The Club for Growth came out with a white paper on Mitt today.  The MSM will read it as a lukewarm endorsement, but the bottom line is the Club thinks Mitt is a good capitalist and would “generally advocate a pro-growth agenda.”  Contrast that with Hillary’s “we’re going to take things away from you for the common good” and its not hard to see which economy would be better to live in.
 
The Daily Illini’s Paul Schmitt declares Mitt the best solution for America’s ills.  A good piece overall, but I tip my hat to Mr. Schmitt for his description of Obama Fever symptoms.
 
Howlin Mad Howie Dean’s Head Mitt Hit Man Damien LaVera returns to the fray with an obviously limited grasp of things foreign to DNC operatives – facts.  Yes, Mitt won’t address the VFW convention in Kansas City.  LaVera obviously overlooked Mitt’s recent work to support Armed Forces members as well as veterans.  I guess Damien didn’t get the Surge of Support memo.  Then again, Damien doesn’t get a lot of things.
 
The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder has details on Mitt’s advertising spending.
 
The Providence Journal’s Froma Harrop chimes in on the issue of the Romney 5’s lack of military service.  She’s so far off base on so many issues I hesitate to name all of them, but let’s start here.  Memo to Froma:  I first take issue with your statement 

Let’s pin down the real problem. We know that the armed forces are all-volunteer (”the good news,” Mitt said) and that few children of the rich have much to do with it. 

If we “all” know this, than it shouldn’t be too hard for you to come up with the facts supporting your argument.  Show me the numbers.  Show me the hard data that shows the majority of the Armed Forces are poor people who couldn’t get other jobs.  Forgive me if I don’t take your word for it, but you are after all a journalist and your profession’s word isn’t worth much.  Moving on to your next (but not only) absurd assertion: 

So while the “chickenhawk” label could stick to most of the candidates, there’s something especially jarring about the Romney family portrait: six hunky males, all untouched by military service. (During the Vietnam War, Mitt obtained a draft deferment to do missionary work in France.) 

What, exactly, is “especially jarring” with that family portrait, Froma?  For your information, my family portrait looks much the same as Mitt’s – minus about $250 million.  Are you going to trot out the ‘chickenhawk’ label for me too?  And, by the way, you neglected to mention that Mitt did in fact sign up for the draft – unlike a very recent former occupant of the Oval.  I guess you think he manipulated his way to a high draft number as well.  Of course, you saved your final cheap shot for last: 

As part of his answer to the “rude” question, Romney called for a “surge of support” for the troops. A more politically astute response would have been to propose a national program requiring everyone’s children, including his own, to serve their country in some fashion. 

Whiskey.  Tango.  Foxtrot.  Over.  A national program requiring everyone’s children to serve their country?  What, Americorps isn’t good enough for you?  Just come out and say it, Froma.  You want Mitt’s boys to be drafted and sent off to the Land of Sand.  You’d be a lot easier to read if you just came out and said what you thought rather than couching it in some nebulous call for national “service”.  Of course, that would make your columns a lot shorter.  Now that would be a good service.  End Memo.
 
Via IMAO.US (I link because they’re friggin’ hilarious) I found Pereiraville.  She went to meet Mitt in Winter Park, Florida.  Great pictures – including the picture of all five Ron Paul supporters.  Who knew they all got together in one place!

Voice of America’s Jim Malone writes on the aftermath of Ames.  I commend Malone for focusing on the political issues of the campaign and not the religious angle.  Would that more reporters followed his example. 

The AP’s Jim Kuhnhenn reports on Mitt’s financial disclosure document to the FEC.   Bottom line – Mitt is loaded.  No news here. 

USNews’ Chris Wilson comments on Mitt’s blogosphere buzz.  Again, Ames has an effect – mainly causing people to pay attention. 

While the Republican YouTube Circus is “back on”, Mitt has yet to confirm participation in the November event and has serious questions about the format.  I’ve seen a good portion of the video questions and have yet to find any of them I could remotely call “serious”.  If the YouTube Circus has participation by the Tier I candidates – Fred and Rudy – then my guess is Mitt will go. 

Mitt headed to San Diego to see the Ground Zero of the border problem. 

Looks like Howlin Mad Howie Dean’s Head Mitt Hit Man Damien LaVera took the day off.  LaVera’s job is safe, however, because the quality of the DNC hit piece didn’t improve in his absence.  If I were the DNC, I’d be very careful about calling a competitor’s donors “dirty”.   Yes, Damien, we’ve got long memories.  We remember the filthy Clinton fundraising machine that turned the White House into a Motel6 for anyone with a few bags of untraceable $100 bills. 

The Hoover Institution’s Dinesh D’Souza has a rather unique piece on Mitt and the Mormon issue.  Worth the read but skip the comments. 

The Salt Lake Trib’s Paul Rolly writes a few hundred words which aren’t worth the bandwidth they’re stored on.  Facts, Paul.  Try a few.  Or just one. 

The Deseret Morning News’ Carrie Moore writes (yet another) column on Mitt and the Mormon issue.  She quotes Article VI’s Lowell, but otherwise the article recycles that which has be done over and over.  Sigh. 

The Trail’s Alec MacGillis writes a truly tasteless pre-Ames piece eluding to a “Mormon” conspiracy influencing the outcome.  Memo to Alec:  Get real.  Soon.  End Memo. 

I’d like to state for the record that the people running the Op-Ed page at Boston’s ABC affiliate WCBV are a bunch of bigoted cowards.  Yes.  You read me right.  Bigoted Cowards.  Only such people would write this type of editorial and leave it unsigned and unattributed.  Prove me wrong and come out and take credit for your work.  I’m not holding my breath. 

The Philadelphia Daily News’ John Baer makes sense.  He wins today’s “Read The Whole Thing” Award. 

A Brownback Blog tries – and fails in spectacular fashion – to put a bad spin on Mitt’s Mickelson takedown.  B4M readers know why I refer to the Senator from Kansas as “Cheap-Shot Sam”.  Looks like the blog doesn’t fall far from the candidate where cheap shots are concerned. 

Evangelicals for Mitt summarizes the debate between John Podhoretz and Blogfather Hugh regarding Mitt’s strategery.  Sorry, John, this round goes to the Blogfather. 

Mitt has a link with video from his Today Show appearance.  Josh and Tagg put in an appearance on the Early Show. 

The Mitt Mobile finally made it to all 99 counties in Iowa.  That’s a lot of real estate!

Not exactly surprising news, but I thought it apt to mention that Mitt has won the Ames Straw Poll by pulling in about 32% of the votes cast.  There are a few ways to spin the Ames results – and the MSM will give you all of them. 

Here’s the bottom line – Mitt did well.  Better than expected actually.  Its important to remember that – outside of opinion polls – Ames is the only contact the candidates will have between now and the Hawkeye Caucai sometime in early January.  Yes, Ames is a non-binding event, but everything between now and January is just talk. 

So, other than Mitt, congratulations are due to Mike Huckabee for a good second place finish.  He’ll makes somebody’s short list in the Veepstakes. 

Memo to Cheap Shot Sam Brownback:  Third place doesn’t even count in horseshoes or hand grenades.  So much for your upset. 

And, the field bids farewell to Tommy Thompson. 

Thank you, and good night.

I think I’m going to start a new category here at B4M – something along the lines of Sports Illustrated’s This Week’s Sign The Apocalypse Is Upon Us.  Well, This Week’s Sign is Fox New’s Blue Streak columnist Susan Estrich.  She’s much easier to read than she is to listen to, but she nailed the Mitt vs. Mickelson brouhaha.  I give credit where credit is due.  Well said, Susan.
 
Much has been made over the past few days about the Mitt-Rudy ‘sanctuary city’ dust up.  Mitt says Rudy continued a holdover ‘sanctuary’ policy from Ed Koch.  For the record, here’s what Rudy said in 1994:

Some of the hardest-working and most productive people in this city are undocumented aliens.  If you come here and you work hard and you happen to be in an undocumented status, you’re one of the people who we want in this city. You’re somebody that we want to protect, and we want you to get out from under what is often a life of being like a fugitive, which is really unfair.

Quacks like a duck.  Walks like a duck.  Barring an epiphany to the contrary, it’s probably a duck.  HT Evangelicals For Mitt.
 
Here’s a shocker – at least it will be to the MSM.  The Des Moines Register’s Perry Beeman reports that Mitt believes discrimination based on sexual orientation is wrong.   Says Mitt:

We as a society don’t discriminate against people based on their sexual orientation.  If people are looking for people who are anti-gay, they aren’t going to find that with me. But I am going to fight to protect traditional marriage.
 
I don’t believe in discrimination against people because they are gay. In state employment, I never asked anyone about their sexual orientation, so I wouldn’t be surprised if we hired a gay judge or two. I am not anti-gay.

If I had an egg timer, I’d use it to time the right wing nutters as they spin up their “Mitt favors gay agenda” posts.  It’s a fundamental principle of this nation that all people are created equal and are entitled to equal protection under the law.  Mitt believes that.  So do I.  Equal protection doesn’t extend to redefining marriage.  Deal with it.
 
The AP’s Glen Johnson writes about how Mitt uses his business acumen to effectively run his campaign.  Johnson’s reporting is good, and you can tell he’s been shadowing Mitt’s campaign for awhile now.  But when I read this paragraph I almost fell out of my chair:

One small but potentially potent bloc: Romney‘s fellow Mormons. While a church almanac says there are only 22,100 Mormons in Iowa, seven-tenths of 1 percent of the state‘s overall population, if they appear en masse at the caucuses, it could be a boon to Romney.

Memo to Johnson:  You don’t know many Mormons, do you?  The possibility of getting all 22,100 Mormons to do anything en masse is about as remote as getting Hillary Clinton to do the funky chicken on Letterman.  Mitt’s support will be broad based and although I’m sure there will be a Mormon contingent voting for him, it won’t be the deciding factor.
 
The Midland Reporter-Telegram’s Bob Campbell reports that Mitt plans to visit Midland, Texas in September.  I’ve once lived in Midland during September.  My only advice to Mitt on Midland is: Bring water.  Lots of water.  There’s no water in Midland – at least none worth drinking.
 
I’d comment on VDARE’s Randall Burns and his link filled anti-Mitt diatribe, but pretty much all you need to know is contained in his two-line bio at the bottom of the column.  He works for Dennis Kucinich – Cleveland’s gift to political comedy.  Enough said.
 
The Washington Post’s Shear and MacGillis report on Mitt’s Iowa cash advantage.  Bottom line – Money talks.
 
The Hawkeye’s Kiley Miller writes about Ann in the kitchen.
 
There’s just no pleasing the New York Observer’s Steve Kornaki.  Memo to Steve:  Easy on the pickle juice.  End Memo.
 
Newsweek’s Gaggle writer Holly Bailey blows the lid off Mitt’s secret weapon that will catapult him to victory at Ames.  What’s the secret?  Food.  Memo to Holly:  Mormons don’t drink, smoke, or take drugs.  Add to that the prohibition against illicit (extramarital) sex and we’re running short on vices.  We’re good a food based hospitality and have been since the Nauvoo Mansion House was opened in the 1840s.  Food.  Its what we do.  End Memo.
 
The Deseret Morning News’ Lisa Riley Roche has (yet another) article on Mitt and the Mormon issue.  Sigh.  There are so many on this subject I’m thinking of developing a macro with boilerplate commentary.
 
(Lack of) Reason’s Jacob Sullum wanted to write something about Mitt and medicinal marijuana.  I’m not sure, but Jason might have inhaled some time during his writing session.
 
Today’s Cheap Shot award goes to the Boston Herald’s Peter Getzinis.  With columns like his, Getzinis should be careful about who he calls and “empty vessel.”
 
PolicialDerby’s Jason Wright wonders when Mitt will start to worry about the national poll numbers which have him tied with McCain.  I’ll be happy to answer.  Memo to Jason:  Mitt will start to worry about the national polls when they start to actually reflect voter sentiment.  Right now its August.  Most of America is more concerned with air conditioning than they are with the race for the Oval.  Look for Mitt to start focusing more on the national polls in a few months when people outside Iowa and New Hampshire actually start paying attention.  End Memo.
 
The Wall Street Journal’s Mark Jacoby pretty much spells out what is at stake with the Ames poll.  Alright all you stubborn Hawkeyes!  Get out there, vote early, and often!
 

USAToday’s Susan Page reports from Cedar Rapids that Mitt’s support for the troop surge in Iraq isn’t an open ended commitment.  Somehow the MSM will spin this to the point Mitt will be painted as supporting total withdrawal immediately. 

Fox has more on the Romney Girls.  Shameless marketing – but very effective. 

The AP has Mitt out front in the Washington State GOP money race. 

There are many people whom I believe qualified to judge the honesty of another individual.  The Boston Globe’s Joan Vennochi is not among that group.  She spent four years sniping at Mitt while he was governor and she just can’t help but recycle her work from that era.  Memo to Joan:  Originality.  Try some.  End Memo. 

Speaking of people who have trouble piecing together two coherent sentences, Jimmy Breslin has a point in his latest Newsday piece.  I’m sure it has something to do with Mitt and politics, but between the 11 mentions of Mormon and the not-so-subtle reference to Rudy’s vision of Mitt coming out of the Manhattan Temple, I’m not sure what that point was supposed to have been. 

Via Evangelicals for Mitt I found the latest Evans & Novak Political Report which tries to make sense of the national polling data in light of Mitt’s good numbers in Iowa and New Hampshire.  Well worth the read. 

Blogfather Hugh takes the AP and Rachel Griffith (anti-war activist and cheap shot questioner) to task for both asking the “why aren’t your grown sons in the military” question and the way the AP reported the exchange.  Once upon a time, MSM luminaries like the AP controlled what was printed and how candidates appeared to the public.  That time has ended. 

Mike Gallagher, having already dug himself well into the pit of religious bigotry, calls in the steam shovel to help him on his way down.  Memo to Mike:  The only people seeing the need to “scrutinize” the religious beliefs of people running for secular political office are those who can’t see their way clear to writing about issues that actually matter.  Sadly, you’ve been in the former category for years now.  End memo. 

The Washington Post’s Cillizza and Balz have a puff piece on Mike Huckabee.  Huckabee has learned from Cheap-Shot Sam that a good way to garner headlines is to snipe at the Tier 1 candidates – especially Mitt.  Pollsters say people like Huckabee but feel he can’t win the primary, let alone the general election.  They’re right. 

The AP’s Liz Sidoti has a roundup of who’s taking shots at Mitt and what ammunition they’re using.  The long and the short of that issue is Mitt can take more than they can dish out.

The AP’s Glen Johnson reports on Mitt’s trip to Bettendorf, Iowa.  There an anti-war “activist” challenged Mitt on the fact that none of his five sons decided to serve in the military.  Why this question is even given voice by Johnson is beyond me.  It’s a cheap shot.  We live in a country where men and women are free to serve in the military – or not.  Instead of focusing on that freedom, some nitwits heckle a father for the decisions of his adult sons.  Go figure.
 
Mitt has launched a new ad in Iowa in the run up to the Ames Straw Poll.
 
The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder has some inside info on Mitt’s push to Ames.
 
CBS’s Pure Horserace thinks Mitt is hearing footsteps on the way to Ames.  He points to a “clearly frustrated Romney hastily leaving the studio after the [Mickelson] interview” as evidence there might be an upset coming from the second tier candidates like Cheap-Shot Sam.  Mitt will win the Ames poll, but you can guarantee that any showing of strength from Tiers 2 or 3 will be overblown by the MSM.
 
The Philly Inquirer’s Dick Polman declares that since Republicans tend to be more religious than Democrats now Mitt should be required to answer questions about his faith.  Polman cloaks his bigotry with the “weird” veil and proceeds to cherry pick pieces of Mormon doctrine, folklore, and myth in order to paint Mitt (and all Mormons) as self-righteous crusaders bent on imposing their faith on the heathen hoards.
 
Ok.  Maybe I embellish Polman’s column just a tad. Memo to Dick Polman:  Replace every single mention of “Mormon” in your column with Jew, Catholic, or Muslim and I guarantee your inbox will be inundated with messages like the one I’m about to send you.  Congratulations.  You’re a bigot.  Here’s your sign.  And, for the record, I want a President who believes in American Exceptionalism.  This is a special country – that’s why everybody wants to come here.  I’m not interested in any “leader” who sees Islamofascism as having anything to add to America.  American Exceptionalists believe the War on Terror must be won rather than appeasing the thugs on the other side.  End Memo.
 
The Christian Science Monitor’s Linda Feldmann has an extensive piece on Mitt, his family, and (of course) his religion.  Having read the whole thing, I find her work well thought out and well written.  That said, I have to take issue with her quotation of Alan Wolfe, director of the Boisi Center for Religion and American Public Life at Boston College:

It doesn’t matter that Mormonism is by now a very fast-growing and successful religion.  It doesn’t matter that Romney’s Mormon faith has in no way impeded his political career thus far. Same with Harry Reid [the Senate Democratic leader, also a Mormon]…. When ordinary people start to think about Mormonism, the word that flits across their brain is ‘cult.’

Memo to Alan Wolfe:  Evidently, sir, you do not know or associate with many “ordinary” people.  End memo.
 
Normally I’m of the opinion that you takes the compliments you gets.  Michael Graham’s Boston Herald op-ed makes me want to reconsider that view.  Thanks, Mike.  I think.
 
Via Article VI I came across Justin Taylor’s take on Michael Gerson’s Washington Post op-ed.  The news on Taylor’s blog is an upcoming Collin Hansen piece on Mitt in the September edition of Christianity Today.  My praise for Taylor ends where the comments begin. 
 
I was unaware Mitt had triplets.

Blogfather Hugh comments on the Washington Post’s E.J. Dionne’s piece about Mitt gaining traction in Iowa.  I can’t argue with Dionne’s logic.  Mitt has the Big Mo in the Hawkeye State and its becoming more and more apparent to friend and foe alike that Mitt is and will be a force to be reckoned with.
 
Also from the Washington Post, William Arkin wishes George Stephanopolous would have followed up on Mitt’s “Jane Fonda to Dr. Strangelove in one week” zinger.   I disagree with Arkin’s premise that Mitt is “walking away from Iraq”.  All evidence is to the contrary.  Arkin is miffed that Mitt got off a memorable soundbyte at Obama’s expense.
 
The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder parses out Mitt’s statements on abortion as they relate to federalism.  If you’re in need of intellectual stimulation, feel free to delve into the details.  Mitt has stated repeatedly (and in more detail than any other candidate) that he is vigorously pro-life.  That’s good enough for me, and I think it’ll be good enough for most voters – with the obvious exception of Cheap-Shot Sam.  He’s smarting from the shellacking he took on Sunday and Marc has his response video.  In summary – too little, too cheap, and much too late.
 
The Orlando Sentinel’s Rachael Jackson chronicles Mitt’s visit to Daytona Beach.
 
I don’t know if CBN’s David Brody reads this blog.  His readers, like me, took issue with his take on the Mickelson ambush interview.  Memo to David:  I deny all knowledge of any letters written with cut-out words.
 
Some days Howlin’ Mad Howie Dean’s Head Mitt Hit Man Damien LaVera just makes me laugh.  With no thought to the fact of his boss’ legendary temper nor the fact that the Dean Scream has hung over the Iowa landscape for over four years now, LaVera has the audacity to say that Mitt’s “temper flared during a recent interview” thus showing his “thin skin”.  Its been at least a week since LaVera managed to cobble together enough critical MSM hit pieces into a DNC press release.  LaVera obviously has a thin grasp of temper tantrums.  To the best of my knowledge, Mitt has never hurled a lamp at anyone.
 
ABCNews’ Dan Harris journeys to Manti, Utah to report on the Mormon angle to Mitt’s candidacy.  Harris’ choice for people to ask about their feelings regarding Mitt’s candidacy is rather unique.  I’ve been to both the Manti and Palmyra pageants and have dealt with the anti-Mormon protesters in both venues.  They represent the far extreme of the evangelical spectrum and spend most of their time shouting into megaphones at the crowds of assembled Mormons.  One can’t even describe them as informative, unless you consider someone yelling “Anyone who believes in Joe Smith is going to hell” to be useful information. 
 
The most informative paragraphs of Harris’ column come (no surprise) at the end where he states:

But even if they embrace Romney, don’t expect evangelicals to embrace Mormonism.

Commenting on Romney to the National Review in December 2006, evangelical leader Chuck Colson said, “As an evangelical, I’m not troubled that he’s a Mormon. I would have theological concerns about his soul, but not about his competence.”

This campaign isn’t about Mormon theology – there’s no place on the ballot for that.  Embrace Mitt all you want – no conversion is required.
 
The Point’s Anne Morse is concerned that a Mitt presidency might increase the number of convert baptisms.  It would be easy enough for her to say that, but then this wouldn’t have caught my attention:

This will be one of those “Lots of Links And Little Commentary” Roundups.  Its what happens when I get overtaken by domestic events.
 
Dean Barnett brought this to my attention last week.  It’s a video clip of Mitt’s interview with WHO radio talk show host Jan Mickelson.  I’m hesitant to call it an interview, because Mickelson basically insinuated that Mitt should’ve been excommunicated for being effectively pro-choice.  Where did Mickelson get his facts about LDS Church policy and doctrine?  As best I can tell – first from a pirated copy of the Church Handbook of Instructions and secondly from George Stephanopolus.  Mitt acquitted himself well and Mickelson ended up looking – and sounding – like a fool. I’m not sure that strays much from Mickelson’s normal operating status.
 
CBN’s David Brody says Mitt needs to better manage his emotions on the Mormon issue or it “could become a real problem for him”.  Memo to David Brody:  You  won’t see Mitt lose his cool.  What you saw in the Mickelson interview was as close to an uncensored view as you’re going to get.  If there was a time when Mitt would’ve come unglued on camera, you can bet it would be when he didn’t know there was a camera running.  If you’re waiting for a Mitt eruption, you’re going to be sorely disappointed.  End Memo.
 
The NRO’s Byron York thinks Mitt did a fine job making mincemeat of Mickelson.
 
Politico’s Jonathan Martin declares Mitt to be

cutting, combative and sarcastic, but most of all agitated at being forced to defend what he and his church stand for.

Memo to Jonathan Martin:  I don’t think I’d call it “agitated”.  I believe “annoyed” would be a better term.  Anyone who thinks George Stephanopolous knows more about Mormon Doctrine than a former Stake President and Bishop does clearly has an agenda that has no place in a presidential race.   Mickelson has no standing from which to lecture Mitt about the dangers of distancing himself from a faith Mickelson clearly does not understand.  End Memo.
 
Also writing at the NRO, Mark Hemingway puts in his buck and half about Cleon Skousen.  Hemingway clearly doesn’t like Skousen and makes a point of using Mitt as a springboard with which to fill his column inches.  What this has to do with a presidential race escapes me.
 
The New York Times’ Michael Luo also chimes in on the WHO clip.  Clearly Mickelson is getting his 15 minutes.
 
In other news, ABC’s This Week hosted a GOP debate.  Note the timing of the broadcast – Sunday morning at 9:00 AM.  Just the time when every single LDS Chapel in the United Stats is filled to capacity – along with most every other Christian denomination in the country.  I haven’t watched the footage yet, but I’m curious as to whether or not George asked any questions about Missouri or the White Horse prophecy.
 
During that debate, Mitt got off some shots at Obama:

In one week he went from saying he’s going to sit down, you know, for tea, with our enemies, but then he’s going to bomb our allies.  I mean he’s gone from Jane Fonda to Dr. Strangelove in one week.

And also directed some fire at Cheap-Shot Sam:

I get tired of people that are holier than thou because they’ve been pro-life longer than I have.

Speaking of Cheap-Shot Sam, TNR’s Michelle Cottle indulges in a bit of hero-worship whilst making some good points about the Republicans beating up their own in the name of God.  Doesn’t anybody remember Reagan’s 11^th Commandment?  At the very least we should be debating political issues, not ecclesiastical ones.
 
Mitt’s PR people have a full roundup of debate related links.
 
The LA Times’ Paul Brownfield has an entertaining look at the 2008 Oval race.  Its Hollywood, what did you expect?
 
The Council on Foreign Relations’ Michael Gerson – in a Washington Post Op-Ed – writes about Mitt, Mormonism, and the White House and ends with this nugget of common sense:

Given this common ground, evangelicals and other religious conservatives should not disqualify Romney from the outset. There may be other reasons to oppose him for president, but his belief about the destiny of the soul is not one of them.

Well said, Mr. Gerson.
 
IowaPolitics’s Chris Dorsey has some of Mitt’s comments on healthcare.  His solution is market (not government) based.  Makes sense to me.
 
The AP’s Mike Glover reports Mitt has a novel concept about what to do with ethically challenged politicians whose conduct only comes to light after they “retire”.  What does Mitt suggest?  Confiscate their pensions.   Mitt doesn’t look favorably on ethical lapses and (as the SF Chronicle’s Debra Saunders explains) isn’t above using creative ways to encourage people to do that which is right but not necessarily in their self interest.
 
The Wellesley Townman’s Samantha Fields has a great quote from Wellesley College professor Wilbur Rich:

A lot of people underestimate Romney.  They don’t remember what he did to Shannon O’Brien [in the governor’s race in 2002]. Everybody thought he had no chance against her … and he came from nowhere to beat her.

Very true professor.  Lots of people are misunderestimating Mitt right now.
 
I know this is getting into what is now old news, but its worth including:  Last week Mitt suggested a Surge of Support for the Troops.  He put some of his money where his rhetoric is and donated $25K to the cause.
 
The Miami Herald’s Adres Oppenheimer writes of Mitt and Latin America.  Oppenheimer disagrees with Mitt on most ever US/Latin American issue and believes that Mitt will be a very lonely guy in the hemisphere if he wins in 2008.  I’m not sure what Oppenheimer wants, but I much prefer the United States over most every Latin American country – especially Venezuela and Cuba.  I believe Chavez and Castro will be very lonely (ideologically) because their form of government cannot survive.   Communists and Populist regimes have a very short life expectancy.
 
Mitt also had an interview at Victory Caucus.
 
Article VI’s John effectively eviscerates Larry Sabato.  Well done, John – though it was a pretty easy target.
 
The Rocky Mountain News’ M.E. Sprengelmeyer.  The Mormon question is number four. 
 
Mitt scares Robin Miller.  If Robin Miller made sense, he’d scare me.  Since he doesn’t, I’ll cease commenting on his post.
 
And finally, the Des Moines Register’s Thomas Beaumont quotes Mitt as being willing to cut his rivals some slack for gaffes and flubbed lines on the campaign trail.  Don’t look for the favor to be returned.
 
This has nothing to do with Mitt, but with blogging in general.  Over at the Yearly Kos convention there was a booth set up with people wanting to organize a Blogger’s Union.  The only thing that would do would be to increase costs and decrease the quality of the work performed.  How Kos could possibly sink any lower on the quality scale is beyond me.

The AP’s Glen Johnson writes about Mitt’s latest Iowa ad focusing on immigration.  The Boston Globe’s Scott Helman claims Mitt is “hardening his rhetoric” ahead of Ames. 

The Hill’s Sam Youngman  notes some concern about Mitt’s lack of traction in Florida.  Every campaign has some rough patches, and Florida’s primary race is still very fluid.  In or out, Fred.  Time to make up your mind. 

Associated Content’s Jason Bauer (any relation to Jack?) reports on Mitts plan for internet sexual predators.  It’s pretty simple actually.  “One Strike And Your Ours”.  I like it. 

The AP also reports that Mitt has designs on restructuring the Department of Homeland Security to focus more on preventing acts of terrorism than to responding to them.  This seems to come as a novel concept to most of the MSM, but it makes perfect sense to me.  From a cost standpoint, I’m pretty sure it costs a lot less to prevent an act of terrorism than to clean up after one.  If you doubt my point, may I suggest you visit downtown Manhattan. 

From the Silly File – commonly known as the Huffington Post, I bring you Chris Kelly.  Mr. Kelly seems overly concerned about the availability of used Playgirl magazines on E-bay, which begs the question of his impetus to search E-Bay for said magazines.  When he provides that information, I’ll be happy to discuss his questions further. 

This article doesn’t mention Mitt, however I have to ask the question.  Does a group of four Congressmen really qualify as a “Caucus”?  Sounds to me more like a badly attended Elders Quorum Social. 

The New York Time’s Michael Falcone reports on Obama’s reaction to Mitt’s (and Rudy’s) lambasting the Democratic Party as a group of “defeatists” and “losers”.  Truth hurts.  Obama came out with some tough talk – proposing that troops be “re-deployed” (read Cut & Run) from Iraq to Afghanistan and Pakistan.  No word as to what he would do with the disaster he’d leave in Iraq.  That doesn’t fit well into a soundbyte. 

The NRO’s Jim Geraghty brilliantly illustrates the silliness factor inherent in the YouTube Circus.  Evidently Mike Worlock of Spartanburg, South Carolina will have a problem with every single government employee (be they federal, state, or local) who happens to be Mormon and sees fit to pay tithing on their government salary.  Excuse my French, Mr. Worlock, but you’re an idiot.  What any person sees fit to do with their hard-earned salary is their business.  Not yours.  Read up on “conflict of interest” before you go making a fool of yourself and thus making yourself an exceptionally easy target for guys like me.  End Memo.  (HT – Article VI) 

And finally today, Mitt suggests a “Surge Of Support At Home”.  Fantastic idea.

The Washington Post’s Trail Blogger Alec MacGillis reports that Virginia Lieutenant Governor Bill Bolling (the highest elected GOP official in the Commonwealth) will endorse Mitt’s candidacy for the Oval.  This is a real pick up for Mitt because it shows some southern support for him.  For those of you in Rio Linda, yes, Virginia is a southern state.
 
KSL’s Carol Mikita documents some Mormon political history and “America’s” insatiable curiosity with a curious religion.
 
The Oskaloosa Herald’s Wes Kappelman reports on Mitt’s latest coffee klatch.
 
FoxNew’s Martin Frost takes 15 paragraphs to say the religious right might sit out the 2008 election because of Mitt.  Sigh.  He’s been saying this for months now.  Memo to Martin:  Wishing don’t make it so.  End Memo.
 
The Des Moines Register’s Reid Forgave caught up with Three of the Five Brothers as they joined a bike race in Iowa.  Forgave included such details as to the brother’s choice of pies along the route and their visit to the Field of Dreams.  It was built.  They came.  Pies were baked, they were eaten.   Memo to Reid Forgave:  Thank you, sir, for putting some originality in your work.  End Memo.
 
The American Spectator’s Jennifer Rubin reports on the latest addition to Mitt’s staff, Legal Eagle Wendy Long.  Rubin wastes no time in getting right to the point:

How did she come to select Romney? She candidly acknowledges that she always liked Fred Thompson, in part because his support of causes like Scooter Libby “warmed her heart,” but ultimately concluded that Thompson could “not hold a candle to the Governor on intellect or leadership.” She contends that Romney is “the constitutionalist” in the race, meaning he best understands and supports concepts of federalism and the commitment to originalism in interpreting the Constitution. 

I like this woman – in a judicial way of course.