Wednesday, April 18, 2007

Evergreen state GOP'ers overwhelmingly support Mitt

Check this article out, it shows that in the first quarter this year, Mitt has raised more money in our state than twice Rudy and John's like amounts combined! Seems Washingtonians have largely made up their mind who they would like to see on the GOP front next year. At least your money is telling that story anyhow.

If you have not already done so, or if you would like to donate more, go to and continue to show our financial support for the most intelligent choice for our vote in '08.

Wednesday, March 14, 2007

Delay in writing

I have been fortunate to be blessed with a new baby girl in my family who will be a month old tommorrow. This has caused me to slack off from posting to this site lately. I am ready to change that and start posting much more regularly.

As the weeks have gone by since my last post, I have checked this site hoping that others who are authorized contributors would chime in as well. My hope is that I can reactivate some of them into the dialogue once again.

Since Mitchell moved to Utah he gave me a user passsword to manage this site, although I am not quite sure if there is somebody else out there who is inactive yet still retains that right, since Mitchell was not the originator of this blog. So while I figure that out as well as a way to put links on here, I ask for your patience and to not give up on this site.

Once I figure out some kinks, I will invite others who have desire to blog here that opportunity as well.

More to come soon.....

Keep on supporting the ascendency of Mitt!

Tuesday, February 20, 2007

Hoping Mitt will clarify on oil

I have heard Mitt say that we are using "too much oil" in this country, and this is also a statement he makes on the new campiagn commercial which he will be airing in select states shortly.

I am one who would like to see him alter this statement somewhat. He ought to say "We are using too much FOREIGN oil", and/or "We are not using oil efficiently enough, our utilization of technology to capture maximal energy output from each gallon can improve."

Maybe the distinction is subtle, but I feel it is significant. Americans need to know Mitt understands and will act on the principle that until other fuel sources are devoloped, we must have an affordable and abundant flow of oil, as our economic engines as currently tooled would stop without it. That would be devastating to our economy and people would suffer and go hungry. Since a retooling will take decades, once an acceptable alternative is found, hardship must not ensue in the interim.

So in the short term, in order to achieve self-sufficiency on oil, we should dramatically increase production domstically. Mitt has alluded to that, with his support of ANWR drilling, and off the continental shelf, and off the straits of Florida, where the Cubans and the Chinese are already at it. He has also alluded to increased use of technology to capture more output from each gallon of oil used. On both these points he ought to move beyond allusion to more specifics.

He should tell Americans the truth, that we do great things with the oil we use, our economy and personal tools generate a standard of living that benefits billions of people and continues our progression in the fields of medicine, science and commerce, just to name a few. A quest to be more energy independent and to be more responsible in our efficient use of it should not be done in a way that will hinder that. Please do not ask us to drive less or travel less or not enjoy certain luxuries, that is not the way of the future and of progress.

Once again, on my issue with his use of the phrase "We are using too much oil" verses how I would like to hear him explain it, maybe the difference is subtle, but I feel it is significant. He needs to articulate that he is NOT on an Anti-oil crusade, there are others in the preidential hopeful field with those credentials, and I believe that rightfully frightens alot of Americans who are honest with themselves about the role oil currently plays in our lives, for better or worse. Its just the way everything is currently tooled. His platform of increased domestic oil production for ourselves, better utilization of the product, and advancing of other technologies in a phased in "retool" of our economic engines to those fuel sources should be better expressed than the statement he is currently putting out: "We are using too much oil".

My hope is that Mitt will get this message. As one who wants him to succeed in rightfully winning the Presidency for 8 years, this is an area I hope he will outshine his competition by correctly explaining to the public the beneficial effects of the oil we do use, how we should be self-suffient by expanding its production, more savvy with its use, and that we should participate in developing and then retooling to other fuel sources to graduallytake its place as they prove themselves more effective economically and environmentally.

I want to hear more from Mitt the educator and less from a Mitt who just uses mantras and sound bites like the rest, whom he is capable of rising above.

Monday, February 05, 2007

to get traction in the northwest

What do you feel can be done to give Mitt more expoure here in the Northwest?

For those of you follow his actions from day to day, it is apparent that most of Mitt's time and resources are being spent on the eastern half of this nation. I would really like to soon see him come out west. I understand he may not spend much time in WA state (at least not western washington) becuase of our deply entrenched democrat majority, but if he were to come to Oregon or Idaho (or even Spokane) there are throngs of us from Western Washington who would migrate to hear him speak.

Maybe Mitt should give Washington a chance, this state is not more blue politically than Massachussetts, and of the largest metro areas west of the Mississippi is here. I am one who is eager to see him here soon. This area needs his message.

Tuesday, January 30, 2007

2008 - socialized medicine - up for a vote - GUARANTEED!

In 2008 you will have 2 people running for the oval office. One of them is intent on nationalizing all health care in the United States. Socialized medicine WILL happen, if you do not convince the American people to vote for the other candidate.

The top three democrat contenders ( Clinton, Obama, Edwards) have ALL been campaigning on the position of their intent to nationalize health care in this country, and they are serious about it. Seems that no matter which one of them wins their parties nomination, this will be an idea put forth for the American people to accept. And the reality is that since either the republican or democrat will win the election, the stakes are extremely high on putting into the race a candidate who can articulate AGAINST the nonsense, against the medical and financial nightmare that would ensue such a fateful decision.

The American people know there are problems with our health care system and will not elect someone I believe, whose position here is to continue the status quo. Who better than Romney to put forth tangible solutions to these problems that reinforce the private sector role in medicine while at the same time expanding coverage available to people at the lower financial echalons in our country? Who better to tell the people that many of our problems here stem from government meddling in the market in the first place? Who better to explain that it is almost always better to subsidize the means of consumption rather than the means of production when helping people acquire goods and services?

If we fail to put the right person into the ring in this 2 person contest, one seventh of our economy will be socialized. Think about it. Then act.

Thursday, January 25, 2007

Internet sites

I have been perusing the various sites of the current GOP and democratic presidential contenders:

Duncan Hunter - cant find a website on exploratory comittee or official candidacy

Who do you think has the best site and why? I notice that Romney is one of only a select few of the sites that actually goes into detail about issues. I would like to see even more detail given here in short order however.

I think McCain's website looks the coolest, but is one of the most devoid of substance on specific issues, second only maybe behind Obama's site which is an empty slate on any issues being presented.

On the lefty side I actually commend Edwards for being forthright on site his site about where he stands on things.

Your thoughts?

Thursday, January 18, 2007

Your Input

Who do you think should Mitt pick as a running mate and why?