Posts Tagged ‘John McCain’

GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY:  “I keep hearing the same thing, that Washington is broken.

“I hear the people say they think we deserve health care for all our citizens, but not government health care and that hasn’t been done.

“They say we ought to be able to get a reduction in the burden on the middle class, and that hasn’t been done.

“They say we ought to solve the immigration problem in this country.  It hasn’t been done. 

“If you send the same people back to Washington just to sit in different chairs, nothing will happen. 

“I will change Washington.  I will take it apart and put it back together.  I know how to bring change.

“I’m Mitt Romney and I approved this message.”


Read Full Post »

This is all pretty odd… This week an abysmal mail went out to North Carolina showing a cartoon-rendered POW John McCain in captivity. Which whisper campaigning is apparently only reprehensible when it’s against John McCain – but when it involves others they are supposed to stop whining and “suck it up”. But now the Swift Boaters are launching into McCain. I ask myself “why?” Frankly, if the hundreds of thousands of other veterans and servicemen would be heralded the way McCain is, I’d be okay. But this constant idolizing him and paying homage to the McCain golden calf is getting on my nerves. He’s playing the POW card the same way that Huckabee has been trying to play the Evangelical card, Obama the black card, Hillary the female card. No one in the world is guaranteed the most important position in the US simply because they were a prisoner.

The other factor I take a serious look into is McCain’s personality. He has clearly and repeatedly displayed a “volcanic temper” throughout his career. I don’t want another beltway politician and I certainly DON’T want this man representing America with the kind of temperament he displays. At the New Hampshire debate he looked villainous. This is not the kind of person I want to set forth as a national hero to my children. From US Veteran Dispatch:

What McCain’s promoters have carefully edited out of their McCain-for-president equation is his post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Department of Defense psychiatrists have evaluated McCain for PTSD several times, the results of which remain locked by privacy laws.

PTSD can develop after exposure to a terrifying event or ordeal in which physical harm occurred or was threatened. U.S. government studies have concluded that former POWs “may remain embroiled in a harsh psychological battle with themselves for decades after returning home.”

An outcome of PTSD is a subtle web of personal problems including difficulty in controlling intense emotions such as anger and an inability to function well under stress.

Psychologist Patricia B. Sutker of the New Orleans Veterans Administration Medical Center and her colleagues reported in a 1991 issue of the American Journal of Psychiatry that as many as nine of 10 surviving U.S. servicemen taken captive during the Korean War may suffer from PTSD and other mental disorders more than 35 years after their release.

In a follow-up study, VA experts concluded that POWs suffer “a much greater risk of developing PTSD than combat veterans.”

So here has surfaced an interesting little tidbit that has a list of reason why McCain could very well have a secret relationship with the Soviets. He might have made a few friends while he was “vacationing” in his younger life. I do know there are all kinds of dynamics that go on and nothing would surprise me. Just take a look at the former Senator from Michigan getting indicted this week for funneling money to Osama Bin Laden this week.

So here’s a little bit of what they’ve been saying at US Veteran Dispatch:

Candidate McCain claims his experience as a prisoner of the communists for 5 1/2 years (three of which he spent in solitary confinement) better qualifies him to be President of the United States. He has forged that experience along with his military record deeply into his campaign.

McCain has admitted that his Vietnamese captors considered him a “special prisoner,” the “crown prince” of U.S. POWs, because his father, Adm. John McCain, was commander of all U.S. forces fighting in Vietnam.

He has admitted that because he was considered such a “special prisoner,” he was targeted for intense indoctrination sessions by Vietnamese, Soviet, Chinese and Cuban intelligence apparatuses operating in U.S. POW camps.

According to McCain, the indoctrination sessions included nonstop brutal beatings and threats to withhold medical attention if he did not cooperate.

McCain admits that on his fourth day of captivity, he broke and began cooperating with the communists.

“Demands for military information were accompanied by threats to terminate my medical treatment if I [McCain] did not cooperate. Eventually, I gave them my ship’s name and squadron number, and confirmed that my target had been the power plant.” Pages 193-194, Faith of My Fathers, by John McCain.

How much more cooperation did POW McCain give his communist interrogators?

It is incumbent upon presidential candidate McCain to prove to the American people that the 5 1/2 years he spent at the mercy of communist interrogators did not make him mentally unstable and that the Vietnamese, Russians, Chinese and Cubans have nothing in their secret files about his behavior as a prisoner they could use to blackmail a President John McCain.

Candidate McCain must explain why, during a May 1993 meeting with Vietnamese officials in Hanoi, he and former POW Pete Peterson (now U.S. ambassador to Vietnam) asked the Vietnamese to keep “Vietnamese files in their possession pertaining to American POWs who were released in 1973 available ONLY to Defense Intelligence Agency researchers.”

Garnet Bill Bell, special assistant to Gen. Thomas W. Needham, commander of the Joint Task Force for Full Accounting, was present at that meeting along with several other Americans.

The Vietnamese, according to Bell, agreed to keep the files, which were apparently extensive, confidential but threatened to release their files on former POW Marine Private Robert Garwood if he continued “to say bad things about them and accuse them of holding living American prisoners of war.”

Candidate McCain must explain why he wants those files kept secret.

Candidate McCain is a strong advocate for bringing Bosnian and Yugoslavian war criminals before a war crimes tribunal, but is opposed to any kind of war crimes investigation of the Vietnamese. Investigations and subsequent trials could bring to justice the Vietnamese torturers known by the American POWs as “the Bug, Slopehead, the Prick, the Soft Soap Fairy, Rabbit, the Cat, Zorba” and many others that were responsible for the murder of at least 55 U.S. POWs and the brutal torture of hundreds of others.

Candidate McCain must explain why he refuses to ask for a war crimes investigation of the Vietnamese, his former captors.

In November 1991, when Tracy Usry, the former chief investigator of the Minority Staff of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, testified before the Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs, he revealed that the Soviets interrogated U.S. prisoners of war in Vietnam. Sen. McCain became outraged, interrupting Usry several times, arguing that “none of the returned U.S. prisoners of war released by Vietnam were ever interrogated by the Soviets.”

Yet, former U.S. POW Laird Gutterson, who was held with McCain, told the U.S. Veteran Dispatch that McCain told him the Soviets were involved when McCain needed special medical attention as a result of his shootdown in 1967.

Former KGB Maj. Gen. Oleg Kalugin testified under oath before the 1992 Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs that the KGB interrogated U.S. POWs in Vietnam.

Gen. Kalugin stated that one of the POWs worked on by the KGB was a “high-ranking naval officer,” who, according to Kalugin, agreed to work with the Soviets upon his repatriation to the United States and has frequently appeared on U.S. television.

Col. Bui Tin, a former Senior Colonel in the North Vietnamese Army, testified on the same day, but after Usry, that because of his high position in the Communist Party during the war, he had the authority to “read all documents and secret telegrams from the politburo” pertaining to American prisoners of war. He said that not only did the Soviets interrogate some American prisoners of war, but that they treated the Americans very badly.

Sen. McCain stunned onlookers at the hearing when he rushed forward to the witness table and warmly embraced Col. Bui Tin as if he was a long, lost brother.

Candidate McCain must answer whether or not he had any contact with the Soviets while he was a prisoner of the communists.

Candidate McCain must answer why he warmly embraced Col. Bui Tin, one of his former interrogators.

During the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs hearings, McCain opposed all efforts by the POW/MIA families and activists to have the Select Committee expand its investigation to study how successful the Vietnamese, Soviet, Chinese and Cuban interrogation apparatuses were at exploiting American prisoners of war. During the Korean War, one out of every three U.S. POWs collaborated.

Candidate McCain must answer why he was opposed to such an investigation.

A McCain POW timeline proving that McCain’s collaborations with the enemy continued over a three year period can be found on the internet at: http://www.usvetdsp.com/mcianhro.htm

Is John McCain a real life Manchurian Candidate? The original 1992 John McCain: The Manchurain Candidate report can be found on the internet at:

I admit there are some things the public do not need to know, but we are in essence interviewing candidates for the most important office in the world. I want all the closet doors opened. Our nation has an amazing array of catastrophes because it didn’t ask the important questions. Here’s the really creepy part on another page here:

McCain’s interrogators considered him a “special prisoner.” They believed that because he came from a “royal family,” he would, when finally released, return to the United States to some important military or government job.

I would like to have these issues explored. The way this reasoning is laid out and the “hidden” files that McCain does not want revealed leaves me with some questions. This is a concern. I don’t need brutal details, but I’d like to see an evaluation about the plausibility of these tenuous and twisted realities.

Read Full Post »

I’m sorry for John McCain, I really am. I am well aware of the effects of deep trauma on a person. It is just not okay to stomp around with your knuckles dragging on the ground smashing the living daylights out of people at any whim. I can not even imagine the horrors of being a McCain child or wife. This is NOT a man who should be holding public office. There is never a place in public society for his antics or behavior. With that said, here’s the documented emotional brutality this man is capable in the public sector. I am truly sorry for his wife and family. I can only imagine what they have had to live through. And sadly, it will take generations of hard work to overcome this legacy. This is a man who will cross any line and tragically he will never be able to comprehend

A Top 10 List…

  1. Defending His Amnesty Bill, Sen. McCain Lost His Temper And “Screamed, ‘F*ck You!’ At Texas Sen. John Cornyn” (R-TX). “Presidential hopeful John McCain – who has been dogged for years by questions about his volcanic temper – erupted in an angry, profanity-laced tirade at a fellow Republican senator, sources told The Post yesterday. In a heated dispute over immigration-law overhaul, McCain screamed, ‘F— you!’ at Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who had been raising concerns about the legislation. ‘This is chickens—stuff,’ McCain snapped at Cornyn, according to several people in the room off the Senate floor Thursday. ‘You’ve always been against this bill, and you’re just trying to derail it.'” (Charles Hurt, “Raising McCain,” New York Post, 5/19/07)
  2. In 2000, Sen. McCain Ran An Attack Ad Comparing Then-Gov. George W. Bush To Bill Clinton. SEN. MCCAIN: “I guess it was bound to happen. Governor Bush’s campaign is getting desperate, with a negative ad about me. The fact is, I’ll use the surplus money to fix Social Security, cut your taxes and pay down the debt. Governor Bush uses all of the surplus for tax cuts, with not one new penny for Social Security or the debt. His ad twists the truth like Clinton. We’re all pretty tired of that. As president, I’ll be conservative and always tell you the truth. No matter what.” (McCain 2000, Campaign Ad, 2/9/00; www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHoXkCprdL4)
  3. Sen. McCain Repeatedly Called Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM) An “A**hole”, Causing A Fellow GOP Senator To Say, “I Didn’t Want This Guy Anywhere Near A Trigger.” “Why can’t McCain win the votes of his own colleagues? To explain, a Republican senator tells this story: at a GOP meeting last fall, McCain erupted out of the blue at the respected Budget Committee chairman, Pete Domenici, saying, ‘Only an a–hole would put together a budget like this.’ Offended, Domenici stood up and gave a dignified, restrained speech about how in all his years in the Senate, through many heated debates, no one had ever called him that. Another senator might have taken the moment to check his temper. But McCain went on: ‘I wouldn’t call you an a–hole unless you really were an a–hole.’ The Republican senator witnessing the scene had considered supporting McCain for president, but changed his mind. ‘I decided,’ the senator told Newsweek, ‘I didn’t want this guy anywhere near a trigger.'” (Evan Thomas, et al., “Senator Hothead,” Newsweek, 2/21/00)
  4. Sen. McCain Had A Heated Exchange With Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) And Called Him A “F*cking Jerk.” “Senators are not used to having their intelligence or integrity challenged by another senator. ‘Are you calling me stupid?’ Sen. Chuck Grassley once inquired during a debate with McCain over the fate of the Vietnam MIAs, according to a source who was present. ‘No,’ replied McCain, ‘I’m calling you a f—ing jerk!’ (Grassley and McCain had no comment.)” (Evan Thomas, et al., “Senator Hothead,” Newsweek, 2/21/00)
  5. In 1995, Sen. McCain Had A “Scuffle” With 92-Year-Old Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-SC) On The Senate Floor. “In January 1995, McCain was midway through an opening statement at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing when chairman Strom Thurmond asked, ‘Is the senator about through?’ McCain glared at Thurmond, thanked him for his ‘courtesy’ (translation: buzz off), and continued on. McCain later confronted Thurmond on the Senate floor. A scuffle ensued, and the two didn’t part friends.” (Harry Jaffe, “Senator Hothead,” The Washingtonian, 2/97)
  6. Sen. McCain Accused Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) Of The “Most Egregious Incident” Of Corruption He Had Seen In The Senate. “It escalated when McCain reiterated the charges Oct. 10 in a cross-examination, calling McConnell’s actions the ‘most egregious incident’ demonstrating the appearance of corruption he has ever seen in his Senate career.” (Amy Keller, “Attacks Escalate In Depositions,” Roll Call, 10/21/02)
  7. Sen. McCain Attacked Christian Leaders And Republicans In A Blistering Speech During The 2000 Campaign. MCCAIN: “Unfortunately, Governor Bush is a Pat Robertson Republican who will lose to Al Gore. … The political tactics of division and slander are not our values… They are corrupting influences on religion and politics, and those who practice them in the name of religion or in the name of the Republican Party or in the name of America shame our faith, our party and our country. Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left, or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right.” (Sen. John McCain, Remarks, Virginia Beach, VA, 2/28/00)
  8. Sen. McCain Attacked Vice President Cheney. MCCAIN: “The president listened too much to the Vice President . . . Of course, the president bears the ultimate responsibility, but he was very badly served by both the Vice President and, most of all, the Secretary of Defense.” (Roger Simon, “McCain Bashes Cheney Over Iraq Policy,” The Politico, 1/24/07)
  9. Celebrating His First Senate Election In 1986, Sen. McCain Screamed At And Harassed A Young Republican Volunteer. “It was election night 1986, and John McCain had just been elected to the U.S. Senate for the first time. Even so, he was not in a good mood. McCain was yelling at the top of his lungs and poking the chest of a young Republican volunteer who had set up a lectern that was too tall for the 5-foot-9 politician to be seen to advantage, according to a witness to the outburst. ‘Here this poor guy is thinking he has done a good job, and he gets a new butt ripped because McCain didn’t look good on television,’ Jon Hinz told a reporter Thursday. At the time, Hinz was executive director of the Arizona Republican Party. … Hinz said McCain’s treatment of the young campaign worker in 1986 troubled him for years. ‘There were an awful lot of people in the room,’ Hinz recalled. ‘You’d have to stick cotton in your ears not to hear it. He (McCain) was screaming at him, and he was red in the face. It wasn’t right, and I was very upset at him.'” (Kris Mayes and Charles Kelly, “Stories Surface On Senator’s Demeanor,” The Arizona Republic, 11/5/99)
  10. Sen. McCain “Publicly Abused” Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL). “[McCain] noted his propensity for passion but insisted that he doesn’t ‘insult anybody or fly off the handle or anything like that.’ This is, quite simply, hogwash. McCain often insults people and flies off the handle…. There have been the many times McCain has called reporters ‘liars’ and ‘idiots’ when they have had the audacity to ask him unpleasant, but pertinent, questions. McCain once… publicly abused Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama.” (Editorial, “There’s Something About McCain,” The Austin American-Statesman, 1/24/07)

Read Full Post »


McCain 2000 Campaign Smeared George Bush In Phone Calls

“[McCain’s] spokesman’s denial that any calls were being made, followed by his own statement that ‘I didn’t have anything to do’ with the negative calls, hardly met the standards of the ‘Straight Talk Express’.” (Carl P. Leubsdorf, Op-Ed, “McCain’s Missteps Hurt His Claim To Be A Political Reformer,” The Dallas Morning News, 3/9/00)
Sen. McCain’s Campaign Resorted To Nasty Tactics During The 2000 Michigan Primary:

Prior To The 2000 Primary, Voters In Michigan Began Receiving Pre-Recorded Phone Calls Criticizing Then-Gov. Bush And Portraying Him As Being Anti-Catholic. “Adrienne Karns, an accountant from Birmingham, Mich., said in an interview that she received a recorded call telling her Catholics should vote for McCain. She said she did not believe the call was endorsed by McCain’s campaign, and instead was sponsored by an outside group. ‘It started off saying it was a “Catholic voters” alert,’ Karns said, noting the call mentioned Bush’s appearance at Bob Jones University in South Carolina and school’s perception as being anti-Catholic. ‘It said McCain had not been to the university, and he was a friend of all Catholics, and all Catholics should vote for John McCain,’ she said. Karns said she was voting for Bush and that the call would not change her mind.” (David Espo, “Religious Broadcaster Attacks McCain Official As ‘Vicious Bigot,'” The Associated Press, 2/21/00)

  • The Script Of The 2000 McCain Campaign’s “Catholic Voter Alert.” “This is a Catholic Voter Alert. Governor George W. Bush has campaigned against Senator John McCain by seeking the support of Southern fundamentalists who have expressed anti-Catholic views. Several weeks ago, Governor Bush spoke at Bob Jones University in South Carolina. Bob Jones has made strong anti-Catholic statements, including calling the Pope the anti-Christ and the Catholic Church a satanic cult! John McCain, a pro-life senator, has strongly criticized this anti-Catholic bigotry, while Governor Bush has stayed silent while gaining the support of Bob Jones University. Because of this, one Catholic pro-life congressman has switched his support from Bush to McCain, and many Michigan Catholics now support John McCain for president.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 3/5/00)

After First Denying Knowledge Of The Calls, Sen. McCain Admitted To Personally Approving Them:

Sen. McCain’s Campaign First Denied Being Behind The Anti-Catholic Calls. “Bush attacked McCain for twisting the issue to portray him as an anti-Catholic bigot and said he was disappointed in the Arizona senator. ‘This is a man who paid for telephone calls in Michigan strongly implying I am an anti-Catholic bigot,’ said Bush, who lost the state’s primary to McCain last Tuesday. ‘This is a man who said he was going to tell the truth and run a positive campaign. It looks like he might have violated both.’ Some Michigan voters received prerecorded phone calls criticizing Bush for speaking at Bob Jones. The McCain campaign at first denied making the calls, but later acknowledged approving them.” (“Bush Slams McCain For Anti-Catholic ‘Smear,'” Reuters, 2/28/00)

  • McCain: “I Didn’t Have Anything To Do With Them To Start With.”  “On Wednesday, Fox News broadcast a news conference from the previous day in which Mr. McCain was asked ‘Have you ordered that those phone calls be stopped?’ Mr. McCain replied, ‘I didn’t have anything to do with them to start with.'”  (David Barstow, “Bush Aide Says McCain Misled Public On Calls,” The New York Times, 2/27/00)

However, Only Days After The Michigan Primary, Sen. McCain’s Campaign Admitted Responsibility, Even Calling The Attack Calls “Accurate.” “After denying any knowledge of the calls early Tuesday, the McCain campaign confirmed today that they had been made, but McCain said the statements were ‘accurate and didn’t call anybody a bigot.'” (David S. Broder, “McCain Rejects Accusations of Improper Tactics,” The Washington Post, 2/24/00)

  • Sen. McCain Acknowledged Personally Approving The Calls. “In an interview on Friday night on a flight from California to Ohio, where he campaigned today, Mr. McCain said he had personally approved the calls, which aides said were inspired by an earlier ad hoc effort by volunteers.” (David Barstow, “Bush Aide Says McCain Misled Public On Calls,” The New York Times, 2/27/00)

Sen. McCain’s Campaign Used The Calls As Retaliation Against The Bush Campaign:

Sen. McCain’s “Catholic Voter Alert” Calls Were In Direct Retaliation For His Loss In South Carolina. “Within days, immediately after Mr. Bush had defeated Mr. McCain in a bitter South Carolina primary battle with the help of Christian Coalition and anti-abortion phone banks, the McCain campaign recognized the effectiveness of the Michigan phone calls and decided to expand on them.” (David Barstow, “Bush Aide Says McCain Misled Public On Calls,” The New York Times, 2/27/00)

Sen. McCain Campaign Spent $8,000 On The Anti-Catholic Calls. “Aides drafted a telephone script, bought lists of Catholic voters and contracted with a telemarketing company, Conquest Communications of Richmond, Va., that on Monday, the day before the primary, called 24,000 Roman Catholic households in Michigan. The campaign spent $8,000 on the calls.” (David Barstow, “Bush Aide Says McCain Misled Public On Calls,” The New York Times, 2/27/00)

Sen. McCain Defended His Campaign’s Use Of The Misleading “Catholic Voter Alert” Calls:  

In The Los Angeles Debate, CNN’s Jeff Greenfield Asked Sen. McCain If His Catholic Voter Alert Calls Were “Straight Talk.” GREENFIELD: “On a related and more specific matter, I guess, you had about a week or so ago repeatedly denied that your campaign was the source of these calls from the so-called ‘Catholic Voter Alert’ and then said well, it was because you thought you were being asked about calls that were about anti-Catholic bigotry, and that’s not what those calls said. But is there any reason why your campaign didn’t say ‘This is the McCain campaign calling,’ instead of a non-existent group? Was that straight talk?” (CNN, Republican Presidential Candidate Debate, Los Angeles, CA, 3/2/00)

Sen. McCain Dug In His Heels When Confronted About The Calls On “Meet The Press.” RUSSERT: “‘The McCain campaign denied any knowledge of the calls.’ That was Monday afternoon. On Tuesday afternoon, ‘McCain spokesman Howard Opinsky said the campaign, “is not making any such calls.”‘ It went on to Tuesday night. David Gregory said to you: ‘He had allies making calls criticizing you. You had allies criticizing him.’ McCain: ‘Not so. No, that’s not so. The calls were made that I had anything to do with–although I don’t know who paid for them–had to do with pointing out that Governor Bush did go to an institution that prohibits racial dating, that is anti-Catholic.’ You knew who was paying for that call?” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 3/5/00)

  • SEN. MCCAIN: “I was paying for calls that stated the facts. The question that he asked me was, ‘Are you running calls that are–that accuse Governor Bush of being anti-Catholic or practicing racial bigotry?’ I said no then. I say no now. We were running factual statements. Those are far different from the kind of phone calls that were run by the Bush campaign which had very interesting allegations.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 3/5/00)

Sen. McCain Aides Expressed “Glee” Over The Exposure The Calls Were Producing. “Mr. Bush has lately been vigorously denouncing what he says are Mr. McCain’s deceptive campaign tactics and has said he is a victim of ‘guilt by association.’ Mr. McCain and his staff refused to rule out more such calls in the coming primaries and have expressed glee that Mr. Bush’s criticism of the calls draws more attention to his visit to the college.” (David Barstow, “Bush Aide Says McCain Misled Public On Calls,” The New York Times, 2/27/00)

Sen. McCain’s Political Director Went As Far As To Tell Bush To Stop Whining About The Attack Ads. “McCain political director John Weaver, in effect, told Bush to stop whining. ‘You reap what you sow, Governor,’ he said, referring to Bush’s South Carolina tactics.” (David S. Broder; “McCain Rejects Accusations of Improper Tactics,” The Washington Post, 2/24/00)

Read Full Post »

Fox News’ Dick Morris: “I thought that Mitt Romney won the debate.” (Fox News’ “Live,” 1/5/08)

         Morris: “You have to see this debate in two contexts. Partly, it’s a popularity contest but partly its an audition to see who’s the toughest fighter, to see who would be the best boxer in the ring with Hillary or with Obama.  Then he came across hands down as the toughest boxer.” (Fox News’ “Live,” 1/5/08)

        Morris: “I really felt fundamentally Romney really made the field.” (Fox News’ “Live,” 1/5/08)

 National Review‘s Jonathan Adler: “At his best, [Romney] was persuasive and presidential.” (Jonathan Adler, “Re: Spin Room,” National Review‘s The Corner, http://corner.nationalreview.com=, Posted 1/5/08)

 National Review’s Kathryn Jean Lopez: “Romney showed a steadiness under fire, sounded like a guy who knows what he’s talking about on a number of issues, and introduced more of his biography than he has at debates. I thought Romney’s performance was a good start to a weekend of debates where he had to do well – if he does very well tomorrow night, kicking it up a notch, he might show he’s a turnaround artist yet in this primary process.” (Kathryn Jean Lopez, “I Second The Levin Emotion,” National Review‘s The Corner Blog, http://corner.nationalreview.com/, Posted 1/5/08)

Lopez: “Romney is really in his element talking about substantial policy here. He knows this health-care stuff.” (Kathryn Jean Lopez, “They’re Doing The Work Of The Free Market,” National Review‘s The Corner Blog, http://corner.nationalreview.com/, Posted 1/5/08)

 Lopez: “I think this seminar format suits Romney, who is a wonk, who loves data and problem-solving (and has even done some of it).” (Kathryn Jean Lopez, “On Domestic Policy,” National Review‘s The Corner Blog, http://corner.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/5/08)

 The Atlantic‘s Marc Ambinder: “And Romney is in his wheelhouse. He’s been very strong so far and seems very eager to get in on every question, but his answers aren’t forced. The Real Mitt Romney…” (Marc Ambinder, “Health Care,” The Atlantic Blog, http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/, Posted 1/5/08)

 Commentary‘s John Podhoretz: “Mitt Romney is the most impressive performer this evening, striking a judicious tone of urgency and fluency.” (John Podhoretz, “New Hampshire: Halfway Through,” Commentary Blog, http://www.commentarymagazine.com, Posted 1/5/08)

 Podhoretz: “But as a matter of performance solely, he is far and away the best and he’s delivered it when he needed it most.” (John Podhoretz, “New Hampshire: Halfway Through,” Commentary Blog, http://www.commentarymagazine.com, Posted 1/5/08)

 National Review’s Mark Levin: “I thought Romney actually held up pretty well, given the onslaught.” (Mark R. Levin, “The Debate,” National Review‘s The Corner Blog, http://corner.nationalreview.com/, Posted 1/5/08)

 Riehl World View’s Dan Riehl: “If you were looking for substance across the board on issues, I think Romney was the clear winner in tonight’s debate. McCain’s well-known temperament problems lingered barely below the surface much of the evening, especially when someone dared disagree with him. Except of course, for his hugs for Hillary and slaps on the back for Fred. This is a change election and old hands from the Senate will not get it done.” (Dan Riehl, “ABC Debate: It Was Romney’s Night,” Riehl World View Blog, www.riehlworldview.com, Posted 1/5/08)

         Riehl: “I’ve been watching the debate on ABC. I guess we can dispense with the nice guy image for Huckabee. He came out with one agenda – attack Romney. Romney handled it well. And as everyone else was on point and not looking to just attack, it left Huckabee looking like a jerk. Maybe he needs bookshelves floating behind him to make the nice guy image work? Just a thought.” (Dan Riehl, “The Republican Debate,” Riehl World View Blog, www.riehlworldview.com, Posted 1/5/07)

Read Full Post »