Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘McCain’

Seems like Huckabee and Thompson may be vying for the VP spot. They don’t seem to be doing much to point out the inherent defects of McCain’s positions. So the liberal GOP is kissing butt. A little “don’t ask, don’t tell” I guess. Nice.

From Jonathon Martin and Politico:

And so with Mitt Romney effectively waving the white flag in South Carolina and Mike Huckabee and Fred Thompson seemingly more interested in being vice president or at least retaining their friendship with him, McCain appears headed into Saturday’s primary without a single glove being laid on him.

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Today, Sen. McCain called for an economic stimulus because the economy “is in some difficulty.”  But, only a week ago, Sen. McCain said “the fundamentals of this economy are strong, and I believe they will remain strong.” And, today, Sen. McCain says corporate tax cuts will stimulate the economy.  But, in the past, Sen. McCain has mocked corporate tax relief as stimulus.

“So after almost three decades spent on Capitol Hill and after joining with Democrats to vote against the Bush tax-relief plans not once but twice, Senator McCain all of a sudden wants to try and help the economy work?”

 “Job creation and economic growth require a unique understanding of global economic challenges and require experience developing and implementing a vision of transforming the economy.  Senator McCain’s votes against pro-growth economic policies and his pessimism about the future of our economy are typical of his Washington-centric approach.”

Republican presidential hopeful, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., ...“No one believes that if Ford Motor Co. received a $1 billion check from the federal government that they’d spend it immediately.” – Sen. John McCain On Corporate Tax Cut Stimulus In 2001 (Joe Salkowski, “Stimulus Splits Area Lawmakers,” [Tucson] Arizona Daily Star, 11/29/01)

Today, Sen. McCain Called For An Economic Stimulus Because The Economy “Is In Some Difficulty”:

Sen. McCain, January 17, 2008: ”I Know The Economy Is In Some Difficulty … Particularly In South Carolina.” (Tom Raum, “McCain Proposes Economic Plan With Corporate Tax Break,” The Associated Press, 1/17/08)

But, Only A Week Ago Sen. McCain Called The Economy Strong And Said It Will Remain Strong:

Sen. McCain, January 10, 2008: “And By The Way, I Don’t Believe We’re Headed Into A Recession. I Believe The Fundamentals Of This Economy Are Strong, And I Believe They Will Remain Strong.” (Fox News, Republican Presidential Candidate Debate, Myrtle Beach, SC, 1/10/08)

Today, The McCain Campaign Says Corporate Tax Cuts Will Stimulate The Economy:

Sen. McCain New Economic Stimulus Plan Calls For Lower Corporate Income Tax Rates. “Republican presidential candidate John McCain proposed an economic stimulus plan on Thursday that would lower the corporate income tax rate and provide a host of other tax breaks for business.” (Tom Raum, “McCain Proposes Economic Plan With Corporate Tax Break,” The Associated Press, 1/17/08)

  • Sen. McCain: ”Now Is The Time To Act To Stimulate Our Economy …” (Tom Raum, “McCain Proposes Economic Plan With Corporate Tax Break,” The Associated Press, 1/17/08)

But In The Past, Sen. McCain Has Attacked Stimulus Via Corporate Tax Cuts:

In 2001, Sen. McCain Opposed A Plan To Cut Corporate Taxes To Help Stimulate The Economy. “Southern Arizona’s representatives in Congress are split on how to break a deadlock over an economic stimulus proposal called for by President Bush. … McCain, a Republican, criticized a part of the GOP-backed House bill that would repeal the corporate alternative minimum tax and refund 15 years’ worth of revenue collected from major corporations under that law.” (Joe Salkowski, “Stimulus Splits Area Lawmakers,” [Tucson] Arizona Daily Star, 11/29/01)

Sen. McCain Mocked Corporate Tax Relief As Stimulus: “No One Believes That If Ford Motor Co. Received A $1 Billion Check From The Federal Government That They’d Spend It Immediately.” “‘The House bill would give billions of dollars in tax money to big corporations’ without creating much benefit for the economy, McCain said. ‘No one believes that if Ford Motor Co. received a $1 billion check from the federal government that they’d spend it immediately.'” (Joe Salkowski, “Stimulus Splits Area Lawmakers,” [Tucson] Arizona Daily Star, 11/29/01)

Today, The McCain Campaign Says Tax Cuts For Consumers Are Not Needed To Stimulate The Economy:

The McCain 2008 Campaign Says Tax Rebates For Consumers Are Not Needed To Stimulate The Economy. “What about putting money directly in the hands of consumers, something some economists and Democratic candidates are proposing? ‘Don’t go for any gimmicks like a rebate or subsidies to people. They don’t need subsidies. They need lower taxes on the factors of production,’ [McCain adviser Jack] Kemp says.” (Alex Frangos, “Jack Kemp Previews McCain-onomics,” The Wall Street Journal, 1/17/08)

But In The Past, Sen. McCain Said Lower Income Tax Rebates Were The Way To Stimulate The Economy:

Sen. McCain, 2001: “A Good Package Would Be One That Gives Relief To Low- And Middle- Income Taxpayers.” “‘A good package would be one that gives relief to low- and middle- income taxpayers, one that extends unemployment and health-care benefits to the unemployed and offers some tax breaks that would take effect quickly,’ [Sen. McCain] said.” (Joe Salkowski, “Stimulus Splits Area Lawmakers,” [Tucson] Arizona Daily Star, 11/29/01)

Read Full Post »

Sen. McCain Is Pushing An Energy Tax Hike That Would Harm Michigan

McCain For Energy Tax Hike“What do John McCain, Environmental Defense, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Pew Center on Climate Change have in common? They have united to support a massive new tax increase on energy – which will raise costs throughout the economy and threaten the vitality of, among others, the oil and automobile industries I suspect that many who would be significantly harmed by McCain’s wrongheaded tax plan –  say, blue-collar workers in Michigan – have never heard of it.” (Roy Cordato, “McCain’s Costly Tax On Energy,” National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)


Sen. McCain Is Pushing For A Massive New Energy Tax Which Would Especially Harm Michigan:

Sen. McCain’s Legislation Would Dramatically Raise Taxes On All Carbon-Based Fuels. “What is not widely understood is that he is currently sponsoring legislation that, in the name of fighting global warming, would dramatically raise the tax on all carbon-based fuels, including gasoline, home heating oil, coal, and to a lesser extent, natural gas.” (Roy Cordato, “McCain’s Costly Tax On Energy,” National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)

Sen. McCain’s Energy Policy Could Devastate The Auto Industry. “Higher energy costs will, among other things, raise the cost of manufacturing big-ticket items in American factories. And higher gas prices will likely raise demand for those classes of automobiles that tend to be manufactured overseas. Somehow, I think Michigan voters will be less than thrilled about this, should anyone bother to inform them.” (Roy Cordato, “McCain’s Costly Tax On Energy,” National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)

Sen. McCain’s Plan Would Send Gas Taxes Sky High And Would Harm The National Economy:

The EPA Estimates Sen. McCain’s Plan Would Hike Gas Taxes By 68 Cents Per Gallon. “The EPA has estimated what the McCain energy tax would mean to consumers. Since the bill’s provisions are phased in, the full cost of the tax would not be felt for a number of years. But in a letter to Senator McCain dated July 2007, the EPA estimated that the tax will be about $.26 cents in current dollars per gallon of gasoline by 2030 and $.68 cents per gallon by 2050.” (Roy Cordato, “McCain’s Costly Tax On Energy,” National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)

The EPA Estimates Sen. McCain’s Plan Would Reduce United States GDP By As Much As $5.2 Trillion. “The effect on the economy of the McCain tax would be similar to any other broad-based tax. In the EPA’s own words: ‘The present value of the cumulative reduction in real GDP for the 2012-2030 period ranges from $660 billion to $2.1 trillion…the cumulative reduction in the present value of real GDP for the 2012-2050 period ranges from about $1.6 trillion to $5.2 trillion.'”  (Roy Cordato, “McCain’s Costly Tax On Energy,” National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)

Sen. McCain Has Repeatedly Teamed Up With Sen. Joe Lieberman To Push Radical Climate Change Legislation:

McCain-Lieberman Would Have Capped Carbon Dioxide Emissions. “The latest bill rejected by the Senate, sponsored by Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz, and Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., would have mandated caps on carbon dioxide and a market-oriented system for trading them. Those who needed more energy could theoretically buy credits from those who could make do with less. But government would still have to establish the overall cap on energy use.” (Thomas Bray, Op-Ed, “Public Rejects Giving Control Of Energy Use To Government,” The Detroit News, 6/26/05)

  • McCain-Lieberman Would Have Hiked Gas Prices. “The increases in gasoline prices projected to occur (is) 9 percent in 2010 and 19 percent in 2025.” (“Analysis Of Senate Amendment 2028, The Climate Stewardship Act Of 2003,” Energy Information Administration, 1/6/07)

The American Council For Capital Formation’s Margo Thorning Said That McCain-Lieberman Would “Significantly Hurt Michigan’s Economy.” “Imposing the McCain/Lieberman bill… would also significantly hurt Michigan’s economy. Residential electricity prices are projected to rise by 12 to 30 percent, household income falls by up to $791 and there would be up to 33,000 fewer jobs in by 2010 compared with the baseline forecast, according to an analysis by CRA International.” (Margo Thorning, Op-Ed, “Opinion: Capping Global Warming Gases Will Cost Michigan Jobs With Little Cooling,” The Detroit News, 3/22/07)

  • Thorning Said McCain-Lieberman “Would Seriously Harm Detroit’s Auto Industry.” “Proposals like McCain/Lieberman would seriously harm Detroit’s auto industry, as both union and management leaders noted earlier this month in a joint appearance before Congress. So profits would sink and jobs would vanish. That’s a high price to pay for a negligible benefit to the environment.” (Margo Thorning, Op-Ed, “Opinion: Capping Global Warming Gases Will Cost Michigan Jobs With Little Cooling,” The Detroit News, 3/22/07)

Detroit News Columnist Thomas Bray Said That The McCain-Lieberman Plan Would Ultimately Result In A Huge Indirect Tax On The American People.  “Aside from the crucial question of whether a government bureaucracy is smart enough to do so, even environmentalists confess that Kyoto or McLieberman measures would have been a small first step in clamping a huge indirect tax on the American and world economy.” (Thomas Bray, Op-Ed, “Public Rejects Giving Control Of Energy Use To Government,” The Detroit News, 6/26/05)

The U.S. Energy Information Administration Estimated That McCain’s Global Warming Legislation Would Have Decreased U.S. GDP By $776 Billion. “The cumulative losses in actual GDP are about $776 billion (1996 dollars) in the SA.2028 (McCain-Lieberman)…. The peak, single-year impact on actual GDP under SA.2028 occurs in 2025, with a loss of $76 billion (1996 dollars), or about 0.4 percent of GDP. The largest percentage change in actual GDP, 0.5 percent, occurs in 2011, where the estimated loss in actual GDP that year is $57 billion…” (“Analysis Of Senate Amendment 2028, The Climate Stewardship Act Of 2003,” Energy Information Administration, 1/6/07)

“Impact Of McCain-Lieberman * If The Climate Stewardship Act Passes, It Would Increase:

  • Energy Costs By 30 To 50 Percent.
  • Unemployment By Nine Percent.
  • Electricity Costs By 46 Percent.
  • Fuel Oil Prices By 33 Percent.
  • Inflation By 27 Percent.” (Editorial, “Climate Stewardship Bill Would Starve U.S. Economy,” The Detroit News, 10/30/03)

Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) Said McCain-Lieberman Was “The Right Thing To Do.” “Continuing his fight for environmental protection and energy security, Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.) today joined a bipartisan group of Senators in offering an amendment to the Energy Bill that would ensure that America takes a leadership role in addressing the effects of global climate change. … Kerry said. ‘It is not just the right thing to do, it is the smart thing to do.'” (Sen. John Kerry, “Kerry Joins Bipartisan Group In Offering Climate Change Amendment To Energy Bill,” Press Release, 6/22/05)

Sens. McCain, Kerry And Lieberman Voted For Global Warming Legislation That Was Soundly Rejected By Senate Republicans And Democrats. 49 Republicans and 11 Democrats voted against McCain’s “greenhouse gas” amendment to the energy bill. (H.R. 6, CQ Vote #148: Rejected 38-60: R 6-49; D 31-11; I 1-0, 6/22/05, McCain, Kerry and Lieberman Voted Yea)

Read Full Post »

Sen. McCain’s Push For Higher CAFE Standards
Reveals A “Curious Hostility” Toward Detroit

“[McCain] has a curious hostility toward America’s most important manufacturing industry, one that accounts directly and indirectly for roughly one in seven jobs nationwide. … As for CAFE, McCain is correct in stating that the industry has fought hard against higher fuel standards. As a senator whose job it is to protect American interests, McCain should join them. CAFE has cost the jobs of American autoworkers.” (Editorial, “Automakers Don’t Deserve McCain’s Disdain,” The Detroit News, 2/27/03)

Sen. McCain Has Pushed For Ever-Higher CAFE Standards, Without Regard To The Impact:

In 2002, Sen. McCain Teamed With Democrat Sen. John Kerry To Propose Higher CAFE Standards. “For the latest time since losing his bid for the GOP presidential nomination two years ago, Senate Commerce ranking member John McCain, R-Ariz., has teamed up with a prominent Democrat on legislation bitterly opposed by the Bush administration. This time, the issue is higher mileage standards for automobiles–and his partner is Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass. McCain and Kerry Thursday agreed to introduce legislation that would increase fuel efficiency standards to 36 miles per gallon by 2015.” (“McCain Again Teams Up With Dems,” National Journal’s CongressDaily, 3/8/02)

Sen. McCain Voted Against Requiring That CAFE Standards Be Economically Feasible. (H.R. 6, CQ Vote #156: Adopted 64-31: R 46-7; D 18-23; I 0-1, 6/23/05, McCain Voted Nay)

Sen. McCain Voted Against Requiring That CAFE “Not Have An Adverse Impact On The Economy, Consumer Choice, And Auto Safety.” (S. 14, CQ Vote #310: Adopted 66-30: R 45-6; D 21-23; I 0-1, 7/29/03, McCain Voted Nay)        

Sen. McCain Voted In Favor Of Higher CAFE Standards For Pickup Trucks. (S. 517, CQ Vote #48: Adopted 56-44: R 40-9; D 16-34: I 0-1, 3/13/02, McCain Voted Nay)

Sen. McCain’s Higher CAFE Standards Are The Same As Higher Taxes:

Sen. McCain Knows That His Push For Higher CAFE Standards Is The Same As Higher Taxes. “Sen. John McCain didn’t expect an enthusiastic response this morning when he touted the need for higher fuel standards to the Detroit Economic Club. No surprise, the crowd didn’t exactly embrace the idea. Asked how raising Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards was ‘different than raising taxes,’ McCain acknowledged he didn’t think his proposal would be very popular. ‘I know, I said it’s a tough issue. CAFE standards have to be improved. There’s too much pollution in the environment, there’s too much dependency on foreign oil and we’re going to have to take a number of steps,’ McCain told the crowd. He finished his answer to dead silence.” (Amy Schatz, “McCain Urges Higher CAFE Standards – In Motor City,” The Wall Street Journal‘s Washington Wire, http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire, Posted 10/9/07)

Sen. McCain’s Higher CAFE Standards Would Kill Michigan Jobs:

The Detroit News: “CAFE Has Cost The Jobs Of American Autoworkers.” (Editorial, “Automakers Don’t Deserve McCain’s Disdain,” The Detroit News, 2/27/03)

General Motors Predicted The McCain-Kerry CAFE Plan Could Cost As Many As 100,000 Jobs. “Major automakers characterize the Kerry-McCain plan as a reckless attempt to legislate technology that could curtail sales of their most profitable SUVs and pickups. General Motors Corp. says that as many as 100,000 jobs would be lost.” (Jeff Plungis, “Automakers Support Alternate CAFE Proposal,” The Detroit News, 3/11/02)

General Motors’ Bob Lutz Said An Increase In CAFE Standards Would “Effectively Hand The Truck And SUV Market Over To The Imports, Particularly The Japanese.” “With Congress warming to new environmental rules, General Motors Corp. Vice Chairman Bob Lutz says a proposal for higher fuel-economy standards that’s gaining popularity in Washington would ‘effectively hand the truck and SUV market over to the imports, particularly the Japanese.'” (Justin Hyde, “GM Exec: Fuel Rules Could Doom U.S. Market For Trucks,” Detroit Free Press, 12/26/06)

  • An Increase In CAFE Standards Would Damage GM’s Large Vehicle Maker Share In North America. “A CAFE increase “would limit GM’s ability to build as many larger vehicles as its customers may demand. Larger SUVs and pickups are a key part of GM’s plan to improve profits in North America.” (Justin Hyde, “GM Exec: Fuel Rules Could Doom U.S. Market For Trucks,” Detroit Free Press, 12/26/06)

Gary Rogers, CEO Of FEV Engine Technology: “The Cost Would Be Astronomical And In My Opinion Would Bring This Nation To Its Knees From An Economic Perspective.” Rogers: “If you are a full-line vehicle manufacturer and you have to go from an average of 24 mpg across the entire fleet of vehicles sold to 36 mpg – a 50 percent increase – in a short period of time by auto industry standards, say 10 years, it would require simultaneously redesigning all vehicles, all engines and all powertrains. Not even GM has the resources to begin that kind of work. The cost would be astronomical and in my opinion would bring this nation to its knees from an economic perspective.” (Gerry Kobe, “The Real CAFE Numbers: Automakers Call Recent CAFE Proposals ‘Radical’,” Automotive Industries, 5/02)

McCain’s Support Of Higher CAFE Standards Will Cost The Auto Industry Billions And Will Impact Jobs. “McCain, together with Democrat John Kerry, were initial co-sponsors of the 35 mpg (so-called CAFE) mandate that just passed Congress — legislation that economists predict will cost the domestic auto industry $85 billion over a decade and impact thousands of jobs.” (Henry Payne, Op-Ed, “Taxing Michigan,” National Review, 1/11/08)

Sen. McCain Has Attacked Detroit For Not Supporting His Job-Killing Higher CAFE Standards:

McCain “Questioned The Auto Industry’s Credibility.” “McCain questioned the auto industry’s credibility, citing past opposition to federal regulations requiring seat belts, greater fuel economy and air bags. ‘Whatever it is, they’ve said it was going to be the end of the auto industry,’ McCain said. ‘It hasn’t happened.'” (Jeff Plungis, “Plan To Raise Fuel Rules Fails,” The Detroit News, 3/13/02)

McCain “Blasted” The Automotive Industry For Resisting Changes. “McCain blasted the automakers for resisting the changes. ‘The auto industry has resisted every single change in safety and efficiency for over 40 years,’ he said. ‘At one time they were against seat belts. At one time they were against air bags.'” (Deirdre Shesgreen, “Senate Applies Brakes To Plan Calling For Higher Fuel Efficiency Standards,” St. Louis Post Dispatch, 3/14/02)

  • The Detroit News: McCain Treated Automakers Like “They Were A Bunch Of Tobacco Executives.” “John McCain opened Senate hearings on the safety of sports-utility vehicles (SUVs) by treating the nation’s automakers as if they were a bunch of tobacco executives.” (Editorial, “Automakers Don’t Deserve McCain’s Disdain,” The Detroit News, 2/27/03)
  • The Detroit News: McCain “Has A Curious Hostility Toward” The Auto Industry. “McCain, who chairs the powerful commerce committee, has a curious hostility toward America’s most important manufacturing industry, one that accounts directly and indirectly for roughly one in seven jobs nationwide.” (Editorial, “Automakers Don’t Deserve McCain’s Disdain,” The Detroit News, 2/27/03)
  • The Detroit News: McCain “Has An Unforgivable Ignorance Of The History Of Automotive Regulation.” (Editorial, “Automakers Don’t Deserve McCain’s Disdain,” The Detroit News, 2/27/03)

Read Full Post »

Sen. McCain Voted Against The Bush Tax Cuts; Candidate McCain Supports Them

“Anybody who watched my campaign should not have been astounded that I voted against the [Bush] tax cut …” – Sen. John McCain, 2001 (Kirk Victor, “McCain’s Evolution,” National Journal, 8/8/01)

 “I will not let the Democrats roll back the Bush tax cuts.” – Sen. John McCain, 2007 (Liz Sidoti, “McCain: Retool Jobs Programs,” The Associated Press, 10/10/07)

 In Tonight’s Debate, Sen. McCain Now Pledges To Make The Bush Tax Cuts Permanent:

 Tonight, McCain Called For Making The Bush Tax Cuts Permanent. “I think one of the first things we have to do that I forgot to mention is make these tax cuts permanent because we’ve got to give certainty to families and businesses all over America that these tax cuts will not expire and then give them the effect of a tax increase.” (Fox News, [Unverified Transcript], Republican Presidential Candidate Debate, Myrtle Beach, SC, 1/10/08)

 But In The Senate, McCain Voted Against The Bush Tax Cuts, Saying They Benefited The Wealthy:

 In 2001, Sen. McCain Was One Of Only Two Republicans To Vote Against The $1.35 Trillion Bush Tax Cuts. The bill lowered marginal rates, eliminated the marriage penalty, and doubled the child tax credit. (H.R. 1836, CQ Vote #170: Adopted 58-33: R 46-2; D 12-31; I 0-0, 5/26/01, McCain Voted Nay)

 ·         Sen. McCain Said The 2001 Bush Tax Cuts Benefited The Wealthy. SEN. JOHN MCCAIN: “I think there is a belief in America that too much of this tax cut still goes to wealthiest Americans. And maybe we could do something about those that still pay a significant portion of their income in payroll taxes.” (CNN’s “Late Edition,” 3/11/01)

 In 2003, Sen. McCain Was One Of Only Three Republicans To Twice Vote Against The $350 Billion Bush Tax Cuts. The comprehensive bill lowered taxes by $350 billion over 11 years – including increasing the child tax credit and eliminated the marriage penalty. (H.R. 2, CQ Vote #179: Passed 51-49: R 48-3; D 3-45; I 0-1, 5/15/03, McCain Voted Nay; H.R. 2, CQ Vote #196: Adopted 50-50: R 48-3; D 2-46; I 0-1, 5/23/03, McCain Voted Nay)

 ·         Sen. McCain Said The 2003 Bush Tax Cuts Benefited The Wealthy. MCCAIN: “I want to see tax cuts, if they are necessary, go to working Americans, not the wealthiest.” (Richard Ruelas, “McCain Isn’t Saying ‘Oui’ To Bush’s Tax Cut Plan,” The Arizona Republic, 4/25/03)

 And In 2004, Sen. McCain Said He Was Against Making All Of The Bush Tax Cuts Permanent:

 Sen. John McCain: “They Want To Make The Tax Cuts For Higher-Income People Permanent, And I Don’t Want That.” (NPR’s “Morning Edition,” 6/16/04)

 Sen. McCain Said He Would “Clearly” Not Support Extending The Tax Cuts.  NBC’s TIM RUSSERT: “Since the Civil War, every president who has been at war has increased taxes. Should the president consider postponing his tax cut?” SEN. MCCAIN: “I would have – I voted against the tax cuts because of the disproportionate amount that went to the wealthiest Americans. I would clearly support not extending those tax cuts in order to help address the deficit. But the middle-income tax credits, the families, the child tax credits, the marriage tax credits, all of those I would keep.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 4/11/04)

 Sen. McCain: “I Don’t Think We Should Continue To Cut Taxes.” MCCAIN: “I don’t think we should continue to cut taxes. I like – I think every American – I’m in favor of the middle-class, middle- income tax cuts, and I would vote to make them permanent.” (Sen. John McCain, Remarks, Washington, D.C., 5/18/04)

Read Full Post »

McCain Pessimistic About Michigan’s Future

Gov. Romney Knows How To Solve Michigan’s Problems

Detroit Auto Show Showcases Industry's Newest Models“Romney talked about reviving the auto industry, but McCain said some Michigan industries cannot be resurrected. ‘I’ve got to give you some straight talk: Some of the jobs that have left the state of Michigan are not coming back,’ he said. ‘They are not. And I am sorry to tell you that.'” (Michael Levenson, “Staking Out The Next Battlegrounds,” The Boston Globe, 1/10/08)

Sen. McCain Doesn’t Believe In The Future Of The U.S. Auto Industry:

Sen. John McCain: “Some Of The Jobs That Have Left The State Of Michigan Are Not Coming Back.” “Romney talked about reviving the auto industry, but McCain said some Michigan industries cannot be resurrected. ‘I’ve got to give you some straight talk: Some of the jobs that have left the state of Michigan are not coming back,’ he said. ‘They are not. And I am sorry to tell you that.'” (Michael Levenson, “Staking Out The Next Battlegrounds,” The Boston Globe, 1/10/08)

Sen. McCain Says He Is Merely “Aware” Of Michigan’s Woes:

Sen. McCain: “I’m Aware Of The Economic Difficulties Here In The State Of Michigan.” “‘I’m aware of the economic difficulties here in the state of Michigan,’ McCain said at a rally in Grand Rapids, just a few hours before Romney arrived.” (Michael Levenson, “Staking Out The Next Battlegrounds,” The Boston Globe, 1/10/08)

Sen. McCain Says He Doesn’t Fully Understand Economic Issues:

Sen. McCain: “‘The Issue Of Economics Is Not Something I’ve Understood As Well As I Should.” “Like Mike Huckabee, who joked recently that he ‘may not be the expert that some people are on foreign policy, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night,’ McCain suggested to reporters Monday that American consumer culture offered a short cut to expertise. ‘The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should,’ McCain said. ‘I’ve got Greenspan’s book.'” (Sasha Issenberg, “McCain: It’s About The Economy,” The Boston Globe, www.boston.com, Posted 12/18/07)

  • Sen. McCain: “I Still Need To Be Educated.” “On a broader range of economic issues, though, Mr. McCain readily departs from Reaganomics. His philosophy is best described as a work in progress. He is refreshingly blunt when he tells me: ‘I’m going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated.'” (Stephen Moore, “Reform, Reform, Reform,” OpinionJournal.com, 11/26/05)

Gov. Romney Will Fight To Revive Detroit’s Auto Industry:

Gov. Romney: I Will Fight For The Automobile Industry. “‘I always thought someday I’d be in the car business,’ Romney told the crowd in Grand Rapids yesterday. ‘Well, now I think I could do more to help the car business and to help Michigan by becoming president than by going to a job in the car industry.'” (Michael Levenson, “Staking Out The Next Battlegrounds,” The Boston Globe, 1/10/08)

“Romney Gets The Auto Industry… You Can’t Say That About Any Other Candidate In Either Party.” “He’d change it, he says, by helping automakers develop new technologies and by finding ways to reduce health care costs. Romney gets the auto industry — in fact, he’s offered himself up to run an automaker if this politics thing doesn’t work out. You can’t say that about any other candidate in either party.” (Nolan Finley, “Like His Dad, Mitt Romney’s A Car Guy,” The Detroit News, 11/1107)

Gov. Romney Knows That Washington Does Not Have A Solution For The Industry’s Problems. “‘I keep hearing this thing about why doesn’t Detroit build cars that we want, and it drives me nuts,’ he says. ‘Detroit is making great cars. Look at the Mustang [he drives one]. The U.S. auto manufacturers are burdened in excess of $2,000 per vehicle in health care and retirement costs. They have to make a car that is competitive for $2,000 less, and that’s not easy to do. They’ve done a remarkable job. They’re really quite creative and able.’ That’s not the kind of talk you hear much from Washington.” (Nolan Finley, “Like His Dad, Mitt Romney’s A Car Guy,” The Detroit News, 11/1107)

Gov. Romney Knows Michigan’s Problems And Takes Them Personally:

Gov. Romney: “It Pains Me Both As A Michigander By Roots And Also As An American To See Our Manufacturing Base In The Auto Sector Erode.” “‘I grew up in the automobile industry,’ the former Massachusetts governor and GOP presidential hopeful says. ‘The biggest time of the year was the auto show at Cobo Hall. And I want to see the American automobile industry succeed. It pains me both as a Michigander by roots and also as an American to see our manufacturing base in the auto sector erode. I want that to change.'” (Nolan Finley, “Like His Dad, Mitt Romney’s A Car Guy,” The Detroit News, 11/1107)

Gov Romney: “We Need To Have Somebody Who Cares Very Deeply About This State – And I Do.” “‘I’ve watched with concern as I’ve watched Michigan go through a one-state recession,’ the former Massachusetts governor said, standing on a chair and yelling without a microphone. ‘It’s just not right, and we need to have somebody who cares very deeply about this state – and I do.'” (Michael Levenson, “Staking Out The Next Battlegrounds,” The Boston Globe, 1/10/08)

Gov. Romney: “Michigan Is A State Going Through A One-State Recession.” GOV. MITT ROMNEY: “And I recognize that when Michigan is hurting, it is a precursor of what could happen to the entire country. Because our manufacturing base, if it’s threatened there, it’s threatened everywhere. And so for me, Michigan is not just, oh, one state that I hope they’re doing well. No, for me, Michigan is a state that has to do well. Michigan is a state going through a one-state recession.” (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks, 1/9/08)

Gov. Romney: “I’ll Make A Commitment: If I’m President, That One-State Recession Is Over.” GOV. MITT ROMNEY: “It ain’t working and you’re going to find that that experiment is going to be rejected by the people of Michigan who want instead, somebody who knows, cares and loves that state and will fight very hard to help it come out of its one-state recession. I’ll make a commitment: if I’m president, that one-state recession is over.” (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks, 1/9/08)

“And I want to do a better job for the American worker. And by the way, this is key for Michigan. And for me, Michigan is personal. I’m going to go to work to help Michigan.” – Gov. Mitt Romney (CNBC, Republican Presidential Candidate Debate, Dearborn, MI, 10/9/07)

Read Full Post »

Here we are a couple days out of the Iowa fiasco. Mitt Romney came in a distant second to Mike Huckabee. News on the ground explains that Evangelicals were aflame because the big news Huckabee’s subliminal floating cross raised their ire. So, in defense, they came out in droves. They came out to make sure the Latter-day Saint faith was “illegitimized” and the defense of their “faith” succeeded. What I see is a legacy of mobs burning Mormons at the stake continued into this century. I saw a mob come out to “crucify” Mitt Romney.

I am Christian. I am Mormon. I was offended by Mike Huckabee’s ad. This comes after some of the ugliest weeks of attempted destruction and “illegitimizing” of my faith. Had Evangelicals, in particular Mike Huckabee and his garbage bag of worshippers actually done “what Jesus would have done”, this race could be oh so different. And let’s not leave out John McCain and both candidates disgusting, bottom-feeding shadow campaigns. No change in policy that Mitt Romney has ever made justifies or qualifies the virtual “burning at the stake” these professed “Christians” have attempted at the Latter-day Saint faith (Mormons) or to the candidate Mitt Romney.

I am full aware of Mitt Romney’s changes in stance on some issues. I am not naive in this regard at all. If Harry Reid – also a Mormon – were running for this election, I would do everything in my power to keep him from office. I say this to qualify that I would not vote for a member of my faith simply because we attend the same world-wide church.

What I find shocking is that our nation would be hard pressed to find any Evangelical who has accomplished the same level of success in all areas of life the way Mitt Romney has. He has been blessed with the phenomenal combination of “hard work” meeting “opportunity” in just about every area of his life. I would like to see any candidate or “Evangelical” who can make these kinds of claims.

Mitt Romney and his family have accomplished success in business, family and poltics that in all regards, populist Evangelicals and non-conservatives can only greedily hope to ever attain. What I suspect is that the Evangelicals are mainly a poor to middle-class religion. The ones who make it to the top are the ones who have exploited the collection plate as keepers of “ministries” or “congregations”. It’s just a suspicion of mine, but I’d venture to say that any religion willing to pay $25,000 for a guest speaker let alone $100 is just out of their minds. The premise that you get “paid” to prosper doing any of the Lord’s work is absurd – just saying. It’s really all about what’s in it for themselves.

So in order to justify their many ethical, political, social, and familial failures, they (these Mormon-hating Evangelicals) must do everything they can to degrade and defame the one candidate who has accomplished so many of the goals these other groups “claim” to want for our country. They profess to want stronger families, success in employment, less dependence on government, clean political stances – in other words, the rugged individual’s American dream. But their candidate, Mike Huckabee is anything but that. His success only comes from the mastery of manipulation of people and their pocketbooks.

Mitt Romney exemplifies the honor and privilege of achieving and accomplishing most, if not all, of those dreams. Yes he is a convert to “life”. Isn’t that we all want? Everyone has made this case ad nauseum. I, too, am a convert. There was a time when I wanted young women to choose life of their own volition, through “long suffering and persuasion”. Times have changed. Our culture is not what it used to be. The moral fiber of our country is disintegrating by the second. There are no fences or guardrails to keep the self-destruction of our nation anymore. Just look to Britany Spears and family to see the model of this. And so the time has come for organized matter dissolve into its unorganized state, the time has also come to put the brakes in place for protecting life.

In the last few weeks, more hangings at traffic lights and cranes took place in Iran . See for yourself if you have the guts. Warning: one is a video of living people dying by hanging at a main intersection by traffic lights. The other are the photos.

Do these populist voters have any idea of the “fences and guardrails” that would be imposed upon us if we continue to take our freedom for granted and hand the GOP over to people that make us “feel good”. Can anyone see what is at stake? Want another shocker? Watch how the Chinese feed live animals to crowds of lions for fun at their local zoos to desensitize their children to the sport and leisure of voracious killing. And by the way, they hang people for adultery. How many people in this country, including Britany Spears, would even be left – let alone a couple of presidential candidates, if Sharia law were to be in effect in this country?

This is not anything about bass guitar playing, Jay Leno schmoozing. This is about voting a candidate who has the experience of sometimes tough, heart wrenching life decisions. This is NOT a game. This is not about fun. This is about voting an executive leader into the greatest office of the greatest nation on this planet. Our voting is about issues.

Mitt Romney is the man with the experience and ethics to carry this nation forward. It is time to set aside jealousy for success, class envy, and liberal antics. Mitt Romney is the best candidate for President of the United States.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »