AZ for Mitt

A blog dedicated to informing Arizonans about Mitt Romney and the campaign for the 2008 presidential nomination.

Saturday, July 28, 2007

Romney the only candidate talking seriously about these issues and proposing actual policy. That's because Romney's a doer, not a talker. Here's a recent press release:

Governor Romney's Initiative To Guard Our Children:

Today, In Iowa, Governor Mitt Romney Announced A New Initiative To Prevent Pornography From Reaching Children On Their Computers. Children accessing pornography online is a major problem but one easily solved through determined action. As President, Governor Romney will work with computer and software companies to ensure that every home computer has effective software to filter out unwanted pornography.

- Governor Romney Will Work To Ensure Every Parent Has Access To Software Filters That Guard Their Children From Online Pornography. Numerous software programs exist that prevent unsolicited content from popping up on Internet browsers and filter websites a child may visit. With one in three youths reporting unwanted exposure to sexual material, the challenge is getting these tools into the hands of parents. To that effect, Governor Romney also will work with computer and software companies to make sure all new computers have optional parental control software filters that are ready and easy to use during setup. Governor Romney will also promote and increase awareness of available parental control filtering products for existing computers.

- Responsible Parents Are The First Line Of Defense In Guarding Our Children From Online Pornography. The most important work being done in America today is the work being done by responsible parents inside the four walls of the American home. We need to inform them and give them the tools they need to protect their children, especially while their children use the Internet to communicate with those outside the home.

Governor Romney's Agenda To Protect Our Children:

Working To Ensure Parents Have The Adequate Tools To Protect Their Children Is Only One Part Of Governor Romney's Agenda To Guard Our Children Online. Governor Romney Has Proposed The "One-Strike, You're Ours" Law For Those Convicted Of Preying On Children Using The Internet. As President, Governor Romney will propose new, tougher federal penalties for first-time offenders who use the Internet to sexually assault children, including stiff mandatory jail time to be followed by lifetime tracking by Global Positioning Satellite (GPS). This will represent a "One-Strike, You're Ours" law for child predators.

- By Enacting Tougher Laws, The Federal Government Will Be Following The Lead Of States Across The Country. Governor Romney's "One-Strike, You're Ours" Law will impose on the federal level the same tough sentences that states like Florida and California have put in place with "Jessica's Law." In Massachusetts, Governor Romney successfully fought to put the photos of the state's most dangerous sex offenders on the Internet, and he signed legislation to make it easier to extend the civil commitments of sex offenders. Yet, most federal laws are not tough enough when sentencing a first-time offender for sex crimes against a child.

- The Growing Threat Of Crimes Committed Against Children Via The Internet Is A Disturbing Trend. In February 2006, the Department of Justice (DOJ) launched Project Safe Childhood, an initiative designed to protect children as they navigate the Internet. The Bush administration correctly recognized that as technology advances and the Internet becomes more accessible, there is a real danger that computer-facilitated crimes committed against children will continue to rise.

- Every Day We Are Reminded About The Growing Threat Posed To Our Children. A new study suggests that 85% of convicted child pornography offenders have also sexually abused children. Also, according to news reports, identified and removed more than 29,000 registered sex offenders from its online site. Sexual predators are going high-tech and so must our laws.

Friday, July 13, 2007

When it rains, it pours...

DES MOINES, Iowa - John McCain's campaign is losing two veteran Republican strategists in Iowa and will report a seven-figure debt for the second quarter in a row, back-to-back blows to a presidential bid still reeling from a major staff shake-up earlier this week.

Ed Failor Jr., said Thursday that he and Karen Slifka plan to notify McCain by letter of their decisions to leave. Both are GOP operatives with deep ties in Iowa, which holds the first-in-the-nation caucuses, and national politics.

"As much as I like Senator McCain, it's not a team I'm willing to stay involved with any longer," Failor said...

In more bad news for McCain, a co-chair of his Florida campaign — state Rep. Bob Allen — was arrested Wednesday...Allen has been charged with solicitation for prostitution, which has a maximum penalty of one year in jail.

And of course Rudy can't be outdone by McCain...

Earlier this week, U.S. Sen. David Vitter, the Southern regional chairman for Rudy Giuliani's presidential campaign, was linked to the so-called D.C. Madam's escort service.

Vitter, a Louisiana Republican, said, "This was a very serious sin in my past for which I am, of course, completely responsible. Several years ago, I asked for and received forgiveness from God and from my wife in confession and marriage counseling."

It was the second blow for Giuliani's campaign. Last month, South Carolina Treasurer Thomas Ravenel, the state chairman for Giuliani's campaign, was indicted on federal cocaine charges.

People criticize Mitt for being "squeaky clean," but that's exactly the type of the leader the GOP and the nation needs.

Thursday, July 12, 2007

It looks like Illinois is trying to steal Iowa's thunder by announcing a GOP straw poll to be held just five days after Ames. Click here for more.

A recent ARG poll (which always seem to put McCain higher than other polls) has the current race this way in Illinois (4% margin of error):

21%--F. Thompson
Everyone else not above 2%.

Given Romney's organizational strengths, he should at least be able to outpace McCain, potentially also Thompson in the Straw Poll if his campaign makes a big push.

Thursday, July 05, 2007

I have to agree with this AP story on CNN that Fred Thompson has style, but lacks substance and specifics at this point (and, I argue, will always come up short in that category, especially compared to Romney's resume and agenda). Here are a few highlights:

Fred Thompson's easygoing, no-nonsense style is clearly his strength and undoubtedly has helped him soar in presidential polls. It may only get him so far.

Sooner or later, the all-but-declared candidate will have to answer the question: What else do you offer?...

His stump speech consists of broad conservative themes, talk of bipartisanship and commentary on issues of the day, but it largely lacks any vision for the future of the country. He deflects questions on what a Thompson presidency would look like and demurs when pressed for specific proposals for how to fix the nation's ills. He opines on hot topics, from taxes to terrorism, in online columns and on his Web site, usually without being challenged....

Faced with questions about where he stands on abortion, he cites a National Right to Life endorsement in his 1994 Senate race and brags, "I was ranked 100 percent on abortion-related issues." But the group gave him a less-than-perfect score in subsequent years, and a Project Vote Smart candidate questionnaire from 1994 indicated that he backed abortion rights in the first trimester.

Thompson also has been forced to defend his lobbying career amid questions about some of his clients, including deposed Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide.

In response to such inquiries, Thompson told reporters: "Nobody yet has pointed out any of my clients that didn't deserve representation." That kind of statement is not likely to deter reporters from looking more closely any more than it did in 1987 when Gary Hart dared people to investigate him amid allegations of philandering. They did and he ended up withdrawing from the race for a time when an extramarital relationship was discovered.

Thompson also has had to deal with a few unforced errors. Last week, he felt the need to clarify a remark he made while criticizing the failed immigration overhaul bill in the Senate. He bemoaned illegal immigration from Cuba and elsewhere, and said: "I don't imagine they're coming here to bring greetings from Castro. We're living in the era of the suitcase bomb."
A day later, he posted an explanation on his Web site. Democrats assailed him for not understanding Cuban-Americans....

Still, for all Thompson's style, he left others waiting to hear more substance.


Robert P. George, a graduate of Oxford and Harvard Law School, is a member of Pres. Bush's Council on Bioethics and a professor of jurisprudence and constitutional law at Princeton. Based on this snippet from an article from, I'm guessing that Rudy Guiliani won't be looking to tap George for support for his campaign or to be a member of Rudy's Faith and Values Committee-if Rudy even has one (though I think Romney should invite George to be a member):

Some politicians say that they’re ‘personally opposed’ to abortion, yet ‘pro-choice,’” says the 48-year-old professor of constitutional law and moral philosophy. “But we must ask: Is this a position that can survive the test of logical coherence? After all, if abortion is wrong, surely it is wrong because it is the unjust taking of the life of a developing human being.” He pauses to let that sink in and then launches another question: “And if one believes that, then what could possibly justify a regime of law that licenses so grave an injustice?”

“Of course,” George adds, climbing up on a front-row chair and crossing his arms, “If abortion is not a form of homicide, if the developing embryo or fetus has the moral status of an unwanted growth — such as a tumor — there would be no grounds on which to ‘personally oppose’ abortion. So the question is this: Is the developing embryo or fetus a human being or a mere unwanted growth? Notice that this is not a religious or even an ethical question. It is a question of human embryology and developmental biology.”

George hoists a foot onto the chair back, plants his forearms onto his knee, and fires off another round of questions: Is it morally acceptable to conduct research on embryos not yet implanted in the uterus, even if the embryos must then be killed? What about so-called spare embryos in frozen storage, which have no prospect of implantation? Is abortion ever morally justified, despite its homicidal character?

Students begin offering tentative answers — but not before they've taken a moment to think. As smart as these kids are, after half a semester in George's Civil Liberties class, they've learned not to blurt out a thoughtless opinion: George will force them to defend it, which could prove embarrassing.

One bespectacled youth speaks up: "I don't think I was an embryo," he announces. His classmates chuckle, but George responds seriously. "You weren't an embryo. Were you a fetus? Were you an adolescent?"

“I am not a physical organism,” the young man insists; he is his ideas, beliefs, and desires.
George pounces on the person/body dualism implicit in this remark and forces the class to confront the implications of affirming it: "If 'I' was not an embryo or fetus, neither was 'I' once an infant," he says. "To have destroyed the fetus or infant that later became 'me' would not have been to destroy me. So at what point then do we say 'I' began to exist? At what point do we draw the line on killing?"

George then drops a cerebral smart bomb: "If dualism is true, the answer won't be 'birth,'" he notes. Will it be six months after birth? A year? Two years? Three? After all, when does a child achieve thoughts, beliefs, and desires?

Pro-choice students must now confront an uncomfortable fact: The logical implications of their position entail believing that killing three-year-old children is morally acceptable.

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, July 03, 2007

There has been much speculation over who Thompson would hurt most by entering the GOP nomination race. However, that's all it's been--speculation. However, a look at CNN's polling numbers for the first five states reveals an interesting pattern:



New Hampshire

South Carolina


When Thompson is up in the polls, McCain is down. Added together their poll percentages range from 24-34%. By contrast, adding Thompson's numbers to Romney or Rudy give ranges from 27-45% and 32-48% respectively.

In addition, there is no pattern--sometimes Romney or Rudy is up and Thompson down (and vice versa), and sometimes Romney or Rudy and Thompson are both up. On the other hand, McCain and Thompson never finish 1-2 in a poll, and never are both at 15% or higher in the same poll.

While I don't claim to be a statistician, this is the only pattern I can see emerging from a combined look of these five first-state polls, and it demonstrates that Thompson is takest the biggest bite out of McCain's numbers.

Evangelicals for Mitt's David French has a good post on today's release of Mitt and Rudy's fundraising numbers. Essentially, comparing apples to apples (let's see if the mainstream media will actually do that), Rudy raised about a million dollars more than Romney: $15 million to $14 million, if you take out the $6.5 million loan Romney gave himself (which boosts his numbers past Guiliani).

Now, I find these numbers puzzling. Rudy admitted spent a majority of his energies in this quarter fundraising, with some numbers indicated he had twice as many fundraising events as did Romney in June. Yet, "America's Mayor," the man leading the GOP polls, was only able to bring in $1 million dollars more? Why? Romney still suffers from name recognition, yet he more than doubles his donor base and barely get out-fundraised by the "rock star" of the Republican party.

If Rudy continues to have to exert twice the energy to barely outraise Romney, my guess is that is going to hurt Guiliani down the road when he needs to broaden his activities.