FRC Says No Rice Please

In their Monday email, the Family Research Council rained on the Condoleeza Rice parade.  Describing her as a “non-starter”, Tony Perkins said that she is not pro-life, pro-marriage or a strong defender of religious liberty.  Perkins also noted that the Family Research Council would only accept a candidate who was strongly pro-life, not just someone who “checks the ‘pro-life box'”.

Will FRC stop promoting Mitt Romney if he chooses Condoleeza Rice as his VP?  No.  They supported Bush even though Cheney supported gay marriage.  But now is the time to use their leverage as a group representing a large segment of fundamental Christianity and steer Romney towards a more socially conservative choice.

Condi is a great and extremely qualified candidate.  But Romney should carefully consider the promises he has made regarding his VP selection process.  If he is looking to shake the Etch-a-sketch image one of his staffers foolishly gave him, than now is a perfect time to take a principled stand.  On the other hand, Romney may do the calculations and figure he will pick up more independents with Condi than he would lose from his base.

Trunkline 2012: Saturday Political News in Review and Cinema Politico Movie of the Week for 10/8/11


Bookmark and Share

Brought to you by White house 2012 & Hulu.com, The Good Pope is a poignant retelling of the story of Pope John XXIII.  He was Pope for only 4 years, seven months and six days when he died of stomach cancer on the 3rd June 1963.  His lived during a period of profound change, and a time which produced some of the most significant events of the 20th Century and once he became Pope, he also  produced some of the most significant events in the contemporary history of the Catholic Church.

Bob Hoskins stars as The Good Pope.

Bookmark and Share

FRC Says Santorum Schooled Cain

Herman Cain has been a rising star of the TEA Party social conservative wing of the Republican party, but that rise may have hit a bump in the road.  Cain’s quick answer to the gay marriage issue was in the debate Monday night was that it was a states’ issue.  That answer is not sitting well with the pro-family Christian grass-roots giant The Family Research Council.

In their Wednesday morning update, titled “Debate and Switch”, the FRC scolded Cain and Ron Paul for not supporting a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and instead deflecting the issue to the states.

So who does FRC say got that issue right?  Rick Santorum, who explained that a marriage amendment would require 75% of the states to approve.

This leaves the question, will TEA Partiers and social conservatives hold to constitutional principles of the tenth amendment and agree with Cain and Paul on gay marriage?  Or will they see the issue in light of the moral majority and government’s role in promoting the general welfare through promoting the American family?  What do you think?  Leave a comment and let us know which direction you think conservatives will take.

In my opinion, Michelle Bachmann gave a great reply to this that most conservatives can get behind.  Essentially, it is a state issue, unless the courts over rule the people of the states on Federal Constitutional grounds.  Then an amendment is necessary.

Romney’s best hope: a wide field

After winning the New Hampshire straw poll and coming in first in current polling of 2012 primary hopefuls, someone might think that Mitt Romney is on his way to represent the Republican party in 2012. They could be wrong.

Mitt was a top contender in 2008. His message of fiscal conservatism and business smarts made many Republicans wish the primary had turned out differently towards the later half of 2008 when the economy was in the tank, gas prices were at $4 a gallon, and every other campaign ad had video of John McCain announcing that the economy was not his strong suit.

Now, with the economy in nearly the same condition two years later, Romney’s poll numbers shouldn’t be a shock. In fact, he has led the Republican field for much of 2010 and would beat Obama in 2012 according to more than one 2010 poll.

 

New Hampshire shows Romney has found his niche

So why would I think that Romney might not be the Republican contender in 2012? 24% of Republican support will not win in a narrow primary field. Consider Romney’s closest competition in the recent Rasmussen poll: Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, and Newt Gingrich. Even his 35% in New Hampshire is ominous with other placing contenders being libertarian right winger Ron Paul, TEA Partiers Pawlenty and Palin, old school conservative Rick Santorum, TEA Party conservative constitutionalists DeMint, Bachmann, and occasional right wing radio host Herman Cain.

Although the entire field in the New Hampshire straw poll is very promising, the candidate who is perhaps closest to Romney’s brand and image would be The Donald, who got 1% of the vote.

If Family Values conservatives and the TEA Party faithful are able to coalesce around one specific candidate, it will not be Romney. In fact, in the Family Research Council straw poll earlier this year, Mike Pence won with Huckabee coming in second. Romney may have easily won in the northeast, but out in Iowa he is polling just behind Huckabee.

As the former governor of Massachusetts, fair or not, Romney has a history. He wasn’t always pro-life. He had his own version of universal healthcare that passed in Massachusetts. Romney has not helped his conservative credentials by avoiding identification with the TEA Party and keeping a low profile in the 2010 wave of conservative electoral victories.

Romney had a strong showing in New Hampshire. But what will happen in the rest of the country when the field narrows? what about when Mike Huckabee drops out of the race, or Sarah Palin? What about Ron Paul, Jim DeMint, or Mike Pence? Will Romney be the fallback choice of their supporters? Or will it be Tim Pawlenty, Newt Gingrich, Haley Barbour or some other conservative who has inserted themselves into the current popular right wing movement in this country? 35% will only get him so far.

Who Wants Palin To Run?

The TEA party loves Sarah Palin.  She can still draw a crowd, and undoubtedly has been instrumental in driving voters to the polls in Republican primaries.  As a result, conservative TEA party Republicans fill races across this country.  Her success continues to fuel talk of a Presidential run among…the leftwing media?

The most recent news outlet to run major speculation on Palin’s Presidential bid is US News and World Report, who took her recent meeting with Republican leaders at the conservative Newsmax.com as a sure sign that she will run.  Along with the story, they ran two slideshows.  One was 10 reasons Palin would be a good President, the other was 10 reasons she would be a bad President.  They are already framing the talking points for us.

Newsmax.com on the other hand ran a story about the meeting headlined: Palin Warns of ‘Armageddon’, ‘Third World War’ In Exclusive Newsmax Broadcast. While many conservatives might agree with her premise, when Palin says the word Armageddon most know she is not speaking figuratively.  It is not exactly the sort of headline a Presidential candidate might have hoped for, especially when the Armageddon reference was only a portion of what she spoke about and was in reference to Iran getting a nuclear weapon.

Palin did speak at length about a Presidential bid and what her Presidency would look like.  So why is US News the excited media outlet here?  It may be that Democrats are counting on a Palin Presidential run, and most conservatives don’t really want it.  Democrats and establishment Republicans have constantly underestimated TEA party candidates, and Dems have seen them as easy targets.  In a year that Obama and his Congress have nothing positive to run on, Obama made a special trip to Delaware, where Christine O’Donnell trails by double digits just to take a few shots at her.  Yes Mr. President, we all acknowledge that you are big and bad compared to O’Donnell, now get back to work.

On the other hand, when Sarah Palin, a devout Protestant Christian, was contending for the Family Research Council’s straw poll at their Values Voter Summit, she did not do well.  FRC is a Protestant, conservative, family values organization.  She should have come in second or third easily.  Instead, she came in fifth behind a Mormon and a divorced and remarried Catholic.

Palin will most likely run, and she will draw crowds with tens of thousands of people.  Out of those crowds, thousands will likely vote for her in the primary.  At this point, I do not see her taking the nomination.

Romney Sticks It To Dems at Values Voters Summit

Mitt Romney, former governor of Massachusetts,...

Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney

 

Bookmark and Share  At the annual Values Voters Summit in Washington, D.C., Mitt Romney csme out swinging and never stopped.  He opened up with a series of sharp quips that ranged from claiming that “Harry Reid’s, Nancy Pelosi’s and President Obama’s “numbers were going down faster than a Jet Blue flight attendents” to a fitting shot at President Obama’s new love affair with golfing and how “America is better off when he takes advice from caddy rather than his economic advisors.

What Values Voters really got a chance to see and hear though was a glimpse at a more relaxed, more fluid, confidentand hardline Romney than we saw in 2008.

In his speech, Romney called these fiorst two years of the Obama Administration, an abject failure.  He backed the claim up by listing a litany of things done by the Administration which have failed the American people in the area of the economy;

“Raising taxes on small businesses — hurt.  Hiking some taxes on investment by almost as much as 200% — hurt.  Pushing Cap-and-Trade — hurt.  Stalling agreements to expand trade witrh other nations — hurt.  Sharply slanting the playing field in favor of union C.E.O’s — hurt.  Handing GM to the U.A.W. — hurt.  The federal takeover of healthcare — hurt.   Trillions of dollars of new debt — hurt.  And the scapegoating and demonizing of the very people who we need to invest in people and jobs also hurt.” 

Romney added that we have  seen the most “anti-growth, anti-investment, anti-jobs measures in our lifetime.”

One of the most powerful lines caqme when Romney stated;

“We have seen the federal government decalre wars on drugs and we have seen them decalre war on poverty but this is the first time we have seen the federal government decalre war on free enterprise” 

The Romney speech was the work of a man who has seemingly become an experienced butcher and each of his points sliced into the Obama, Pelosi, Reid regime like a machete.  It was alos the work of a man whom you can tell is going to go after President Obama on the economy, which is Romney’s strong suit, unmercifully.

But Romney’s speech before a group of voters more interested in family values than economics, did not foucus only on the economy.  It simply demonstrated Romney’s ability to all the issues together as segued from the economy to human values and morality after pointing out that Barack went from being the man of “yes we can” to the man of “no he didn’t” and mentioned how “the man who said he would unite the country, turned out to be the most divisive in history”.

In general Romney offered a preview of a presidential candidate who is on message and focussed.  He also demonstrated the keen ability to tie his economic experience to the social issues that willmotivate the Republican base that he will need to inspire if he wants to be the Republican nominee for President in 2012. 

Below you will find the entire Romney speech on video.  Take the time to view it for yourself and I believe that you walk away with the sense that Mitt Romney is both hungry and polished.

Bookmark and Share

Santorum’s Speech to the Annual Values Voters Convention

United States Senator Rick Santorum, sponsor o...

Rick Santorum

Bookmark and Share Rick Santorum delivered a powerful speech at the annual Values Voters gathering of the Family Research Council.  He began by telling the audience that he disagreed with the so-called experts who are trying to tell Republicans to deal strictly with economic issues.  According to Santorum “the idea that values and moral issues are not part of integrated sets of issues that keep this country free and safe and prosperous is a very dangerous idea”  He added that we can’t go out on one wing of issues and expect to fly on just the wing talking about taxing and spending.   Santorum believes that at the core of all the issues is that government is taking freedom away. 

In the end Santorum layed out another very important point worth mentioning.  He warned that voters should not get down too down on Republicans after they take back either or both branches of Congress and do fail to produce dramatic change.  Santorum reminds us that on the November 3rd of 2010, Barack Obama will still be President and more than that, real change takes time.  Just as it did with Democrats who took control of Congress in 2006 but didn’t start dramatically changing things until 2008.  But Santorum punctuated his remarks by claiming that there were only three times in the past 100 years that “really big things happened”to change government…..The New Deal, The Great Society and the last two years of the Obama Administration. 

Santorum went on to explain that the key denominator in nthoise three cases wewre not simply a liberal President but were rather the  fillibuster proof margins that liberals had in Congress.  The point being that no matter what happens on November 2, 2010, republicans will not have the numbers to bring about the dramatic change that we want.  However if we remain focussed, come 2012 the numbers could be there and the opportunity to create the change we need in dramatic fashion will be in our reach.

Below you will find Santorum’s speech in its entirety;

Bookmark and Share

%d bloggers like this: