SCHotline Press Releases

Attorney General Henry McMaster

Invites you to a

Super Tuesday Election Party And Thank You Party For SC McCain Supporters and Volunteers

Tuesday February 5th

7 PM-Until

Sponsored by Rick Quinn at the Back Porch Cafe

1600 Gervais Street

Columbia, SC

FREE FOOD AND REFRESHMENTS!

RSVP:  <mailto:Henry@HenryMcMaster.com> Henry@HenryMcMaster.com or 803-799-8638

Trey Walker

803-206-0847

treywalker01@aol.com <mailto:twalker@mccain08hq.com>

JOHN MCCAIN ON MITT ROMNEY’S LATEST ATTACK AD IN NEW HAMPSHIRE

ARLINGTON, VA — U.S. Senator John McCain today made the following statement on Mitt Romney’s latest desperate attack ad in New Hampshire:

“If there’s any doubt that we’re doing well, it’s when Mitt Romney starts attacking. He’s attacking Huckabee out here in Iowa. I’m familiar with tailspins and I think he’s in one. Look, on the issue of immigration, my position is clear: We have to secure the borders, the borders have to be secured first. As president I would have the governors in the border states certify that the borders are secure. We learned a lesson and the message is they want the borders secured first. Then we go on to a temporary worker program and addressing the issue comprehensively. Look, I’ve never voted for a tax increase — Governor Romney increased taxes. I don’t know how to respond to a lot of his charges because tomorrow he may have a different position. … [Governor Romney has changed positions] on every issue, it’s a matter of record. And I haven’t changed.” (Fox News’ “Fox and Friends,” 12/28/07)

·         Watch John McCain Address Mitt Romney’s Latest Attack Ad On “Fox & Friends” This Morning

AD FACTS: ROMNEY FOR PRESIDENT TV AD, “FUTURE”

MITT ROMNEY: “I’m Mitt Romney and I approve this message.” ANNCR: “John McCain, an honorable man. But is he the right Republican for the future? McCain opposes repeal of the death tax. And voted against the Bush tax cuts … twice.”

·         McCain Voted Against Bush Tax Cuts Because There Was No Restraint On Spending. “On the tax cuts, there was no restraint on spending. There should have been restraint on spending. If we’d adopted my tax cuts, which had automatic restraints on spending, we’d be talking about more tax cuts now. The reason why the Republicans are in trouble is because out of control spending and the corruption that led to it.” (Fox News’ “Fox & Friends,” 10/16/07)

·         McCain Supports Making Bush Income And Investment Tax Cuts Permanent. “I stand on my record, and my record is 24 years of opposing tax increases, and I oppose them, and I’ll continue to oppose them. I think it’s very clear that the increase in revenue that we’ve experienced is directly related to the tax cuts that were enacted, and they need to be made permanent rather than the family budgets and businesses being uncertain about their future.” (Fox News Republican Debate, Durham, NH, 9/5/07)

·         John McCain Has Repeatedly Voted To Extend Bush Tax Cuts. (S. 2020, CQ Vote #347: Passed 64-33: R 49-4; D 15-28; I 0-1, 11/15/05, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 4297, CQ Vote #10: Passed 66-31: R 49-4; D 17-26; I 0-1, 2/2/06, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 4297, CQ Vote #118: Adopted 54-44: R 51-3; D 3-40; I 0-1, 5/11/06, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 5970, CQ Vote #229: Motion Rejected 56-42: R 52-3; D 4-38; I 0-1, 8/3/06, McCain Voted Yea)

·         Romney Refused To Endorse 2003 Bush Tax Cuts, Reportedly Saying He “Won’t Be A Cheerleader” For Programs He Opposed, Drawing Praise From Democrat Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA). “Governor Mitt Romney refused yesterday to endorse tax cuts at the heart of President Bush’s economic program, but he told members of the state’s congressional delegation during a private meeting he also would not oppose the cuts because he has to maintain a solid relationship’ with the White House. … ‘I was very pleased,’ [Rep. Barney] Frank said afterward. ‘Here you have a freshman governor refusing to endorse a tax cut presented by a Republican president at the height of his wartime popularity.’ According to the observer, who spoke on condition of anonymity, Romney told the delegation that he ‘won’t be a cheerleader’ for proposals he doesn’t agree with, ‘but I have to keep a solid relationship with the White House.’ Shawn Feddeman, Romney’s spokeswoman, said the governor has neither endorsed nor opposed the tax cut plan because ‘it’s just not a state matter.’” (Wayne Washington and Glen Johnson, “Romney Weighs In — Carefully — On Bush Tax-Cut Plan,” The Boston Globe, 4/11/03)

·         Romney Took “No Position” On $30-$40 Million Estate Tax Hike. “Thousands of Bay State residents will soon face higher Massachusetts estate taxes because of the state’s efforts to retain the death tax’ even as the federal government moves to eliminate its levy. The Massachusetts Department of Revenue estimates that a rule change — made as part of last summer’s budget bill — will mean an additional $30 million to $40 million in estate tax revenues will flow into state coffers during fiscal 2004, the first full year in which the new rules are in play. The change in the state’s death tax, which takes effect Jan. 1, initially affects estates worth more than $700,000, according to the Revenue Department. It’s that level that is the key difference between the old and new rules, because $700,000 is below the federal standard, meaning that estates that may be exempt from the federal tax will still owe the state. Under the old rules, the state and federal exemptions were the same. The average taxable estate could end up paying tens of thousands of dollars in additional charges under the new rules, which break the link between the state and the federal tax. … In Massachusetts, the move was made as part of the budget bill passed last summer, but the new rules were not issued until late October. Governor-elect Mitt Romney disagreed with the tax and budget approach taken by the Legislature, but a spokesman for his office said he has no position on the estate tax issue.” (Charles A. Jaffe, “Residents Face Higher Estate Taxes,” The Boston Globe, 11/15/02)

ANNCR: “McCain pushed to let every illegal immigrant stay here permanently.”

·         Under McCain-Backed Immigration Reform, At Least Two Million Illegal Immigrants Who Have Committed Serious Crimes Would Be Ineligible For Legal Status, And Would Be Apprehended And Deported Were They To Try. “DHS Secretary Chertoff, who helped negotiate this legislation, has warned that two million people in this country illegally have committed serious crimes. If some of them attempt to legalize their status, we will apprehend them. If they don’t, we can concentrate our efforts on locating them and not rounding up lettuce pickers, hotel maids, and babysitters. Most importantly, we can devote all the resources necessary to finding terrorists who have broken our immigration laws, like three of the terrorists who intended to attack our soldiers at Ft. Dix.” (John McCain, Remarks To Miami Chamber Of Commerce, Miami, FL, 6/4/07)

·         Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff Estimated That Between 15-20 Percent Of Illegal Immigrants Would Be Disqualified From Acquiring Legal Status, “For Committing Crimes And For Other Reasons.” “Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff … said he expected that about 15 percent to 20 percent of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the country would be disqualified for committing crimes or for other reasons.” (Anne C. Mulkern, “Path To A Legal Home Immigration Compromise Focuses On Permanent Residency, Beefed-Up Borders,” The Denver Post, 5/18/07)

·         Immigration Reform Compromise Disqualified Thousands Of Illegal Immigrants From Staying In United States, Including Felons And Others Convicted Of Breaking The Law. “The range of crimes that disqualify applicants from the Z visa program extends into the thousands and includes: Any felony; Any three or more misdemeanors; Any serious criminal offense; Crimes involving moral turpitude (with narrow exceptions for certain misdemeanors such as those committed before age 18); Violations of a law relating to a controlled substance.” (The White House, “Immigration Fact Check: Responding To Key Myths,” White House Website, www.whitehouse.gov, 5/25/07)

ANNCR: “Even voted to allow illegals to collect Social Security.”

·         John McCain Opposes Illegal Immigrants Collecting Social Security Benefits. “Under current law, undocumented immigrants are ineligible for Social Security benefits which I think is entirely appropriate.” (John John McCain, Congressional Record, S4744, 5/18/06)

·         Chicago Tribune: McCain-Backed Immigration Reform Bill “Does Not Provide Amnesty Or Social Security To Illegal Immigrants …” (Jill Zuckman, “Plenty Of Mud, Not Much Clarity On Border Debate,” Chicago Tribune, 9/26/06)

·         Nonpartisan FactCheck.org: Social Security For Illegal Immigrants Attack Is “Mischaracterization Of An Amendment,” As “Nobody’s Proposing Paying Benefits To Illegals.” “Republicans are tagging Democratic opponents across the country for wanting to ‘give Social Security benefits to illegal immigrants.’ But nobody’s proposing paying benefits to illegals, not until and unless they become US citizens or are granted legal status. The charge is a mischaracterization of an amendment offered during debate of the immigration bill that passed the Senate last May with a healthy bi-partisan majority, 62-36. The amendment would change current law to prevent immigrants from getting credit toward future Social Security benefits from taxes paid before they have legal permission to work.” (”Republican Campaign Theme Debunked: Social Security for Illegal Immigrants,” http://www.factcheck.org, 12/28/07)

·         New Hampshire Union Leader On Romney Immigration Attack On McCain: “That Is A Lie.” “Earlier this month Romney sent a flyer to New Hampshire households stating that McCain would grant Social Security benefits to illegal aliens. That is a lie. Both McCain and Romney would grant benefits to immigrants only after they receive citizenship.” (Editorial, “Romney’s Migration: He Shouldn’t Need To Lie,” New Hampshire Union Leader, 12/19/07)

·         Fox News’ Chris Wallace: Mitt Romney’s Immigration Attack “Is Not True.” WALLACE: “Let me turn to another subject. Mitt Romney is putting out a mailer in New Hampshire now that says that you support Social Security benefits for illegals, which is not true.” (Fox News’ “Fox News Sunday,” 12/26/07)

·         Watch Fox News’ Chris Wallace Call Romney’s New Hampshire Mailer “Not True”

·         The New York Times: Romney’s New Hampshire Mailer Provides “Misleading Information About [McCain's] Positions On Immigration.” “The pamphlet goes on to provide misleading information about the rivals’ positions on immigration. It says, for instance, that Mr. McCain supports giving Social Security to illegal immigrants. In truth, Mr. McCain supported legislation that would allow illegal immigrants who come forward, pay fines, then wait their turn to become citizens the chance to collect Social Security — but only after they are citizens.” (Marc Santora, “Romney Goes Negative,” The New York Times’ Caucus Blog, 12/7/07)

ANNCR: “And Mitt Romney? Romney cut taxes and spending as Governor.”

·         Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation: More Than $700 Million Per Year In Increased Fees And Taxes Under Romney. “Fees and taxes have increased more than $700 million a year under Governor Mitt Romney and Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey, a leading budget specialist said yesterday. Michael J. Widmer — president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, which closely tracks state finances — said the state has raised roughly $740 million to $750 million per year by increasing fees and corporate taxes gained from what the Romney administration describes as ‘closing loopholes.’” (Brian Mooney, “Analyst Puts Increase In Fees, Taxes At $700m,” The Boston Globe, 9/27/06)

·         “[R]omney … Approved Hundreds Of Millions In Higher Fees And Fines Including Raising The Cost Of Getting A Marriage License, Filing A Court Case, Buying A House Or Renewing A Drivers License.” (Steve LeBlanc, “Romney, In Change Of Heart, Signs No-New-Taxes Pledge,” The Associated Press, 1/5/07)

·         Romney Raised State Fees By Over $500 Million In 2003 Alone, “Far More Than Any Other State In The Nation” That Year. “A 2003 survey of states by the National Conference Of State Legislatures found Massachusetts imposed at least $501.5 million in fee hikes, far more than any other state in the nation that year.” (Steve LeBlanc, “Romney, In Change Of Heart, Signs No-New-Taxes Pledge,” The Associated Press, 1/5/07)

·         Cato Institute: Romney’s Claim That He Didn’t Raised Taxes Is “Mostly A Myth.” “[R]omney will likely also be eager to push the message that he was a governor who stood by a no-new-taxes pledge. That’s mostly a myth. His first budget included no general tax increases but did include a $500 million increase in various fees. He later proposed $140 [million] in business tax hikes through the closing of ‘loopholes’ in the tax code.” (Stephen Slivinski, “Fiscal Policy Report Card On America’s Governors: 2006,” Cato Institute, 2006, p. 26)

·         Cato: “If you consider the massive costs to taxpayers that his universal health care plan will inflict once he’s left office, Romney’s tenure is clearly not a triumph of small-government activism.” (Stephen Slivinski, “Fiscal Policy Report Card On America’s Governors: 2006,” Cato Institute, 2006, p. 26)

·         Romney’s Attempts At Government Reform As Governor “Saved Relatively Little Money.” “In his out-of-state speeches, Romney suggests that the consolidation of state agencies was a major factor in closing the budget gap. But those changes saved relatively little money: Folding 16 human-services agencies into four, a change Romney often cites outside the state, saved about $7 million, according to the administration. Eliminating the Metropolitan District Commission saved about $3.5 million, according to the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a business-funded nonprofit group that monitors state spending.” (Scott Greenberger, “Romney Often Casts Himself As Budget Hero,” The Boston Globe, 10/24/05)

·         Michael Widmer Of The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation: “No Romney reform has saved any meaningful money. It’s all on the margins. The have no connection to the closing of the [budget] gap …” (Scott Greenberger, “Romney Often Casts Himself As Budget Hero,” The Boston Globe, 10/24/05)

ANNCR: “He opposes amnesty for illegals.”

·         Chicago Tribune: “Romney Himself Once Supported McCain’s Legislation That Would Provide A Path To Citizenship For Illegal Immigrants.” “Romney himself once supported McCain’s legislation that would provide a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. And he has endured embarrassing news stories this year about the landscaping company that takes care of his lawn used illegal immigrants to do the work.” (Jill Zuckman, “Romney Takes On McCain In New 30-Second Ad,” Chicago Tribune, 12/28/07)

·         In March 2006, Romney “Expressed Support For An Immigration Program That Places Large Numbers Of Illegal Residents On The Path Toward Citizenship.” “Gov. Mitt Romney expressed support … for an immigration program that places large numbers of illegal residents on the path toward citizenship … Romney said illegal immigrants should have a chance to obtain citizenship.” (Evan Lehmann, “Romney Supports Immigration Program, But Not Granting ‘Amnesty,’” The Lowell Sun, 3/30/06)

·         Romney: “I don’t believe in rounding up 11 million people and forcing them at gunpoint from our country … With these 11 million people, let’s have them registered, know who they are. Those who’ve been arrested or convicted of crimes shouldn’t be here; those that are here paying taxes and not taking government benefits should begin a process towards application for citizenship, as they would from their home country.” (Evan Lehmann, “Romney Supports Immigration Program, But Not Granting ‘Amnesty,’” The Lowell Sun, 3/30/06)

·         Romney Said Republicans Who Broke With President Bush On Immigration “Made A Big Mistake.” “[M]assachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Has Made It Known That He Supports The President’s Immigration Position, Saying That Republicans Who Have Broken Rank With Bush ‘Made A Big Mistake.’” (Liz Sidoti, “McCain May Alienate Some Conservatives,” The Associated Press, 9/20/06)

·         In November 2005, Romney Spoke “Approvingly Of Efforts By McCain And Bush To Solve The Nation’s Immigration Crisis,” Calling McCain’s Proposal “Quite Different” From Amnesty And Deeming It “Reasonable.” “When Mitt Romney swooped into the heart of John McCain country this week, he brought a pointed message on illegal immigration: McCain’s approach is the wrong one. … But that is markedly different from how Romney once characterized McCain’s bill, elements of which are receiving new attention in Congress and from President Bush. … In a November 2005 interview with the Globe, Romney described immigration proposals by McCain and others as ‘quite different’ from amnesty, because they required illegal immigrants to register with the government, work for years, pay taxes, not take public benefits, and pay a fine before applying for citizenship.” (Scott Helman, “Romney’s Words Grow Hard On Immigration,” The Boston Globe, 3/16/07)

·         Romney: “I think an amnesty program is what — which is all the illegal immigrants who are here are now citizens, and walk up and get your citizenship. What the president has proposed, and what Senator McCain and Cornyn have proposed, are quite different than that. They require people signing up for a — well, registering and receiving a, if you will, a number — a registration number. Then working here for six years and paying taxes — not taking benefits. Health, Medicaid, food stamps and so forth, not taking benefits. And then at the end of that period, registering to become a citizen, or applying to become a citizen and paying a fee. And those are things that are being considered. And I think that that’s — that those are reasonable proposals.” (Audio: www.boston.com, Scott Helman, “Romney’s Words Grow Hard On Immigration,” The Boston Globe, 3/16/07)

·         Listen To Romney Call McCain Immigration Position “Reasonable” And “Quite Different” From Amnesty

ANNCR: “Mitt Romney. John McCain. There is a difference.”

·         New Hampshire Union Leader: “[Romney] Lacks Something John McCain Has In Spades: Conviction. Granite Staters Want A Candidate Who Will Look Them In The Eye And Tell Them The Truth. John McCain Has Done That Day In And Day Out, Never Wavering, Never Faltering, Never Pandering. Mitt Romney Has Not.” “And after a year of comparing Romney to McCain, of sizing up the two in person and in the media, Granite Staters are turning back to McCain. The former Navy pilot, once written off by the national media establishment, is now in a statistical dead heat with Romney here. How could that be? Romney has all the advantages: money, organization, geographic proximity, statesman-like hair, etc. But he lacks something John McCain has in spades: conviction. Granite Staters want a candidate who will look them in the eye and tell them the truth. John McCain has done that day in and day out, never wavering, never faltering, never pandering. Mitt Romney has not. He has spoken his lines well, but the people can sense that the words are memorized, not heartfelt. … In this primary, the more Mitt Romney speaks, the less believable he becomes. … Voters can see that John McCain is trustworthy. Mitt Romney has spent a year trying to convince Granite Staters that he is as well. It looks like they aren’t buying it. And for good reason.” (Editorial, “The Romney Backlash: Conservatives Are Coming Home,” New Hampshire Union Leader, 12/26/07)

·         New Hampshire Union Leader: “Republicans Know For Sure That McCain Isn’t Hiding His True Position [On Immigration]. The Same Cannot Be Said Of Romney And Giuliani.” “If Republicans are voting for Mitt Romney because they think he would be tougher on illegal immigration than John McCain would be, they need to explain how Romney suddenly switched from supporting McCain’s position just two years ago to attacking it (with distortions) this year. … The fact is, neither Romney nor Giuliani nor McCain has a pure conservative record on immigration. The difference is, Republicans know for sure that McCain isn’t hiding his true position. The same cannot be said of Romney and Giuliani.” (Editorial, “Romney’s Migration: He Shouldn’t Need To Lie,” New Hampshire Union Leader, 12/19/07)

·         Portsmouth Herald: “[McCain] Is A Strong Military Man Prepared From Day One To Defend Our Nation Against Its Enemies. Of All The Republicans Running, He Is By Far The Best Qualified To Lead Our Country.” “John McCain has been leading the country from his seat in the U.S. Senate for 20 years. He is a man of integrity and honor who would help the Republicans rid themselves of the stench of Jack Abramoff and other lobbyists and allow the GOP to reclaim its status as the party of fiscal restraint. He is a strong military man prepared from day one to defend our nation against its enemies. Of all the Republicans running, he is by far the best qualified to lead our country.” (Editorial, “Vote Sen. McCain In GOP Primary,” Portsmouth Herald, 12/16/07)

·         Salmon Press: “[McCain's] Military Record Is Truly Heroic — In Stark Contrast To Those Of His Opponents … His Experience In Foreign Affairs And In Military Issues Is Unmatched In The Field.” U.S. Sen. John McCain has the right stuff to become a statesman, indeed to become among our greatest presidents, but standing in his way is the prickly business of having to get elected. Once considered the presumptive nominee of the Republican Party, his presidential campaign stumbled in the early going — in part because he refused to bend his principles — but is now gaining some momentum. We hope that momentum continues, for in our judgment John McCain towers over his political rivals and is our unwavering choice in New Hampshire’s Republican presidential primary next month. Sen. McCain is a man of great depth and character. He has demonstrated an enormous capacity for growth over his political career and his military record is truly heroic — in stark contrast to those of his opponents. As a congressman and senator from Arizona he has exhibited the ability to attract both sides of the political aisle. And yet he is a conservative in the best sense of the word: principled, unwilling to cave for political gain and an unbowed enemy of wasteful spending. His experience in foreign affairs and in military issues is unmatched in the field.” (Editorial, “New Hampshire’s Salmon Press Endorses Sen. John McCain,” Salmon Press, 12/13/07)

###

WHAT THEY’RE SAYING ABOUT MITT ROMNEY’S ATTACK AD IN NEW HAMPSHIRE

“Mitt Romney … is now running the most negative campaign of any presidential candidate in either party.” — The Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz

With “Misleading” New Attack Ad, Romney “Is Now Running The Most Negative Campaign Of Any Presidential Candidate In Either Party”

The Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz: “Romney … Is Now Running The Most Negative Campaign Of Any Presidential Candidate In Either Party.” “Mitt Romney, who targeted Mike Huckabee in an earlier commercial, is now running the most negative campaign of any presidential candidate in either party.” (Howard Kurtz, “Romney Rips McCain On Senate Record,” The Washington Post’s Trail Blog, 12/28/07)

·         Kurtz: Romney Attacks Are “Misleading.” “Romney’s description of McCain’s failed immigration bill — which was backed by President Bush — is so selective as to be misleading. The measure would have allowed illegal immigrants to seek legal status only if they first returned to their country of origin and paid a fine, and it was coupled with stricter border enforcement — key elements omitted by the ad. Romney called a similar bipartisan effort reasonable’ in 2006.” (Howard Kurtz, “Romney Rips McCain On Senate Record,” The Washington Post’s Trail Blog, 12/28/07)

The New York Times’ Marc Santora: Romney Ad “Misleading.” “Mr. Romney assails Mr. McCain on both tax policies and immigration. On both topics, the commercial presents facts that could be construed either as selective or worse, misleading.” (Marc Santora, “New Ads: Romney Attacks McCain; McCain Touts Support,” The New York Times’ Caucus Blog, 12/28/07)

Chicago Tribune’s Jill Zuckman: “Ironically, Romney Himself Once Supported McCain’s Legislation That Would Provide A Path To Citizenship For Illegal Immigrants.” “Ironically, Romney himself once supported McCain’s legislation that would provide a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. And he has endured embarrassing news stories this year about the landscaping company that takes care of his lawn used illegal immigrants to do the work.” (Jill Zuckman, “Romney Takes On McCain In New 30-Second Ad,” Chicago Tribune, 12/28/07)

The Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz: “It Is Not True That McCain Backed Social Security For Illegals.” “It is not true that McCain backed Social Security for illegals; a Senate amendment would have allowed payment of past benefits only after immigrants obtained legal status.” (Howard Kurtz, “Romney Rips McCain On Senate Record,” The Washington Post’s Trail Blog, 12/28/07)

“No Better Sign” of McCain’s “Growing Strength In New Hampshire” Than “Desperate” Romney Going Negative In Granite State

The Wall Street Journal’s Susan Davis: “There May Be No Better Sign Of” McCain’s “Growing Strength In New Hampshire” Than Romney Attack Ad. “There may be no better sign of Sen. John McCain’s growing strength in New Hampshire than Mitt Romney’s decision to go negative today on him in a statewide television ad.” (Susan Davis, “Romney Goes Negative In New Hampshire,” The Wall Street Journal’s Washington Wire Blog, 12/28/07)

The Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz: Attack Ad “Comes As Romney’s Poll Numbers Are Declining In” New Hampshire And Iowa. “This New Hampshire ad, like the anti-Huckabee spot in Iowa, comes as Romney’s poll numbers are declining in both states. Romney tries to cushion the blow in both ads by saying a few nice words about his opponents before assailing their records.” (Howard Kurtz, “Romney Rips McCain On Senate Record,” The Washington Post’s Trail Blog, 12/28/07)

Eye On ‘08 Blog: “Desperate Romney Flip-Flops And Goes Negative In NH” (Eye On 08 Blog, www.eyeon08.com, 12/28/07)

·         Eye On ‘08 Blog: “Romney’s Problem Is That He Is Out Of Credibility.” “Let’s be clear. Wednesday (afternoon?) Romney told the Trib reporter that they are going positive. By Friday morning, they were going negative … Of course, Romney’s problem is that he is out of credibility. As the Union-Leader pointed out, ‘the more Mitt Romney speaks, the less believable he becomes.’” (Eye On 08 Blog, www.eyeon08.com, 12/28/07)

###

Please visit this page if you want to remove yourself from the email list.

Press Release from McCain for President 

ROMNEY ON IMMIGRATION: “The More Mitt Romney Speaks, The Less Believable He Becomes”

“In this primary, the more Mitt Romney speaks, the less believable he becomes.” — New Hampshire Union Leader

Last Year, Romney Supported “Path Toward Citizenship” For Illegal Immigrants, Said Republicans Breaking With President Bush On Immigration “Made A Big Mistake”

“Gov. Mitt Romney Expressed Support … For An Immigration Program That Places Large Numbers Of Illegal Residents On The Path Toward Citizenship … Romney Said Illegal Immigrants Should Have A Chance To Obtain Citizenship.” (Evan Lehmann, “Romney Supports Immigration Program, But Not Granting ‘Amnesty,’” The Lowell Sun, 3/30/06)

·         Romney: “I don’t believe in rounding up 11 million people and forcing them at gunpoint from our country … With these 11 million people, let’s have them registered, know who they are. Those who’ve been arrested or convicted of crimes shouldn’t be here; those that are here paying taxes and not taking government benefits should begin a process towards application for citizenship, as they would from their home country.” (Evan Lehmann, “Romney Supports Immigration Program, But Not Granting ‘Amnesty,’” The Lowell Sun, 3/30/06)

“[M]assachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Has Made It Known That He Supports The President’s Immigration Position, Saying That Republicans Who Have Broken Rank With Bush ‘Made A Big Mistake.’” (Liz Sidoti, “McCain May Alienate Some Conservatives,” The Associated Press, 9/20/06)

In 2005, Romney Called McCain Immigration Proposals “Reasonable” And “Quite Different” From Amnesty

In November 2005, Romney Spoke “Approvingly Of Efforts By McCain And Bush To Solve The Nation’s Immigration Crisis,” Calling McCain’s Proposal “Quite Different” From Amnesty And Deeming It “Reasonable.” “When Mitt Romney swooped into the heart of John McCain country this week, he brought a pointed message on illegal immigration: McCain’s approach is the wrong one. … But that is markedly different from how Romney once characterized McCain’s bill, elements of which are receiving new attention in Congress and from President Bush. … In a November 2005 interview with the Globe, Romney described immigration proposals by McCain and others as ‘quite different’ from amnesty, because they required illegal immigrants to register with the government, work for years, pay taxes, not take public benefits, and pay a fine before applying for citizenship.” (Scott Helman, “Romney’s Words Grow Hard On Immigration,” The Boston Globe, 3/16/07)

·         Romney In November 2005: “I think an amnesty program is what — which is all the illegal immigrants who are here are now citizens, and walk up and get your citizenship. What the president has proposed, and what Senator McCain and Cornyn have proposed, are quite different than that. They require people signing up for a — well, registering and receiving a, if you will, a number — a registration number. Then working here for six years and paying taxes — not taking benefits. Health, Medicaid, food stamps and so forth, not taking benefits. And then at the end of that period, registering to become a citizen, or applying to become a citizen and paying a fee. And those are things that are being considered. And I think that that’s — that those are reasonable proposals.” (Audio: www.boston.com, Scott Helman, “Romney’s Words Grow Hard On Immigration,” The Boston Globe, 3/16/07)

·         Listen To Romney Call McCain Immigration Position “Reasonable” And “Quite Different” From Amnesty

Romney Sends “Vague And Seemingly Inconsistent Messages” On Immigration As “His Public Statements Suggest He Actually Agrees With Major Tenets Of The [McCain] Proposal”

New Hampshire Union Leader: “Republicans Know For Sure That McCain Isn’t Hiding His True Position [On Immigration]. The Same Cannot Be Said Of Romney And Giuliani.” “If Republicans are voting for Mitt Romney because they think he would be tougher on illegal immigration than John McCain would be, they need to explain how Romney suddenly switched from supporting McCain’s position just two years ago to attacking it (with distortions) this year. … The fact is, neither Romney nor Giuliani nor McCain has a pure conservative record on immigration. The difference is, Republicans know for sure that McCain isn’t hiding his true position. The same cannot be said of Romney and Giuliani.” (Editorial, “Romney’s Migration: He Shouldn’t Need To Lie,” New Hampshire Union Leader, 12/19/07)

Time Magazine: “[W]hen Romney Slowed Down And Focused On A Single Issue — Immigration — At A Press Conference In Dover, N.H., The Brazen Cynicism Of His Candidacy Became Almost Embarrassing.” (Joe Klein, “Mitt Romney’s Disappointing Campaign,” Time, 5/31/07)

Tampa Tribune: Romney “Sent Vague And Seemingly Inconsistent Messages” On Immigration. “As immigration reform continues to divide the candidates in the Republican presidential primary, Mitt Romney sent vague and seemingly inconsistent messages on the issue in a campaign swing through Florida Thursday. [R]omney said he opposes the current reform package in the Senate, but wouldn’t say what it would take to fix it.” (William March, “Romney Vague On Immigration,” Tampa Tribune’s “March On Politics” Blog, 5/25/07)

·         Tampa Tribune: “In The Past, Romney Has Appeared To Support Allowing Illegal Immigrants To Apply For Citizenship Without Having To Leave The Country First.” (William March, “Romney Vague On Immigration,” Tampa Tribune’s “March On Politics” Blog, 5/25/07)

Miami Herald: Romney’s Statements “Suggest He Actually Agrees With Major Tenets” Of Plan He Claims To Oppose. “Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said he ’strongly opposes’ an immigration plan also denounced by his party’s conservative wing, yet his public statements suggest he actually agrees with major tenets of the proposal in Congress.” (Beth Reinhard and Lesley Clark, “Romney’s Immigration Stance At Odds With State GOP Leaders,” The Miami Herald, 5/24/07)

Palm Beach Post: Romney Offered “Mixed Message On Illegal Immigrants … Saying He Supports Allowing Them To Apply To Become Permanent Residents But Opposes Current Legislation That Would Allow Them To Do Just That.” “Mitt Romney offered a mixed message on illegal immigrants Thursday, saying he supports allowing them to apply to become permanent residents but opposes current legislation that would allow them to do just that. … While Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts, said he would ‘not deny’ illegal immigrants the ‘opportunity to apply for permanent residency or citizenship,’ he would not say how he would change the proposed legislation to make such application acceptable.” (Brian Crowley, “Romney Skirts Solution To Immigration Issue,” Palm Beach Post, 5/25/07)

St. Petersburg Times: “Facing Scrutiny In Florida On Immigration, Republican Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney Shed Little Light On His Policy During Campaign Stops Thursday.” (David DeCamp, “Romney Offers Little On Immigration,” St. Petersburg Times, 5/25/07)

·         St. Petersburg Times: Romney “Did Not Provide Many Details About How He Would Deal With Illegal Immigrants Already In The Country.” “Romney, a former governor of Massachusetts, opposes the immigration bill in Congress supported by key Floridians, including Gov. Charlie Crist and Sen. Mel Martinez, both Republicans. The bill would give an estimated 12-million illegal immigrants a route to legal residency and citizenship. Romney, however, did not provide many details about how he would deal with illegal immigrants already in the country.” (David DeCamp, “Romney Offers Little On Immigration,” St. Petersburg Times, 5/25/07)

The Boston Globe: Romney “Has Offered No Specific Solutions Of His Own To The Immigration Crisis … [And] Is Facing Increasing Questions About What He Would Do About The Problem.” “[W]hile Romney has been aggressive with his barbs, he has offered no specific solutions of his own to the immigration crisis. With McCain and his surrogates pushing the issue hard, Romney is facing increasing questions about what he would do about the problem.” (Scott Helman, “Critics Press Romney On Immigration View,” The Boston Globe, 6/1/07)

Hotline Blog: “[I]f You’re Wondering Precisely What Mitt Romney … Would Actually Do With The 11-12M Illegal Immigrants Already Here, Well, You’ll Have To Wait A While. No Specific Proposals Are Forthcoming, We Are Told.” (”McCain Is A Lone Wolf On Immigration,” The Hotline’s “On Call” Blog, 5/23/07)

The Politico: “Romney Continues To Punt On What To Do With The 12 Million Illegal Immigrants In The Country.” (Jonathan Martin, “The ‘A’ Word,” The Politico, 5/25/07)

Romney’s Current Immigration Attacks Called “Not True,” “Misleading,” “Lie”

Fox News’ Chris Wallace: Mitt Romney’s Immigration Attack “Is Not True.” WALLACE: “Let me turn to another subject. Mitt Romney is putting out a mailer in New Hampshire now that says that you support Social Security benefits for illegals, which is not true.” (Fox News’ “Fox News Sunday,” 12/26/07)

·         Watch Fox News’ Chris Wallace Call Romney’s New Hampshire Mailer “Not True”

The New York Times: Romney’s New Hampshire Mailer Provides “Misleading Information About [McCain's] Positions On Immigration.” “The pamphlet goes on to provide misleading information about the rivals’ positions on immigration. It says, for instance, that Mr. McCain supports giving Social Security to illegal immigrants. In truth, Mr. McCain supported legislation that would allow illegal immigrants who come forward, pay fines, then wait their turn to become citizens the chance to collect Social Security — but only after they are citizens.” (Marc Santora, “Romney Goes Negative,” The New York Times’ Caucus Blog, 12/7/07)

New Hampshire Union Leader On Romney Immigration Attack On McCain: “That Is A Lie.” “Earlier this month Romney sent a flyer to New Hampshire households stating that McCain would grant Social Security benefits to illegal aliens. That is a lie. Both McCain and Romney would grant benefits to immigrants only after they receive citizenship.” (Editorial, “Romney’s Migration: He Shouldn’t Need To Lie,” New Hampshire Union Leader, 12/19/07)

###

“The tired, sluggish, former front-runner you may have read about was nowhere in evidence when the senator came to the Journal’s offices yesterday. In his place was a combative and — yes — straight-talking candidate with no qualms about rising to a challenge or speaking his mind. In short, he looks once again like the spry 63-year-old who nearly knocked off front-runner George W. Bush eight years ago.” — The Wall Street Journal’s Brian Carney

Excerpts From “Of Pork And Patriotism”

By Brian M. Carney
The Wall Street Journal
December 15, 2007

John McCain sits across the table from the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal, fielding questions on everything from taxes to torture to terror. He’s asked what surprised him the most about the behavior House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid with regard to Iraq. His answer — “their lack of patriotism” — is of the characteristically impolitic kind that often defines his personality. Over the course of a 75-minute conversation, it’s on display time and again.

For a candidate who was mostly written off by the media only six months ago, the senior senator from Arizona seems remarkably confident of his primary chances.

Mr. McCain is 71. But the tired, sluggish, former front-runner you may have read about was nowhere in evidence when the senator came to the Journal’s offices yesterday. In his place was a combative and — yes — straight-talking candidate with no qualms about rising to a challenge or speaking his mind. In short, he looks once again like the spry 63-year-old who nearly knocked off front-runner George W. Bush eight years ago.

When asked whether he would tag Hillary Clinton as well with a “lack of patriotism,” Mr. McCain does dial it down a notch. “Maybe ‘lack of patriotism’ is too harsh,” he allows. “‘Putting political ambitions ahead of the national interest’ may be a more subtle way” of putting it. He then adds, with a chuckle, “And we all know how subtle I am.”

Just how subtle comes across in expanding on Mrs. Clinton’s stance on the war and on the surge. “She had that very clever line — I don’t know who wrote it for her — that you’d have to suspend disbelief in order to believe that the surge is working. Well, you’d have to suspend disbelief that it’s not now.” And then, as if confronting her in a presidential debate, he addresses the absent senator from New York directly: “Do you still stand by that statement, Senator Clinton? Do you still believe you’d have to suspend disbelief to believe that this surge is working?” …

He has been one of the most prominent and unapologetic supporters of the war in Iraq, even though he at times disagreed with the administration about tactics and strategy.

And he voted against the Bush tax cuts — even though he admits that they helped the economy in the midst of a recession. “We all know that [they helped]. Without a doubt. Without the slightest doubt. Absolutely.”

Even so, he defends his opposition to them on the grounds, he told us, that Congress couldn’t get spending under control. “I opposed the tax cuts because there was no spending restraint. … If we’d enacted spending restraints, we’d be talking about more tax cuts today. And to the everlasting shame and embarrassment of the Republican Party and this administration, we went on a spending spree and we didn’t pay for it. … And every time I called over to the White House and said, look, you’ve got to veto these bills, the answer was, ‘We’ll lose the majority, we’ll lose this election, we’ll lose the speaker.’ Well, you know what happened.”

The words “I told you so” don’t quite pass his lips, but his sense of vindication is plain enough.

As for the tax cuts themselves, he now pledges that he would fight to make them permanent. “I will not agree to any tax increase,” he says. And then once more for emphasis: “I will not agree to any tax increase.”

His combativeness is on display again when the subject of interrogation techniques is raised. It’s a subject on which the Journal’s editorial board has been critical of Mr. McCain in the past. Does he assert, he is asked, that techniques such as waterboarding never produce reliable information?

He turns it back on the questioner: “I do assert that America’s moral image in the world is badly damaged when it comes out that we torture people. … I do assert that we’re going to win this battle against al Qaeda on ideological grounds.”

Then he adds: “So my assertion is that it’s fascinating, it’s fascinating, that those who have served in the military — particularly in positions of responsibility — almost all of them say, ‘Don’t do it.’ Those who have never served, those who have never heard a shot fired in anger and never will, say, ‘Let’s torture the hell out of them. Let’s take them to the rack. Let’s do what the Spanish Inquisition invented.’”

That last is a caricature, and given the jab at “those who have never served,” it might even come across as a mean-spirited one, but Mr. McCain manages to put it across without any evident derision in his demeanor or voice. On the contrary, it is said almost amiably. …

In Iraq, meantime, Mr. McCain sees events at long last moving in the right direction. “I think this is a seminal moment in American history. I really do. Because we’ve got a long way to go. Al Qaeda is on the run but they’re not defeated, OK?

“And we’ve got really a long way to go. But I’m telling you, if we could keep going like this for another nine months to a year or so, and get the Maliki government to start functioning effectively — and a lot of things are happening by the way that are not at the highest level — I think you’re going to see things happen in the rest of the Middle East.

“The Syrians sent someone to Annapolis [for the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks]. That’s good news. The Iranians may be cutting back on the explosive devices. Pakistan: Musharraf is acting as we wanted him to.”

In his view, these are all connected, and all related in turn to the reversal of fortunes in Iraq since the surge began. “And I’m convinced that if we can continue this success, you’re going to see a change in the Middle East. Plus, some progress on the Israeli-Palestinian issue. If we fail, we’re not going to be in the neighborhood and it’s every nation and every group for themselves.”

Of course, Mr. McCain will have to resign himself to being right but ignored unless he can actually win. And while he may once have been seen as what he calls “the designated successor” to the Republican nomination, he’s now a distinct underdog. So he places a lot of emphasis on what he calls the “volatility” of the current race.

“We all know that if I sat here two weeks ago and I said, ‘By the way, Huckabee is ahead in Iowa and South Carolina,’ you’d just have said, ‘Yeah, right.’” He goes on: “I think you’re going to see a lot of ups and downs. Sixty percent, 70%, 80% say they’re undecided.”

He also sees hope, ironically, in the despondency of the GOP faithful. “Our base is dispirited. I’m telling you, our base is dispirited. We’re going to have to rev up our base. We’re going to have to promise them we’re going to stop this spending. We’re going to have to promise them that we’ll get trust and confidence back with them.”

The senator says he doesn’t worry too much about the electoral tactics, but he does know what lies ahead. “We’ve got to win New Hampshire,” he says, or at least exceed expectations there. “And then I think we can do well in South Carolina. In South Carolina we’ve got the base this time. The Attorney General, the Speaker of the House, Lindsay Graham, most of the base.” …

[A]ssuming he can do well there, “Then I think we’re obviously very much in the game. What happens to Huckabee, what happens to Rudy, what happens to Romney — all this stuff is in such flux now that it’s very difficult to predict and so we’re not paying a lot of attention, obviously.” …

Overall, the impression Mr. McCain gives is that he is enjoying this campaign tremendously. Asked whether he thinks he’s running a better campaign since his financing fell off a cliff along with his poll ratings, he shoots back with a laugh, “Do you think I could have run a worse campaign before my finances went south?”

He blames his fall from front-runner status on his leadership on immigration reform, and says, “If I lose this election, it will be on the immigration issue. There’s no question in my mind.” But as with the other issues he discussed in our meeting, he doesn’t give the impression that he regrets his stand for one minute.

Read Entire Report On John McCain’s Wall Street Journal Editorial Board, “Of Pork And Patriotism”

Watch Interview With John McCain And The Wall Street Journal’s James Freeman

###

JOHN MCCAIN ENDORSED BY OVER 100 RETIRED ADMIRALS AND GENERALS [Watch Video]

ARLINGTON, VA — Today over 100 retired admirals and generals endorsed John McCain for President of the United States at a press conference in Columbia, South Carolina. These distinguished leaders supporting John McCain come from all branches of the armed services and include former POWs, Medal of Honor recipients and former members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

John McCain was joined today in Columbia by five distinguished military veterans: Admiral Leighton “Snuffy” Smith, USN (Ret.); Vice Admiral Mike Bowman, USN (Ret.); Rear Admiral Tom Lynch, USN (Ret.); Rear Admiral Bob Shumaker, USN (Ret.); and Major General Stan Spears, USA, Adjutant General of South Carolina.

“This nation is at war and we’d better damn well understand that fact,” said Admiral Leighton “Snuffy” Smith, USN (Ret.). “John McCain understands it, and he is the only candidate that has not wavered one bit in his position regarding the importance of victory in the war against Islamic extremism or in his commitment to the troops who are doing the fighting. He has consistently demonstrated the kind and style of leadership that we believe is essential in our next Commander in Chief. Our nation faces a growing array of serious foreign policy challenges. John McCain is the ONE candidate who, in our view, truly understands the strategic landscape and is fully prepared to deal decisively and effectively with those who wish to be our friends and, importantly, those who wish us harm.”

John McCain thanked the admirals and generals, stating, “I am deeply honored to have the support of so many distinguished military leaders. I thank them for the trust they have in me, but more importantly, our nation is indebted to their service in defense of our freedom. Our next president will face two wars and an array of national security challenges around the world. My experience, knowledge and background have prepared me to confront these great challenges and lead as commander in chief from day one.”

Retired Admirals And Generals Joining John McCain In South Carolina Today:

Admiral Leighton “Snuffy” Smith, Jr., USN (Ret.): Admiral Smith retired from the Navy after over 34 years of service in positions that took him, literally, around the world. His last active duty assignment was Commander, U.S. Naval Force, Europe, Commander in Chief Allied Forces Southern Europe (NATO) and, concurrently, Commander of NATO’s first ever out of area land operation, the Implementation Forces (IFOR) in Bosnia charged with implementing the Dayton Peace Accords. As a naval aviator Admiral Smith flew carrier-based light attack jet aircraft during multiple deployments to the Mediterranean, North Atlantic, Western Pacific and Indian oceans. These included three cruises in waters off North Vietnam where he flew over 280 combat missions.

Vice Admiral Mike Bowman, USN (Ret.): Bowman spent 36 years in the Navy, attaining the rank of Vice Admiral. Highlights of his Navy career include: Naval aviator with tour tours in Vietnam and Wing Commander during Desert Storm and notable assignments including Squadron command, three Air Wing commands, Senate Liaison for the Secretary of the Navy and later Chief of Legislative Affairs, Carrier Group command, Chief of Naval Air Training and Commander Naval Air Force, U.S. Pacific Fleet.

Rear Admiral Tom Lynch, USN (Ret.): After a 31-year career of naval service, Lynch retired in the rank of Rear Admiral. His naval service included Chief, Navy Legislative Affairs, command of the Eisenhower Battle Group during Operation Desert Shield, Superintendent of the U.S. Naval Academy from 1991 to 1994 and Director of the Navy Staff in the Pentagon from 1994 to 1995. Admiral Lynch graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy with his Bachelor of Science degree in 1964 and received his M.S. from George Washington University.

Rear Admiral Bob Shumaker, USN (Ret.): After graduating from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1956, Admiral Shumaker attended flight training and eventually joined VF-32, a fighter squadron in Jacksonville, Florida. He was a finalist in the Apollo astronaut selection, but a temporary physical ailment prevented his selection. In 1964 he graduated with a masters degree in aeronautical engineering from the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School and then joined VF-154 in San Diego, California. In February 1965, he was shot down on a mission over North Vietnam, was captured, and spent the next eight years as a POW. In 1973 he was repatriated and resumed studies, which eventually led to a doctorate degree in electrical engineering. As a Captain he was a government project manager for smart missiles at the Naval Air Systems Command. In 1983 he was promoted to the rank of Commodore and became the Superintendent of the Nav al Postgraduate School. At the Pentagon in 1986, as a Rear Admiral, he was responsible for coordinating the research efforts of the Navy’s air, surface, electronics and space activities. He retired from the Navy in 1989 and became an assistant dean at The George Washington University and later became the associate dean of the Center for Aerospace Sciences at the University of North Dakota, from which he retired in 1991. Admiral Shumaker’s military decorations include the Distinguished Service Medal, two Silver Stars, four Legions of Merit, the Distinguished Flying Cross, a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts.

Major General Stan Spears, USA: General Spears is Adjutant General of South Carolina. He leads and directs the 10,500-member South Carolina Army and Air National Guard. He serves on the Board of Visitors for the Citadel, the military college of South Carolina. General Spears is the senior Adjutant General in the United States and the several territories. Born and raised in York County, South Carolina, General Spears is a graduate of the University of South Carolina, where he played on the football team. In 1962, he was commissioned as a Second Lieutenant in the Army National Guard. He served as a traditional Guard member for the next 32 years, achieving the rank of Brigadier General and assignment as Assistant Adjutant General.

RETIRED ADMIRALS AND GENERALS SUPPORTING JOHN MCCAIN FOR PRESIDENT