Reader Mail

Thinking Ahead

Romney and friends, one step further along. Bipartisanship at its finest. Roush's litany of abuses. Plus more.

10.28.08

Send to Kindle

BLINDSIDED
Re: The Prowler's Post-Defeat Planners:

We were blindsided by an anonymous hit piece from the Prowler today suggesting Mitt Romney was sitting on his hands this election season. The not-for-attribution quotes, factual misrepresentations and fanciful imaginings of its author makes for a psychedelic bit of reading. Furthermore, the timing of the piece, coming as it did on the same morning that Mitt Romney was appearing (yet again) with John McCain (this time in Ohio) just adds to the offense. Since no one called us for reaction, I hope you will allow me as a senior adviser to the governor to set the record straight

The truth is I can't think of another Republican leader who has spent more time this election year than Mitt Romney in helping GOP candidates and conservative causes, starting at the top of the ticket with McCain-Palin but also involving dozens of other federal and state races and some important ballot campaigns. Aside from the work he's done for the McCain-Palin ticket, he has personally campaigned for 32 candidates running for House and Senate seats, as well as for two gubernatorial candidates.

Plus, the financial support he has extended goes beyond what he has been able to effect through his personal appearances. Governor Romney's Free and Strong America PAC was formed in April and since then has donated $202,000 to 75 GOP candidates. He's also made another $173,000 in donations to party organizations and other entities, including $10,000 to the National Organization for Marriage in California to pass Proposition 8, and $5,000 to stop a ballot initiative in Massachusetts to decriminalize marijuana. After Senator McCain withdrew from Michigan, Romney contributed $50,000 to a demoralized state party there to help with their races. The total amount of financial support provided to Republican candidates and causes through Romney-controlled state and federal PACs is an eye-popping $375,000.

Why has Governor Romney worked so hard since leaving the presidential race? Because #1, he's a loyal Republican, and #2, he believes this is a critical election year, and that the policies and principles of the Republican Party are the best ones to strengthen our economy, our military and our families.I hope you can find a way to correct the record. -- -- Eric Fehrnstrom
Free and Srong America PA

I think the Prowler has it more accurate than the Romney apologists in the reader comments. I watched Deval Patrick (D) defeat Muffy Healy (R) with what amounted to zero support from the then out-going governor. Patrick was able to skate by on a banal "Yes we can" slogan, and completely vague feel-good campaign while he waited for the clock to tick down. Healy went hard on fiscal conservatism and her strong suit -- criminal justice. Mitt was too busy looking out for himself in the presidential to lend a hand. Kerry should be ripe for the picking, but Beatty's got a tough row to hoe. Mitt could very easily tilt things more Beatty's way with a little effort.

Before McCain was nominated, I liked Mitt from an issues perspective -- but always thought he was a little stiff/phony in the personality department. I now believe he does lack the "realness" of Palin -- and without much effort in the name of the party, he doesn't seem to get the "neighbors help one another" quality that would endear him to a greater percentage of Republicans.

One of the paths to getting a conservative back in the White House is to highlight the "libs will do or say anything to win" selfish personalities of their leaders, and that their policies are marred with trying to please every voting group under the sun without any serious analysis on their effects. Mitt may believe in conservative policy, but he sure acts like he only cares about his personal political future -- to the detriment of the party.
-- William H. Stewart
Boston, Massachusetts

In follow-up to today's piece in The Prowler, I believe that one of Mitt Romney's key advisors/supports is Dan Senor. Not coincidentally, Senor is the significant other of CNN's Campbell Brown who has been particularly aggressive in her criticism of Governor Sarah Palin. I have heard from fairly good sources that Senor and Brown were furious that Senator John McCain did not pick Romney as the VP.

Just thought you'd find the information worthwhile.
-- MAM

Mitt Romney is a phony. He's always been a phony and he always will be. The reason why he will not be in charge on November 5 is that Sarah Palin is a genuine person. Whether you like her or not, she's genuine. Romney is a legend in his own mind, but Sarah will be the conservative choice in 2012, win or lose.

Palin/Jindal 2012!
-- Keith Kunzler

TOO CLOSE TO CALL
Re: Larry Thornberry's Sunday With Sister Sarah:

I think that there may be considerably more support for the McCain/Palin ticket than may have been reported or be apparent. I have long thought that the professional polls can not be trusted, if for no other reason than most of them bear the name of a major main stream news organ in their title. Now, I thought that the McCain-Obama race would be close on election day. I have said that the only real hope the Democrats have to win the White House is Democrat vote fraud. Now I have discovered reports of an almost unknown poll whose results, if accurate, are truly amazing. The AOL Presidential Straw Poll.

AOL runs a straw poll on Presidential preference. Reportedly, the poll ending 10/18/08 had McCain up 60% to 38%. In the 10-/25/08 poll McCain was up 63% to 37%. Now I know that this is not a scientific poll, but it is interesting. Just one more point, in July of 2004 the poll reportedly had Bush at 49% and Kerry at 48% with 2% undecided. If anyone has further information on this poll, I think that we would all be interested in hearing about it. We certainly won't from the MSM.

I wouldn't bet the farm on this information, but, if accurate, the election may turn out much differently than predicted. Now if only we can get voter fraud under control. Curiouser and curiouser.
-- Michael Tobias

REACHING ACROSS THE AISLE...FOR HANDOUTS
Re: G. Tracy Mehan, III's The Recriminations Begin:

Mr. Mehan writes: "One wonders what the Republican White House and Congress were thinking when they passed the new drug entitlement bill a few years back."

If my memory serves me the Speaker of the House was a pharmacist and the Majority Leader of the Senate was a doctor...in the Age of Abramoff, while, we now know, the "Friends of Angelo" (i.e. Dems) were backing the truck up over at Fannie and Freddie. Pondering it, to how much clearer an example of "bipartisanship" can we point? Palin/Jindal 2012!
-- Reid Bogie
Waterbury, Connecticut

A MATTER OF DOCTRINE
Re: Mike Dooley's letter (under "Fact Checking Religion") in Reader Mail's Under Attack:

Regarding Mike Dooley's letter of 27 October, "Under Attack," while the Creed of Nicaea-Constantinople (to give the full and accurate title) as recited in the various Western Churches includes the famous (or infamous) Filioque clause (the Holy Spirit "who proceeds from the Father and the Son), in fact, the original Greek text of the Creed merely states that the Holy Spirit is "the Lord and Giver of Light, who proceeds from the Father." This has been, of course, the major bone of contention between the Churches of the East and West since the 9th century.

In an effort to resolve the matter, the Pontifical Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity issued in 1996 a "Clarification on the Procession of the Holy Spirit," which begins by stating that the original, uninterpolated Greek text of the Creed is the only "universally binding ecumenical symbol of faith." It also points out that the Father alone is the "Archos Anarche," from whom the Son is begotten and the Spirit proceeds, while at the same time noting that the Holy Spirit is sent into the world by the action of the Son.

Underlining the point, both John Paul II and Benedict XVI use the Creed without the Filioque when writing ecumenical documents. As a Byzantine Catholic -- a member of an Eastern Catholic Church that follows Orthodox practices and beliefs while remaining in communion with the Church of Rome -- I have not used the Filioque in any liturgical service since the mid-1990s, precisely because it is the policy of the Church of Rome to respect the Tradition of each particular Church in the Catholic Communion.

Moreover, the U.S. Council of Catholic Bishops is at the present time completing the process of eliminating the Filioque from vernacular celebration of the Mass of the Latin (Roman Catholic) Church, "in order to bring liturgical practice into line with doctrine." When the Filioque is finally suppressed throughout the Latin Church, the cause of Christian unity will receive a tremendous boost by bringing all the apostolic Churches of the world under the same Symbol of Faith.

It's interesting that the Episcopal Church, which has in general walked away from all forms of Tradition in the last half century, should be clinging tendentiously to the Filioque, a doctrinal innovation of dubious theological import, at a time when it is jettisoning most of the other core doctrines it carried away when it broke from the Church of Rome back in the 16th century.
-- Stuart Koehl

BUT WHAT ABOUT THE PRESENT?
Re: Jay Molyneaux's letter (under "Cradle to the Grave") in Reader Mail's Under Attack:

Let us take a look at Mr. Molyneaux's predictions for the future:

1. The detonation of a weapon of mass destruction in one or more of our larger cities. Could happen. This administration chose to waste $10 billion per month on a conventional war against people who did not attack us on 9/11, thus diverting attention from those who did. No matter the justifications given by this administration and its supporters, the fact remains we have wasted incredible resources on a conventional war when the people who attacked us are stateless terrorists capable of thinking outside the box. By misusing our security resources, this administration has left us insufficiently prepared for another attack within our borders.

2. The Dow could dip below 5000. Maybe. We can thank Al "ooops, I never dreamed this would happen" Greenspan, Phil "lets deregulate everything" Gramm and SEC chairman, Christopher "I never met a regulation I had any interest in enforcing" Cox for setting the stage for our current financial mess.

3. Social Security payments will be cut. Could happen. This must be a wet dream for right wingers -- the beginning of the end of Social Security.

4. No cars in cities. The market will take care of this. There will be no supply of oil to run our cars in the not too distant future. But who needs an alternative energy policy?

5. Freedom of speech will be restricted. Yea, I'm the leading agent in the Fairness Doctrine. My assignment is TAS.

6. Medical care will skyrocket. Will? Where have you been the past few years? When insurance and pharmaceutical profits are the central focus of health care policy, you get what we already have -- skyrocketing costs.

7. Passports. No need to do this. Your privacy has already been compromised by the current administration.

8. and 9. Unemployment and poverty. Ahh, yes. The fruits of unfettered capitalism, brought to us by the Bush administration.

10. Second Amendment. By whom? Obama has made it clear that we all enjoy the right to bear arms. This has always been religion for the right.

Finally, Mr. Molyneaux writes, "The goal of the Democrat leadership is a Cuban style democracy. One Party, one leader, one candidate, one correct vote. Strict control of the population by a central state apparatus and we serve the government, not the other way round." I thought Karl Rove promised us one party. Who worked harder than Tom DeLay to gerrymander this dream into reality? As for Cuban-style democracy, you may have missed the great move toward socialism instituted by the Bush administration to try to keep the current financial crisis from turning into a world wide depression.
-- Mike Roush

 

ACORN'S HONEST SIDE
Re: Joseph Lawler's ACORN's Unlikely Allies:

To be honest, simple embezzlement would be the best thing that ACORN could do with the money they are given. Better that than further their agenda of undermining democracy and promoting leftist causes and candidates.
-- Ron Bales
Tampa, Florida

Like this Article

Print this Article

Print Article