Romney/BVP Briefs
First a bit of housecleaning. We mistakenly left former Gubernatorial candidate and Lt Gov. Nominee Bob Vander Plaats off the list of people who are interested in the State Chairmanship.
Also Mitt Romneys PAC made a big pickup today hiring Matt Rhoades, research director for the RNC and BC04. He was largely responsible for bc04's tremendous rapid response team as well as the anti-Kerry research.
Most importantly he has a good relationship with Matt Drudge, who was already expected to be relatively hostile to McCain..
Nice pick up for Mitt.
Also Mitt Romneys PAC made a big pickup today hiring Matt Rhoades, research director for the RNC and BC04. He was largely responsible for bc04's tremendous rapid response team as well as the anti-Kerry research.
Most importantly he has a good relationship with Matt Drudge, who was already expected to be relatively hostile to McCain..
Nice pick up for Mitt.
posted by Caucus Cooler at 12/06/2006
20 Comments:
This was on State 29. The republican party is splitting up into camps of pro-take away private property to give it to other private property owners - (Dave Roederer camp), and those that believe that private property should only be taken for roads etc (how we used to think the constitution read before the Kelo ruling).
Does Dave Roderer being in the take away property camp have an impact on the 08 campaign? WHere is McKennedy (McCain) on this issue? Does he side with the people or the chambers of commerce and private real estate developers?
State 29 excerpt:
Iowa's economic development leaders said Thursday that they want lawmakers to re-establish a state destination program like Vision Iowa, develop a plan for recruiting, retaining and retraining workers, and allow cities to use eminent domain powers in urban renewal areas...
...Addressing criticism that programs like Vision Iowa tend to favor large cities, [David Roederer, executive director of Iowa Chamber Alliance] said incentives shouldn't be determined by size, "but determined by the vision of the community and local support to pull it off."
I remember during Vilsack's veto of anti-Kelo eminent domain legislation (which was later overridden by the Iowa Legislature) that every larger city in Iowa with a chamber of commerce sided with him and embraced civic thuggery. All these unelected, hoity-toity chamber members wanted to preserve a city's ability to condemn perfectly good property and give it to their lawyer friends or some out-of-state developer in order to build more strip malls and crap like that.
Who are the economic development leaders beside Knapp who personally profits from such legislation?
So, size doesn't matter?
I believe few things in life can be as dangerous as a politician with -- or merely seeking -- power. And Iowa is soon to be the hotbed for vote-seeking candidates. That's why I'm spearheading a drive to require Warning Labels On Politicians.
Warning labels already appear on drugs, cigarettes, pesticides and other items that can negatively impact a person’s health and well-being. So why not require similar warnings on members of society who have proven themselves as dangerous – or more dangerous – than many items that already carry such labels – politicians!
Through this Warning Labels On Politicians effort, I'm calling on politicians from across the political spectrum to be “transparent” with voters and agree to display warning labels on all literature, signage and advertising related to their campaigns. First on my list are two U.S. senators, Clinton of New York and John McCain of Arizona.
Due to the their status as party frontrunners for the White House in 2008, I’m calling on Senators Clinton and McCain to serve as examples for politicians at all levels of government.
If they want to be viewed as honest, upfront and transparent, they’ll agree to place warning labels on all materials related to their campaigns.
To date, I've prepared warning labels for Clinton, McCain and a number of other politicians expected to launch 2008 White House bids. The list of “labeled” politicians thusfar includes Democrats John Edwards, John Kerry, Barack Obama and Tom Vilsack as well as three other Republicans: Newt Gingrich, Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney.
Others, though not expected to run for the White House, also earned warning label recognition. They are Nancy Pelosi, the first female ever elected to serve as Speaker of the House, and Sen. Harry Reid, who will begin serving as Senate majority leader in January.
As additional candidates surface on the national stage, more warning labels will be created, though not all will be presidential candidates. Stay tuned, Iowa!
Also, be advised Warning Labels On Politicians is not affiliated with any nonprofit organization or political action committee.
Individuals interested in supporting this effort can sign an online petition at www.petitiononline.com/WLOP/petition.html. They can also purchase Warning Labels On Politicians merchandise at www.cafepress.com/bobmccarty/1764235.
We are sure that mccain had a position on eminent domain long before he met roederer.
As a side note this is a very old story.
I think the "warning labels" idea is very good.
Because its an assessment of who is best prepared to win in IOWA cancer man...
The romney bloggers are unbelievable. We compliment him and its all part of our secret plan to lower expectations for mccain. We criticize him and its because we're anti romney.
Tough bunch to please!
What is McCain's position? It's legitimate. No one is suggesting that Roderer is advising McCain on eminent domain. I want to know what McCain's stance is. The republican party is splitting into new ideological factions adn it's a legit question for any presidential campaign to be asked. It's also a critical question to ask our state legislators, who very likely are going to pass the bill that allows the government to take your grandma's home for a strip mall.
cooler: I guess this IS a mccain blog, like krusty is a romney blog. why the coyness in answering the question about mccain's position on private property rights?
Does "old" mean it's illegitimate? If so, McCain better drop out right now.
Oh the coyness is because we have absolutely no idea what his position is on eminent domain.
We'll look into it and post something in the comments section if we find anything.
Zzzzz...
Thanks murph..
Cooler, you truly do serve us well.
No BVP for State Chairman comments??
CC I've always thought you seemed pretty fair to all candidates. The only time I've lost my cool is in the stupid mormon thread. My skin has thickened since then.
Halperin's "The Way to Win" specifically points out getting Drudge on your side is key in the 08 election. Roades is a smart move. Not that I'm an expert or anything.
To be fair, the Cooler is run by very decent people that are well liked in IA politics. However, nice people can also have an agenda which in this case seems to be to lower expectations for McCain. Can we fault them for that? No. Can or should we point out that agenda? Affirmative.
My agenda is clearly pro-Romney. Fire away!
According to the Krusty poll Mitt should run away with Iowa Straw Poll. He should be the hands down favorite to win and anything less would be a huge disappointment.
If the Iowa Republican Caucus was held today who would you support?
Selection Votes
Chuck Hagel 2% 8
Tom Tancredo 3% 13
George Pataki 5% 22
John McCain 5% 21
Tommy Thompson 2% 7
Newt Gingrich 10% 40
Rudy Giuliani 4% 16
Mitt Romney 53% 224
Sam Brownback 3% 13
Mike Huckabee 14% 57
421 votes total
well, I guess that's assuming that political junkies like us are representative of the voting population as a whole -- quite a stretch of imagination.
That's also assuming you think an Internet poll is quite a scientific indicator of public opinion -- jeez, I think I voted for Romney on that poll at least 10 times!
-and don't forget that Huckabee and Gingrich are two and three like that would ever happen.
McCain is at 30% in the national polls along with Rudy. Mitt is around 9%. Anything less than 25% of the vote in the Iowa Caucus is a nail in the coffin on Bob Dole err John McCain's too little too late express.
With regard to Krusty, keep in mind it is an internet poll of the people who frequent the blog, just like the McCainiacs who run/frequent this one and that is ok.
Keep in mind Sporer's site had Pataki holding steady with about 50% of the vote. Go figure. That too is ok, but consider the source.
If I had a blog, Mitt would have nothing less than 93% of the votes cast.
Larson and crew can play their little games with expectations the way Culver did and we all recognize it. Not exactly "Straight Talk" now is it?
Post a Comment
<< Home