that Basically Worked” 6/26/2011. http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/health/articles/2011/06/26/romneycare__a_revolution_that_basically_worked/?page=2 See also: “Massachusetts has the highest rate of insured children in the county — more than 99 percent.” 6/16/2011 http://itemlive.com/articles/2011/06/16/health/health03.txt See also: MA Dept of HHS report 9/15/2010: “1.7% of children uninsured.” http://www.kff.org/uninsured/upload/7698_02.pdf Also see: Urban Institute report, Aug 2010: 1.7% of MA children uninsured. http://www.kff.org/uninsured/upload/7698_02.pdf
25. World Health Organization ranks the United States #37. http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html Maybe not actually the lowest in the world, but the lowest of all the major industrialized nations. At least we beat Slovenia, Cuba, and New Zealand!
26. An analysis of the Democratic health care overhaul by the Congressional Budget Office shows it would cost $940 billion over a decade and expand insurance to 32 million people. http://www.rollcall.com/news/44347-1.html
27. Congressional Budget Office letter to Harry Reid, 12/19/2009, http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/108xx/doc10868/12-19-Reid_Letter_Managers_Correction_Noted.pdf .   See also: “The Real Cost of ObamaCare” http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=522147
28. “Net cost of health care reform to the state (net of federal reimbursement) is a little more than 1 percent of its entire annual budget. ” MA Governor’s Budget, 2011. http://www.mass.gov/bb/h1/fy11h1/exec_11/hbuddevhc.htm
29. Commonwealth of Virginia v. Sebelius, and State of Florida v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Department of Justice, http://www.justice.gov/healthcare/
30. Sections vetoed by Romney were sections 5, 27, 29, 47, 112, 113, 134 and 137. http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/SessionLaws/Acts/2006/Chapter58
31. Even though President Obama at one point threatened to veto parts of his own plan (http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/obama-healthcare-costs-trillion/2010/05/12/id/358810), in the end, he supported both the House and Senate versions of the bill.
32. The sections vetoed by Governor Romney are annotated in the legislation: http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/SessionLaws/Acts/2006/Chapter58
33. Video – Obama says he’d like to see single-payer health care plan: http://www.breitbart.tv/obama-in-03-id-like-to-see-a-single-payer-health-care-plan/
34. Boston Globe, Nov. 13, 2005 – Differences between the Romney Plan, and House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi’s plan. http://www.boston.com/yourlife/health/other/articles/2005/11/13/healthcare_plans_similarities_differences/
35. AP News and Denver Post, “Obamacare Approval Drops to 35%”, http://www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_17831739?source=rss
36. 2010 Poll by Washington Post and the Kaiser Foundation, 68% support MA Health Care Law. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/WaPoKaiserHarvard_MassPoll_Jan22.pdf See also: Reuters, Huffington Post, MA Health Care Plan Gets High Marks in Poll 3/10/2011: “84 percent of residents are satisfied with the Massachusetts plan.” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/10/massachusetts-health-care_n_834184.html See also: Boston Globe 6/5/2011 – Support For MA Health Care Law Rises, “poll by the Harvard School of Public Health and The Boston Globe found that 63 percent of Massachusetts residents support the 2006 health law.” http://www.boston.com/news/politics/articles/2011/06/05/support_for_massachusetts_universal_health_care_law_rises/?rss_id=Boston.com+–+Top+political+stories See also: 2005 State House News Service poll of 400 voters conducted by Gerry Chervinsky: http://blog.hcfama.org/2005/09/26/new-poll-voters-favor-massact-initiative-62-33/ and Aug 18, 2009 Suffolk University Poll, showing 94% of seniors “satisfied with their coverage.” http://www.suffolk.edu/research/37139.html. Also see Suffolk Univ. Poll 1/14/2010, showing 54% of MA residents support the MA healthcare law. http://www.suffolk.edu/39994.html.
37. New York Post, 12/21/2009, “Obamacare: No Exit” http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/obamacare_no_exit_l9njng7Izk9KYNuzdvOeOP See also, Republican Study Committee Info Alert: Opting Out of ObamaCare – Is it Really an Option? http://rsc.jordan.house.gov/UploadedFiles/RSC_Info_Alert_on_State_Opt_Out__doc.pdf
38. Self evident. I can’t believe you actually looked for the footnote on this one.

Where is the Florida Tea Party now?

I went to a Tea Party one time in Orlando Florida, I believe April 15th 2009. I was pretty underwhelmed. A lot of fringe goof balls. Some local uninformed  people like Bud Heddinger who was a news anchor years ago. Nice guy but just not a source of information.

Florida just had a month where more jobs were created than all of the states combined. Yet where is the love? On a daily basis the ragweed of so called journalists rip on Governor Rick Scott. They lie about what he does and why, each day. The Tea Party is quick to bitch and complain about any politician. They look for their so called perfect candidates. But why do they stand still when a person they elected to do things, does what he said he would do and is being lied about?

To me, until you stand up and defend a good man that has integrity, fights for you on a daily basis...You are a bunch of phonies. Your walk does not match your talk. Patriots? What a joke. Many talk about a revolution in which you will fight to the death. Yet, you will not march in favor of a man who is constitutional. Is doing his best to save this state. You are all full of hot air. You are all a joke when the poop hits the fan. When the heat gets too hot in the kitchen, you are no where to be found.


Rick Scott had a 7 year plan to raise 700,000 jobs here in Florida. He is on pace to attain that in 4 1/2 years. Yet no one says anything. He travels and brings back companies from other countries willing to relocate, or expand to here. He has taken on issues such as a deficit and made great headway in the few months he has been in office.

Why don't you hold rallies to support what Rick Scott is doing. It is just as important as any rally you had before. But that would be inconvenient wouldn't it? I mean after all he is in office. It would be your chance to tell people all of the wonderful things he is trying to get done in Florida. But wait? Do you even know what those things are? I would venture no. That would take some research. He fights everyday for the best interests of me and you and what do we do for him? Nothing. We let him get beat up in the media and lied about. So, where are these so called Florida Tea Party leaders? Waiting for the next election?

People do not count the cost. The cost is great. Many people have actually given their lives for this country. We say how appreciative we are. Yet when a dear person like Rick Scott stands alone basically and tries to fix and do the right thing, these so called self proclaimed Patriots sit at home with their little fake muskets up their butts.

Public School System

I could begin by stating that the Public Schools are listed as one of the 10 planks of Marxism. Well, actually it is listed as one of the ten planks. It is listed as number 10. You might be surprised what the other 9 are.

Most people today can not even tell you what socialism is. You mention Obama's Socialistic Policies, call him a Socialist; and they look at you like you are crazy. This is another prime example of the public school system at work.

I can remember in middle school in the late 1960's being taught that Communism in its pure form is not a bad thing at all. Even then, they were planting in young minds concepts built on propaganda and not on the reality of things.

Definition of SOCIALISM

1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods 

2: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done 

 There you have it. So there is no need to be blind to what is going on. But back to the teachers. Here in Florida the Teachers paid zero into their own retirement. Yep... Zippo. In most states it was 5%. But to hear them tell it, it would destroy their lives to pay that 5%.

 

Due to a weak GOP in the state, it ended up being 3%. The 5% would have fixed some big financial issues within the School System and possibly saved some jobs. The teachers losing jobs, if they bothered to get real information, other than Union Propaganda, would know that their greediness is costing fellow teachers their jobs. Here is Florida, Governor Scott trimmed 615 million in GOP and Democratic projects to try and save these people's jobs. Many created by stimulus money that is now gone.

If it were up to me, the teachers would have to make investments just like everyone else. Government jobs are not like private sector jobs. In the private sector, wage and retirement packages are based off of one thing. Profit and the ability to pay for itself. There are market values. It has its own way of working.

But in the Government jobs, it is all from revenue from the tax payer themselves. Many who do not have children in schools. Many who pay private tuition's for their own children and are thus paying twice. Then there are the people who can not or never will have children. Why should their tax dollars go into the school system? It should not.

So here we are. A non profit, all tax driven education system that tells our children how bad America is. How greedy the Capitalists are. And we need pay these teachers on top of a good salary, benefits and now a free ride in retirement?

Why are we doing this? It makes very little sense. Yet we have no choice. Talk about being unconstitutional...taxation without representation.

Saying no to Sarah Palin means what?

First we had to deal with the Ron Paul followers that every time you said thanks, but no thanks, they called you a Neocon. It was their little way of saying if you do not like Ron Paul there is something wrong with you. Their demeanor and approach was that of a religious cultist. Trained to think one way regardless of the facts. Unable to hold a debate because when the obvious weaknesses of Ron Paul are explained they act like little children. Hold their hands over their ears and keep screaming Neocon. That is all they have.

Well we have come full cycle with the Palin crowd. If you do not like her, somehow that means your "boy" is Obama. How dare you! I do not know about you, but when I look for someone Presidential, I have my ideas of what that is. I do not want an average Joe that it would be comfortable to have a cup of coffee with.

I do not want someone who feels compelled to stand up all the time and say what I would say if given a venue to do so. To me that is just a lower form of leadership. Instead of attacking, I need in depth explanations of what the issues are. Why what is going on now does work. What could be done, and how that can take place. Also why that would work.

That is a major deal breaker for me with Sarah Palin. I used to listen and always come away disappointed. I do not care how a person looks. I do not care how well they point out the things going on, that we may all be upset about; but have little ability to speak out in our little venues. Problem solving is the Oil that lubricates the engine of life in a Government. The vinegar, which is sour taste in your mouth has purposes. However those purposes mean very little unless you know it also brings a long an answer. Ability to answer and explain.

I understand why Sarah quit her position of Governor of Alaska. But how many people will understand that? She took on a responsibility. Took an oath to the people of her state, and she chose to bail on that job. Just because of that, people will point to her and say you quit. How can I trust you? Sarah chooses the polarizing approach in her speeches. That will lead to several attacks against her, and in a general election you can not win. It is not enough to get the Tea Party vote. You need the middle of the road, the blue dog democrats and she will not get that. To top that off she plays this tantalizing approach on whether or not she will even run. She has been campaigning since she left the Governors mansion. Who is she kidding? I do not need a game player.

Where is the meat of Sarah Palin?
For me, the question about someone that may wish to be the next President is simple. Where is the meat? Where is not only your ability to solve a problem, but your ability to convey that to the people. We need more than a back yard mechanic that can replace parts. We need someone that can fine tune the engine. Take it apart, and put it all back together as they explain to the owner why and how. Wouldn't that make you feel comfortable? Confident? It does me.

I once had a math teacher that understood the basic functions of math. However her ability to convey it was limited. One of the great things about Ronald Reagan was his ability to communicate what he was talking about. Sarah Palin does not leave me feeling like she understands more than the basics of a back yard mechanic. That worries me if the issues are more than just changing parts.

The truth of the matter is America's economy and deficit spending may already be past the point of no return. This is not a normal election in 2012. The deficit, and loss of jobs is bringing America to its' knees. Doesn't that scare you? It is very ignorant to say that America has always overcome, and it will again. So did all of the other countries, until they did fall.

Problem solvers are not the popular people in life because they do the things needed  to resolve things. Rick Scott is facing that in Florida. Mitt Romney had that in Massachusetts. The results were there in very adverse conditions. I listen to Mitt Romney explain why something doesn't work. What he believes will work. Then he tells me why it will.  All the time he is putting that engine back together. I feel safe and I feel confident. I do in no way feel that when I listen to Sarah Palin. My guy did not quit and my guy excelled in adverse conditions. He wrote a book on how to fix things while she was off filming a reality show. C'mon! So just because I do not want Sarah Palin near the white house does not make her a bad person. It just means in a time when we need exceptional, there is no room for popularity contests that lead to error by the people in a choice. We have that right now.

Who Started the Housing Crisis?

There were laws introduced to force banks to make risky loans which has greatly backfired on America. Someone is to blame but who? Take a look here below 4/6/1996

This is very clear. Clinton Administration. Now take a look at how the Democrats react when they are challenged and warned about an imminent disaster:

There it is, very obvious and next it shows Obama in bed with them too:

shorter version is here:

You might say, why didnt President Bush do something? Well he did, several times:

 this is interesting too... who does Fanny Mae support?

The Truth is simple. It was one side in this case. Any questions?

At what Point will we be Honest?

One of the more natural weak aspects of humans is that we are swayed by appearance in today's political world. One of the first factors is "do they have the look"? They have done many studies and concluded that better looking people, with similar work habits and abilities will usually go much further in their careers than an average to homely looking person. It may seem shallow, but it is true.

Robert Bork, by his abilities could have been perhaps the greatest Supreme Court Judge in History. But his looks were so odd that the procedure in choosing him was hampered by his weird looks. The Democrats had the numbers, but America tended to shy away from him because of his looks and demeanor. Had he looked handsome and been a little more "charming", it would have been much harder for the Democrats to stop his nomination. The Package was great inside, but people did not look at that, They could not get past the exterior, which made the slander by the Democrats more believable to the public. They did not care, and America lost out.

In today's society, people are put down mentally if they are overweight, not attractive. The perception is that they are lazy, perhaps less intelligent. Just not as comforting to have around in important positions as a handsome man or beautiful woman.

Only you can decide how deep your rules are for what attracts you. For me it is the track records of people. In doing that you need to take into consideration the circumstances. For example if an athlete runs a very fast sprint time such as in the 40 yard dash. 4.5 seconds is a very good time in the distance. Say this person has continually run a 4.3 dash. Their reputation is of a speed burner. But one week they run a 4.55 and in another competition a few weeks after that they run a 4.5...the consensus all of a sudden is that the athlete is not a 4.3 40 yard dash runner.

However if they took the time to look at what was going on, they would see that it had rained both times, making the track slippery, and thus impeding the runner.

America is a sinking ship. The debt spending is beyond anyone's comprehension. Unemployment is at highs like the great depression. People are losing their homes at all time records. The values are plummeting. Each day it gets worse and worse. It is obvious this is President Obama's economy. Yet all he does is blame someone else. That is not leadership.

The Tea Party marches on. They stand up for America. Their words are to return America back to a country that adheres to the Constitution, which is written to guide it in its daily workings. How it is supposed to be governed. Yet, they do not pay attention to the fact that the runner had to run in adverse conditions. They just proclaim that that candidate is not speed burner they were once proclaimed to be. There is a spot on the runners record, but are not honest enough to see why. They watch everyone like a hawk and when something happens that they do not understand the circumstances, they bury them. Everyone is a Rino.

It gets back to how everything appears on the outside, without realizing what is really going on in the real arenas' and how those arenas are run. They ignore due process, and even understanding it..the pursuit goes on for the eternal perfect beauty.


I support Mitt Romney because against a veto proof legislature he balanced a budget by cutting programs and not raising any taxes.

I support him because he took a state 50th in unemployment to 11th in one term.


I support him because he has always been against Federal Socialized Medicine, and is the first Candidate to say that he will give waivers to all 50 states until ObamaCare can be repealed in the House and Senate.

I support him because he is against Cap and Trade legislation, stating it would be an economic disaster.

I support his mandates as the history tells us the founding fathers used them too. Read Here about the truth.

I support him because he is for drilling in America

I support him because he has a plan to fix the economy.Check it out

I support him because he is strong against Illegal immigration (check it out)

I support him because he fought hard as a pro life Governor( check out his vetoes)

I support him for his Tax record (check it out)


A close look shows a very conservative man who happens to be a great problem solver that is being smeared by the good old boys.

I support him on his desire to help his state with bad Health Care issues. Some of the things he vetoed that would have made it even better were vetoed back and left in. Here are the pros and cons by Mike Sage:

First of all, most people don't know that the MA health care solution wasn't something the government just sat around and dreamed up as an ideal health care plan. It was essentially an emergency solution to a funding shortfall caused by the federal government pulling $384 million out of the MA health care budget.

Drastic measures had to be taken, compromises had to be made on both sides of the political spectrum, and it was a matter of making the best of a bad situation. That being said, here are the pros and cons of the MA plan, as I see them:

Pros:

* It did address the $384 million health care funding shortfall in 2005.

* It did make MA the top state in the nation for percentage of insured citizens.

* It did promote private health insurance solutions, a private sector intiative.
* It did encourage the ability to shop between insurance providers for the best deals.

* Whatever penalties and fees were attached were relatively low.

* A 2010 poll showed that 67% of MA residents were satisfied with it.

* It's never been ruled unconstitutional (versus Obamacare, which has been ruled unconstitutional by two federal appeals judges.)

* It did not involve any sort of a government "takeover" of any part of the healthcare or insurance industries.

* It was designed to be revenue neutral, requiring no taxes be raised.

Cons:

* It included tax penalties for failing to obtain an insurance plan. Massachusetts tax filers who failed to enroll in a health insurance plan which was deemed affordable for them lost the $219 personal exemption on their income tax, a provision that Romney vetoed, but was overridden on.

* It gave too much authority to the Commonwealth Health Insurance Connector Authority, also known as the Health Connector.

* It provides free health care insurance for residents earning less than 150% of the federal poverty level

* The law also partially-subsidizes health care insurance for those earning up to 300% of the federal poverty level.

Many changes were made to the MA health care reform act after Mitt Romney left office. In October 2006, January 2007, and November 2007, bills were enacted that amended and made technical corrections to the statute (Chapters 324 and 450 of the Acts of 2006, and chapter 205 of the Acts of 2007).

Wow! Common sense and a little truth go a long way to clear up misconceptions.

Would a Pro Abortion Governor Do this?

"To the Honorable Senate and House of Representatives: "... To those who believe that life begins at conception, the morning-after pill can destroy the human life that was created at the moment of fertilization. "Furthermore, this legislation would make the morning-after pill available to young girls without any restrictions on age... this bill undermines the state's parental consent laws and represents a departure from the public consensus that minor children should not act without parental involvement in these matters." Boston Globe - A letter to legislators on the veto (July 26, 2005) "Romney announced that he would oppose any legislation that would allow for the creation of new human embryos for scientific experiments... "emotional framing of the [embryonic-stem-cell-research] debate is disingenuous for a few reasons, the first being that the governor has presented a compromise position: In a non-ideal (from the pro-life vantage point) but pragmatic compromise move, Romney has decided to support experimentation on surplus frozen embryos from in-vitro fertilization procedures. But proponents of embryonic-stem-cell research refuse to meet him there. They want it all. "As Romney put it in a press conference on Thursday, ''All of the rhetoric has been, 'We are throwing away embryos - surplus embryos - that could be used for stem-cell research and that makes no sense.'... And now, now that I've said, 'Ok, I support that,' now [the other side says], 'No, that's insufficient. How could you possibly limit it to that?' Well, that's what they've been asking for.'' "In other words, Romney has called their bluff... "Romney has started out of the gates playing it straight. ''I am in favor of stem-cell research. I am not in favor of creating new human embryos through cloning,'' he told the press on Thursday. Whether honesty will be enough to get him a coalition that will support a ban on cloning or sustain a veto of the Harvard wish list remains to be seen. The implications of failure, however, are crystal clear." National Review - Romney vs. Harvard (Feb. 11, 2005)

Glenn and Helen Show - Jan 10, 2007 Romney reviews abortion record the week he left office  (1 minute) Romney  2008 Mitt Romney's Record on Abortion Gives judicial criteria, states record What he will fight for (is in favor of)

"The state Department of Public Health has determined that Catholic and other privately-run hospitals in Massachusetts can opt out of giving the morning-after pill to rape victims because of religious or moral objections, despite a new law that requires all hospitals who treat such victims to provide them with emergency contraception. "The new law, which was passed overwhelmingly by the Legislature this summer over the objections of Governor Mitt Romney, takes effect next week... " ''We're very disappointed that the Romney administration is not honoring the intent of the Legislature, who voted overwhelmingly to protect the health of rape victims," said Melissa Kogut, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts... "The Department of Public Health decision is welcome news for Catholic hospitals who do not provide emergency contraception and feared that the new law would make them do so. (In 2004, NARAL surveyed the 71 hospitals in Massachusetts with emergency rooms and found that one in six did not offer emergency contraception to rape victims. Among the nine Catholic hospitals included in the survey, NARAL found that six did not offer it.) "Judy Mackey, a spokeswoman for Saint Vincent Hospital in Worcester, which does not offer the morning-after pill, said it would have been difficult for the hospital to navigate between state law and Catholic tenets." Boston Globe - Private hospitals exempt on pill law (Dec 7, 2005) “Governor Mitt Romney said yesterday that he will reject the Legislature's bill supporting stem cell research, urging lawmakers to rewrite the measure to prohibit scientists from cloning and to remove a passage that redefines when life begins. “Romney had said previously that he planned to veto the bill, but for now he has decided to return the measure to the Legislature with four amendments... “The move is the latest twist in a battle between Romney and the Legislature over the future of stem cell research in the state. The governor has echoed the hopes of many that stem cell research may one day find treatments for diseases, and he shares the conviction that the research is important to the state, with its heavy concentration of scientists and the biotechnology industry. But the governor has split with a large majority in the Legislature over cloning human cells, something Harvard scientists are planning to do. “Although the Legislature passed the measure by a veto-proof margin, the amendments keep the issue alive and shine a light on what the governor believes are other flaws in the bill, particularly its assertion that life does not begin until an embryo is implanted in a uterus... “In a letter outlining his position, to be delivered to lawmakers today, the governor said the bill would change a 1974 law defining an unborn child as ''the individual human life in existence and developing from fertilization until birth." “In the letter, the governor calls this ''a matter of profound moral and ethical consequence," adding that it ''implicates a much broader array of issues than the relatively discrete question of whether stem cell research should be permitted." ” Boston Globe - Romney urges changes to stem cell bill, Adds amendment to prohibit cloning - May 12, 2005 “Mitt Romney can probably hear his echo when he gathers those who are standing with him on this fight, but that's not stopping him from trying. Instead of an outright veto, on Thursday morning Romney sent back to the statehouse his edits on a bill that would legalize embryonic-stem-cell research and cloning in Massaschusetts. That the bill greenlights experimentation on human embryos — and allows for their creation for this purpose — is devastating enough. But where the legislation gets even worse is in the finer print, where the legislature seeks to change the state's definition of human life. “Since 1974, an "unborn child" in Massachusetts has been "the individual human life in existence and developing from fertilization until birth." Barring a Romney victory on this point, the legislature is poised to change the law to define human life as beginning at the "implantation of the embryo in the uterus." In a letter sent to the legislature this morning, Romney calls this statutory change "completely unnecessary." ... “For legislators who reluctantly signed onto the "therapeutic" cloning go-ahead, influenced by the emotional testimony on its behalf calling the legislation a panacea ("It's about saving lives and helping children."), that's an uncomfortable position — changing the definition of life, on top of everything else. So Romney, sending the bill back now, is giving them another chance to do a little clean-up. “Romney's protests against the bill — in the form of four proposed amendments — otherwise represent his consistent opposition to the cloning efforts in Massachusetts. For instance, in a guaranteed no-go amendment, Romney proposes to ban cloning, striking too much at the heart of the bill to have any mileage, unfortunately. But you can't blame the man for trying. His two other amendments would hold back prospects for “human embryo farming” by prohibiting embryos from being fertilized for research purposes, and limit the compensation women would get from "donating" eggs for research in an attempt to avoid exploitation (women’s selling their eggs as a viable income source)... “To anyone whose been watching the debate, however, Romney has proven to be one of the more clear-thinking and honest pols on this heated topic: Even if his position hasn't been ideal, he has made a valiant effort and shed some light on the opposition's endgame. “Especially for those concerned with the advancement of a cause — protecting the dignity of human life — Romney's actions deserve to be looked at outside of the 2008 periscope occasionally. Romney has engaged himself in taking on human cloning. And though the battle's all but lost in the Bay State at this point, legislatively, pro-lifers who also happen to be cynics or are otherwise ticked off at Romney (for legitimate reasons in some cases, such as his position on frozen embryos or his past remarks on abortion), should consider that he is currently fighting an uphill battle while basically carrying their banner. And he is doing so articulately, with a national audience paying attention (which on stem-cells and cloning, are no small things).” National Review - The Meaning of Life - May 12, 2005 "Besides Romney’s veto of the “emergency contraception bill”, Sturgis said he fought well against embryonic stem-cell research/human cloning, and had tried to veto the legislature’s bill, offering amendments that among other things would have protected the definition of life as beginning at conception." “I certainly could not have written the amendments better than that myself.” (Marie Sturgis, executive director of Massachusetts Citizens for Life) Life Site News - The Romney Report - May 7, 2007 “BOSTON, May 11 - Hoping to make a recently passed bill on stem cell research more restrictive, Gov. Mitt Romney said Wednesday that he would ask the legislature to amend the bill by changing the definition of when life begins and by excluding a type of embryonic stem cell research that he opposes. “The governor said in an interview that rather than veto the bill immediately, he would ask the legislature on Thursday to adopt four amendments. The legislature approved the bill overwhelmingly, by votes of 119 to 38 in the House and 34 to 2 in the Senate, enough to override a veto. “One of Mr. Romney's amendments, seeking to ban the creation of embryos specifically for research, is an argument that he has been making for months... “The other three are new proposals. One would undo the legislature's definition of when life begins... “"To change the definition of when life begins is a very significant moral and ethical change," Mr. Romney said... “Another proposal involves tightening what the governor says is a loophole in the bill's language.” New York Times - New Limits Are Proposed for Research on Stem Cells - May 12, 2005 "Gov. Mitt Romney vetoed a bill Friday that would expand embryonic stem cell research in Massachusetts, but the measure has more than enough support in the Legislature to override the governor's veto. "Romney supports research using adult stem cells or leftover frozen embryos from fertility clinics. But he opposes the legislation because it would also allow therapeutic cloning, in which scientists create a cloned embryo to harvest stem cells in hopes of using them to treat and cure disease. "Critics have said the practice amounts to creating human life only to destroy it. " ''It is wrong to allow science to take an assembly line approach to the production of human embryos, the creation of which will be rooted in experimentation and destruction,'' Romney said in a letter to lawmakers explaining the veto. "The Republican governor had appealed to the Democrat-controlled Legislature to amend its original bill and ban the cloning measure. He also urged lawmakers to include language defining the beginning of life as the moment of conception, banning the production of human embryos for other research purposes, and limiting compensation to women who donate their eggs... "Stem cell research has become an issue nationally as well, as a bill lifting limits on stem cell research makes its way through Congress. "The House approved the bill, which does not allow therapeutic cloning, by a 238-194 vote on Tuesday, and the Senate is expected to take it up. President Bush has promised a veto. " ''What our Legislature has done goes well beyond what was done in Washington,'' Romney said." Fox News - Mass. Governor Vetoes Stem-Cell Bill (May 27, 2005) "A number of conservatives also have cheered him on in his war with the state legislature over embryonic-stem-cell research, even though there are differences between his position and the one held by most pro-lifers. The issue first came up last fall, when Democrats offered a bill to permit the cloning of human embryos for scientific research. At a meeting in the governor's office, Harvard professor Douglas Melton described the science. ''I felt uncomfortable,'' says Romney. ''I thought of Brave New World or The Matrix, with hundreds of thousands of little lives being made and then being crushed.'' So Romney announced that he would not support a law that allowed the creation of human life for the purpose of destroying it. He used funds from his campaign account to make his case in radio ads. He did this even though his wife suffers from multiple sclerosis and arguably would benefit from the most aggressive stem-cell research conceivable." National Review - Manitee Mitt (Dec 14, 2005) "Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, a 2008 Republican presidential hopeful, said Thursday his administration's new restrictions on stem cell research are aimed at heading off an ''Orwellian'' future. "The state's Department of Public Health this week issued regulations banning the creation of embryos for research purposes." Newsmax - Mitt Romney Warns of 'Orwellian' Stem Cell Research (Aug. 31, 2006) "The next governor will also face pressure to address a Romney administration program that funnels about $800,000 annually into abstinence-only sex education lessons in public schools." Boston Globe - For new governor, divisive issues loom Governor Romney is also an advocate of parental control over what their children are taught in school sex education and has emphasized that in the press: "Governor Mitt Romney, an opponent of same-sex marriage, said: ''Schools under our parental-notification law are required to inform parents . . . of matters relating to human sexuality that may be taught in the classroom and to allow that child to be out of the classroom for that period of the education.'' " Boston Globe - Arrested father had point to make, Disputed school's lesson on diversity - Apr 29, 2005 Note: Governor Romney passed a medical plan that reduces the number of people who receive state funded abortions. His views, including his view of always being against funding of abortions, are listed in the next section (History of views section). Contrary to blogs and campaign claims, he did not fund abortions. His record regarding funding is noted below.

Abortion Funding: With the endless ability to invent and spread rumors, or inaccurately skewed or false stories, there is no way to effectively address every misleading or inaccurate claim. Hopefully most are addressed through the presentation of well documented, accurate information with links to an abundance of original sources, and backed by the assertions of prominent, trustworthy individuals, as done here. However, one inaccurate and misleading claim not addressed above that deserves to be addressed, since many individuals have tried to promote it and it got widespread attention when presidential candidates picked up on it and repeated it, is the following:

Romney Abortion funding record

“The Annenberg Foundation's nonpartisan FactCheck.org just delivered a powerful rebuke to the basic honesty of a McCain mailer used in South Carolina (and defended by Sen. McCain after reporters called it to his attention). “In particular, FactCheck.org called McCain's assertion that Mitt Romney "provided" taxpayer-funded abortions "simply false." “ "Romney never pushed for taxpayer funding for abortions. The state law he signed provided greatly expanded state-subsidized health insurance for low-income residents," Factcheck.org explained. An independent body -- the Commonwealth Connector -- not Romney, decided that abortions would be covered (a move required by two Massachusetts state supreme court rulings).” Townhall.com - article by Maggie Gallagher - Jan 16, 2008 ["Maggie Gallagher is president of the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy (www.iMAPP.org), whose motto is "strengthening marriage for a new generation" and whose unique mission is research and public education on ways that law and public policy can strengthen marriage as a social institution." - marriagedebate.com] So what is the truth of what Gov. Romney did with respect to taxpayer funding of abortions? Romney speaks for himself in response to brazen attacks on the subject by another presidential candidate: “The Massachusetts Citizens for Life just several months ago brought me in and gave me an award for my public leadership on the basis of being pro-life. So the best way you can learn about someone is not by asking their opponent, but ask them, “What do you believe, and what’s your view?” And I am pro-life. And virtually every part of that ad is inaccurate. “I’m pro-life. My positions are pro-life. The idea that, for instance, I’ve been in favor of taxpayer funding of abortion; that’s wrong. I oppose taxpayer funding of abortion. In our state we passed a medical plan that reduces the number of people who received state funding for abortion. So the ad is just completely wrong.” NY Times - Transcript of The Republicans Candidate Debate - Aug 5, 2007

HISTORY OF PRO-CHOICE AND PRO-LIFE VIEWS:

He had vexed the local press with his more conservative views, and as one magazine explained, in that liberal state where democrats are estimated to outnumber republicans by nearly four to one, “There's a complicated dance Republicans [usually] must do to be competitive in Massachusetts... they must never vex the editorialists at the Boston Globe by violating the most sacred liberal taboos, especially the [Globe's] prohibition against nonliberal stands on abortion”. [7] It was in that environment, where he answered attacks and questions in the 1994 and 2002 races, particularly in his answer to a 1994 debate question [8], in which he is often quoted by smear artists. Their representation that he believed in abortion, or has no belief, but just flips and flops, is a mischaracterization that many leading conservatives and evangelicals have refuted. [9] Efforts to mischaracterize him include leaving out relevant parts to quotes, not providing links to full quotes, and excluding pertinent information such as what follows: In the 1994 senate race, he came out and said he was against funding for abortion, "except in cases of rape, incest or threat to the mother's health." And he received "the Massachusetts Citizens for Life endorsement because he supported parental-consent laws, opposed taxpayer-funded abortion or mandatory abortion coverage under a national health insurance plan and was against the Freedom of Choice Act that would have codified Roe". [10] In his 2002 race, when the legality of partial-birth abortions were being considered, Mitt Romney came out in opposition to those being legal. [11] He also differed from his democrat challenger for governor who "proposed changing state law to let 16-year-old girls end their pregnancies without parental consent" by stating he would veto such a bill. In fact, "none of the major pro-abortion groups would have anything to do with him." [12] What he did say, in a democratic state where most voters wanted the ability to have abortion preserved, was that he would not try to change their abortion laws, which promise he kept. [13]  In fact, his official campaign platform of what he pledged to do with regards to abortion stated "As governor, Mitt Romney would protect the current pro-choice status quo in Massachusetts. No law would change." [14] Several times he stated that in terms that he will respect, protect or preserve a woman's right to choose, and he expressed the pro-choice viewpoint that people should be able to make their own choice, even in his platform. But he "promised that if elected, I'd call a truce — a moratorium, if you will,... I vowed to veto any legislation that sought to change the existing rules." [15] A pro-life advocate who had spent the last few years directing two programs for a nonprofit pro-life organization stated: “Romney's pledge not to change abortion law was absolutely brilliant. The political realities of Massachusetts make pro-life policy victories virtually impossible in the heavily Democratic legislature. By refusing to change abortion laws, Romney launched a strategic effort to keep the commonwealth from further liberalizing abortion policy, including the age of parental consent proposal.” [16] The California Republican Party Chairman described Romney's approach this way: he has the ability to disagree without being disagreeable. [17] Because of that approach and his personal views against abortion, in 2005, a former campaign staffer said he thought Romney was faking a pro-choice stance but was pro-life. [18] Romney disagreed. [19] Although when he ran as governor in 2002 he again indicated he did not want to be known as pro-choice [20] (as one who described himself as personally pro-life) [20b], he later acknowledged that his position as a candidate was effectively pro-choice, and that he was wrong in taking that position. [21] Although when campaigning to the pro-choice electorate he reiterated his commitment to not to take away their abortion-rights, his position was moderately pro-choice, and he was viewed as a social moderate. [22] And he did want to hold the line on social limits as his platform indicated and his subsequent actions as governor demonstrated. After all, prior to being elected governor, he publicly stated that although abortion is a choice, it is the wrong choice. [23] As Governor, when new pro-abortion laws came along, which would result in or encourage more abortions, he opposed them. [24]  He backed up his pledge to veto any effort to expand access to RU-486, the abortion pill, with the even stronger action of vetoing a bill expanding the use of a morning-after pill. [25] He also created and funded a program to encourage abstinence before marriage, which could effectively reduce abortions. [26] And when he encountered the cheapening of life and the encouraging of funding for abortions to aid stem cell research, he thought seriously on the matter, and his views about abortion deepened, resulting in consistent pro-life actions on stem cell research. [27] And so he was the first republican governor who had served in a liberal state in which he had to deal with both human cloning and court-imposed same-sex marriage, and yet he has a solid, pro-life, conservative record. There was no flipping, unless one views his deepening conservative views as a flip, which were more moderate than extreme in the amount of shift, and there was certainly no flop! [28] (The sum-total of his shift was saying he personally opposed abortion and that it should have restrictions, but be safe and legal, in 1994, to fighting the expansion of the use of abortion throughout his term in office in 2003-7 and taking solid pro-life positions. As a director at a pro-life non-profit organization stated, he went from being a mildly pro-choice senate candidate to a firmly pro-life governor-- see article in link for reference [16])

FOOTNOTES:

» Full reference material of quotes with links

PRO-LIFE LEADERS STATEMENTS:

Dr. John Willke— • President of Life Issues Institute • Founder, 22 year President- International Right to Life Federation, • Co-founder, 10 year (past) President- National Right to Life Committee "The doctor known as the founder of the pro-life movement has endorsed former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney in his bid for the Republican presidential nomination... " “Unlike other candidates who only speak to the importance of confronting the major social issues of the day, Governor Romney has a record of action in defending life,” Dr. Willke said. “Every decision he made as governor was on the side of life. I know he will be the strong pro-life president we need in the White House, Governor Romney is the only candidate who can lead our pro-life and pro-family conservative movement to victory in 2008.”... "Dr. Willke, helped found the National Right To Life Committee and served for 10 years as its president. Dr. Willke serves as president of the Life Issues Institute, Inc., and president of the International Right to Life Federation. "Dr. Willke a physician, had a daily radio program that was carried on over 300 radio stations for 20 years. His one-minute radio comments, entitled "Life Jewels," were carried on over 750 stations in English and 300 more in Spanish. He has written eleven books, and is a lecturer and a frequent television and radio show guest. His works have been published in 32 languages, and he and his wife Barbara have lectured in 76 countries." Newsmax - Oct 22, 2007 (See also the following link for his credentials) http://www.lifeissues.org/willke.html National Right to Life Political Action Committee (PAC) statement: "National Right to Life also appreciates the pro-life position taken in this presidential campaign by former governor Mitt Romney." http://www.nrlpac.org/ - April 2008 (archived page — data on original link expired) Marie Sturgis— Executive Director of Massachusetts Citizens for Life "It’s a view echoed by Marie Sturgis, executive director of Massachusetts Citizens for Life, who says, “Having Governor Romney in the corner office for the last four years has been one of the strongest assets the pro-life movement has had in Massachusetts. His actions concerning life issues have been consistent and he has been helpful down the line for us in the Bay State.” " National Review - Jan 10, 2007 Kris Mineau— President of Massachusetts Family Institute "Mineau is among those Massachusetts social conservatives who are grateful to have had Romney in the statehouse... “For the four years of his administration, Governor Romney provided strong leadership on key conservative social issues — whether it was politically expedient to do so or not.” He tells National Review Online, “I believe Mitt Romney has done an excellent job in defending traditional family values in Massachusetts despite an extremely hostile legislature and judiciary, not to mention an attorney general and secretary of state who both opposed everything the governor stood for.” ... "Mineau is among the signatories of a letter expected to be released on Thursday by a coalition of “organizations dedicated to fighting for the pro-family agenda in Massachusetts.” ... The letter, which organizers provided NRO with drafts of Wednesday night, defends the governor’s record and praises his staff for their commitment to affirming a culture of life, protecting traditional marriage, and defending religious liberty. Among those signing the letter are Harvard University law professor Mary Ann Glendon (who also serves as the president of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences in Rome)." National Review - Jan 10, 2007 " “On marriage and cloning, he has provided aggressive leadership as a positive, pro-family governor,” says Kris Mineau of the Massachusetts Family Institute." National Review - Dec 14, 2005 • Thomas A. Shields— Chairman, Coalition for Family and Marriage • James Morgan— President, Institute for Family Development • Joseph Reilly— President, Massachusetts Citizens for Life • Rita Covelle— President, Morality in Media Massachusetts • Kris Mineau— President of Massachusetts Family Institute • Other Massachusetts pro life leaders An Open Letter Regarding Governor Mitt Romney (January 11, 2007): “As you know, Mitt Romney became the governor of our state in 2003. Since that time, we have worked closely with him... “Some press accounts and bloggers have described Governor Romney in terms we neither have observed nor can we accept. To the contrary, we, who have been fighting here for the values you also hold, are indebted to him and his responsive staff in demonstrating solid social conservative credentials by undertaking the following actions here in Massachusetts: “Staunchly defended traditional marriage. ... “Fought for abstinence education. In 2006, under Governor Romney's leadership, Massachusetts' public schools began to offer a classroom program on abstinence from the faith-based Boston group Healthy Futures to middle school students. Promoting the program, Governor Romney stated, "I've never had anyone complain to me that their kids are not learning enough about sex in school. However, a number of people have asked me why it is that we do not speak more about abstinence as a safe and preventative health practice." “Affirmed the culture of life. Governor Romney has vetoed bills to provide access to the so-called "morning-after pill," which is an abortifacient, as well as a bill providing for expansive, embryo-destroying stem cell research. He vetoed the latter bill in 2005 because he could not "in good conscience allow this bill to become law." ... “All of this may explain why John J. Miller, the national political reporter of National Review, has written that "a good case can be made that Romney has fought harder for social conservatives than any other governor in America, and it is difficult to imagine his doing so in a more daunting political environment." “We are aware of the 1994 comments of Senate candidate Romney, which have been the subject of much recent discussion... they do not dovetail with the actions of Governor Romney from 2003 until now - and those actions have positively and demonstrably impacted the social climate of Massachusetts. “Since well before 2003, we have been laboring in the trenches of Massachusetts, fighting for the family values you and we share. It is difficult work indeed - not for the faint of heart. In this challenging environment, Governor Romney has proven that he shares our values, as well as our determination to protect them. “For four years, Governor Romney has been right there beside us, providing leadership on key issues - whether it was politically expedient to do so or not. He has stood on principle, and we have benefited greatly from having him with us. “It is clear that Governor Romney has learned much since 1994 - to the benefit of our movement and our Commonwealth. In fact, the entire nation has benefited from his socially conservative, pro-family actions in office. As we explained earlier, his leadership on the marriage issue helped prevent our nation from being plunged into even worse legal turmoil following the court decision that forced "gay marriage" upon our Commonwealth. “For that our country ought to be thankful. We certainly are.” An Open Letter Regarding Governor Mitt Romney - Jan 11, 2007 (For more info on the letter, read previous entry by clicking here) (For a prominent Massachusetts pro-life leader's statement on Romney, who did not sign the letter, click here) James C. Dobson— Chairman of Focus on the Family "Later in the day [Tuesday, February 5, 2008], Dobson told talk-show host Dennis Prager that he would vote for Romney if the former Massachusetts governor won the GOP nomination" Newsmax - Feb 6, 2008 (archived page — original link expired) "That commitment to not cast a ballot for someone who would end preborn life has not wobbled one whit: certainly not in Dr. Dobson’s indication he could vote for either Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee, the two candidates who unapologetically championed the pro-life cause" (Citizen Link, a website run by Focus on the Family) Citizen Link - Apr 10, 2008 (archived page — original link expired) » For more quotes from James Dobson, click here Michael Novak— Theologian, author, and former U.S. ambassador “More and more this year, among the other pro-life candidates, I have been attracted by Mitt Romney’s good and cheerful disposition, level-headedness, and unruffable temperament (if there is such an adjective)... The discipline he has shown in his career tells me that he is tough-minded... “I really admire several other Republican candidates for certain special qualities of their own... But I have gradually focused in on Mitt Romney as best representing what I would like to see in a President during the next four years... “I have watched Mitt Romney’s steadiness under fire, and I endorse it.” Townhall - Michael Novak - Dec 17, 2007 "Michael Novak received the Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion (a million-dollar purse awarded at Buckingham Palace) in 1994, and delivered the Templeton address in Westminster Abbey." He has received many other awards. "Theologian, author, and former U.S. ambassador, Michael Novak currently holds the George Frederick Jewett Chair in Religion and Public Policy at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C." "His writings have appeared in every major Western language, and in Bengali, Korean and Japanese... Mr. Novak has written some 25 influential books in the philosophy and theology of culture". Mr. Novak is a highly respected Catholic. http://www.michaelnovak.net/Module/Site/Biography.aspx (For more statements by conservative and religious pro-life leaders, click here)