Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Tim Pawlenty Courageously Flip Flopping On Ethanol Subsidies

Tim Pawlenty needs to do a better job of telling the truth if he is going to make "Time for Truth" his campaign slogan. He launched his presidential campaign by calling for a gradual phase out for ethanol subsidies:
America is facing a crushing debt crisis the likes of which we've never seen before. We need to cut spending, and we need to cut it...big time. The hard truth is that there are no longer any sacred programs.
The truth about federal energy subsidies, including federal subsidies for ethanol, is that they have to be phased out. We need to do it gradually. We need to do it fairly. But we need to do it.
Now, I'm not some out-of-touch politician. I served two terms as Governor of an ag state. I fully understand and respect the critical role farming plays in our economy and our society. I've strongly supported ethanol in various ways over the years, and I still believe in the promise of renewable fuels - both for our economy and our national security.
But even in Minnesota, when faced with fiscal challenges, we reduced ethanol subsidies. That's where we are now in Washington, but on a much, much larger scale.
It's not only ethanol. We need to change our approach to subsidies in all industries.
It can't be done overnight. The industry has made large investments, and it wouldn't be fair to pull the rug out from under it immediately. But we must face the truth that if we want to invite more competition, more investment, and more innovation into an industry - we need to get government out. We also need the government out of the business of handing out favors and special deals. The free market, not freebies from politicians, should decide a company's success. So, as part of a larger reform, we need to phase out subsidies across all sources of energy and all industries, including ethanol. We simply can't afford them anymore.
Some people will be upset by what I'm saying.
Conventional wisdom says you can't talk about ethanol in Iowa or Social Security in Florida or financial reform on Wall Street. But someone has to say it. Someone has to finally stand up and level with the American people. Someone has to lead.
Tim Pawlenty is getting a lot of praise from many conservatives for beginning his campaign by being "tough" and "courageous" for taking a "risky" and "noble" position on a sensitive subject. He's bold for "speaking the truth to power" because Iowa is a state known for being a large recipient of federal ethanol subsidies and he went into the lions den by traveling to the state of Iowa and calling for a gradual phase out of government money for the ethanol industry.  
Even Tim Pawlenty is prasing himself on the back for his speech in Iowa. But as Michael Tomasky points out, "any time a politician feels the need to pat himself on the back that much, you should immediately raise your BS deflector shields."
Yet, if truth is the benchmark that Tim Pawlenty wants to be measured against and he makes truth his campaign theme, he falls short of his own standards by flip flopping on this issue. The real genuine truth is that 
Tim Pawlenty was a proponent of ethanol subsidies before he was "gusty" for speaking out against it:
In 2008, Alaska governor Sarah Palin got the vice presidential nod, much to the disappointment of one group: the Minnesota Corn Growers Association (MCGA). The group had been hoping that John McCain would pick Pawlenty, according to the trade magazine Ethanol Producer. Pawlenty, the MCGA said, had “more moderate views towards ethanol” than most Republicans. It was a telling endorsement, particularly when compared with the tongue-lashing the MCGA gave the GOP platform that year, which it considered anti-ethanol to the point of being “devastating” to the industry.
The endorsement was well deserved. Throughout his time as governor, Pawlenty has been a friend to ethanol. In 2004, Pawlenty created the JOBZ program, an innovative way to subsidize ethanol. While Minnesota was no longer approving producer payments (13 cents per gallon of ethanol) for new ethanol plants, the JOBZ program offered “a new incentive, one that many investors find nearly as alluring,” gushed Ethanol Producer. JOBZ, the magazine continued, “provides relief from corporate franchise tax, income tax for operators or investors, sales tax on business purchases and capital gains tax, and property taxes. It also provides an employment tax credit for high paying jobs.”
A year later, Pawlenty signed legislation mandating that all gas sold in Minnesota contain 20 percent ethanol by 2013, up from 10 percent. (Since the EPA has not yet approved the 20 percent blend, the mandate will most likely not go into effect in 2013.) In 2005, Pawlenty also urged other states, at a meeting of the Governors’ Ethanol Coalition (which had 31 member states at the time), to mandate that all gasoline contain 10 percent ethanol by 2010.
The “E85 Everywhere” program, which promoted the 85 percent–ethanol fuel, was launched in 2006. Pawlenty wanted there to be plenty of stations where consumers could purchase E85. He requested $12 million in subsidies for gas-station owners to encourage them to offer it. State legislators balked at the sum; instead, the state began offering $1.75 million in subsidies starting in 2007. But even with the subsidies, Minnesota did not achieve Pawlenty’s goal of 1,800 E85 stations by 2010. As of 2009, the state had 351 gas stations that sold E85.
What amazes me is that top notch conservative bloggers are falling for Tim Pawlenty's slick political move of getting people to buy in to his false portrayal of himself as a politician who is taking on issues that other politicians are afraid to address. For example, Allahpundit falls in love with the the deceptive propaganda of Tim Pawlenty as a speaker of truth:   
Pawlenty’s ethanol gambit forces them to rethink that by posing the following question: If he’s willing to confront Iowa voters about their little ethanol gravy train in the name of fiscal responsibility — even though his candidacy probably depends on winning the state — then who wouldn’t he be willing to confront? He’s got guts. I’m not so sure about his risk-assessment skills, but he’s playing to win.
Not only are well seasons conservatives buying into the false advertisement of Tim Pawlenty, but many conservatives will praise some candidates for boldly flip flopping and scorn others for doing so. It appears that conservatives like to cherry pick which flip flops they like and which they don't like. For example, the best example of this comes from Ed Morrissey over at HotAir.com:

[Former Minnesota Gov. Tim] Pawlenty went to Iowa and told the truth — that the federal government’s subsidies of ethanol were bad policy that we can no longer afford.  Romney went to Iowa and pandered for big-government solutions in a market that should either be standing on its own two feet by now or putting resources into other solutions instead.  Which candidate showed political courage?
If Tim Pawlenty is going to be praised for anything, he should be praised for his political courage to flip flop so brazenly and openly while getting the masses to praise you for doing it. But the truth is that it doesn't take a lot of courage for a politician to flip flop:  
While endorsing its substance — as an advocate of smaller government should — I wonder how much “fortitude” this announcement actually took for him to make. Was it instead simply a well-calculated move in a chess game for Pawlenty? Had he already decided that he was willing to sacrifice the pawn of his Iowa Caucus votes for a better chance at winning the game of the Republican presidential nomination?
Did he see that, like his former support for cap-and-trade Legislation, another issue on which he reversed himself, his past endorsement of ethanol subsidies could become a roadblock for him in securing the sought-after support of his conservative base unless dealt with at the outset of his campaign? And was throwing Iowa farmers under the bus his way of dealing with it? Reasonable questions to ask, I think.
If conservatives are going to scorn candidates for flip flopping, then they ought to be consistent in meting out their condemnation. Here, T-Paw was pandering to voters by flip flopping on a key issue and lying to the Iowan voters and the rest of the nation about his false courage for taking on ethanol subsidies. Yet, Mitt Romney was being consistent in his support for ethanol. He supported ethanol subsidies during the 2008 Presidential campaign and he still supports it now.  Watch Mitt Romney give his position on ethanol back in 2007:

As I said earlier, if if truth is the benchmark that Tim Pawlenty wants to be measured against and he makes truth his campaign theme, then Tim Pawlenty is not a courageous man. And that is the pure and unvarnished truth.

Saturday, May 28, 2011

Romney-Cain Ticket For 2012!?

Matt Lewis writing for the Daily Caller has an intriguing idea that Mitt Romney and Herman Cain should run on the same ticket together in the general election: 
One possible match that is beginning to grow on me is the notion of a Romney-Cain ticket. (Stick with me here). Both are successful businessmen, so, in a way, this would be sort of like what Clinton-Gore did in 1992 when — instead of seeking to “balance” the ticket with an older Democrat from the North — Democrats doubled-down on the young, Southern thing. Cain would balance the ticket geographically and philosophically. But the primary message would be obvious: Romney-Cain are proven business leaders who can fix the economy. Period.
… I’m not suggesting the two team up now. But if Romney goes on to win the nomination (not an absurd possibility), there is something about it I like. Conservatives who are skeptical of Romney (or even hostile towards him) might be wooed to the ticket by the exciting Herman Cain. Romney would bring the establishment money and highly-professional operative team to the table, while Cain would bring excitement, energy, and authenticity.
There would, of course, also be the historical angle of electing the first black Republican vice president. And unlike McCain’s selection of Palin (which did inject the ticket with much-needed energy and enthusiasm) — Cain will have the advantage of having been through the ringer via running for president, himself. Palin was air-dropped in the middle of a presidential race, with little time to ramp-up. Conversely, Cain is making his mistakes now — when the stakes aren’t as high — and growing as a campaigner.
It could happen. Romney-Cain in 2012!
I am a fan of this idea. 
Even though it is too early to be thinking about who should be the vice president for 2012, I like the idea of a Romney-Cain ticket. I also like the idea of a Romney-Perry ticket too. 
But lets talk about why a Romney-Cain ticket could be a smart and powerful team for 2012. Mitt Romney is a strong candidate has run before in 2008. He knows how to organize a presidential campaign and is very skilled at raising cash for himself. He is also the most credible candidate on a wide range of issues such as the economy, health care, national security and social issues. He also has excellent leadership skills in both the public and private sector. 
Herman Cain would be an excellent choice as Mitt Romney's vice president.  Herman Cain supported Mitt Romney in the 2008 elections. Both men have extensive private sector experience. Moreover, Mitt Romney has a lot of support form independent and tea party voters. While these people are excited about Mitt Romney, they are even more excited about Herman Cain because his strength is the ability to get a grassroot network support going
“I cannot compete with a Romney when it comes to money. He has at his disposal his own personal fortune,” Cain said in an interview with POLITICO. “I don’t come anywhere near that, quite frankly. He has a fundraising network because he has run before. I have the advantage of a grassroots network.”
Thinking about vice presidential picks is no doubt a lot of fun. However, Right now, unemployment as the number one concern with the economy as the number two concern for Americans. As a result, we have a lot of Republican candidates who are seeking to capitalize on America's need for real economic leadership and are offering themselves as a leader who can fix America's economic and financial troubles.
As a result, we have candidates like Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman and Governor Rick Perry who are all contemplating jumping in for 2012 and plan to advertise themselves as people who can fix the economy. Sarah Palin and Rick Perry will talk about how they created jobs as governors of their states. Michelle Bachmann will talk about how she was an early leader in the TEA party movement as way to appear credible on the issue of jobs and the economy. 
However, Mitt Romney is the only 2012 candidate who has both private and public sector experience in creating jobs. No other candidate can make that claim. With that kind of impressive record, Americans are starting to warm up to Mitt Romney as someone they what to have in the White House. They are starting to rally around him because they are seeing that he is the best candidate who can defeat Barak Obama in 2012. 
In the end, its fun to think about and speculate who might Mitt Romney's V.P. pick will be. But that a choice that Mitt Romney has to make if he becomes the Republican nominee. The choice that Americans will have to make is choosing the right candidate to take on Barak Obama. 
The best choice that Americans can make is in voting for Mitt Romney.

Friday, May 27, 2011

Mitt Romney's Official Annoucement For 2012 Will Come Next Week!!

Out of all the official announcements for 2012 made by various Republican candidates, Mitt Romney's announcement that he will officially a candidate on June 2 is the announcement that I've been waiting for: 
Emphasizing the importance of the first-in-the-nation primary state to his campaign, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney will formally announce his candidacy for President in New Hampshire next Thursday, June 2.

UnionLeader.com has learned that a noontime barbecue at GOP stalwart Doug and Stella Scamman's Bittersweet Farm in Stratham will be the venue for the Romney announcement. Both Scammans are former New Hampshire House members; Doug Scamman is a former Speaker of the House.

While other candidates have made their formal announcements elsewhere, Romney will be the first of the 2012 cycle to announce in the Granite State.
The reason why I'm happy for Mitt Romney to officially become a candidate for 2012 is because he really is the kind of leader the Republican party needs and has been looking for. With many Republican candidates dropping out of the race, many conservatives are starting to rally around Mitt Romney because he is a conservative who has credibility on a wide range of issues. A recent poll found that the former governor of Massachusetts has the broadest appeal to conservatives when it comes to issues that are important to them:   
Mitt Romney is the candidate who'll be able to build a Republican coalition, but no one does better than Sarah Palin on connecting with GOP voters on social issues, according to a new Gallup poll.
Romney wins support from a wide swath of Republicans, pulling 16-18 percent regardless of whether their most important issues are government spending, the economy, national security or moral values. Palin has even stronger support among Republicans who put a premium on moral values — 23 percent of them back the former Alaska governor — but that's about the only segment of the electorate that picks her.
Not only is Mitt Romney the kind of leader that conservatives of all stripes can rally around, he's the kind of leader that all Americans can rally around. Mitt Romney has the broadest appeal of any Republican candidate in the field right now and receives support from people from a wide range of political perspectives. He enjoys support of liberals, independents, moderates, TEA party members, libertarians and conservatives. Which is very good news for Mitt Romney and bad news for Obama in the general election. 
Moreover, Mitt Romney is the best candidate that the Republican party can offer to the American people who are looking to eject Barak Obama from the White House. If Mitt Romney receives the Republican nomination, he will put a lot of swing states into play and they will lean in Romney's favor such as New Hampshire, Nevada, Michigan, South Carolina, Florida and other states as well. This will force Obama to spend precious time and resources into these states rather than directing his time and money to states that he really needs to be focusing on. Once again, this is good news for Mitt Romney and bad news for Obama. 
Finally, although the 2012 elections are barely warming up, Mitt Romney and Barack Obama have been waging a silent battle against each other for quite some time. No other Republican candidate can raise the kind of cash that President Obama and Gov. Mitt Romney are raising. As a result, when it comes to raising money,  the only person Obama is concerned about is Mitt Romney.
I've been waiting for this announcement for a very long time. I've been a long time supporter of Mitt Romney and I have always believed that he has been the kind of leader America has been yearning for. Americans are looking for a  President they can be proud of. We want a person whom all Americans can all rally around in times of peace or war. We want a person who will proudly represent America and will not apologize for the positive influence it has had around the world. Americans want a candidate who will promote freedom and liberty around the world and when a people in an oppressed nation rally for freedom, he will not waffle on what to do. 
This upcoming Presidential contest will be a very competitive race both in the primaries and in the general election. However, I am strongly confident that over time, people of diverse backgrounds and political perspectives will unite around Mitt Romney both as a candidate and as the future President. 

Thursday, May 26, 2011

New Sarah Palin Documentary To Be Released Soon: Is It A Sign She Will Run In 2012?

Sarah Palin knows how to keep the public guessing about whether or not she will run. Some people, such as myself, think that she will not run in 2012. However, other people do think she will.  Here are the list of indicators that make people think she is running: 
  1. The Movie After last fall's midterm elections, Palin contacted conservative director Stephen K. Bannon to make a movie highlighting her accomplishments as Alaska governor. Palin screened the movie last week.
  2. Arizona Home Palin bought a house in Scottsdale, Arizona for $1.7 million through a shell company to keep her identity secret. The new home would make a far more conventient place to HQ a presidential campaign.
  3. Public Appearances Palin will begin showing up at more public events "as early as this weekend."
  4. New Staff Palin has hired two people to manage her schedule. This comes after hiring a former adviser to Bob Dole as chief of staff and dismissing two neoconservative advisers, Randy Scheunemann and Michael Goldfarb. The duo were replaced them with an adviser, Peter Schweizer, who is more skeptical of the American intervention in Libya.
  5. Cultivating Supporters California lawyer Peter Singleton has been contacting Iowan Tea Party activists and Republicans to build support for a Palin candidacy, though he says he's acting alone.
According to some people, this soon to be released documentary about Sarah Palin is a significant indicator that she will run in 2012:
In the strongest sign yet of a possible Sarah Palin run at the presidency, filmmaker Stephen Bannon this week announced a $1 million documentary, "The Undefeated," about her term as Alaska's governor.
Scott Conroy, a reporter at RealClearPolitics.com and co-author of "Sarah from Alaska," got a sneak peek at the documentary and said on "The Early Show" Thursday he's heard from "several reliable sources" that, over the next couple of days, another "major indicator" is going to surface that she's ready to run in 2012.
Of the documentary, Conroy said, "This is really the biggest news that we've had in a while about Sarah Palin in terms of her presidential prospects. It's suggests strongly that she's been planning something all along. She's been kind of quiet."
So far, Sarah Palin's poll numbers don't look too good for her: 
* The latest NBC/Wall Street Journal poll showed her running in fifth place — with 10 percent — in a hypothetical Republican presidential primary race.
* A March Washington Post/ABC News poll showed Palin’s approval rating among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents had dipped below 60 percent — a far cry from her stratospheric near-90 percent approval ratings when she was named John McCain’s running mate in 2008.
* A February Des Moines Register poll of likely Republican voters in Iowa showed Palin’s favorable rating at 65 percent, down from 71 percent in a November 2009 survey. As importantly, those viewing Palin “very favorably” dropped from 27 percent in 2009 to 19 percent in 2011.
Not all poll numbers are bad news for Sarah Palin.Gallup released a poll today showing Sarah Palin tied with Mitt Romney as the top Republican contender if she were to become a candidate for 2012. However, despite the recent Gallop poll results, the evidence points to the fact that Republican support for her has declined.  
Not only does she not fare well with Republicans in the polls, but its the nation wide poll numbers that is  also hurting her as well: 
However you feel about Sarah Palin and regardless of what you think about her poll numbers, Sarah Palin has an public perception problem. As a result, this soon to be released documentary is designed to rehabilitate her image and boost her poll numbers among Republican voters: 
Whether the documentary is successful at rebuilding Palin's image remains to be seen, but it premieres in Iowa next month.
The documentary, Conroy said, covers Palin's years as governor in Alaska.
Conroy said, "A lot of people, even Sarah Palin's biggest fans, don't really know anything about her record in Alaska. And that's really what the film focuses on. Her record in Alaska as governor for the first two--and-a-half years that she was in office, the only two-and-a-half years, was very impressive for the most part. She accomplished a lot on oil and gas issues. She really was the kind of maverick that's now become sort of a cliche. But that's what attracted her to the McCain campaign. She had approval ratings that were consistently above 80 percent. And she accomplished a lot for the state. She was really a transformative governor in a lot of ways."
He continued, "So I think what the movie tries to do is it tries to reintroduce her to people who may have already written her off. You know, she became sort of a firebrand for conservatives in the campaign in 2008 and afterwards. But this is really going to try to recapture her independent streak."
This film will be a biased documentary about Sarah Palin. She commissioned this film. As a result, you will learn alot about her by what she chooses to reveal and not reveal about herself
The movie will not mention Palin's notorious reaction to criticism of her reaction to the January shooting of Democratic congresswoman Gabriel Giffords. She responded to suggestions that a now infamous campaign map showing Giffords's electoral district in the crosshairs of a gun had influenced the shooter Jared Lee Loughner by accusing her opponents of manufacturing a "blood libel", a phrase which refers to the false accusation that Jews killed Christian children to use their blood in religious rituals. Palin's use of language was widely criticised, and her reaction to the shooting compared unfavourably to the more statesmanlike response of President Barack Obama. Subsequently, her chances of building enough momentum to secure the Republican nomination for the 2012 race have appeared to dwindle.
Bannon's two-hour movie features interviews with Palin supporters in Alaska and conservative bloggers such as Andrew Breitbart. The politician does not appear on camera, but her voice is used for narration via clips from the audiobook version of Going Rogue. RealClearPolitics reports that the film makes "unmistakable allusions to Palin as a Joan of Arc-like figure".
You can watch a brief preview of the documentary "The Undefeated" over at TheRightScoop.com
I am still not convinced that Sarah Palin will run. I don't think that this film serves as good evidence that reveals her intent for 2012. And I'm not the only person who remains skeptical about the significance of this documentary: 
However, Palin choosing to actually launch a presidential bid is a different thing entirely. Neither Bannon's intentions, nor the film, serve as evidence for a genuine Palin campaign -- another publicity stunt is just as likely.
Even if she does run, the film may not have the effect Palin wants if how her reality television show is any indicator of how this documentary will turn out:
However, if Palin's TLC reality show, "Sarah Palin's Alaska," is anything to go by, the interest is unlikely to last (5 million people tuned in for the show's premiere; 2 million fewer watched Episode 2).
In the end, I could be entirely wrong about my prediction that she won't run. 
However, If she does run, it won't be an easy campaign for her. She has participated in a national campaign as John McCain's running mate but this is her first presidential campaign. Moreover, she will have to face well organized campaigns like Tim Pawlenty and Mitt Romney's. Finally, she will have to compete against TEA party favorites like Michelle Bachmann and Herman Cain.

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

Rudy Giuliani Seriously Considering A Second Presidential Run

Rumors have been swirling around for some time now that Rudy Giuliani was considering second Presidential run. The former mayor of New York City first hinted at the idea of running a few weeks ago when he spoke at the Republican Lawyers Association 12th Annual National Policy Conference: 
Giuliani took only one question following his half-hour speech. Asked whether he had decided to launch a 2012 White House bid, he said “not yet,” but that it’s a possibility.
“I will sure think about it. … It’s too early and I want to see how it all develops,” he answered. “My major goal is to elect a Republican in 2012. If it turns out that I’m the best one to do that, I can probably be talked into doing it or convince myself to do it,” he said.
“If I thought somebody else had a better chance of doing it, I would be a very enthusiastic supporter of somebody else,” he added.
Now it appears he's gone from "I'm not sure yet" to "I probably will" for 2012:
Former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani, whose presidential campaign fizzled in 2008, is leaning toward another race for the White House, according to a close associate.  New York Republican Rep. Peter King, who has known Giuliani for more than 40 years, says the former mayor “is very close to saying he’s going to run.”
“If he were to make the decision today, he would run,” says King.
Speaking at a dinner with reporters in Washington, King, who was an enthusiastic Giuliani supporter in 2008, said the former mayor has been quietly lining up support and exploring strategy. Giuliani has also examined the mistakes his campaign made in ’08, when he did not seriously compete in a contest until the Florida primary, by which time he was hopelessly behind in the race.
If Rudy runs, he will have a very difficult time from the very moment his campaign starts. With so many high profile candidates already in the race or very close to jumping into the race, Rudy will have hard time building up his campaign war chest since most of the big money donors have already made commitments to support other candidates. 
Moreover, he has no organizational structure and it will take a while to build a efficient, well organized campaign team across the country. A candidate can't afford to lose time in getting organized especially when facing off with campaigns who have established an intimidating organizational team like Tim Pawlenty and Mitt Romney. 
Then there's strategy. Rudy will have to come up with an entirely new game plan if he is in it to win. In 2008, Rudy decided to apply an untried theory that a candidate can become the front runner of a presidential campaign by skipping New Hampshire and Iowa, win Florida and go on to win many states on Super Tuesday. I'm not sure if he has a game plan in place for 2012. If he doesn't, he better think of one soon.

Monday, May 23, 2011

Donald Trump Can't Make Up His Mind: Is He In Or Is He Out?

 It was exactly one week ago that Donald Trump withdrew from the race. Now he's saying he might jump back in as a candidate for the 2012 election: 
"I can't rule out anything ... it's vital that we choose the right person, and at this moment, I don't see that person."
I agree with Donald Trump. Its important that we choose the right person to defeat Barak Obama. Unfortunately, he isn't the right person who can do that. 

Tim Pawlenty Announces He's Officially In For 2012

Today, Tim Pawlenty will be officially in the race for 2012 and he will be making his announcement from Iowa: 
As I predicted before, Tim Pawlenty announcement will be overshadowed by other candidates: It is already happening.
For example, Tim Pawlenty is making his announcement now before Michelle Bachman does because he doesn't want to be eclipsed by her but its already too late. Even though Michelle Bachmann hasn't made any decision about whether or not she will be running in 2012, people are talking about her rather than T-Paw:
U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann, another Minnesota Republican who is exploring a White House run, is believed to be ready to formally announce her candidacy soon, possibly within the next week. Bachmann could be expected to pull well among social conservatives in her native Iowa, overshadowing Pawlenty and complicating his hopes of doing well there. Like Pawlenty, she has been traveling extensively in the Hawkeye State, where she plans to spend Memorial Day weekend before heading to first primary state New Hampshire.
Some people will make a quick mention of his announcement and then move on to talk about other candidates like Jon Hunstman:
Former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty makes it official this morning. He’s jumping into the race for the 2012 Republican nomination for president. Not with a third installment of “The Bourne Candidacy” but with three network interviews that will almost assuredly go better than Newt Gingrich’s one disastrous turn on “Meet the Press” last Sunday. But since he’s got a whole week’s worth of I’m-running activities, my focus right now is not on Pawlenty. It’s on Jon Huntsman.
Tim Pawlenty is already getting lost in the news cycle just on the very day he has makes candidacy his candidacy official. That is not very good news for a first tier candidate with very little national name recognition.

U.K. Police Give Obama A Code Name For His Visit To England: Chalaque

President Obama may not like the code name that the British Police has given him while he visits England.
More than one person has wanted to call Barack Obama a 'smart alec', and now British police will get the chance to do so without getting reprimanded.
That's because Scotland Yard has tapped the codename 'Chalaque' to refer to the U.S. president for security reasons during his upcoming state visit to the United Kingdom May 24-26.
Indarjit Singh, a Punjabi speaker in the UK who is director of the Network of Sikh Organisations, told the Sunday Times the word 'is sometimes used when we want to denigrate someone who we think is too clever for their own good'.
Another Punjabi speaker told the paper the word Chalaque is 'not considered rude', but could be 'mildly offensive'.
Some British newspapers are curious why Obama was given this code name:
Scotland Yard insiders told the Sunday Times that their codewords are 'randomly generated by computer', but the paper wondered why officials decided to stick with them, when they could have simply had another word selected that would be less provocative.
Although I'm not a citizen of the United Kingdom, I could think of a few good reasons why he'd get a code name like that. Maybe its because Obama gave the Queen an Ipod as a gift and a book and some other items
Diplomatic jaws dropped across the continent yesterday when it was revealed that U.S. President Barack Obama had, once again, fumbled a routine protocal of international statecraft: finding the right gift for a foreign leader or head of state. In a private ceremony with Queen Elizabeth, Her Royal Highness bequeathed to the Obamas one of the earliest known copies of William Shakespeare’s Henry V. She also presented him with the framed orginal sheet music of John Newton’s “Amazing Grace.” To the Obama daughters, the Queen gave a dollhouse-sized replica of Windsor Castle with a functioning train station in the year of the compound. They also received a prize Shetland pony. Mrs. Obama was given a ruby ring commissioned and worn by Queen Victoria.
The Obamas, unfortunately, did not seem prepared for the occasion despite the row set off by the exchange of gifts between Prime Minister Brown and the U.S. President barely a month ago.  Mr. Obama rather unceremoniously handed the Queen a shopping bag from the Duty Free shop at Heathrow airport. It contained a signed paperback copy of Dreams of My Father, purchased at the WH Smith shop at the airport, a bottle of Johnny Walker Scotch (black label), a CD of the Swedish band ABBA’s greatest hits (still in shrink wrap with a 2-for-1 sticker on it) and ten bags of M&Ms with the presidential seal on them.
The Queen responded in a rather flat: “How delightful.”
Perhaps its the fact that Obama gave a few DVDs to Gordon Brown, the former Prime Minister of England: 
Barack Obama, the leader of the world's richest country, gave the Prime Minister a box set of 25 classic American films - a gift about as exciting as a pair of socks.
Mr Brown is not thought to be a film buff, and his reaction to the box set is unknown. But it didn't really compare to the thoughtful presents he had brought along with him. 
The Prime Minister gave Mr Obama an ornamental pen holder made from the timbers of the Victorian anti-slave ship HMS Gannet.
The unique present delighted Mr Obama because oak from the Gannet's sister ship, HMS Resolute, was carved to make a desk that has sat in the Oval Office in the White House since 1880.
Mr Brown also handed over a framed commission for HMS Resolute and a first edition of the seven-volume biography of Churchill by Sir Martin Gilbert.
In addition, Mr Brown and his wife showered gifts on the Obama children giving Sasha and Malia an outfit each from Topshop and six children's books by British authors which are shortly to be published in America.
In return, the Obamas gave the Browns two models of the presidential helicopter, Marine One, to take home to sons Fraser and John.
Or maybe its the fact that Obama sent the bust of Winston Churchill back to England
Has America's even- tempered new president already ruffled feathers in the land that spawned Borat and Benny Hill? That's certainly how the spiky British press responded after the White House sent back to the British Embassy a bust of Sir Winston Churchill that had occupied a cherished spot in President Bush's Oval Office. Intended as a symbol of transatlantic solidarity, the bust was a loaner from former British prime minister Tony Blair following the September 11 attacks. A bust of Abraham Lincoln—Obama's historical hero—now sits in its place. A White House spokesperson says the Churchill bust was removed before Obama's inauguration as part of the usual changeover operations, adding that every president puts his own stamp on the Oval Office.
But the British press, as is its wont, smells a snub. The Telegraph speculated that British diplomats' pulse rates would soar, while The Times of London wondered if a shadow had been cast over the special U.S.–U.K. relationship.
Or maybe its because President Obama revealed the national security secrets of England to Russia in order to secure a treaty with Russia: 
A series of classified messages sent to Washington by US negotiators show how information on Britain’s nuclear capability was crucial to securing Russia’s support for the “New START” deal.
Although the treaty was not supposed to have any impact on Britain, the leaked cables show that Russia used the talks to demand more information about the UK’s Trident missiles, which are manufactured and maintained in the US.
Washington lobbied London in 2009 for permission to supply Moscow with detailed data about the performance of UK missiles. The UK refused, but the US agreed to hand over the serial numbers of Trident missiles it transfers to Britain.
For everything Obama has done to England, the British Police must have been holding back on the names they'd really like to call him.

Sunday, May 22, 2011

Sarah Palin Will Probably Not Run In 2012

There a lot of signs indicating that Sarah Palin may not be running in 2012. With Mitch Daniels, Tim Pawlenty, Mike Huckabee, Paul Ryan and other 2012 candidates out of the race, all eyes are on Sarah Palin now. The big question among journalists, commentators, politicians and political junkies is this: will she run or not?
Despite the fact that many people have been speculating for a very long time on whether she will run in 2012 or not, everything appears to indicate she will not be running. There are rumors that she is considering running to become a U.S. Senator to replace Senator Jon Kyl and that those rummors appear to have some credibility since she recently bought a house in Arizona:
Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, a possible 2012 presidential contender, may have purchased a luxury home in north Scottsdale, the Arizona Republic reports.

Safari Investments LLC reportedly paid $1.695 million for the 8,000-square-foot home in what appears to have been a deal on behalf of a secret high-profile buyer.

The purchase comes after talk in some Arizona political circles that Palin was shopping for homes in the Scottsdale area, according to the newspaper. 
Another piece of evidence comes from an e-mail that Sarah Palin's PAC recently sent out to her supporters
“Taking back control of the House last year was only the first step,” Palin says in the mailer from SarahPac, sent out nationwide. “Now you and I must fix our eyes on 2012. Our goal is to take back the White House and the Senate.”
The e-mail is clever since she is still trying to keep people guessing about whether or not she will run in 2012. However, the last few words in that e-mail is ambiguous. It could just mean that after taking back the house in a huge landslide, Republicans are ready to continue their sweep of the senate. It could also mean she's gearing up for a run in the Senate. The e-mail shrewdly reveals nothing but it might be a subtle signal that she's shifting her political ambitions away from the White House to the Senate. 
There are other reasons why she probably won't run. Her poll numbers don't look too good for her: 
* The latest NBC/Wall Street Journal poll showed her running in fifth place — with 10 percent — in a hypothetical Republican presidential primary race.
* A March Washington Post/ABC News poll showed Palin’s approval rating among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents had dipped below 60 percent — a far cry from her stratospheric near-90 percent approval ratings when she was named John McCain’s running mate in 2008.
* A February Des Moines Register poll of likely Republican voters in Iowa showed Palin’s favorable rating at 65 percent, down from 71 percent in a November 2009 survey. As importantly, those viewing Palin “very favorably” dropped from 27 percent in 2009 to 19 percent in 2011.
Another reason why she will not run in 2012 is because she may not be up for another grueling political campaign: 
She has little appetite for the nitty-gritty hardcore campaigning in Iowa and New Hampshire that the genuinely committed candidates – like Romney, Tim Pawlenty, New Gingrich and Rick Santorum – are already doing and which lasts for months on end. Palin also knows from her own experience how brutal the scrutiny of the media will be for any leading Republican candidate and, perhaps, especially for her. But if she runs, she won't be able to avoid it. The national press will camp out in Wasilla, yet again. She will not want that.
Like Huckabee, she has became rich and famous on the back of the failed 2008 campaign. Books, speeches and TV shows seem to offer a lot of power without any of the tiresome reality of running for office. Especially in a race that looks so hard to win.
Also, if she loses – either the nomination race or against Obama – she will seriously tarnish her credibility. America will forgive many things, but a two-time loser? Not so much. Better to be a might-have-been than a never-was.
There's also one other reason why Sarah Palin may not run: Michelle Bachmann. She has the star power that Sarah Palin has but she doesn't have the kind of baggage that the former governor of Alaska has. Even liberal journalist and commentators think that Bachmann has a real shot at defeating Obama and becoming the first female president of the United States.
I won't be surprised if Palin doesn't run. For those of us who follow her closely, all the signs point to her not jumping in the race. Of course, Palin could surprise us all and run. However, I'm almost positive she's not going to run.

2012 Presidential Election: What Does The Republican Field Look Like Right Now?

The 2012 field has been narrowing down pretty quickly. It used to be that the 2012 field was overflowing with so many potential 2012 candidates. With so many candidates announcing that they are formally in for 2012 and so many people bowing out of the race, its hard to keep track of everyone. 
Here is what the 2012 field looks like right now: 
Gary Johnson, former governor of New Mexico
Tim Pawlenty, former Minnesota governor 
Herman Cain, businessman 
Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House
Buddy Roemer, former Governor of Louisiana

Mitt Romney, former Mass. governor

Exploratory Committee formed
Ron Paul, Texas representative
Rick Santorum, former Pa. U.S. Senator
Fred Karger, Gay Rights activist
Roy Moore, former Supreme Court Judge of Alabama

Tentative candidacies
Michele Bachmamn, U.S. Rep, Minnesota
Sarah Palin, former Alaska governor
Rick Perry, Governor of Texas
John Huntsman, former governor of Utah
Rudy Guiliani, former mayor of New York City

Has decided not to run
Donald Trump, real estate magnate
Mike Huckabee, former Arkansas governor
Haley Barbour, current Governor of Mississippi.
Mitch Daniels, Indiana governor
Chris Christie, New Jersey governor
Paul Ryan, U.S. Representative for Wisconsin's 1st congressional district
Mike Pence, U.S. Representative for Indiana's 6th district
John Thune,  U.S. Senator, South Dakota

Jim DeMint,  U.S. Senator, South Carolina

Paul Ryan: I'm Not Running For 2012 Either

It wasn't that long ago that the Republican field was looking quite crowded but now its getting smaller with many potential 2012 candidates choosing not to run. After much speculation and many people attempting to recruit Paul Ryan to run, he's announced he's not going to run in 2012:
In an appearance Sunday’s “Meet the Press” on NBC, Wisconsin Republican Rep. Paul Ryan, the chairman of the House Budget Committee, said he was disappointed in the news.
“Meet the Press” moderator David Gregory asked Ryan if the news about Daniels opened the door for his own presidential aspirations? Ryan said no.
“Well look – I’ve been very clear about this, about running for president,” Ryan said. “I feel because we are in a big budget debate – I’m in a great position as House Budget chairman to weigh in on this debate and I feel like the moment we are in, I want to stay focused on where we are right now and that is getting our fiscal house in order.”
Gregory asked if Ryan would be open to getting in on the ticket as a running mate and the Wisconsin congressman declined to address that possibility.
“I’m not going to get into all those hypotheticals,” Ryan said. “I’m not running for president. I’m not planning on running for president.  If you’re running for president, you got to do a lot of things to line up a candidacy. I’ve not done any of those things. It’s not my plan. My plan is to be a good chairman of the House Budget Committee and fight for the fiscal sanity of this nation.”
Gregory interpreted Ryan’s response as perhaps being a little bit of a door opening, but Ryan disagreed.
“It’s not a door opening,” Ryan said. “I do know how this works. I’m not going to get into all these hypotheticals in the future. My point is I’m not running for president. You never know what opportunities present themselves way down the road. I’m not talking about right now and I want to focus on the fiscal problems of this country. And I really believe David, where I am as chairman of the House Budget Committee puts me in a great position to be a great contributor to this debate.”
Watch the video of Paul Ryan's interview with David Gregory below: 

Paul Ryan has given a pretty firm Sherman statement that he's not running. I'm not surprised by his refusal not to jump into the race. I didn't think he would run at all. I just couldn't see it happening.
He's making a smart move here in not running. Right now, he's in the best position to move the conservative position forward on THE crucial issue of our time: the national debt.
He would be insane to abandon all his hard work he's put into the his "roadmap plan" to reduce the national debt. Ryan is a smart and intelligent politician who is making the right choice here. He's sincere in his desire reduce the national debt. He's doing something that more politicians ought to be doing and that is getting our financial house in order. Instead, we have too many politicians looking for ways to pump up their image and inflate their egos.
In an era where real American heroes are hard to find, Paul Ryan is kind of politician the American people need.

Mitch Daniels: I'm Not Running In 2012

With the 2012 election starting to warm up, the Republican field is starting to get smaller and smaller. Haley Barbour, Donald Trump, and Mike Huckabee have all bowed out from the race. Mich Daniels will be among the men who will not run for 2012. Mitch Daniels made his announcement via an e-mail to his supporters
The Daniels email, obtained by POLITICO, went out from Indiana GOP chief Eric Holcomb, a key Daniels adviser, soon after midnight, with the word "Urgent" in the subject line.
"The following is from Governor Mitch Daniels…." the email began.
“I hope this reaches you before the public news does," Daniels wrote. "If so, please respect my confidence for the short time until I can make it known to all."
"The counsel and encouragement I received from important citizens like you caused me to think very deeply about becoming a national candidate. In the end, I was able to resolve every competing consideration but one, but that, the interests and wishes of my family, is the most important consideration of all. If I have disappointed you, I will always be sorry."
Daniels, who had deep fundraising ties from his time in the Bush administration and his own years in Washington, went on: "If you feel that this was a non-courageous or unpatriotic decision, I understand and will not attempt to persuade you otherwise. I only hope that you will accept my sincerity in the judgment I reached," he wrote.
"Many thanks for your help and input during this period of reflection. Please stay in touch if you see ways in which an obscure Midwestern governor might make a constructive contribution to the rebuilding of our economy and our Republic.”
The email, which went to a list of supporters but not the Indiana GOP's broader email list, was unusual —pols who bow out of campaigns rarely choose to announce it just after midnight on a Saturday.
Its no surprise that Mitch Daniels would bow out. He's made plenty of public statements that indicated that he wasn't sure if he wanted to run. He stated that he was not ready to debate Obama on foreign policy yet he thought he could beat Barak Obama. He has also stated that he may not run if he couldn't get the Democratic legislature to close the state session of Congress.
Ultimately, Mich's decision to run or not depended his wife. He wanted to run but he was waiting to see if his wife liked the idea of running. However, it was clear that his wife never liked the idea of enduring a grueling presidential campaign and facing the press who want to ask her marriage. In fact, running for president was a very scary idea for her.
With Mitch Daniels out, it will benefit the top tier Republican 2012 canididates
Daniels's decision would seem on the surface to benefit Pawlenty in Iowa, where he's looking to come in with solid numbers in the caucuses, and Huntsman in New Hampshire, where the former Utah governor is expected to play hard if he runs. But it also is ultimately positive for Romney, who is increasingly able to cast himself as a stronger frontrunner; his aides recently reported raising $10 million in a single fundraising "call day" from Nevada.
While other candidates might benefit from Mitch's decision not to run, I think it will most likely benefit Mitt Romney. He's the only candidate who is matching Obama in fundraising right now and can make swing states lean towards voting for a Republican challenger to Barak Obama.
However, with Mitch Daniels out, the pressure is on for other candidates to move out from their exploratory committee to becoming official candidates or to announce whether they will run or not. All eyes will be on Sarah Palin. Some people think she will not run in 2012 and there are rumors that she is considering running to become a U.S. Senator.
Look for a wave of announcements from 2012 Republican candidates to come in the next month or so.

Saturday, May 21, 2011

Herman Cain Formally Annouces He's In For 2012

The 2012 election is slowly heating up as candidates make the transition from exploratory committees to officially becoming candidates for the 2012 Presidential elections. Yesterday, Tim Pawlenty formally announced that he will officially be a candidate for the upcoming presidential election. 
Today, Herman Cain has formally announced that he will also be a candidate for the 2012 election. He's already released a YouTube video that coincides with his announcement which you can watch below:

He also published an op-ed that summarizes his common sense approach to leadership and how he will solve the problems that our country faces. His column,"Solving For X," is about how there are simple formulas that have been established to resolve the problems that our country faces:
Over the course of the last year and a half, I have crisscrossed the country and shared my vision for America. More importantly, I have listened to the concerns of folks all across this land -- from the farmer in Iowa to the retiree in Florida to the student in South Carolina. Throughout my needs assessment tour, I have learned that America faces significant challenges and we are right to demand a return on our investment. We see ourselves as putting so much in, and getting so little out—in the form of widespread joblessness, runaway debt, skyrocketed energy prices and an unclear foreign policy agenda.

But, we remain undaunted. Americans know that “solving for x” simply means using the right formula. What’s that formula, you might ask? Working on the right problems. Asking the right questions. Removing barriers to success. Surrounding yourself with the right people.

This is my “common sense” approach to real leadership. This approach is coupled with a steadfast belief that politics should never compromise principles. And my principles are rooted in the Constitutional guarantees of limited government and individual freedom.

I believe in a strong military and clear foreign policy that ensures the safety of our country. I believe in lower taxes, less regulation and private sector job creation that ensures the economic stability of our country. And I believe in the moral foundation upon which this nation was based and continues to make Her strong, independent and free.
With his common sense approach to politics and leadership, he's not a candidate that you can easily write off. He might be a troublesome candidate for other 2012 contenders like who are looking to win the support of the TEA party movement. Although Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann have not decided whether or not they will run in 2012, you can be assured that Herman Cain is a candidate they must be worried about if they decide to run. He is certainly popular with the conservative online community. Moreover, a recent Gallup poll showed that although Herman Cain is not a well known canidate among  while likely GOP primary voters, he was the best-liked among those who knew him. 
Not all conservatives are excited about Herman Cain. Charles Krauthammer thinks that Herman Cain doesn't have a chance to win at all and is merely a candidate who will excite people but that's about it. Watch Krauthammer explain his view below:

As time goes on, we'll see if Charles Krauthammer is right or not about Cain winning the election. However, Cain will definitely will make the 2012 election exciting and interesting. 
With Tim Pawlenty's and Herman Cain's announcements, I think you can expect other 2012 candidates to start making the transition from exploratory committees to officially becoming candidates. Look for a wave of announcements to come in the next month or so. 

Friday, May 20, 2011

Tim Pawlenty To Announce He Will Run In 2012

With Donald Trump, Mike Huckabee and Haley Barbour withdrawing from the 2012 Presidential elections, people are looking to see if other politicians will jump in to fill the vacuum left by the men who will not run. One of those men looking to fill that void is Tim Pawlenty. He was the first 2012 candidate to form an exploratory committee. Next Monday, he will be announcing that he is no longer exploring the idea of running and that he will officially be a candidate for 2012: 
Former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, a laid-back Midwestern Republican who governed a Democratic-leaning state, is running for president and will declare his candidacy on Monday in the leadoff caucus state of Iowa, an adviser told The Associated Press.
The adviser, who disclosed the plans on the condition of anonymity in advance of next week's announcement, said Pawlenty will formally enter the race during a town hall-style event in Des Moines, Iowa.
He's choosing to make his long-expected bid official in a critical state in his path to the GOP nomination. Advisers acknowledge that Pawlenty, 50, must win or turn in a strong showing during next winter's caucuses in the neighboring state of Iowa to have any chance of becoming the Republican who will challenge President Barack Obama, a Democrat, next November.
After Monday's announcement, he will head to Florida, New Hampshire, New York and Washington, D.C.
However, Tim Pawlenty doesn't seem to be really excited about running: 
And when I ask Pawlenty, during a second interview in Des Moines, Iowa, exactly when he decided he was up to the grand challenge of the presidency, he answers in less than grandiose terms, explaining how he'd set up a political-action committee in 2009. I try again, saying I am curious about when he first imagined himself worthy of the history books, ready to send soldiers to their deaths and endure the national stage's harsh toll. "I don't know," he replies. "I wish I had a good answer for you on that." Pawlenty says it is not an idea that crossed his mind 15 or 20 years ago but that as he considered life as a relatively young ex-governor, he felt obliged not to take the easy path and "go make some money and play hockey and drink beer." He adds that he almost didn't run at all. "Mary and I talked about this at length, and many times, and it was a close call," he says, mentioning his wife of 24 years. He adds with a laugh, "It could have gone the other way for all the reasons you're suggesting."
Tim Pawlenty's announcement comes as no surprise. However, the buzz and hype surrounding his planned announcement on Monday will be short lived because he will most certainly be  be upstaged by other Republicans who have not thrown in their hat into the ring yet. We are still waiting to find out if Mitch Daniels, Michelle Bachman and Sarah Palin will run or not. There's also speculation that Texas Govenor Rick Perry is also considering running in this upcoming presidential election. Rudy Giuliani is also thinking about running again for 2012. 

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Why People Are Warming Up To Mitt Romney

While Mitt Romney is getting slammed from both the left and the right over the unveiling of his new health care plan, the American people are warming up to Mitt Romney. Why are people gravitating towards Romney?
The recent surge in Mitt Romney's popularity is occurring for many reasons.  Donald Trump, Haley Barbour and Mike Huckabee has dropped out of the race. He's raised $10.25 million dollars in one day. But perhaps people are starting to warm up to Mitt Romney because he's confronting the major issues of the day with a level of maturity that is rare among the Republican 2012 contenders. 
Brian McGrory over at the Boston Globe makes this point:
Maybe I missed something here, but isn’t personal responsibility something that Republicans generally support? The alternative, mind you, is that people who either don’t bother paying for insurance or can’t afford it clog emergency rooms — the most expensive entry point to the health care system — to receive care that’s spread among taxpayers who have already paid for insurance on their own. That’s really what Republicans support?
So to the point, Romney stood up and stood tall last week and defended the Massachusetts law, with the caveat that it was never meant to be a national plan. The authority to tackle health care, Romney said, resides with the states, and what fits well in Massachusetts may not be the best solution in Montana or Mississippi. This is reasonable and practical.
Meaning that conservative commentators just about broke their legs rushing to their keyboards and cameras to tear the speech apart. “Mitt Romney’s Illogical, Terrible Health Care Address,’’ was how the National Review termed it. And that was one of the kinder takes.
Think about this for a brief moment: The first time Romney has refused to disavow the past or contort himself in a way that defies the physics of successful politics, he is slammed by his own party for daring to be true to a belief. But in that, amid the waterfall of negativity that has rained on his camp ever since, Romney may find the exact message he needs in his eternally uncertain campaign.
The fringe philosophers of each party get the most attention by throwing juvenile tantrums, but it’s the adults in the center who end up handling the arduous work of government and, occasionally, reform. The public gets this. For the moment, anyway, voters are done with radicals with all the answers. They want honest brokers.
As a result, people are rallying around Mitt Romney despite what the political elite of the left and the right think about RomneyCare. In fact, many voters are willing to vote for him because what Romney did in Massachusetts has no effect on how they feel about him:
Yet, a majority of respondents (53 percent) said that Romney's involvement in helping to pass Massachusetts' universal health care law would not affect their decision to vote for him. Among those who identified as Undeclared/ Independent (roughly 40 percent of all likely GOP Primary voters), some 20 percent said Romney's involvement in passing Massachusetts' health care bill would actually make them more likely to vote for him, and similarly 50 percent said it made no difference.
Given the influence of New Hampshire's Presidential Primary and that independents and new voters who register at the polls may choose a Republican ballot, it's beneficial to Mitt Romney that these voters are not holding his Massachusetts health care legacy against him.
It would be easy to dismiss Romney's numbers in New Hampshire given its proximity to Massachusetts -- especially considering that the state's main population center resides within Boston's media market. However, given that our Florida numbers match New Hampshire's (vote/lean Romney -- NH GOP: 38 percent, FL GOP 33 percent) it's clear that Romney is finding some strong baseline support from Republican voters in key areas.
Further, Suffolk University Political Research Center (SUPRC) New Hampshire study found the two most important qualities for a presidential candidate among potential voters were honesty (29 percent) and integrity (10 percent). And, while pundits have slammed Romney for his failure to clarify this or denounce that, he certainly hit these notes on the head, saying "A lot of pundits around the nation are saying that I should just stand up and say this whole thing was a mistake... There's only one problem with that: It wouldn't be honest."
Those journalists, bloggers and political junkies who are honest in their observation are seeing what the American people see. Mitt Romney isn't the perfect candidate but that's what America needs right now. America needs a candidate like Mitt Romney who isn't afraid to offer honest solutions to the biggest concerns of our day.  That is why they're not holding RomneyCare against him. They see him as a man who is not perfect but is unafraid to be a leader America yearns for.