I’ll admit it. I’m a “new media” addict. I haven’t turned on a MSM channel or subscribed to a newspaper in years, and yet I’m more informed than I’ve ever been in my entire life. From morning till night, armed with my Walkman radio and my key board, I’m what Laura Ingraham describes as an “aggressive news consumer”. My morning starts with Laura’s show, which leads into Rush, who leads into Glenn Beck’s radio show, who leads into Sean Hannity’s radio show, who leads into Britt Hume, who leads into Glenn Becks CNN tv show, who leads into O’Reilly, who leads into Hannity & Colmes. In between, I’m surfing the web, hitting up all my favorite blogs, and usually by midnight, I’ve consumed a fair assessment of the days news. I thank God for radio talk shows, the internet, and the demise of the stranglehold that the left has had on the media and the news we receive. I applaud the death of the Dinosaur Media and will dance upon it’s grave when it finally dies off.

As Electromneyin2008.com (this sites owner) is constantly updating with up-to-the-minute election news with the help of several wonderful contributors, finding unique content for WomenforRomney is a challenge. I will, however, try my best. During the course of any one day, some things stick and some things don’t, whether it be for informative or entertainment value. On this particular day, it was a call into Rush Limbaugh’s show that stuck with me……

The day after Mitt Romney’s Michigan Primary win, several women called into Rush’s radio show. Rush was taken by surprise by their enthusiasm and the depth of their knowledge of Mitt Romney as a candidate. Mitt was their “guy”, and they were brimming with excitement that Michigan had given him a pretty resounding nod of the head, with a strong conservative/republican vote for the win. After several calls, Rush realized that these women callers all had a deep admiration for Mitt Romney; not only as a candidate, but as a husband, a father, and businessman. Rush took three calls, and they all went similar to this:

RUSH: “I’m wondering — it’s hard to say this with three calls in one busy broadcast — but I wonder if we’re uncovering something here that’s being missed, and that is that there’s this army of women who apparently are really drawn to Romney…..You’re right, you are the third babe today that’s just going on and on and on about Mitt Romney. It’s all based on policy, right, it’s not based on how he looks?”

CALLER: It is based on policy, yes. He’s a very good-looking man — but it is based on policy, because we women who are true conservative –Republicans — and comfortable in our own skin — and would never vote for anybody based on gender or race, want to listen to what these candidates are saying.”

RUSH: “What do you think of his wife and family?”

CALLER: “I think that he has a lovely wife and five beautiful sons and daughters-in-law and grandchildren. He comes across as a very wholesome American. More important than that, though, is for us to begin to see that he believes in Americans’ ability to use their own mind and ingenuity, to produce the best ideas and products, and hope that the government would just step aside and allow the free market system to work and let our government just continue to protect us so that we remain the strongest country in protecting freedom and homeland security and the war on terror, and I — ”

RUSH: “Let’s get to the character side. I’m running out of time. Does Romney, to you, exude a powerful morality?”

CALLER: “He exudes the most powerful morality I have seen in any candidate.”

RUSH: “This is fascinating. Ruth, I can’t thank you enough.”

CALLER: I thank you, Rush, and just keep up the wonderful work. My husband and I listen to you every day, and we love you, and just keep that faith, because there are Republican conservatives out there who will prove who the true candidate will be, and I believe it will be Romney.”

RUSH: “We have decided to come up with a name for you babes who are smitten with Mitt Romney, first of many, but this works: Mittens. We’re going to refer to you as Mittens.”

I guess in Rush’s world, that makes me a “Mitten”.  It’s a title I can definitely live with….it’s comfortable and it fits.

Even the MSM couldn’t ignore Governor Romney’s win in the Michigan Primary last night.  Unlike Romney’s Wyoming victory, the cameras were rolling in Michigan for days before the contest.  They recorded Romney’s positive messages about turning around the Michigan economy, protecting our borders and defeating our enemies abroad.  These issues won Romney 39% of the Michigan vote, fully 9% more than the McCain, who finished second.

This win gives the Romney campaign the only thing it had been lacking up to this point–a first place win that even opponents couldn’t explain away.  Since January 4, various media pundits and backers of other candidates have valiantly ignored the strong second place showings, the tremendous nation-wide support, the win in Wyoming, and the fact that Romney had a majority of the popular vote and of pledged delegates.  Instead, they focused on the fact that in Iowa and New Hampshire Romney’s name was not in the number one slot.

However, this race is shaping up to be one that will be unique in the history of Presidential politics.  Prominent wins by Huckabee and McCain have brought strong conservative voices into the race to actively campaign against them.  Conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh had even declared that to nominate either of these candidates would mean the end of the Republican party.  Should either of these liberal men be nominated, conservatives would have to find, or form, another party to represent the values of small government and individual freedom.

I think that the same thing would be true of a Giuliani nomination.  Giuliani does not represent the social conservative values that so many Americans hold dear to them.  Nor is it clear that he would respect promises at fiscal and judicial conservatism.  This leaves us to decide between Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson.  (Ron Paul would be an ideal president–in 1824.  If only we could get the rest of the world to limit their weapons to the technology of that era then he would be a logical choice for conservatives.)

Fred Thompson seems to be a good person with a desire to do what is best for his country.  Romney, however, has a resume that is unique among the candidates.  He has spent his life learning to find new and innovative solutions to common problems.  The problems of Washington are as common as it gets, but epic in scale and with no one willing to stick out their political neck to solve them.  Romney is not a career politician and he has the drive to solve even the most difficult problems.  Romney also has the business head to understand and analyze the waves of numbers that describe our nation’s current economic status and the options for altering government involvement.

If Romney has one failing it is that he sometimes seems to view the government as the head of a large business interest.  Corporations sometimes offer benefits for the good of the employee and the good of the company at large.  Government does not have this responsibility to the people of this nation.  When government “offers” benefits such as welfare and health care to the people the price is a portion of our freedom.  Romney, in my estimation, is the most conservative candidate in this race.  But he can be much more conservative.  It is my hope that as the campaign progresses he will move in that direction.

In the meantime,  Congratulations to Governor Romney and his family.  Congratulations to all of his supporters.  And God Bless America.

It has been common knowledge for some time that Romney’s strategy for winning the nomination hinged on doing well in Iowa and New Hampshire.  With his second place finish in Iowa, the MSM has been quick to proclaim that if Romney comes in behind McCain in New Hampshire his campaign is over.

On the Rush Limbaugh radio program today, Limbaugh pointed out that a second place finish for Romeny, far from being the death nell for his campaign, would actually put him in a good situation.  It would mean that Romney was the one candidate who has finished strong in both Iowa AND New Hampshire.  In addition, these strong showings would be in spite of years of negative press by the MSM and lots of attacks by at least four other candidates who have each been considered “front runners” in turn.

The bottom line is that Romney is in good place to win the nomination.  Through his various battles with other “front-runners,” Romney’s national name recognition has increased dramatically.  Through the advertising and campaigning in the various states, Romney’s message has resonated more consistently with conservatives across the nation.

There are 47 more states to select delegates after the New Hampshire primary.  These states are still to be fought and won.  Whether Romney finishes first or second in New Hampshire, it is simply one more step on the path to victory.

On the Rush Limbaugh Show today, the conservative talk show host issued a challenge, a sort of game if you will, for his listeners to engage in while listening to the rhetoric being spouted during the remainder of the presidential primary season.  The object is to catch one of the Democratic hopefuls talking about freedom.  Specifically, to notice how many times the word freedom is used to actually speak about liberty and individual choice.

I would like to try and chronicle this here at Women for Romney.  If you hear a Democrat speak about the wonderful freedoms of the United States of America, rush over here and post a comment.  Tell us who, where and what was said if possible.  In addition I’d like to see how well the Republican’s score.  Starting with tonight’s debate, I will be listening for the GOP candidates to come to the ardent defense of freedom and will chronicle it here for you.

Limbaugh noted that most of the Dems plans for our nation’s future involve mandates and regulations.  If the founding of this country, and everything that has made it great could be summed up into one word, he argues, that word would be “freedom.”  These days there seems to be an auction on how much politicians will give us in return for that freedom.  Who’ll give me free health care, a $5000 baby bond, a retirement fund and a swimming pool?

I will not sell my liberty so cheaply when it has been paid for with the blood of young men.  Help me to keep track of our politicians who do–or don’t–feel the same.