The best ally for peace in the world is a strong America.
Our influence must once again match our generosity.
Some believe America's strength comes from government... I believe the American people are the source of America's strength.
We strengthen America by increasing freedom, by letting people keep more of what they earn, and improving education and innovation.
America can't continue to lead the family of nations if we fail the family at home. How do we strengthen the family? By putting marriage before children: every child deserves a mother AND a father.Mitt is right on. This is a tremendous opportunity. This may prove to be a chance to prove Joseph Smith and Brigham Young right: If the constitution is to be saved at all, it will be by the Elders of Israel. The most important issue of our time is strengthening the family. Mitt is the only candidate who knows about and believes in the Family Proclamation. Following that document is more important than any petty party platform.
or Rocky Balboa Blu-rayLet me tell you something you already know. The world ain’t all sunshine and rainbows. It is a very mean and nasty place and it will beat you to your knees and keep you there permanently if you let it. You, me, or nobody is gonna hit as hard as life. But it ain’t how hard you hit; it’s about how hard you can get hit, and keep moving forward. How much you can take, and keep moving forward. That’s how winning is done. Now, if you know what you’re worth, then go out and get what you’re worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hit, and not pointing fingers saying you ain’t where you are because of him, or her, or anybody. Cowards do that and that ain’t you. You’re better than that!
"So let's talk. Let's chat. Let's start a dialogue about your ideas and mine."
Let's not.
"Because the conversation in Washington has been just just a little one-sided lately, don't you think? And we can all see how well that works."
Oh, come on. There have been two sides in Washington - on one side, the corrupt pork-barrel-loving free-spending big government greedheads who want open borders and to use the public trough as a way to line their own pockets, and then on the other side, we've had the Democrats. I take it back, Senator Clinton is absolutely right. The conversation in Washington has been one-sided; it could use some actual conservatism.
America cannot continue to lead the family of nations around the world if we suffer the collapse of the family here at home.
Where alone in the Middle East is there his dream of an Arab middle class of sorts? Where do Arabs have good schools? And where is there adequate medical care?
Ask the over one million Palestinians who live in a democratic Israel.
December 14, 2006, 5:00 a.m.
A Primary Factor
Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney in an exclusive pre-Christmas 2006 interview.
An NRO Q&A
It seemed that the second the 2006 elections were over we were onto 2008, and already the campaign seems to be in full swing — even before some of the potential candidates have set up official exploratory committees. And among the most talked about on the Republican side is Mitt Romney, who is just about to finish his term as governor of Massachusetts. He agreed to be e-interviewed by National Review Online Editor Kathryn Lopez (who — full disclosure — has some pro-Romney tendencies). The full interview — in which he addresses Iraq, gay marriage, abortion, religion, and more, appears below.
Kathryn Jean Lopez: Governor, you recently got back from a trip to Asia. What were you doing there?
Gov. Mitt Romney: I traveled to Japan, China, and South Korea. Two things from my China trip stand out. First, they will be a more powerful economic competitor than we in America recognize. They are hard working, market oriented, and smart. They even have some lower taxes in some areas than we do. Bottom line: They are competing to win. Second, it is important for us as a nation to reach out to China and to chart out a course that is consistent with a free economy and a free society. This goal must be consistent with our own principles.
We also had the opportunity to go to visit the DMZ when we were in Korea. Imagining what goes on behind that border is one thing — but standing there, staring into North Korea is chilling. Communism and the brutal repression there have exacted an extraordinarily heavy penalty on the people of North Korea and the contrast with the exuberance and prosperity of South Korea could not be more stark.
Lopez: China is, of course, a bit of a human-rights disaster too. Did you have qualms going there at all?
Gov. Romney: I believe in building bridges not walls. We specifically addressed the detention of a Massachusetts citizen, Yang Jianli, with Chinese officials and we asked for special attention and consideration for his early release. Working with China on our own security interests — including the isolation of North Korea — must not be at the expense of our commitment to freedom and basic human rights.
Lopez: What did you make of the Iraq Study Group report that was released last week?
Gov. Romney: The members of the Iraq Study Group deserve credit for their hard work. But their recommendations read like the product of a flawed process — one more focused on reaching consensus for the sake of reaching consensus. There were a few recommendations that I found especially striking: Suggesting that somehow the Israel-Palestine conflict is a root of sectarian and insurgent violence in Iraq is just wrong. Sunnis are killing Shia and vice versa. Pressuring Israel won’t change that.
Proposing that we negotiate with terrorist regimes like Syria and Iran — without a rigorous analysis of how our incentives could ever be aligned — is just counter-productive. I have no quarrel with talking, especially if it yields valuable intelligence and insight about an adversary. But that’s a far cry from actually negotiating with Iran, which sponsors Hezbollah, has nuclear ambitions, and has been clear in its intention to wipe our ally Israel off the map. And Syria is systematically undermining the sovereignty of Lebanon and funding and arming terrorists. Any suggestion that we might trade something for their help or forbearance is out of the question. When considering a negotiation, one must ask what kind of leverage we have, and recognize that there are situations where we have more to lose than gain by negotiating.
Finally, inferring that our troops may be withdrawn from combat positions before Iraq is secure runs counter to my view and to the views I have heard from some of America’s most accomplished military leaders. I am not suggesting that there are simple solutions for Iraq. But it is clear to me that some of these recommendations will not meet our objectives in Iraq, or in the broader long war America is fighting today.
Lopez: You just finished up a term as head of the Republican Governor’s Association. Do you feel a bit like you couldn’t have been RGA president there at a worse time, given all the November losses? Do you regret at all not running for reelection as governor?
Gov. Romney: This certainly was a difficult year. We knew going into the sixth year of a two-term administration that we would be going against history to try to pick up seats. A wartime election only added to that difficulty. We raised an unprecedented $27 million for the governor’s races — almost 50 percent more than ever before — and we were able to reelect great governors like Sonny Perdue, Mark Sanford, Tim Pawlenty, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Don Carcieri, Jim Douglas, Bob Riley, and others and elect new governors in places like Florida, Idaho, and Nevada. The bad news is that we lost six governors, but the good news is that we only lost six governors.
I loved being governor of Massachusetts and feel we accomplished a great deal. I’m proud of what my team was able to get done by applying Republican principles and reaching across the aisle. And now I look forward to devoting my time to new challenges.
Lopez: As you know, in recent days the Boston Globe and the New York Times, as well as the Boston newspaper, Bay Windows, have run pieces about your 1994 race against Ted Kennedy and your run for governor that appear to be in conflict with your current position against gay marriage. Are they?
Gov. Romney: These old interviews and stories have frequently been circulated by my opponents ever since I took a stand against the Massachusetts supreme-court ruling on same-sex marriage. This being the political season, it is not surprising this old news has appeared again. But I have made clear since 2003, when the supreme court of Massachusetts redefined marriage by fiat, that my unwavering advocacy for traditional marriage stands side by side with a tolerance and respect for all Americans.
Like the vast majority of Americans, I’ve opposed same-sex marriage, but I’ve also opposed unjust discrimination against anyone, for racial or religious reasons, or for sexual preference. Americans are a tolerant, generous, and kind people. We all oppose bigotry and disparagement. But the debate over same-sex marriage is not a debate over tolerance. It is a debate about the purpose of the institution of marriage and it is a debate about activist judges who make up the law rather than interpret the law.
I agree with 3,000 years of recorded history. I believe marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman and I have been rock solid in my support of traditional marriage. Marriage is first and foremost about nurturing and developing children. It’s unfortunate that those who choose to defend the institution of marriage are often demonized.
Lopez: And what about the 1994 letter to the Log Cabin Republicans where you indicated you would support the Federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) and seemed open to changing the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in the military? Are those your positions today?
Gov. Romney: No. I don’t see the need for new or special legislation. My experience over the past several years as governor has convinced me that ENDA would be an overly broad law that would open a litigation floodgate and unfairly penalize employers at the hands of activist judges.
As for military policy and the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, I trust the counsel of those in uniform who have set these policies over a dozen years ago. I agree with President Bush’s decision to maintain this policy and I would do the same.
Lopez: Congressman Harold Ford and 33 other Democrat House members voted for a federal marriage amendment this year; you don’t hear a whole lot of coverage of facts like that — or criticisms that they might be as mean and hateful as Republicans who vote similarly are regularly characterized. Does the mainstream media have double standards for Republicans?
Gov. Romney: Well, they do tend to ignore a lot of facts on this issue. How many people have heard that marriage amendments or referendums this year passed by large margins including by 84 percent in Tennessee; 84 percent in South Carolina, 58 percent in Virginia, and by 59 percent in Wisconsin? In 2004 similar measures passed by wide margins in 13 states. California passed a referendum by 61 percent opposing same-sex marriage in 2000. This is a mainstream issue on which most Americans are fairly united but coverage often doesn’t reflect that.
Lopez: In a 1994 debate with Senator Kennedy, you said “I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time that my Mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a U.S. Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years we should sustain and support it.” Further confusing matters, the Boston Globe reported in 1994 that “as a Mormon lay leader [you] counseled Mormon women not to have abortions except in cases of rape, incest, or where the mother’s life was at risk.” Governor: What is your position on abortion today? On Roe? How do you account for what is obviously a change — certainly publicly — on the issue?
Gov. Romney: My position has changed and I have acknowledged that. How that came about is that several years ago, in the course of the stem-cell-research debate I met with a pair of experts from Harvard. At one point the experts pointed out that embryonic-stem-cell research should not be a moral issue because the embryos were destroyed at 14 days. After the meeting I looked over at Beth Myers, my chief of staff, and we both had exactly the same reaction — it just hit us hard just how much the sanctity of life had been cheapened by virtue of the Roe v. Wade mentality. And from that point forward, I said to the people of Massachusetts, “I will continue to honor what I pledged to you, but I prefer to call myself pro-life.” The state of Massachusetts is a pro-choice state and when I campaigned for governor I said that I would not change the law on abortion. But I do believe that the one-size-fits-all, abortion-on-demand-for-all-nine-months decision in Roe v. Wade does not serve the country well and is another example of judges making the law instead of interpreting the Constitution.
What I would like to see is the Court return the issue to the people to decide. The Republican party is and should remain the pro-life party and work to change hearts and minds and create a culture of life where every child is welcomed and protected by law and the weakest among us are protected. I understand there are people of good faith on both sides of the issue. They should be able to make and advance their case in democratic forums with civility, mutual respect, and confidence that our democratic process is the best place to handle these issues.
And yes, as a private citizen I have counseled women not to have abortions.
Lopez: Does that mean you were “faking it” — as one former adviser has suggested — as a pro-choicer in your previous political campaigns? Why should anyone believe you’re really pro-life now?
Gov. Romney: I believe people will see that as governor, when I had to examine and grapple with this difficult issue, I came down on the side of life. I know in the four years I have served as governor I have learned and grown from the exposure to the thousands of good-hearted people who are working to change the culture in our country. I’m committed to promoting the culture of life. Like Ronald Reagan, and Henry Hyde, and others who became pro-life, I had this issue wrong in the past.
Lopez: Since we’re on the Internet here: How tech savvy are you? Are you constantly plugged in or tend to use staff to filter a lot of the blogs and things? Do you use a crackberry? What’s your view of the importance of this new media?
Gov. Romney: I do spend a fair amount of time on the Internet. I use e-mail, have a Blackberry with me at all times, and get almost all my news online.
The new media is a great force for the democratization of information. No longer can just a few newspapers or television stations control what information we have access to. The monopoly on news has been broken wide open. I trust the people and the power of ideas to triumph in the free and competitive information market that the new media provides.
Lopez: So I gather you might want to run for president. When are we going to hear a Romney exploratory announcement? As you know, Senator McCain, Mayor Giuliani, Sam Brownback, and others — on the Democratic side, too — have already become official explorers. What’s your delay?
Gov. Romney: My term as governor doesn’t end until January 4, 2007, and I will be making my decision after the first of the year after having the opportunity to get together with the whole family over the Christmas holiday. We are already starting the 2008 political season earlier than ever before so I’m sure the American people don’t mind getting a chance to enjoy their holidays before the campaign season begins again.
Lopez: Besides giving your family a last chance to talk you out of running for president, what are you doing for Christmas?
Gov. Romney: I’ll be doing what I enjoy most in life which is playing with my ten grandchildren, catching up on a lot of reading I want to do, and talking with my wife, Ann, as well as to my sons and daughters-in-law about some interesting possibilities for the new year.
Lopez: Will an exposé on Mormon Christmas celebrations hurt you in the primaries?
Gov. Romney: This may sound strange to some, but my grandchildren will be eagerly awaiting presents to be delivered to their homes by a bearded man in a red suit led by a pack of flying reindeer. The lead reindeer, by the way, has a red light bulb for a nose — certainly a YouTube scandal waiting to happen.
Lopez: Read anything good lately?
Gov. Romney: A few of my current favorites are The Cube and the Cathedral by George Weigel, The Looming Tower by Lawrence Wright, America Alone by Mark Steyn, The Places in Between by Rory Stewart, and Bill Bryson’s latest book The Life and Times of the Thunderbolt Kid.
Lopez: Thanks so much for your time, Governor. Merry Christmas and we’ll all see you in 2008.
Gov. Romney: Merry Christmas to everyone at NRO.
For so long we've been flooded with stories about our military intended to paint these brave men and women as abusers, torturers, and murderers. I hope John Murtha, Ted Kennedy, Dick Durbin, Andrew Sullivan, and their like take the time to read the ABC News story below. Our armed forces are made up of magnificent human beings.Marines Save Iraqi Baby to Honor Fallen Soldier
A Routine Mission Turned Into a Mission to Help Sick Child
Dec. 7, 2006 — - The story of a group of Marines' quest to save a sick baby in war-torn Iraq gives some hope to humanity this holiday season.
At the center of the story is Navy medic Chris Walsh and the 1st Battalion 25th Marines. The Marines were patrolling the streets of Fallujah in June when they faced an enemy attack.
"An IED exploded immediately adjacent to Chris' vehicle, so they all piled out to chase the trigger man," said Capt. Sean Donovan.
But the Marines had a surprise encounter in their pursuit.
"And as they did so, a woman came from one of the houses calling to them that the baby was sick. So they stopped, and Chris came up and looked at the baby," Donovan said. "And this was baby Mariam, and it was immediately clear to him that this baby desperately needed care."
Baby Mariam was just 2 months old and suffering from a rare intestinal abnormality. Under the threat of another attack, Walsh had to make a quick decision.
"Right on the spot, the mission changed from the trigger man to the baby girl," Donovan said.
A routine military mission suddenly became a lifesaving mission for Walsh and those around him.
"The shared willingness to engage this mission was the bravery of the family in bringing her forward," Donovan said.
Visiting Under Cover of Darkness
For the next three months, Walsh and the team made house calls under the cloak of darkness into the dangerous city to help the baby.
They were trying to get baby Mariam stabilized, taking photographs, consulting experts, and trying to get her papers to leave the country for medical care.
Staff Sgt. Ed Ewing led the visits.
"We showed up at all different times of the night," Ewing said. "They never knew when we were coming. We did that purposely to protect us and protect their family."
As months went by, the unit continued its routine patrols. On Sept. 4, tragedy struck when one of their Humvees was hit once again by an IED.
This time three men in the unit were killed — Lance Cpl. Eric Valdepenas; Cpl. Jared Shoemaker; and Walsh, baby Mariam's guardian angel.
For those who survived, saving baby Mariam became a eulogy to their fallen comrade.
"To honor Chris, to honor the other men that died in battalion, we had to go through with the mission and keep fighting," said Father Marc Bishop.
Mission Accomplished
Eventually the Marines won their fight, and baby Mariam was granted permission to leave Iraq.
Dr. Rafael Pieretti from Boston's Massachusetts General Hospital performed the surgery, which took place in October.
"She's doing well," Pieretti said. "She's gained weight. She's socializing more. She has a different life."
On the eve of baby Mariam's arrival, Walsh's mother, Maureen, received a letter from Donovan, telling her the story of a life that was saved because of her son's big heart.
The letter from Donovan read in part: "Although he won't be visible, Chris will be very much on that patrol, the hope for Mariam's very tiny life having arisen from the charity and gallantry of your son."
Recently Maureen Walsh met baby Mariam.
"It made me feel like Chris was there," she said. "He wanted something like this. He wanted to make a difference in somebody's life."
I don't want to beat the subject to death, either, but perhaps as a Mormon I should say a few things, partly in our defense and partly to set things straight.
1. The term "Mormon" isn't like "colored," but it's probably headed that way. The anti-Mormon crowd uses it sneeringly, and so it is becoming associated with them. However, for now most Mormons don't take offense at the term, although they do generally prefer "LDS."
2. On Temples: Yes, only members of the Church in good standing can enter. One must be interviewed by a Bishop and a Stake President (analogous to a Catholic Priest and Bishop) in order to confirm that status. This isn't very different than things done by other religions: in the Jewish Temple, for example, only certain men were allowed to enter. Of course, we have many meetinghouses that we regularly use for meetings and activities and anyone is welcome there; Temples are relatively few in number and are not used for general meetings.
3. On Mormon "garments" (underwear): These are very analogous to the vestments worn by priests and ministers in other churches. We have a lay priesthood, not a paid clergy, so members of our priesthood work at jobs like any other person, and wearing symbolic clothing is not always practical. We count among our members farmers and lawyers, doctors and salesmen, bus drivers and educators. If we wore sacred symbolic clothing on the outside we would be thought strange for having everyone dress the same; we don't mind being thought strange, but you can see that however we did it, people would make fun. The garments represent our covenants with God; they're reminders that we should try to be obedient to Him and that He is our Creator and Father. Many people of many faiths wear reminders of one sort or another, from crosses on chains to religious medallions to special aprons to a particular style of dress. Some religious people wear their hair in particular ways. By wearing such garments under our clothing, however, we are not trying to hide our faith. On the contrary, we are strongly encouraged and taught to share our message openly and freely; I think everyone knows enough about us to know that we generally do just that.
4. On being a "loony" religion: Yes, there are parts of our religion that must be taken on faith. K-Lo, your comment about transubstantiation (in which we do not believe) is perfect. I think any religion, including any Christian religion, requires faith in one way or another. In fact, believing that Christ rose from the dead on the third day (which we do believe) and that this was not a story started by followers after His death requires faith. Can anyone prove that the Bible is the inerrant word of God? Or that Christ was born of a virgin mother? These beliefs must appear "loony" to outsiders, too. "Loony" is very much in the eye of the beholder.
I'm not trying to convert anyone here, but such comments and questions are going to come up more often if Romney runs. Frankly, such a thing makes many of us nervous as we know that many of our most sacred beliefs will be ridiculed. We do remember lots of anti-Mormon persecution and we still experience some of it today, although now it's not nearly as bad as when the governor of Missouri issued an "Extermination Order" against us, saying that the Mormons should either be expelled from the State or exterminated.
How do the Islamicist tyrants answer the obvious success and growing appeal of Bush's democracy program?
They kill people, of course.
But they also tell the story, over and over: "America will never stick it out. We'll keep killing Americans till they give up and go away, and then you will answer to us!"
Until they believe that the Islamofascists are never coming into power, many people will remain afraid to commit themselves to democracy.
Since the United Nations and United States are frozen voyeurs of this genocide because they honor the sovereignty of Sudan, which refuses to allow U.N. troops to enter and end the mass murders, these rebels are now killing Sudan's murderous forces and being killed by them -- adding to the rivers of blood.
6 November 2006
SALT LAKE CITY — Last week, President Gordon B. Hinckley — president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints — became the oldest prophet in the history of the Church.
On 3 November 2006, President Hinckley was 96 years old and 133 days, surpassing President David O. McKay, who died at 96 years and 132 days on 18 January 1970.
During the October 2006 general conference of the Church, President Hinckley said: “If I last a few months longer, I will have served to an older age than any previous president. I do not say this to be boastful but rather grateful. ... The Lord has permitted me to live; I do not know for how long. But whatever the time, I shall continue to give my best to the task at hand.”
I am convinced a volunteer army would be an army of the poor and the black and the brown.His recent insult of the troops proves that he still holds the same world view. He is normally a good enough politician to hide what he really thinks. Even if his excuse of botching a joke is true, his actions show that he really does loathe the military.
There are two conditions which may justify a truly Christian man to enter, mind you I say enter - not begin, a war: one, an attempt to dominate and to deprive another of his free agency. And two, loyalty to his country. Possibly there is a third. Defense of a weak nation being unjustly crushed by a strong, ruthless one.
Make no mistake — logically, that's where the ticking-bomb scenario takes you. [Hillary] Clinton insists that she wasn't really saying that torture should be legal — no, no, of course not. She still thinks that torture is immoral, ineffective and counterproductive. It's just that for an "improbable but possible eventuality" such as a true ticking-bomb scenario, she thinks that we should make "a very, very narrow exception within very, very limited circumstances."This is a stupid argument because Syria, North Korea, and Iran ALREADY VIOLATE GENEVA CONVENTIONS. It is well known that these countries hold political prisoners and starve, torture, and kill them. North Korea's gulags and reeducation camps are infamous.
And this wouldn't undermine the Geneva Convention? You'd better believe that countries such as Syria, North Korea and Iran would also just love to carve out some "very, very narrow exceptions" to treaties banning torture.
