The Boston Globe--Your source of unfounded/fabricated Romney news

I apologize for trashing the Boston Globe so much lately, but really . . . they're bringing it upon themselves by writing headlines and articles like this: "Before different crowds, Romney offers different words on judges".

This time, even Hotline On Call picked up the headline and wrote this with a link to the story:

Gov. Mitt Romney praises judges while in MA; outside the state...eh...he says something a little different

It appears that Hotline's staff doesn't appear that they read the article though--Romney's comments were IN Massachussetts--not out of state.

Back to the Globe now . . .

BOSTON --Anyone who has listened closely to Gov. Mitt Romney in recent years has heard him rail against the Supreme Judicial Court and the "activist judges" . . . [next comes one of my favorite "unbiased" sentences]. Romney did so as recently as last weekend, when the potential 2008 presidential candidate interrupted his national travels to return to Boston for a televised religious gathering that condemned the concept of gay marriage.

Essentially, the article's conclusion hinges on kindergarten logic . . . Romney, to be consistent, must hate all judges since he criticized the 4 of 7 justices on the MA Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) that acted in an activist way by ruling that Gay Marriage is a constitutional right in MA.

So, according to their logic, since Romney criticized that ruling (as he should have and will continue to do), the Globe now labels him a hypocrite for praising his own appointee, Phillip Rapoza, for Cheif Justice of the MA APPELATE court (not even same court!)

Amid an elaborate ceremony in the Statehouse to commemorate the appointment of Phillip Rapoza as chief justice of the Massachusetts Appeals Court, the governor showed no contempt for the Supreme Judicial Court or its leader, Chief Justice Margaret Marshall, who sat with him on the dais.

To my knowledged, Romney has never personally attacked Marshall . . . would this be the appropriate forum to start? Sorry Globe, Romney's too much of a class act for that (though if he did and maintained the apparent consistency that the Globe requires, the Globe headline would have read: "Romney Bashes First Woman Cheif Justice of Massachussetts")

Romney praised Rapoza and told the audience he embodied many of the expected qualities in a judge, presumably including those who are able to win appointment to the Supreme Judicial Court: intelligence, experience, legal understanding, "wonderful" judgment and "Solomonic" character.

Sounds good to me.

Marshall, who in the past has elliptically criticized Romney for creating a hostile environment toward jurists, also took a different tack in her remarks to the audience at Rapoza's swearing-in.

She praised the Massachusetts constitution as "one of the great, great documents in the long march towards human freedom" before celebrating the fact that Rapoza would be among those jurists to ensure it is upheld via his service on the appellate court.

"You could not have made a better appointment for this critical role," Marshall told Romney.

So, Marshall looks like the real inconsistant one here, eh? Why isn't that the headline then?

Rapoza is Romneys highest appointment in the MA judiciary and an impressive one too. Find out more about Rapoza here and here.

Pirating Laws

I had no idea that Mike Whalen was not just competing with Bruce Braley (in Iowa's 1st Cong district), he's also got to fight off the Pirate candidate.

Globe Digs in . . . Speculative Accusations Make them Look Desperate

The Globe writers have made an unwise maneuver . . . instead of dropping a poorly reported supposed "expose" about Romney's Mormon Political Network after clear evidence that the picture they were painting was highly erroneous, they instead dig their heels in and come out with this follow-up piece today that tries to escalate the level of "scandal." It's actually pretty funny to read . . . even a bit sad that these reporters work for one of the "top" newspapers in the nation and this is the best they can get on Romney. They are getting desperate to pin something on Romney.

They start off . . .

Governor Mitt Romney vigorously defended a plan yesterday by his political advisers to develop a network of Mormon supporters for his potential presidential bid,

What is this "vigorous defense" that they refer to? Romney said:

``Clearly, I'm going to raise money from people I know, and that includes BYU alums, people of my church, people of other churches, Harvard Business School graduates,"

So Romney essentially admitted to being a politician (real big story) . . . but I see no where that he defended any "plan" to specifically and exclusively develop this so-called "Mormon network" (unless their definition of a "Mormon network" is "two or more individual Mormons who decide to support Romney for President" . . . if that's the case, then we have a "Romney Mormon Network" right here in my own home!)

Romney's comments suggest that the fund-raising initiative, which his political advisers dubbed Mutual Values and Priorities, or MVP, remained an active effort.

Oh really? Where did they come up with that? Talk about hearing what you want to hear! A Romney spokesman even stated that the MVP program had been abandoned (that it never really took off). I guess these reporters see their big "expose" of the MVP program disintegrating and they're trying to breathe life back into it?

But they get even more desperate:

They quote a statement of Otterson, a church spokesman, about the LDS strong history of political neutrality and then mention that he "declined to elaborate" . . . like the church has something to hide about it's history with politics. Well, I guess they missed Otterson's response to the Globe article they wrote . . . looks like plenty of "elaboration" to me.

Then they line up some IRS "experts" to strengthen their "scandal story" that the LDS church is in violation of non-profit tax codes.

Donald C. Alexander, who headed the IRS from 1973 to 1977, said yesterday that the collaboration among Romney's political team and leaders of the church and school could run afoul of federal law.

``The massive effort described in your article is, if not over the line, I think much too close to the line," he said. ``I think individual Mormons can and probably will support the governor, but they should support the governor as individuals, not in their capacities as having responsibilities for a church or for a university."

That last sentence is true and is the lesson all church organizations should take away from this ordeal. However, what is this "massive effort" he speaks of? I'm offended I wasn't included. Funny stuff, eh?

Finally they bring in a voice of reason:

Milton Cerny, a retired lawyer who formerly oversaw tax-exempt groups for the IRS, had a different take, saying the actions of the church and BYU did not appear to violate federal law, because Romney is not officially running for president.

``You don't have an announced candidate," said Cerny, who lives in Virginia. ``These are committees being formed to see whether the individual could be a viable candidate or not."

So, even if the "spirit of the law" was violated (which it was not, IMO), all parties involved are completely in no violation of the "letter of the law".

This article redeems itself near the end with some entertaining coverage of Romney visit to Florida.

In Daytona Beach yesterday, Romney, speaking to about 50 Republicans outside a GOP campaign office, cracked a joke about the Massachusetts media.

``There are two factions of reporters where I come from in Massachusetts," he said. ``We have the Hillary-loving, Ted Kennedy apologists -- and we have the liberals."

The audience erupted in laughter and applause. Romney also heaped praise on Jeb Bush, calling him the best governor in America. ``There's no question about that," he said.

Later in the day, when Romney appeared with Bush at an event for congressional candidate Vern Buchanan, at an airplane hangar in Venice, Fla., he received a standing ovation from about 200 Republicans.

Romney mingled, signed autographs, posed for photographs, and sang an impromptu Irish blessing with a barbershop quartet before refusing to answer any more questions from the Massachusetts reporter.

``Hi, on our way," he said as he brushed past to a waiting van.

Of course they had to end with an insinuation that Romney was avoiding any more discussion about his huge "MVP-scandal." However, I'd love to hear more about him singing that impromptu Irish blessing with a barbershop quartet . . . Anyone know if he's got pipes?

Romney Gets Highest Fiscal Policy Grade of any US Governor Working With a Democratic Legislature

One full day on the Globe/Mormon piece was enough. Changing subjects . . .

The Cato Institute released it's "grades" for the fiscal policy records (taxes and spending) of the governors of all 50 states. The full report card is here.
While officially Romney got a "C" that is the highest grade that any Governor got that had to work with a Democratic legislature. That he tied for 12th in the nation when he has to work with a 87% Democratic legislature is truly amazing.

In the full report (warning . . . it's a 40 page pdf) there's a lot more info, data, and even commentary on each of the Governors. Of Romney they write:

As Mitt Romney launches his bid for the Republican presidential nomination, his fiscal record as governor should be scrutinized. Romney likes to advance the image of himself as a governor who has fought a liberal Democratic legislature on various fronts. That's mostly true on spending: he proposed modest increases to the budget and line-item vetoed millions of dollars each year only to have most of those vetoes overridden. But Romney will likely also be eager to push the message that he was a governor who stood by a no-new-taxes pledge. That's mostly a myth. His first budget included no general tax increases but did include a $500 million increase in various fees. He later proposed $140 in business tax hikes through the closing of "loopholes" in the tax code. He announced in May 2004 that he wanted to cut the top income tax rate from 5.3 to 5 percent, but that was hardly an audacious stand. Voters had already passed a plan to do just that before Romney even took office. In his budget for 2006, he proposed $170 million more in business tax hikes, almost completely neutralizing the proposed income tax cut. If you consider the massive costs to taxpayers that his universal health care plan will inflict once he's left office, Romney's tenure is clearly not a triumph of small-government activism.

Much of that sounds pretty harsh (and some of it is outright misrepresentation or speculation), but the Cato Institue isn't dishing out praise to anyone. Even Gov. Blunt of Missouri (the ONLY one who got an "A" grade) didn't get only kind words from Cato:

Blunt hasn’t had to fight against tax increases since they are nowhere on anyone’s political radar screen. The second year of Blunt’s tenure, however, indicates that his status as one of the most fiscally disciplined new governors may be short-lived. His second budget proposed a massive spending increase of more than 8 percent, and the legislature was only too happy to oblige. It even reversed some of the cuts to Medicaid that passed in 2005.

For comparison of other 2008 GOP hopefuls:

Pataki got a "D"

If he runs for the Republican presidential nomination on a record like that, it’s going to be very hard for him to convince the small-government advocates who vote in the GOP presidential primaries that he’s still one of them.

Huckabee got an "F":

Huckabee wants to run for the GOP presidential nomination next year. He’s already been hailed as a viable big-government conservative candidate by some. That seems about right: Huckabee’s leadership has left taxpayers in Arkansas much worse off.

Overall, Romney did better than anyone else who had to work with a Democratic legislature. He's a true fiscal conservative . . . imagine what he could of done if he had the chance to work with a fiscally conservative legislature!

Follow-up on Globe Article--They're worse than I thought.

After reading these links,

LDS Church's responses here and here

and

coverage from the Article6Blog

it looks like either the Globe was wrong (? outright misrepresentation) or LDS church leaders are openly lying. Hmmm . . . I wonder which?!?!?!?

Actually, I think that these early attacks are great for Romney. They add clout to his building campaign (that the OTHER side is already fearing him . . . because they don't want to face him in a general election) and gives early experience in how to handle these issues to both the church and the Romney campaign. Better now than in a year from now. Romney himself is distanced from this one pretty well. This one's not "sticking" to Romney at all.

Terry McCauliffe says Romney IS the "McCain alternative"

Former Democratic National Committee Chairman, Terry McCauliffe was asked by fortune magazine Washington Bureau cheif, Nina Easton, the following:

Terry, who do you predict is going to be the leading Republican alternative to McCain in 2008?

MCAULIFFE: Mitt Romney. I think he has a great business background [and] has done some great things on health-care initiatives in Massachusetts. You know, Ed and I have actually seen him on speaking engagements. He trudges around with his PowerPoint presentation. If he can deal with the religious issue [Romney's a Mormon], I think that he would be formidable.

Add one more to the list of political heavyweights that thinks that Romney's looking like "the man"

Romney camp consulted with Mormon leaders

Never let it be said that I just put the "pro-Romney" articles here on my blog . . . some of the anti-Romney stuff is just pure silliness. However, this story is going to be discussed, so I'd like to hear what people think of this issue.

The Boston Globe (ever the friend to Romney) ran a story that tries to tie Romney to an endorsement by the church (or at least that's the headline and picture they're trying to paint). This isn't a major scandal, but it's not good press either.

My quick take . . . the tie to BYU and the action of the associate dean were unwise maneuvers. There will be plenty of support for Romney among members of the church. Patience is required to let it happen the right way. However, being LDS and knowing our incredibly strong record of political neutrality and following the rules (we don't do "voter guides" like other churches/Christian organizations), it is sort of bothersome that the Globe would paint the church in this light.

A companion article is here which, just by it's subject matter/title, seems to suggest that the LDS church "better watch out" or else we'll lose our non-profit tax status. Pretty annoying.

Hotline's coverage is here.

Part of their disscussion . . .

Fact: the Globe story, read closely, does not suggest that anyone in the church did anything wrong or illegal, or that Romney's aides acted improperly. Fact: Bishops of Mormon churches are forbidden from using church directories for politics, which means that Romney needs to find other ways to collect LDS church membership lists across the country.

Since Hotline is big on McCain (and therefore not too hot on Romney) it's interesting that they don't seem to see much of a scandal here.

:atest Nussle vs. Culver Debate Available Online

You can link to the debate here.

The format was a little different allowing for direct questioning from candidate to candidate.

One bothersome thing was that the TV station had little 2 minute "issue blurbs" before some of the questions. They were highly biased and very pro-embryonic stem cell research and pro-raising minimum wage, etc . . . Not good journalism.

Despite that, Nussle out-performed Culver once again.

It's also bothersome how often Culver tried to tie Nussle to President Bush--pretty slimey if you ask me.

The choice is clear.

VOTE FOR NUSSLE!!!

Text of Romney's Speech at Liberty Sunday/FRC Event

From the Governor's Website:

Remarks by Governor Mitt Romney
Liberty Sunday: Defending Our First Freedom
October 15, 2006

Welcome to this historic city. The authors of liberty recognized a Divine Creator who bequeathed to us certain inalienable rights. They affirmed freedom of religion and proscribed the establishment of any one religion. Today, there are some people would like to establish a single religion for America . . . the religion of secularism. They not only reject traditional religious values, but also the values of the founders. And they set aside the wisdom of the ages. Their allies are activist judges. Here in Massachusetts, activist judges struck a blow to the foundation of civilization, the family. They ruled that our constitution requires same sex marriage. I believe their error occurred because they focused on adult rights. If adult heterosexual couples can marry, they reasoned, then to have equal rights, adult homosexual couples must also be able to marry.

But marriage is not primarily about adults. Marriage is primarily about the nurturing and development of children. A child’s development is enhanced by the nurturing of both genders. Every child deserves a mother and a father. Of course, the principal burden of the Court’s ruling doesn’t fall on adults. It falls on children. We are asked to change the state birth certificate. To prevent “heterocentricity,” mother and father would become parent A and parent B. An elementary school teacher reads to her 2nd graders from a book titled “The King and King” about a prince who marries a prince. And a 2nd grader’s father is denied the right to have his child removed from class while that book is being read. Our state’s most difficult-to-place adoptive children may no longer be placed by Catholic charities because they favor homes where there’s a mother and a father.

The price of same sex marriage is paid by children. Our fight for marriage, then, should focus on the needs of children, not the rights of adults. In fact, as Americans, I believe that we should show an outpouring of respect and tolerance for all people, regardless of their differences or their different choices. We must vigorously reject discrimination and bigotry. We are all God's children. He abhors none of us.

Massachusetts is the front line on marriage, but unless we adopt a federal amendment to protect marriage, what is happening here will unquestionably enter every other state. The spreading religion of secularism and its substitute values cannot be allowed to weaken the foundation of family or the faith of our fathers who more than life their freedom loved.

Great stuff! That last sentence is masterful, IMO.

I watched the event and Romney was VERY well received by that religious crowd. He received multiple effusive and long-lasting standing ovations and was asked by FRC head Tony Perkins to give his speech a second time because the satellite feed/webcast went out early during his first speech. They didn't mind hearing him again one bit.

This is the kind of leadership we need by a POTUS if we're ever going to get a federal marriage protection amendment passed through.

A view from the other side: Romney is a "Bush Lieutenant"

Wisconsin politics looks like it is getting slimy. The Wisconisn Democratic Party recently sent out this press release aiming to "kill two birds with one stone" (Degrade the current GOP candidate for Governor--Mark Green and lay some groundwork against Romney's 2008 presidential bid). They list 5 areas where Romney and Green have similar records of bad governance.

ON EDUCATION
Under Romney’s Governorship, between 2002 and 2004, Massachusetts had the largest reduction in K-12 spending in the nation.

They forgot to mention that in late 2005 (after these "horrible cuts" occured) that Massachusetts "blew away" the rest of the nation on the NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) exam, marking the only time in history that one state had the top performance in all 4 categories (4th grade Reading & Math and 8th grade Reading & Math). Sounds like vintage Romney . . . do more with less!

ON HIGHER EDUCATION
Romney has cut funding for higher education in Massachusetts by $12 million.

Mostly these cuts were for duplicative administrative positions and the "patronage" problem that Romney has been trying to fix in Massachusetts.

ON TAX BREAKS FOR THE RICH
Romney cut almost $3 billion from public schools, health care, and other public services to finance tax breaks that disproportionately benefited the wealthy.

This one is completely unfounded. Romney has tried to cut taxes in MA but the money-hunger MA legislature froze the voter initiative to bring the income tax rate to a lower level. The only truth to that comment is that he did gut the budget upon taking office in 2003 and turned a $3 billion deficit into a nearly $1 billion surplus.

ON FISCAL MISMANAGEMENT
Romney has increased government spending every year he’s been in office, increasing spending by 19 percent over his four years in office.

Oh, they conveniently left out that essentially all of his vetoes to cut spending each year are over-ridden by the Democrats in the legislature. Also, he balanced the Mass Budget and has consitantly called for spending restraint . . . but it falls on the deaf ears of the spend-happy legislature.

This accusation also flies in the face of their first three complaints . . . that he cut spending to all of these institutions.

Accusing Romney of "fiscal mismanagement"??? Now that's a good one!

ON A WOMAN’S RIGHT TO CHOOSE
Romney has vetoed legislation to require doctors to offer emergency contraception to rape victims and has vetoed a bill to expand access to emergency contraceptives.

Good for him!

I just think it's funny to read this stuff that the Dems put out. Some of it is just music to my ears.

In other Wisconsin politics news, it looks like former Wisc Governor Tommy Thompson is strongly weighing a bid for POTUS in 2008. He could be a player in the Iowa Caucus, but I don't see his candidacy "catching on" elsewhere.

LA Times is at it again: "Can a Mormon win evangelical support?"

The LA Times writers and editors must be enamoured with Romney's religion. It's all they seem to write about. (see here and here for their other recent coverage of Romney--plus, don't forget that they are the media source who ran the poll misleadingly showing that "37% of Americans don't want a Mormon POTUS")

However, the most recent installment "Can a Mormon win evangelical support?" by Times writer Gregory Rodriguez may signal a change. Rodriguez explains why he thinks Dr. James Dobson was wrong when he recently said he didn't think large numbers of Evangelicals would vote for a Mormon.

In a recent radio interview, prominent evangelical activist James Dobson said that Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's Mormon faith "could pose a serious obstacle" if he decided to run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008. Dobson said he thought that conservative Christians wouldn't feel comfortable casting a ballot for a Mormon.

Chances are, he's wrong.

It's not the most doctrinally accurate piece I've ever read, but it is a move in the right direction for the LA Times.

Republican Governors Flex Their Fundraising Muscle

This Washington Post piece rightly gives Romney credit for the fundraising success the RGA (Republican's Governors Association):

Casting aside its traditional image as a minor player in campaigns, the Republican Governors Association raised $8.5 million over the past three months and has now raked in $20 million in 2006 alone.

The RGA's haul from July 1 to Sept. 30 eclipsed the group's previous three-month fundraising record, set in the first quarter of this year, by more than $2 million. The association also passed its total yearly record for fundraising ($18 million) in the first nine months of the year. The Democratic Governors Association raised $5 million in the period and has collected nearly $14 million this year, roughly $1 million short of its all-time high.

Gov. Mitt Romney (Mass.), the RGA chairman, has also tapped his vast fundraising network to benefit the group and leaned heavily on a handful of fellow governors, including Sonny Perdue (Ga.), Matt Blunt (Mo.) and Haley Barbour (Miss.).

"No one has worked harder than Mitt Romney to ensure the financial success of RGA," Musser said. "The results speak for themselves."

Do you think the nickname I gave him several months ago of "Midas Mitt" will stick?

Mitt, the rising star, catches Thatcher vote

London-based The Sunday Times has an interesting article about Romney and his recent meeting with former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.

In an essential rite of passage for American politicians, Mitt Romney was ushered into the presence of Baroness Thatcher at a Washington think tank last month. If not quite an official anointing, the handshake and chat with so venerable a figure was an unmistakable sign to conservatives that he was “one of us”.

The improbably handsome right-wing governor of left-wing Massachusetts is generating enormous buzz as the conservative with the best chance of beating the independent-minded Senator John McCain for the 2008 Republican nomination.

Probably my favorite quote from the article was:

As governor, Romney has already proved his appeal to swing voters. One party-goer described him as an American Tony Blair. “He’s extremely eloquent with strong convictions. He’s a visionary . . .

I've been a HUGE Tony Blair fan for years. Maybe that's part of why I found myself like Romney so much too.

Also, the article quoted Luara Ingrahm saying of Romney, "he's the man" and it also gave a "shout out" to Evangelicals for Mitt.

Great article and well worth the read

Beltway Boys---Warner out potientially helps Romney, McCain or Giuliani

On Fox News show "The Beltway Boys" Mort Kondracke and Fred Barnes were discussing the early "bowing out" of potential 2008 Democratic POTUS hopeful Mark Warner, and it's impact on the Democratic nomination, and the 2008 race as a whole.

They thought that Warner (a very moderate Democrat) saw that there wasn't much room to "the right of Hillary Clinton" in the race for the nomination (I continue to find that funny . . . that Hillary is occupying the centrist/moderate stance within her party). That Warner is out of the picture makes it even more likely that potential Republican nominees who are well positioned to capture much of the moderate vote (McCain, Giuliani, and Romney were the three they mentioned) would win the nomination.

Romney is the most socially conservative of those three and has a better standing among the GOP base. However, it has to be realized that he does have somewhat of a moderate streak (mostly this is just plain "pragmatism over ideology" that has stamped much of his pre-political and political life) and that is why some hard-core conservatives object to him. I also think that him being a "D.C. outsider" and not a life-long politician will help him in getting the moderate vote (looks and charisma won't hurt either, eh?)

Romney at Univeristy of Chicago School of Business

Jason Bonham at My Man Mitt has a great recap of Romney's recent visit and speech at the University of Chicago School of Business for their "Distinguished Speakers Series."

For those of us very used to his "stump speech" (which is great, by the way) he gives at political events this one was a nice change of pace.

Apparently, Jason wore the Napoleon Dynamite "Vote for Mitt" shirt to the event. They look like they're available here.