This narrative from The Caucus The New York Times Politics Blog chronicles a reporter’s perspective on families and the Romney campaign.
The part that really stood out for me in the piece is the quote in the title of this message, the following is the exact statement:
Members of the Romney family gathered for a photograph.
(Photo: Elise Amendola/Associated Press)
As a way of building up families, Mr. Romney talked over the weekend about reviving a policy under President Reagan that mandated a “family impact statement” be drafted for every new policy or government program. I wondered what one of those might look like for a presidential campaign.
Check out the entire entry, I found it very insightful about the behind the scenes of Romney’s campaign. I’m so happy that he cares so much about his family that he’s taken each and every one of them along for the ride.
Cross Posted at Elect Romney in 2008.
In this race for president there has been a lot of focus on what conservatives don’t want. First on the list is another Clinton presidency. Most of us agree that any of the Republican candidates would be far better for the country than the electing the first female president.
With that conviction comes a number of questions, however. Looking at the past, we can see that it is better to get behind one Republican candidate rather than splitting the vote between several conservative candidates which leaving the liberal with a single, solid base. That said, should we nominate a candidate simply because at the moment he seems to be doing better in the polls than the Democratic leader.
Unfortunately, this is all far from hypothetical. Sean Hannity has dubbed his radio show the “Stop Hillary Express,” and vowed to support whichever candidate wins the Republican nomination. Jim Dobson has commented that he would either not vote or vote for a third party candidate if the Republican nominee is not a social conservative. Many feel inclined to support Rudy Giuliani simply because in current national polls he is ahead of Hillary Clinton.
At this point, the focus should be on choosing the best candidate for the job. Polls can be manipulated or misleading. Public opinion can also change. Once we have a nominee we can focus on closing any gap in the national polls.
Mitt Romney is the more socially conservative than either Rudy Giuliani or Fred Thompson. He has shown in-site and leadership on such issues as health care and security. He has been successful in many endeavors both professional, political, and personal throughout his life. He has a plan for the future.
Many will argue that he is not “ideal.” Well, I have yet to find an ideal politician. What I have found, in Mitt Romney, is the person who best fits my idea of good government who is running for President in 2008.
South Carolina has been a tough spot for the Romney campaign to get off the ground and it seemed fairly obvious why. South Carolinians are known for being anti-Mormon and distrustful of Yankees in general.
Over the last couple of months, though, Governor Romeny has risen dramatically in the polls. And it makes me smile to see bloggers and reporters scratching their heads over why this is so. You see, I lived and worked in South Carolina for 9 months and I know exactly what happened.
The people I met in South Carolina were honest, church-going folks who lived the golden rule. If their preacher preached against Mormons they mostly assumed he knew what he was talking about. But it didn’t change the way they treated thier Mormon neighbors. For the most part, it didn’t change the way that they thought about their Mormon neighbors.
Many of the people I met didn’t like Yankees. They would talk harshly about “the Yankees up North” but they would always welcome any New Englanders who moved into town. Some fought for years to keep the Confederate flag flying over the state capital even though it was offensive to black citizens. Yet these same people had countless black friends and co-workers whom they respected and admired.
For these people, any bigoted beliefs they held were meant to apply to some distant group of people that they did not know. Anyone they knew that did not fit these stereotypes was obviously an exception to the rule.
That’s the key. As long as the people of South Carolina did not know Mitt Romney, he was just a Mormon Yankee. And, as far as they were concerned, he could have the vote of all the Mormon Yankees living in South Carolina. But then they got to know him. They saw his family. He became a neighbor; a friend. Then they could judge him on his own merits rather than stick him into a pre-determined catergory.
In my 9 months as a South Carolina citizen, I never did meet anyone who was as bigoted as the average South Carolinian is reported to be. Of course, that doesn’t mean they weren’t there. I heard plenty of stories from people who knew them or were related to them. And Mitt Romney will probably never win the support of those people.
But the majority of South Carolinians are simply waiting for him to convince them that he is not just a good guy but a good guy with the right qualifications to be president.
“Well there’s no question in my view that one of the ways you instill family values is by having the White House be a place that demonstrates family values,” Romney said earlier this week.
At a forum hosted by the George Bush Presidential Library earlier this year, a young man began the question and answer portion by energetically praising Romney’s values and integrity. Romney responded with the quip, “That’s my son, by the way.”
Anyone who comes within arms length of the Romney campaign will notice the prominent role that his wife and sons play in his life. It is also apparent to anyone willing to scratch the surface that they have the kind of love and respect for their father that makes them willing to be an enthusiastic part of his bid for the presidency. What parent doesn’t want their sons, or daughters, to have that kind of confidence in them?
Romney continued his comments by saying, “And… I think during the last Clinton presidency the White House did not demonstrate that in a way that was helpful to our nation’s culture.”
Almost anyone old enough to vote will remember the nationwide refrain in the late 90s that went something like this: “Well, maybe he isn’t a good person in his private life but he’s doing a good job as president. And his personal life is none of our business anyway.”
I heard this sentiment repeated so often that I wondered if people were actually trying to convince themselves. After all, Clinton’s personal life caused him to commit perjury, encourage others to perjure themselves, obstruct justice in a case against him, and be impeached by the Congress of the United States. It has also been suggested by commentators like Rush Limbaugh (actually, he’s the only one I know of first hand but I believe he makes a valid point) that the lack of personal integrity in Clinton’s life both before and during his presidency made it difficult for him to aggressively command the armed forces and counter the terrorist threat against our nation. *
These serious consequences were in addition to the fact that the Clinton escapades were reported with lavish detail throughout the nation, leaving a trail of disgrace and depravity surrounding the White House where we once had thought to shelter dignity. Romney, of course, realizes the enormity of leading a nation by example. He continued in his remarks, “you’re gonna be under a microscope and at least during the time you’re in the White House you ought to live by a high standard, because the world is looking at you, you’re representing not only yourself but your country. And the kids of America are looking at you.” In this election we can decide much about the future of our nation’s families. How will we define marriage and family? What will we teach our children about morality and personal responsibility? What limits will we place on the sanctity of life? With these issues at stake, we couldn’t do better than to elect a man who has pledged to lead the crusade for family values by example.
*This is in reference to commentary done on the Rush Limbaugh show around the time the film “The Path to 9-11” aired on ABC in 2006. Comments were based on information quoted from Richard Clarke’s book “Against All Enemies: Inside America’s War on Terror.”
Is Giuliani creating his own political party? The Demi-Republican Party? Democrat on social issues and Republican on fiscal issues.
Giuliani is often considered a front-runner in the Republican race, however it is often difficult knowing to which party he really belongs. I often think that he could have run as a conservative Democrat as easily as he is running as a liberal Republican.
Why do so many so-called Republicans support a candidate that only stands for a portion of what Republicans really believe?
Giuliani is not the best Republican candidate. He does not uphold the values held by the Republicans in this nation.
Giuliani is socially liberal in nearly every respect—even ask his staff.
Regarding the issue of fidelity within marriage, Giuliani’s track record is not stellar. Most people know he has been married three times—If this isn’t bad enough look at the way he treats the women he marries. The first one was kind of a weird situation. He was married to his second cousin for 14 years; then he had it annulled—how do you erase a marriage of 14 years? Did annulling it make him feel like he had not done something wrong? The end of his second marriage of 17 years, which was riddled with questionable female “relationships”, came after he announced his plans for separation at a press conference—where’s the tact? Regarding his separation, Giuliani stated, “This is damaging and painful for everyone”—yet he still proceeded? His third marriage was, I guess, a “traditional” THIRD marriage—he married a woman who told everyone she had only been married once. As it turned out, her marriage to Giuliani was also a third for her—no surprise? See entire article at CNN
.
In a memo written by Giuliani’s staff, his aids give a harsh assessment of his flaws in a “vulnerability study”.
Giuliani’s staff stated that, “his support for abortion and gay rights may alienate many conservative voters.”—I hope so. Giuliani’s aides were also concerned that, as a former Democrat, he would be painted as a “flip-flopper,” and that his tenure as an official in Ronald Reagan’s Justice Department was an “albatross for a liberal city” (referring, of course, to New York City). “There is not a minute to waste in inoculating against the Reagan Republican moniker,” the memo said, adding that the candidate should emphasize his “independence from traditional national Republican policies.”—Or do as he did and re-define the Republican parties values.
The memo also stated that, “gay marriage really is the only issue where Giuliani opposes the gay agenda.”
While a supporter of abortion rights, Giuliani had stumbled badly on the issue in his 1989 mayoral campaign, sounding like “just another pro-life male politician trying to explain how he wasn’t anti-woman,” the memo said. The advisers said Giuliani could “win over undecided pro-choice activists” by being more “succinct” about his support for the procedure and for public financing of abortions.
The memo also reported the “charge” that “Giuliani received special treatment from a friendly federal judge to avoid military service during the Vietnam War,” and later “hypocritically prosecuted draft dodgers.”
So where does Giuliani stand on complete fidelity in marriage, abortion, gay rights, and war—just ask his staff. His staff would tell you that, “He doesn’t really fit in with the Republicans. Too liberal.” See entire article at The Washington Post The Washington Post
I hope during this primary election people will stand strong with the candidate that truly maintains their values and not their vote simply out of fear. I worry that many people will compromise their values by voting for Giuliani because he will supposedly “relate to both parties” or “have the best chance to beat a Democrat.” Mitt Romney is our strongest candidate for all of these reasons. He has maintained his values as is represented by his intact, faithful marriage. Mitt Romney can certainly relate to both parties and solidly has the best chance to beat a Democrat as he showed as Governor of a mostly-democrat state.
~ Angi Bagley-Hansen
“We must make private contribution, not concentrated power, the yardstick of reward.” George Romney
“There is not one day when I have regretted making a full commitment to public service. The battles, the triumphs, the personal associations are more rewarding than I could have ever imagined. I could have made a good deal more money over the last five years had I stayed at my investment job…Instead, I have come to know many more people and to help many more people I do not know. It’s a currency of a different denomination: it can’t be taxed, stolen, or depleted. The more I have of it, the richer I feel” Mitt Romney
Donna L.
In a recent article, entitled “Romney’s Chicks“, the author blatantly patronizes today’s American homemakers. He suggests that a large amount of Romney’s female supporters are “just housewives”. The author’s agenda is clear, but he is clueless.
Today’s homemakers, as they guide, nurture and enrich their families, are the developers, trainers and empowerers of tomorrow’s leadership. Who better to endorse and support a candidate whose promise is Strong. New. Leadership? Who better to perfectly judge the qualities and values needed for efficient leadership?
Today’s women, whether leading within the corporate boardroom or leading within the four walls of their own homes, are ready for a Presidential candidate who has what it takes to get our country back on track with the values, strength, innovation and integrity that has made America the greatest nation on earth.
Mitt Romney is that candidate!
And maybe it takes “just a homemaker” to lead the nation in recognizing such a simple truth.
Your thoughts are welcome.
Bethie
When Ann Romney appeared on Fox & Friends this week she shared a story about how she got her boys to practice the piano, and I find it good advice for any situation. She talked about how she really got on her oldest 3’s case to practice , but when #4 came around she just stopped the pressure and encouraged him to play sports. Eventually he asked to play the piano, and can play it well. The Romney’s had laid the foundation for piano playing (among I’m sure a vast array of other good solid family values), and he “got it”. The same goes for values in general, if we teach our children well. They won’t go far from them. Governor Romney is by all accounts a solid family man, with family values. And I look forward to having him as our next President of the United States of America.
Ann Marie