Ahead of the first caucuses and primaries, I hope to bring more awareness—especially among those who may not closely follow presidential politics—to the candidacy of former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, a terrific man who boasts an impressive resume in his record of achievement in business and government.  Yes, he looks presidential, but rest assured I was not deluded by his appearance.  As my ultimate mission is to win votes for Gov. Romney, to the intellectually dishonest detractors who have reached judgment before rational analysis, I say: You’re dismissed.  I’m reaching out not to you, the ideologically imbued few who vote only along party lines, but to likely voters for whom logic and reason are within grasp. 

Before I make the case for Gov. Romney, here’s a bit about my political disposition: I’m neither a political strategist nor pundit, but I am a supporter who’s campaigning on Gov. Romney’s behalf as a private citizen.  Make no assumptions as to my political affiliation.  I’m not a Democrat nor Republican, but a registered Independent.  No single ideology is, in and of itself, infallible; by aligning myself with one party or another, I run the risk of making decisions based on emotional allegiance, not logical assessment.  That said, I do tend to lean right, for conservative principles—military, economic, social—are the foundational values that provide a platform of strength.  I also resist the “do-what-feels-good�? liberal doctrine, recognizing, instead, that true progress results from self-discipline and self-governance.  Conservative in mindset, I also consider myself a definitive progressive.  Please hear me: I said progressive, not liberal.  Conservatism and progressivism are not diametric opposites.  A true progressive believes every day brings new opportunities for learning and betterment; a true progressive is open-minded to better ways of doing, being, and thinking, while adhering to the traditional values of strength that cannot be aborted.  The problem is that over the years the liberals managed to hijack the term “progressive�?; they comfortably hide behind that mask because the term “progress�?—infinitely more effective than “liberalism�?—means advancement, whereas the ideology of “liberalism�? equates to the art of going too far.  A clear distinction must be made, for true progress is advancement of the heart, mind, body, and soul.  Social liberalism is the art of having no respect for boundaries—the agent of excess—which often leads to destruction.  For evidence, look no further than the sea of filth in which our youth is swimming, perpetrated mainly by the liberal entertainment industry—for profit.  Political liberalism holds at its core a policy that reeks of anti-American sentiment.  Its big-government agenda holds people captive to a system of reliance and dependence.  Instead of giving people the tools to succeed on their own, liberal politicians immobilize the less fortunate or capable—the very people they claim to assist—thereby enlarging their own stature and power base by stifling upward mobility.  In a word, liberalism is regression.  But I digress…

Let’s get the most alarming issue out of the way: Americans may overlook the qualifications of a truly great, honorable, and competent man, Mitt Romney, on grounds of religion—Mormonism.  When his name is mentioned in conversation, the first reaction is usually, “That Mormon guy?  Don’t know if I could vote for a Mormon.�?  This is a typical reaction from L.A. liberals, the same liberals who profess to be the most tolerant.  It’s often difficult to get beyond this stage and into more substantive policy issues because Mormonism is a religion often misunderstood, or not at all understood.  Whatever the deterrent, no candidate should be held to a religious litmus test in a country founded on the principles of religious liberty and diversity.  Religion, in my view, is not a matter of whom you worship, but how you live and treat those around you.  The evangelical right, while claiming a monopoly on religious and moral values, have launched among the most repugnant attacks on Gov. Romney, displaying blatant hypocrisy matched only by incurable bigotry.  No one should find it necessary to deliver a speech on religious tolerance, as did Gov. Romney, in a country whose very founders fled religious persecution in pursuit of religious liberty.  He’s declared that the affairs of his church end where the affairs of the nation begin, and there is no indication, past or present, to justify our not taking him at his word.  Yet, through the vicious attacks and discrimination, he’s maintained a dignity and nobility that are testaments not to his presidential looks, but his presidential behavior.

Governor Mitt Romney’s “Faith In America” Address

Gov. Romney boasts an impressive resume as a scholar, philanthropist, businessman, public servant, and family man.  He is an intellectual heavyweight who attracts his share of criticism, but absolutely no critic can dispute his intense intellectual curiosity and capacity.  More impressive than his professional resume is his personal resume, the accomplishments within the four walls of his home.  He’s been married to his wife, Ann Romney, for 38 years, and raised five sons, all of whom followed their father’s footsteps by graduating from Ivy League schools and serving their community and church.  His commitment to his wife and children—the “family values�? that liberals despise—and squeaky clean past are striking, in large measure because he is a handsome, powerful, charming, and wealthy man undoubtedly tested by “interns�? who’ve crossed his path.  Unlike BJ Bill and Fruity Rudy, he’s never faltered.  (Sorry, I just couldn’t help myself there.)

Gov. Romney earned his MBA from Harvard Business School and law degree from Harvard Law School with honors.  Upon graduation, he worked as a management consultant at Bain and Co., arguably the world’s most respected management consulting firm, where he honed his corporate turnaround skills.  It was there that he began earning the name “turnaround artist�?, quickly rising to the ranks of vice president.  Jim Cramer, the host of CNBC’s Mad Money, calls him “the best businessman in North America�?. 

Image of Mitt Romney, his wife Ann and five adult sons

In 1984, the founder of Bain and Co., seizing on Gov. Romney’s talents, convinced him to form Bain Capital, a venture capital firm, in which he would give Gov. Romney operating control.  The firm would go on to fund Staples and Domino’s Pizza, among many other successful enterprises.  During his 14-years at the helm, Gov. Romney led the start-up to $5.9 billion in managed assets, with a stunning average annual internal rate of return of 113%.  Today, the firm manages some $40 billion in assets.

In 1991, when Bain and Co. (not to be confused with Bain Capital) was in dire straits and suffered from excess debt, Gov. Romney was summoned by his former mentor and boss to resuscitate the company as Interim CEO.  In a one-year assignment, he returned the company to profitability. 

In 2001, when the scandal-plagued Salt Lake City Winter Olympics was suffering from a $397 million budget shortfall, Gov. Romney was asked by the organizing committee to come to its rescue.  Facing the grave security challenges the post 9/11 world would pose, he ended the games with a $56 million surplus at the end of his tenure, money that would go on to fund future games. 

While serving as president of the Winter Olympics, Gov. Romney received a message from a Massachusetts anti-tax activist saying, to paraphrase, “I know you’re busy with the Olympics, but when you’re done, please come back and save Massachusetts�?.  In 2003, Gov. Romney was elected republican governor of the most liberal state in America, a state whose registered republican voters amount to a meager 13%.  He won the election with a 5-point margin.  Among his most notable accomplishments were balancing a $3 billion budget deficit he inherited without raising taxes, while successfully passing a health insurance plan that would get insurance for all residents.  (He’s careful to remind us that health insurance is not the same as healthcare, for those who aren’t insured still receive healthcare when they are in emergency rooms—a subsidy paid for by taxpayers.  In other words, taxpayers who don’t have health insurance are paying taxes to ensure their healthcare in the event of an emergency.  So, why not reform the system to make health insurance affordable to all, using the money that’s already there to buy everyone preventive care, in lieu of awaiting the arrival of an emergency?)

It is around Gov. Romney’s governorship, not business acumen or family values, that his most vocal and threatened critics focus their attacks, in large measure because political records can be obscured by changing the surrounding context, whereas profit and loss statements and squeaky clean personal lives are irrefutable.  The most damning charge to Gov. Romney is that of his “flip-flopping�? on the issue of abortion—the attack that keeps on attacking (pun intended)—because, quite simply, his critics have nowhere else to go.  Though without foundation, the charge has stuck with the help of the liberal media.  Since Gov. Romney was elected governor of MA on a pro-choice platform, critics dismiss his now pro-life stance as an opportunistic move to pander to the right.  They specifically cite his change in position in ’05, charging he did so only after deciding he would run for the presidency, knowing he could not win the republican nomination on a pro-choice platform.  First of all, a flip-flopper is one who changes positions back and forth; Gov. Romney did not go back and forth, and is therefore, not a flip-flopper.  Second, this kind of thinking is dangerously simplistic and naïve on his opponents’ part, and violates the first rule of competition: Do not underestimate your opponent.  His father was a governor and presidential contender, his mother a senatorial candidate—does anyone really think his presidential ambitions only began in ’05?  It’s more likely that he’s planned for this moment for decades, if not groomed since his embryotic days, and viewed the MA governorship as a stepping stone to the presidency.  We are inundated with YouTube clips of Gov. Romney’s assertion of his pro-choice beliefs back in his MA days.  However, a careful evaluation of his choice of words prove a reluctance to say “I am pro-choice�?, opting, instead, to declare his will to uphold the existing laws in MA which legalize abortion (translation: will not seek to overturn Roe v. Wade), and making such procedures safe (translation: Since abortion is legal, they must be safe).  He maintained that he was effectively pro-choice—that is, pro-choice in an operational and functioning capacity—but personally pro-life, a credible claim given the record of his services to his church and commitment to family values.  He did not feel that he would be serving the interest of the people of MA—a predominantly pro-choice base—if he were to impose his personal views on them, and thus, assured them he would not seek to change the existing law. 

His successful election to the MA governorship tells a story not of a man without core convictions, but a man adept at finding grounds for consensus by picking winnable battles, a man who embraced bipartisanship and successfully reached across party lines to work with an ideologically opposed legislature that was 85% democratic.  Yet, the very critics who scream the loudest about Washington partisanship were the first to voraciously attack the character of a perfectly good man when he proved to understand compromise.   

Gov. Romney’s victory in the MA gubernatorial race tells another story, one of a political genius who skillfully outwitted the liberals in the most liberal state in the land, who strategically survived the scrutiny of present-day politics while keeping all his promises to the people.  Politics and strategy, unfortunately, go hand in hand.

What is true about Mitt Romney is that he’s an ambitious man.  Ambition, often characterized as a negative trait, is a positive attribute when the end goal is noble.  Gov. Romney understands his destiny: He was born to lead, born to bring about positive change, born to deliver results.  He wants to use his talent toward the betterment of mankind.  His, indeed, is a noble ambition.  Although I respect those who don’t have the stomach for politics, I applaud the well-intentioned folks who do.

As those born into privileged lives often are, Gov. Romney is baselessly attacked for riding his father’s coattails, specifically, inheriting most of his fortune from his father.  The indisputable fact is he made his vast fortune (estimated between $250-$400 million) as a hardworking businessman armed with fierce business instincts, intellectual prowess, abundant energy, educational attainment, and problem-solving propensities.  He’s endured desperate charges that he’s “buying the presidency�?, a laughable analysis given anyone who follows modern-day politics must know that the office of the presidency cannot be purchased, for if it were possible, we’d have enjoyed a President Ross Perot, or perhaps, President Steve Forbes.  Whereas personal wealth can propel a candidate to national attention, among others, it takes organization, political acumen, the right message, and a communicable plan for change to win the presidency.  Yes, he’s outspent his opponents thus far, but let’s employ some critical thinking, folks: Gov. Romney was a little-known candidate running against hugely popular politicians; what’s the harm in leveling the playing field?  Hillary Clinton’s been a staple in the mainstream media and democratic politics for 16 years; Barack Obama hovers alongside the star power of the most popular woman in media; Fred Thompson has movie-star fame; Rudy Giuliani’s enjoyed six years of free publicity post 9/11; and both John Edwards and John McCain benefit from national attention and media exposure from previous presidential campaigns.  Mitt Romney would be foolish not to borrow from his wealth to raise awareness toward his candidacy. 

What of Mike Huckabee, you ask?  After all, the man was little known, spent little money, and, after an impressive performance in the YouTube republican debate, catapulted to the top of the polls.  Many factors explain his rise (and, as I predicted, subsequent decline in the polls).  His witty one-liners, constant biblical references, and emotional rhetoric captured the attention of some, while those of us blessed with common sense maintained that he was uniquely qualified as a comedian or therapist of some sort, but not a leader of the free world who’d ably govern and protect.  His sustenance in the polls was due squarely to the help of the liberal media, who deeply desire for him to win the republican nomination because they accurately appraise him to be the most frivolous and beatable republican candidate.  He enjoys glowing coverage, unchallenged interviews (Tim Russert, anyone?), disproportionately abundant airtime and media mentions, and reluctant scrutiny.  He often glorifies his competitive rankings in the polls by reminding us that he’s “outspent 20-1�? by Mitt Romney.  Gov. Romney, the liberal media’s most feared candidate (they know he can win the votes of democrats, plus, wipe the floor with Hillary Clinton in a matchup), suffers from continual biased and unfavorable coverage on TV, in print, and online—if not blatant omission of coverage—most notably by the Clinton News Network (aka CNN).  It isn’t surprising that Mike Huckabee is a leading candidate despite spending less; what is surprising is that while enjoying the push of the liberal media—the price tag of which is exponentially greater than any advertising Gov. Romney can buy—his campaign failed to derail that of Mitt Romney’s. 

The liberal media’s support is the reason for Mike Huckabee’s rise, but isn’t, however, the reason he should not and cannot be president.  The reason speaks directly to the policies, character, and scandals behind the mask of spirituality and compassion: pro-tax hikes; increased spending; weak immigration policies; evangelical extremism; pardoning of criminals; infantile grasp of international affairs; bigotry toward homosexuals; serial ethics violations; indulgent acceptance of gifts while in public office; and more disturbingly, his suggestion that AIDS patients be quarantined.  The question he recently posed to the New York Times, “Don’t Mormons believe that Jesus and the devil were brothers?�? tops them all.  Although he apologized to Gov. Romney for his remark, one must question the judgment and dignity of a presidential contender capable of such bigotry and idiocy.  Yet, the media gives Mike Huckabee a pass while relentlessly pounding Gov. Romney on inconsequential issues, such as whether he was really a “life-long hunter�? (reportedly an exaggeration, as a scrub-down proved Gov. Romney has only hunted twice in his life).  Boo-hoo…

While the media mercilessly attacks Gov. Romney over the most trivial issues, they readily omit all stories that affirm his good character.  How many people know that he donated his $800,000 salary as President of the Winter Olympics to charity?  Or that he declined to take a salary as Governor of Massachusetts?  One of the best measures of his character came in 1996, when one of his colleagues’ 14 year-old daughter disappeared after attending a party in NYC.  Gov. Romney closed down his entire office, asking that all 30 employees and partners fly to NYC to help find her.  He set up a “command center�? in the conference room of his hotel, hired private investigators, established a tip line, and coordinated efforts with the police.  Still not satisfied, he pulled out his rolodex and called every company he’s done business with in NYC to ask for their help.  The story even made the evening news, with footage showing investment types scouring central park.  As a result of the massive operation he orchestrated, the girl was found in the basement of a New Jersey home, nearly dying from a drug overdose.  Yet, how many people know about this exemplary demonstration of conviction, selflessness, compassion, and loyalty?

If past behavior is the best indicator of future behavior, then there is no doubt that Mitt Romney will be a great president, and dare I say, the best in our lifetime.  He’s a nearly flawless candidate who possesses the right experience, leadership, character, and values.  His resume is unrivaled, his character unequivocal.  What separates him from all other candidates is while everyone else has an idea of how they will improve America—ranging from solid plans to hallucinations—Gov. Romney is a tested and proven turnaround artist who knows how to deliver results.  He will come to Washington not as a politician or businessman, but a proven problem-solver.  He understands that for every problem, there is a solution.  He masters the science of problem-solving: identify the problem, gather data, bring together diverse opinions, define solutions and devise a plan, and execute.  This was the model by which he’s achieved astounding results in the past, and it’s the model by which he’ll deliver results in the future.  He stresses that a strong America demands the strict adherence to the three conservative principles he calls the “three-legged stool�?: strong military, strong economy, and strong families.  When elected, his top priorities will be to defeat the radical Jihadists bent on defeating the free world; balance the federal budget without raising taxes, a goal he’ll achieve by auditing every federal organization to identify and eliminate waste and duplication—a top-to-bottom “frisk�?, if you will; and preserve America’s culture and values.  Lastly, with his self-evident record of bipartisanship in MA, where he engaged—and challenged—an ideologically opposed legislature, he is our best hope for change and unity in a time when the country is bitterly divided. 

Gov. Romney successfully turned around every organization he’s lead, and I can’t wait until he gets his hands on Washington!  My prediction: The good citizens of the United States will make Mitt Romney their 44th president.  Watch it happen. 

If you’ve read this far, I thank you!!!

Note: I did not go into the specifics of Gov. Romney’s position on all the issues, because the goal of this piece was to incite critical thinking and clear judgment on the controversial issues surrounding his campaign, not repeat his platform.  To learn more about where he stands on the issues, please visit www.MittRomney.com.  I encourage you to respond online or in person, and, if time permits, we can go head-to-head, toe-to-toe, but hopefully, not fist-to-fist.

Guest post written by LAConservative.

Technorati Tags: mitt romney, primary elections