I have in the last day taken to affecting quasi neutrality with the phone people in Washington. It catches them off guard and they listen very well to you this way. Today, following this, I tried to highlight how much obvious gain Romney got straight off the bat for simply saying what the American people want. There is no hard-sell or anything on their part. All other candidates are going to have to play catch up to him, etc.
Moral, ethical, logical reasons do not penetrate the minds of the reptiles we talk to in Washington.
Self interest will and does.
If you have grown weary of blowing lava into the ears of the kiddy-staffers, try a low energy, high impact method like the one outlined above
ps
This seems to work especially well on those senators with their hats in the ring for the next election.

Posted by: Angus MacLeod on May 23, 2007 02:08 PM

THERE'S GOOD WORDS COMING FROM THIS CANDIDATE

"...Immigration reform is necessary, but it will succeed only if it enhances national security, promotes economic growth, and protects freedom and liberty. The only practical solution is a comprehensive plan that addresses internal enforcement of immigration laws, the origins of illegal migration, and border security. The Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act (S. 1033) introduced by Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Edward Kennedy (D-MA) does not achieve these ends...."

See the whole URL:

http://blog.electromneyin2008.com/index.php?title=the_mccain_kennedy_immigration_reform_bi&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1#comments

Posted by: Softwarengineer on May 23, 2007 02:17 PM

Gov. Romney is hitting some good points, has spoken out against the Senate amnesty bill, but we'll have to watch him closely to make sure he doesn't try to redefine terms in the future. And FYI, he is also a buddy of Jeb Bush.

Posted by: Fed Up on May 23, 2007 04:30 PM

Immigration Barely Registers as Issue in New Hampshire

By - Beth LaMontagne
(May 23, 2007)
U.S. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., spoke with New Hampshire area reporters this morning to address the Senate immigration package. McCain said he supports the current compromise reached on immigration reform and argued that even though some are criticizing the bill, the country is looking for leaders to take action quickly to protect America's borders.

"I think we can agree the status quo is unacceptable," said McCain. "I think we can agree that unless we have 60 votes in the Senate, we're not going to get anything done. I think we can say unless the president is heavily engaged, it's not going to work."

McCain added that he understood the opposition to the bill was incredibly intense because of the government's failures to protect the borders and curb the number of immigrants working illegally in this country. This is a national security issue that needs to be addressed now, said McCain, and he hoped that opponents would come to see that.

"I hope that we can understand that this issue has to be addressed," he said. "If they have a better idea we could pass in both houses and get the president to sign, I would love to see it."
When McCain opened Wednesday morning's call to the press, the first question was not in regards to immigration, but New Hampshire's recently passed civil union bill. The second question addressed the expansion of Indian reservation gambling in Massachusetts.

Although New Hampshire voters take pride in vetting candidates on all the issues, immigration is not getting much attention during primary season. New Hampshire shares a border with Canada at the most desolate and narrow point of the state. There have been a handful of instances of local police expressing frustration over the federal government's lack of enforcement regarding illegal immigrants working in the state, but according to poll numbers, the immigration issue barely registers with New Hampshire voters.

In a recent CNN/WMUR Granite State poll of likely Republican voters, five percent said immigration was their top issue and 10 percent said it was in their top three. At town hall meetings with both Republican and Democratic presidential candidates, the questions are typically about the war in Iraq, health care, social security and the economy.

Republican presidential candidates have taken advantage of the hotly contested immigration issue and the Senate compromise to go on the offensive against McCain, particularly criticizing the bill for potentially granting legal status to millions of illegal immigrants. In New Hampshire, however, there is little sign that the immigration issue will hurt McCain or bolster any candidate that opposes the bill. In fact, state Republican Chairman Fergus Cullen commended McCain for tackling the tough issue.

"Sen. McCain, to his credit, has been willing to take a political risk on an issue that's not associated with a lot of political gain," said Cullen. "I think Sen. McCain is showing political courage on this issue ... There is a segment of the party that is really opposed to anything that looks like a compromise and it's a vocal group." People may not be wholly satisfied with the end result, added Cullen, but that's what happens with any good compromise.

Posted by: people james on May 23, 2007 05:54 PM

In Texas we have a saying, "Dance with the one who brung ya". Romney's "conversion" is quite recent and he is certainly not the one who "brung us to the dance" in the arena of illegal immigration and how to deal with it. Frankly, I do not believe him...do not believe it is sincere...do not believe he will follow through in any way that those of us in FAIR would desire.

No, Tancredo has my support...and only him. He has been faithful to our beliefs for a long time and has the track record to prove it. I would be willing to bet quite a lot that Romney has only seen the parade we have going here and decided to run out in front of it as "leader"...for now.

What part of "illegal" did he fail to see or comprehend before? Only a fool could have failed to see and only a person wanting to avoid being categorized as one of us would have failed to speak out long before now.

Tancredo...all the way.

Posted by: J on May 24, 2007 07:15 AM

Watch out. My former Governor has done complete 180ies without even blinking. Don't forget, he made his money and his friends as a venture capitalist. Bush said "no amnesty" when he was campaigning. He lied. Romney raised 12 million dollars almost overnight. Who do you think gave it to him? Why did they give it to him? There is a pattern here.

Tancredo 2008

Posted by: Bill Dexter on May 24, 2007 09:11 AM

Duncan Hunter is, by far, the best alternative and the best Presidential candidate hope for American citizens and taxpayers who want to actually be represented in Washington.
The establishment media's so-called leading candidates, McCain and Guiliani, have a long pro-amnesty record, and Romney's ultimate intentions about illegal immigration suspiciously remain unclearly stated.
As for Obama and Hillary, its merely a choice of what variation of an open-borders socialist state you prefer.

Posted by: Gary on May 24, 2007 03:43 PM

In Romney's credit, he's the best "administrator" among the GOP candidates, as to his overall career accomplishments OUTSIDE OF politics (measurable management accomplishments).

I'll admit it freely, I'm impressed with him in a leadership position, as someone who is not familiar with having lived in any jurisdiction that he's been responsible for -- but I've read a number of critical comments from residents/voters in Massachusetts who complain about his term/s as Governor there, so I am taking cautionary steps in my support for Romney accordingly (and that combined with the fact that many involved in Romney's current campaign were also involved in the Bush campaigns, AND his relationship with the Bush Family accordingly).

I like Romney as a "fresh" candidate as per his presentations alone and only (so far). I also like Romney based upon his resume and intelligence that's inherent therein.

I DON'T find it easy to support him when and as he may be silently repetitive of the Bush Family politics. I can't be any more clear than this:

-- Romney independent of Bush: supportable

-- Romney recreating Bush Family politics: not supportable.

ALSO, his immense, rather amazing financial support base remains somewhat unidentified so far and it needs to be made clear who it is who's funding his remarkable largesse. If it's not made clear, Romney is not someone I'd support nor vote for.

IF Romney is nominated and Jeb Bush is his V.P. candidate, then that would also make voting for that ticket impossible for me.

I won't be voting Democrat, to be clear, for any Democrat candidate given who is on the horizon from that Party.

However, as to the GOP, Tancredo I support, his person, his statements, his work in Congress, but he does not have the presence that Romney has (or that Guiliani does for that matter and I won't -- ever -- be voting for Guiliani). I support Hunter also as I do Tancredo.

But so far, I don't see Hunter nor Tancredo generating the same sort of clear support that Romney does...and that is either a good thing (depending on the issues I've already mentioned as to Romney) or a bad thing (meaning, if Tancredo and Hunter are clearly apart from objectionable Romney possible supporters/funding sources/Bush Family, then Hunter and Tancredo are clear frontrunners).

Romney has a heavy anchor around his name if and as it ever becomes clear (I don't know, just asking) that he's largely funded by the same interests and groups who funded Bush, AND if Romney's so closely affiliated with the Bush campaign/Famiily as to intend on replicating/continuing the Bush Administration behaviors and goals if elected.

But Romney is clearly the finest composed among the candidates. I'm trying to consider listening to and reading about the day-to-day happenings of another White House after Bush leaves and the ONLY candidates I can consider as least objectionable in their families and persons are Romney, Tancredo, Hunter and of course, Thompson should he run (but I don't think he's going to). Oh, and Newt Gingrich isn't electable, in my opinion, based upon his personal history (too many people object to his multiple marriage history).

Posted by: -S- on May 24, 2007 06:22 PM

As long as he says the things I like to hear; and takes the positions I support, I will continue to find his candidacy attractive. Tancredo is number one. Hunter and Paul are favorable. As is Fred Thompson.

Posted by: Kerthialfad on May 24, 2007 07:01 PM

I take everything that any candidate says with a grain of salt. Remember, President Bush also touted security and enforcement during his 2nd campaign and then 3 days after the election stabbed us in the back with his claims of "political capital"...

Posted by: takn on May 25, 2007 11:02 AM