We wondered this morning how Team Romney would fight back against Obama’s dishonest attack ad highlighting Romney’s time at Bain Capital.

Now we know, and we’ve gotten to see just how good Romney’s rapid response team is in the process. Hey Barry, probably not a good idea to mess with these guys.

First, Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul sent out this statement to the press as well as on the Romney website and social media outlets:

“We welcome the Obama campaign’s attempt to pivot back to jobs and a discussion of their failed record. President Obama has many questions to answer as to why his Administration used the stimulus to reward wealthy campaign donors with taxpayer money for bad ideas like Solyndra, but 23 million Americans are still struggling to find jobs. If the Obama Administration was less concerned with pleasing its wealthy donors and more concerned with creating jobs, America would be much better off.”

Then, Team Romney followed that up with a press release blast that followed that same line of defend and attack — using Solyndra as their foil of choice:

President Obama’s Idea Of The Free Market Is “Crony Capitalism” That Showers Federal Dollars On His Friends And Allies, While Leaving Taxpayers On The Hook For Losses:

The Washington Post: “You Can Call It Crony Capitalism Or Venture Socialism — But By Whatever Name, The Energy Department’s Loan Guarantee Program Privatizes Profits And Socializes Losses.” (Editorial, “The Energy Department’s Loan Guarantee Program Is The Real Solyndra Scandal,” The Washington Post, 11/17/11)

The Washington Post: “The Problem Is That Bureaucrats Are More Likely To Bet Wrong Because They Are Generally Not Full-Time Investment Experts And Have No Skin In The Game Themselves.” (Editorial, “Solyndra: A Bad Bet Obama Should Regret,” The Washington Post, 10/6/11)

Obama Bundlers Worked In His Department Of Energy “As It Showered Billions In Taxpayer-Backed Stimulus Money On Alternative Energy Firms.” “Several of Barack Obama’s top campaign supporters went from soliciting political contributions to working from within the Energy Department as it showered billions in taxpayer-backed stimulus money on alternative energy firms, iWatch News and ABC News have learned.” (Ronnie Green And Matthew Mosk, “Bundlers On The Inside,” iWatch, 9/29/11)

…

The Energy Department’s Inspector General Found That Contracts Were Steered To “Friends And Family.” “The Department of Energy’s inspector general, Gregory Friedman, who was not a political appointee, chastised the alternative-energy loan and grant programs for their absence of ‘sufficient transparency and accountability.’ He has testified that contracts have been steered to ‘friends and family.’” (Peter Schweizer, “Obama Campaign Backers And Bundlers Rewarded With Green Grants And Loans,” Newsweek, 11/12/11)

“$3.9 Billion In Federal Grants And Financing Flowed To 21 Companies Backed By Firms With Connections To Five Obama Administration Staffers And Advisers.” (Carol D. Leonnig and Joe Stephens, “Venture Capitalists Play Key Role In Obama’s Energy Department,” The Washington Post, 2/14/12)

And The Result Of Those Taxpayer Giveaways To Obama Allies? Lost Jobs And Bankrupt Businesses:

The Obama Administration Loaned Over Half A Billion Dollars To Solyndra – Which Later Went Bankrupt – And Engaged In A “Risky Investment Strategy” With Other Similar Projects. “Solar panel maker Solyndra received a $528 million Energy Department loan in 2009 – and went bankrupt last year. The government’s risky investment strategy didn’t stop there, as a CBS News investigation has uncovered a pattern of cases of the government pouring your tax dollars into clean energy.” (Sharyl Attkisson, “Tax Dollars Backing Some “Risky” Energy Projects,” CBS, 1/13/12)

Solyndra’s Bankruptcy And 1,100 Layoffs Represented “A Blow To The Obama Administration’s Efforts To Create Green Jobs.” “In a blow to the Obama administration’s efforts to create green jobs, solar-cell maker Solyndra announced Wednesday that it will close its remaining Fremont factory, lay off its 1,100 employees and file for bankruptcy. The news marked an abrupt end for a company once considered among the most innovative in a fast-changing industry. The bankruptcy also represents a high-profile failure for a federal stimulus program that gives loan guarantees to green-tech manufacturers.” (David R. Baker and Carolyn Said, “Solyndra Closes Fremont Plant – Stimulus Hopes Dim,” San Francisco Chronicle, 9/1/11)

…

After that, the Romney campaign organized a conference call for reporters, where Ed Gillespie continued the counter-attack on Obama, continuing to use Solyndra as an example of “crony capitalism”.

Then, Romney press department shot off a shorter memo which counter-punched Obama for mentioning this morning that Bain Capital added debt to GST:

In the short time since this morning when the Obama campaign attacked Mitt Romney’s business record, the President has added more debt to our national debt than he accuses GS Industries of having two years after Mitt Romney left Bain. (Note: $500M is .01% of Obama’s new debt since taking office; Obama has been in office 1210 days; .01% of his time in office is .12 days, or slightly less than 3 hours.)

The Debt That Barack Obama Attributes To GS Industries, At A Time When Romney Was No Longer At Bain, Would Pay For Less Than 3 Hours Of The New Debt Of Obama’s Presidency.

And now to end the day, Team Romney has cut their own one minute ad, highlighting the story of another steel company Bain Capital invested in — one that became highly successful and went on to create more than 6,000 jobs:

If Obama expected Romney to roll over and play nice like John McCain did in 2008, he’s going to continue to be surprised like he was today. We will see how many times the Obama campaign can try and fire the Bain bullet throughout the remainder of the campaign, but I have a feeling their failure to keep their powder dry until later in the game is going to come back to haunt them.

Governor Huckabee has taken some heat by some fiscal conservatives for lending support to Michelle Obama’s Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act.   I defended the Governor when Michelle Malkin suggested that his position on this issue was proof he was a nanny-stater.

In his new book, A Simple Government, Huckabee addresses a related issue: school breakfasts.  He is blunt: “What does it say about our society that so many parents apparently can’t get it together enough to give their children a bowl of cereal and a glass of juice.  It is that they just assume, after years of the practiced, that it’s the government’s job to pay for school breakfasts?”  In the next paragraph, he makes it plain that it’s the parents job to feed their kids.

In the paragraph after that, however, he appears to backpedal, writing that he is no way suggesting that we stop school breakfasts.  In a conference call with bloggers today, I asked him plainly:

If you were president in 2013 and a Republican House and Senate voted to end the federal school breakfast program in one year and the school lunch program one year after that, and the department of education the year after that, would you sign the bill, considering that in your book you show that these things would be better handled by parents, churches, and the states, respectively, rather than the federal government, and in fact, the federal role in education is itself unconstitutional?

His answer:   Yes, he would sign a bill abolishing the Federal Department of Education, if Congress gave him such a bill to sign.  On the question of school lunches, he fudged a little (pardon the pun), suggesting that he would consider it if he could be assured there would a church organization or the states would make up the difference.  Not a knee-jerk answer, but thoughtful and responsive, even if a little tentative.

I joined a Mike Huckabee conference call about his upcoming book, “Do the Right Thing.” Among the highlights:

• Huckabee said it’s too early to declare for 2012. Was anyone expecting different?
• Regarding the controversy over Huckabee’s statements on Mitt Romney, Huckabee stated the book is not a slam piece on 2008. He does discuss Romney, Thompson, and others to set the record straight as to what happened behind the scenes. However, Huckabee said the book is not focused on “lamenting the past” but ideas for the future as well as being an overall positive book focusing on the achievements of a remarkable group of people who with little money and resources achieved great results as well as a vision for conservatism’s future.

I don’t know how you’re really and truly shocked that Huckabee would have a discouraging word about Romney. It seems Inspector Reneauesque:

 This was a book that discussed the campaign. There’s been a lot said about Huckabee and his effort. The Huckabee-Romney dynamic was a huge part of that. There have been many explanations for what happened in the campaign that have been offered up by De Facto Romney surrogates. I give Huckabee credit for putting his name to his criticisms. I think it’s particularly relevant that people understand some of the whys of this campaign as well as what’s happened with some Christian Conservative leaders who are off-track.

Huckabee stated his belief that adults could handle the truth, and I think they can. Huckabee noted Romney’s spokesman didn’t deny Huckabee’s claims, merely got ticked at Huckabee for making.

• Some interesting Huckabee chapter titles, “Politically Homeless”, “Welcome to Washington, DC: Roach Motel” and “Big Ideas Not Just Big Government,” “Elections by Ebay.” Good titles, I pre-ordered the book in July and look forward to reading it. 
• Huckabee made the case for Chip Saltsman for RNC Chairman, and went beyond Saltsman being Huckabee’s campaign manager, but rather pointed to Saltsman’s ability at new media, along with his  success running a shoestring effort.
• How hard did Huckabee campaign for McCain? He lost his voice on the last day of the campaign. Not even McCain did that.
• Huckabee when asked why the GOP lost was careful not to blame McCain personally, but he said the GOP lost not because of our principles but because we failed to articulate them and failed to govern. High federal spending and the bail out belied conservative talk of fiscal conservatism. He also thought that articulating a message woiuld have been more effective than the time spent on issues like Wright and Ayers that obviously didn’t connect with the American people.
• Regarding the last campaign, Huckabee stated he would have done his campaign differently in terms of where time was spent. He opted to go to Michigan after New Hampshire rather than camping out in South Carolina as Fred Thompson did. This allowed Thompson to surge to third and led to Huckabee’s narrow loss when combined with a snowstorm in a Huckabee stronhold in Greenville, SC.
• Huckabee’s main message of the book, “Do the right thing” is the centrality of cultural conservativism.  “It’s impossible to seperate the morality of a country from the economics of a country. “Over 10 1/2 years as Governor, Huckabee learned, “The cost of government is tied directly to the breakdown of the family.” To those who would like to just talk economics, Huckabee says that as a practical matter, “You can’t reduce government, if people are irresponsible.” He challenges critics who believes the issues are seperate to answer his argument and to “Tell me how there is no connection” between the moral and economic states of the nation.

On a blogger’s conference call on Friday, Michael Steele made it clear that he will reach out to and work with right-leaning bloggers should he become RNC Chair:

“…Thanks for ‘blogging’ in… I think that the fact that I’m on the phone with you guys should give you some indication of where I want to take this party next. It has always amazed me that we have under-utilized an incredibly important resource and that is the men and women out here who blog, and who share information, collect information, and spread the word around. We have not, certainly at the national level, effectively utilized some of our strengths, effectively utilized certain strategies that will allow us to reach out with our message across this country. So, part of the parcel of what I want to do as chairman is to kick-start this in a different direction. Technology is my friend. I blog quite a bit. I’m usually on the net 2 or 3 o’clock in the morning which is crazy, but fun because I get a sense of what is going on around the world and tap into the thinking of a lot of our grassroots players out there and that includes you. So, it’s a real honor to welcome you all to this and let me just tell you this will be just the first of a series of conversations leading up to the election of the next chairman and one that process is done, many of you will be at the table in helping to shape an internet strategy, a communication strategy, that will be second to none.”
…
“When it comes to what you do as bloggers, now my understanding and appreciation of blogging is that this is something that Republicans really kind of started back in the Clinton era. There were a lot of guys and gals that started communicating amongst this thing so why did we let this enterprise drop? Why aren’t we actively engaging you to test ideas, to find out what’s going on in the streets, and sharing the information of what we’re doing on policy, on tactics, on all these things that get people excited and want to be a part of something…”

You can listen to the entire conference call here.

I returned from lunch to find an invitation to Tim Pawlenty’s conference call from Denver for MN media.  I joined it in progress.  Everything is paraphrased when not in quotes.

Live Blog

The Governor had some generic opening statements about Senator McCain’s experience and values over Sen. Obama — the usual boilerplate.  An observation:  Pawlenty seemed quite tired and his voice was just a bit raspy (A bit subdued?  Down?).

Q: Do you plan on staying in Eagan tonight?

A: I am scheduled to fly back late afternoon and I am staying, I believe, at the Governor’s residence. Doesn’t plan on staying in Eagan because of possible conflict with the kids schedule.

Q: Any chance you will be flying to Sadona, AZ?

A: I am scheduled to be in Minnesota.

Q: Will you be in Ohio tomorrow?

A: I am scheduled to be in Minneapolis tomorrow and through the weekend.  My sense is Senator McCain and the McCain campaign are close to making a decision.

Q: Do you think you have the requisite experience to be president?

A: I served in a legislative body for 10 years, 4 years as majority leader, executive leader for 6 years, CiC of the MN Nat’l Guard, record of accomplishment.  Those are some of the things required for high office.

“I’ll see you all back in Minnesota soon.”

*End call*

UPDATE:  Pawlenty canceling interviews.  He is either the veep or more tired than I thought.

Here’s the audio from this morning’s McCain Campaign conference call regarding Barack Obama’s energy policy with Rep. Eric Cantor and economic advisor Doug Holtz-Eakin:

You can listen to today’s McCain blogger conference call with Rep. Marsha Blackburn here.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

The McCain Campaign is holding a blogger conference call, which will focus on foreign policy, with Rep. Marsha Blackburn this afternoon.

The McCain Campaign held a conference call to discuss today’s decision in DC v. Heller attended by Sen. Sam Brownback and Senior Policy Advisor Randy Scheunemann. I was not able to attend myself today due to prior commitments, but I was able to get the highlights.

Here is Sen. Brownback:

I am very pleased to see the Supreme Court ruling on the D.C. gun ban case, finding that the Second Amendment is an individual right, and this has been a long time coming. It’s an important one. It recognizes the Second Amendment as the other amendments in the Constitution are an individual right.

I am amazed at the flipping on this position by Barack Obama. Initially, he comes out and says that he believes in banning hand guns. He is for the D.C. gun ban, and now seems to be sidestepping the issue and acknowledging support — at least saying that this seems to be a right. Of course, it’s an individual right. This is either an incredible flip-flop or incredible inexperience. On this issue, anyone who’s been around politics in Washington , D.C. , for a period of time knows the centerpiece of this gun ban debate is whether or not the Second Amendment is an individual or a collective right. And, I’m really surprised about this move by Barack Obama.

It does seem to reflect a willingness that as the campaign changes from a primary to a general, willingness to change on positions, to be more liberal in the primary, to moving more conservative in the general election. I guess I should welcome that, but it looks like, to me, either inexperience or incredible flip-flopping. We’re seeing this take place on campaign finance, recently, now on the FISA bill that’s on the floor of the United States Senate. He has said previously that he would filibuster it and now he says he’s open to the compromise.

I want to put a marker out there that I think the next thing to move, that you may watch and see Senator Obama move on has got to be on Iraq , with the news coming out about the surge and its success. I think you’re probably going to see that start to take place. I really would just hope that Senator Obama would look at this the way I do. I didn’t initially support the Surge and said, ‘Look, I was wrong. Senator McCain was right. This is working and God bless him for maintaining that position. That, at this point in time, we’re looking now at securing Iraq rather than toward exiting with a failed terrorist state.’ There was a lot at stake in this, and John fought to put his name, his reputation, his campaign on the line and did the right thing. John McCain’s a maverick. He’s fought for a bipartisan fashion. I think that the biggest thing I’ve seen from Barack Obama is a willingness, aggressiveness, to talk bipartisan and yet to vote the hard left– most liberal member of the United States Senate.

Here’s Randy Scheunemann:

Let me just add a little bit of detail about Sen. Obama’s positions — plural — on firearms issues. He has expressed support for the D.C. gun ban saying that he thought it was constitutional. He sidestepped questions for months on how he thought this case, Heller and District of Columbia , should be decided. He refused to sign an amicus brief that a large bipartisan majority of the Senate signed that Senator McCain was pleased to sign, arguing that the Supreme Court should decide the decision the way they in fact did decide the decision today. Despite being a professor of constitutional law, he said he had no position on this because he hadn’t reviewed all the briefs at one point.

In his votes, you can see Senator Obama’s position clearly on Second Amendments. He has voted to ban guns. He has voted to allow politically motivated lawsuits. He has voted in the Illinois State Legislature against self-defense rights. He has a clear and consistent record of opposing Second Amendment rights and our expectation is he’ll try to have it both ways and say that he supports the decision today even though he was unable to express support for it at any time over the previous period of months when he was asked about it.

Second, I think what’s becoming clear in this campaign that for Senator Obama the most important issue in the election is the political fortunes of Senator Obama. He has demonstrated that there really is no position he holds that isn’t negotiable or isn’t subject to change depending on how he calculates it will affect his political fortunes. You can see that in his changing positions on public financing for campaigns, on the immunity provisions in FISA legislation, on his position on NAFTA where he called for a unilateral renegotiation, on his positions on unconditional meetings with dictators like Ahmadinejad in Iran, on his position of Jerusalem being an undivided capital and twenty-four hours later saying it’s a subject for negotiations.

And frankly, I think we are going to see, as Senator Brownback pointed out, yet another position from Senator Obama in coming days and weeks on Iraq . You literally need a kaleidoscope to follow Senator Obama’s positions on Iraq . In 2005, he was against cutting off funds and putting a timetable in place. In 2007, he voted to cut off funds and he said the surge would not reduce sectarian violence. In 2008, he said he would disregard the advice of military commanders and proceed with a timetable for withdrawal, and then he told Iraqi Foreign Minister Zabari that he would listen to the advice of military commanders. I think what we see is that he will say and do anything if it furthers his political purposes. That’s what we’re seeing today on the Second Amendment and what we expect to see in the future on Iraq .

You can listen to the entire conference call here.

I was able to sit in on Team McCain’s blogger conference call today where the focus was on the Senator’s health care initiatives.

McCain looks to remedy our health care problems by unleashing the power of innovation that has made this country great as well as keeping the power to make decisions regarding health care in the hands of American Families, not the Federal Government.

Critical aspects of the plan will include an emphasis on HSA’s (Health Savings Accounts) and a $5000 tax credit.

Senator McCain went into detail regarding his plan in a speech at Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute at South Florida University.

Here are the key snippets:

1. The Problem is Cost:

In any serious discussion of health care in our nation, this should always be our starting point – because the goal, after all, is to make the best care available to everyone. We want a system of health care in which everyone can afford and acquire the treatment and preventative care they need, and the peace of mind that comes with knowing they are covered. Health care in America should be affordable by all, not just the wealthy. It should be available to all, and not limited by where you work or how much you make. It should be fair to all; providing help where the need is greatest, and protecting Americans from corporate abuses. And for all the strengths of our health-care system, we know that right now it falls short of this ideal.

Underlying the many things that trouble our health care system are the fundamental problems of cost and access. Rising costs hurt those who have insurance by making it more expensive to keep. They hurt those who don’t have insurance by making it even harder to obtain. Rising health care costs hurt employers and the self-employed alike. And in the end they threaten serious and lasting harm to the entire American economy.

2. Government is not the solution to this problem:

There are those who are convinced that the solution is to move closer to a nationalized health care system. They urge universal coverage, with all the tax increases, new mandates, and government regulation that come along with that idea. But in the end this will accomplish one thing only. We will replace the inefficiency, irrationality, and uncontrolled costs of the current system with the inefficiency, irrationality, and uncontrolled costs of a government monopoly. We’ll have all the problems, and more, of private health care — rigid rules, long waits and lack of choices, and risk degrading its great strengths and advantages including the innovation and life-saving technology that make American medicine the most advanced in the world.

The key to real reform is to restore control over our health-care system to the patients themselves.

3. Placing power in the hands of American Families will lower health care costs:

When families are informed about medical choices, they are more capable of making their own decisions, less likely to choose the most expensive and often unnecessary options, and are more satisfied with their choices. We took an important step in this direction with the creation of Health Savings Accounts, tax-preferred accounts that are used to pay insurance premiums and other health costs. These accounts put the family in charge of what they pay for. And, as president, I would seek to encourage and expand the benefits of these accounts to more American families.

Americans need new choices beyond those offered in employment-based coverage. Americans want a system built so that wherever you go and wherever you work, your health plan is goes with you. And there is a very straightforward way to achieve this.

4. Don’t destroy what is right with the current system:

Under current law, the federal government gives a tax benefit when employers provide health-insurance coverage to American workers and their families. This benefit doesn’t cover the total cost of the health plan, and in reality each worker and family absorbs the rest of the cost in lower wages and diminished benefits. But it provides essential support for insurance coverage. Many workers are perfectly content with this arrangement, and under my reform plan they would be able to keep that coverage. Their employer-provided health plans would be largely untouched and unchanged.

5. Give American Families the ability to to invest in a long-term health care solutions that preserve individual freedom:

But for every American who wanted it, another option would be available: Every year, they would receive a tax credit directly, with the same cash value of the credits for employees in big companies, in a small business, or self-employed. You simply choose the insurance provider that suits you best. By mail or online, you would then inform the government of your selection. And the money to help pay for your health care would be sent straight to that insurance provider. The health plan you chose would be as good as any that an employer could choose for you. It would be yours and your family’s health-care plan, and yours to keep.

The value of that credit – 2,500 dollars for individuals, 5,000 dollars for families – would also be enhanced by the greater competition this reform would help create among insurance companies. Millions of Americans would be making their own health-care choices again. Insurance companies could no longer take your business for granted, offering narrow plans with escalating costs. It would help change the whole dynamic of the current system, putting individuals and families back in charge, and forcing companies to respond with better service at lower cost.

It would help extend the advantages of staying with doctors and providers of your choice. When Americans speak of “our doctor,” it will mean something again, because they won’t have to change from one doctor or one network to the next every time they change employers. They’ll have a medical “home” again, dealing with doctors who know and care about them.

6. Market solutions and innovation is the answer for providing coverage to the uninsurable:

Even so, those without prior group coverage and those with pre-existing conditions do have the most difficulty on the individual market, and we need to make sure they get the high-quality coverage they need. I will work tirelessly to address the problem. But I won’t create another entitlement program that Washington will let get out of control. Nor will I saddle states with another unfunded mandate. The states have been very active in experimenting with ways to cover the “uninsurables.” The State of North Carolina , for example, has an agreement with Blue Cross to act as insurer of “last resort.” Over thirty states have some form of “high-risk” pool, and over twenty states have plans that limit premiums charged to people suffering an illness and who have been denied insurance.

As President, I will meet with the governors to solicit their ideas about a best practice model that states can follow – a Guaranteed Access Plan or GAP that would reflect the best experience of the states. I will work with Congress, the governors, and industry to make sure that it is funded adequately and has the right incentives to reduce costs such as disease management, individual case management, and health and wellness programs. These programs reach out to people who are at risk for different diseases and chronic conditions and provide them with nurse care managers to make sure they receive the proper care and avoid unnecessary treatments and emergency room visits. The details of a Guaranteed Access Plan will be worked out with the collaboration and consent of the states. But, conceptually, federal assistance could be provided to a nonprofit GAP that operated under the direction of a board that included all stakeholders groups – legislators, insurers, business and medical community representatives, and, most importantly, patients. The board would contract with insurers to cover patients who have been denied insurance and could join with other state plans to enlarge pools and lower overhead costs. There would be reasonable limits on premiums, and assistance would be available for Americans below a certain income level.

7. Break down the barriers to true freedom of choice:

…cooperation among states in the purchase of insurance would also be a crucial step in ridding the market of both needless and costly regulations, and the dominance in the market of only a few insurance companies. Right now, there is a different health insurance market for every state. Each one has its own rules and restrictions, and often guarantees inadequate competition among insurance companies. Often these circumstances prevent the best companies, with the best plans and lowest prices, from making their product available to any American who wants it. We need to break down these barriers to competition, innovation and excellence, with the goal of establishing a national market to make the best practices and lowest prices available to every person in every state.

8. Tort Reform is an essential part of lowering costs:

Another source of needless cost and trouble in the health care system comes from the trial bar. Every patient in America must have access to legal remedies in cases of bad medical practice. But this vital principle of law and medicine is not an invitation to endless, frivolous lawsuits from trial lawyers who exploit both patients and physicians alike. We must pass medical liability reform, and those reforms should eliminate lawsuits directed at doctors who follow clinical guidelines and adhere to patient safety protocols. If Senator Obama and Senator Clinton are sincere in their conviction that health care coverage and quality is their first priority, then they will put the needs of patients before the demands of trial lawyers. They can’t have it both ways.

I had the pleasure of sitting in on this morning’s campaign conference call. Sen. McCain was unable to attend it personally, but his top aides Steve Schmidt, Jill Hazelbaker and Pat Hynes filled in. It was filled with a lot of information and I did my best to get all of it down.

• Steve Schmidt began the call by giving the broad outlines of McCain’s “Service to America” tour which begins next week. The Senator will travel to six places around the country that has impacted and influenced his life while he was growing up. The purpose is to show how McCain’s past is directly correlated to how he sees the world now and how he will act when he’s the 44th President of the United States. It’ll serve as the beginning of the campaign’s formal introduction of McCain to the American people that will run through the Senator’s speech at the Republican National Convention in September.
• Day 1 (March 31st): The Senator will give a speech at McCain Field in Meridian, Mississippi. The speech will highlight his family’s lifetime of service to this country through the military. From his grandfather serving 43 years in the military (1902-1945), to his father serving in WWII and Vietnam, to John McCain’s own experience in Vietnam and to his son Jimmy serving in Iraq and other soon Jack still at the Naval Academy.
• Day 2: McCain will head to Alexandria, VA where he will give a speech at Episcopal High School where he attended. He will talk about the lessons that his English teacher taught him that he continues to heed to this day.
• Day 3: He will then give a speech at the Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland.
• Day 4: He will then travel down to Pensacola, Florida where he attended the Navy’s flight school.
• Day 5: He’ll then travel to Jacksonville, Florida and give a speech that calls for greatly increasing the size of the military.
• Day 6: On the final day, he will return to his hometown in Prescott, Arizona and give a speech there.

After recounting that, Schmidt opened the floor to questions. Michael Goldfarb of the Weekly Standard had the first one:

• Goldfarb asked about senior Obama adviser Merill McPeak’s somewhat anti-Semetic comments towards Israel and what that says about Obama himself.
• Schmidt talks about McCain’s long record of being pro-Israel, but goes on to say that McPeak’s comments are “disturbing” and that they help show that while the Obama campaign talks a good game about their New Politic, things like this just show the detachment Obama has between his rhetoric and reality.

Next up is Townhall’s Hugh Hewitt:

• Hewitt asks about McCain’s planned speech calling for an increased military and wonders if the McCain campaign will release any specific numbers.
• Schmidt doesn’t want to give anything away and says to just wait for the speech itself.

John Hawkins of Right Wing News has the next one:

• He asks about Heath Schuler’s comments that McCain blocked a House border fence bill.
• Schmidt unequivocally denies that McCain did anything of the sort and wondered whether Schuler suffered one “too many hits” when he played college football to make him dream that up.

Ed Morrisey from HotAir has another:

• Continuing along the same vain, Morrisey asks about the Senator’s immigration position and the presence of Juan Hernandez in the campaign.
• Schmidt reiterates John McCain’s immigration position. The border will be secured before anything else, but McCain continues to believe in the need for some kind of guest worker program. Notes that whatever personal positions one may hold, if you work for Senator McCain you will only advocate positions that he believes in. Not your own.
• Morrisey follows up with another question but unfortunately I missed it. I’m sure the Captain will fill in the blanks.

Next up was Jennifer Rubin of Commentary and occasionally here at Race42008:

• She wanted to know the campaign’s thoughts on Obama’s statements that he would be open to raising taxes on individuals who make more than $75,000 a year and an increase in the captial gains tax.
• Schmidt takes Obama to task for his conception of what it means to be “rich.” Says that people who make $75,000 a year aren’t rich and that they are hard working Americans. If Obama’s tax plans are enacted, it will severely cripple the economy.

Doug Lambert of GraniteGrok had the last question:

• He wanted to know what McCain thought of Newt Gingrich’s idea to have McCain and Obama (or Clinton) do a series of Lincoln-Douglas style debates around the country.
• Schmidt says that McCain wants the general election with whichever Democrat prevails to be about the issues. Too often candidates have fought at the margins and thus have scored only marginal victories. He says that there are huge issues separating the candidates and the country as a whole and that this election will be one in which the country will decide which path to go down. Schmidt also says that Obama is misrepresenting his campaign. He bases it in this New Politics framework, but has been engaged in negative attacks almost everyday against Hillary Clinton. He also talks about being this unifying figure, but in reality, he’s a down the line liberal. At the same time, it’s John McCain who is rising about the fray and has the experience that shows that he is the one that can unify the country. John McCain is the real change agent.

I had to miss the conference call this afternoon, but Jim Geraghty over at NRO has a great wrap-up:

The McCain camp held a conference call with Communications Director Jill Hazelbaker, Campaign Manager Rick Davis, and Trevor Potter, former FEC Chairman and John McCain 2008 General Counsel.

[By the way, how solid is the ground McCain is on when the guy making sure his FEC filings are on the up-and-up used to run the FEC?]

I joined in progress, and am fairly certain these comments were from Potter: “The bank was very clear on that yesterday, saying that they never recieved any collateral from us in the form of certificates from the matching funds program. It was clear that if any loan occurred, that no collateral in that form.”

“The law does not establish any requirement that the FEC vote to allow someone out… We don’t object to the commission voting, and they’re welcome to do that. But we don’t believe that it is required as a matter of law.”

Q: Would have McCain have been able to get the loan without the possibility of matching funds?

Potter: “It’s a hypothetical. We won’t know. It’s a question for what’s inside the banker’s brain, rather than inside our brain. We said, ‘we are likely to withdraw from the system… if we can financially withdraw from that system, we will. The bank knew that was a possibility.”

Rick Davis: “The way we read that wasn’t a commitment for collateral. They’re a bank, they’re not in the business of running campaigns. They wanted to know ‘what happens if.’”

Potter: “They had loaned us the money based on our projections of income and expenses. If we had put up the matching funds as collateral, we could have gotten a larger loan, probably twice the size.”

Rick Davis: “We’re not dealing with a vulnerability of law or ethics, we’re dealing with a political issue. That’s why I’m on this call – if was an issue of law, I would defer to Trevor. Obama started this attack, saying we were run by lobbyists. I would dare say that they have as many lobbyists on their campaign as we do. Then we had this hypocritical comment by Dean. We’re happy to debate ethical standards and commitment to reform all day long.”

Davis points out that McCain pushed for CFR after it had failed nine times. Once he was chair of the Indian Affairs Committee, he held hearings on Jack Abramoff. He went after Boeing on a procurement scandal in the defense budget.

“We hear a lot about change, but we see few people willing to spend their own political capital on actually changing things.”

Update: Matt Lewis also recaps the call-

McCain’s team made the point that McCain is essentially doing the same thing Howard Dean did in 2003, when he withdrew from the matching funds system. As you may recall, Dean decided to forgo the matching funds based on an online vote of his supporters. Davis scolded the media for buying the Democrat’s argument:

“I think you guys totally took the debate from Howard Dean and totally got sucked into a debate that he’d know something about …”

Potter argued the Supreme Court has concluded that public financing is voluntary, and as such, candidates have a constitutional right to withdraw from the program. Refuting Dean’s argument (that it was okay for him to opt out of the system because the FEC voted to allow him out of the system), Potter pointed out that the FEC could not possibly vote to allow McCain out of the financing — even if they wanted to — because there are four vacancies, thus denying them a quorum. (Guess who is blocking confirmation of one of the FEC appointees?)

Potter says that simply by sending the FEC Chairman a letter on February 6, saying that he wants out of the system, McCain was released.

Putting aside the legal argument that both McCain and Obama are making, I think it’s obvious to anyone paying attention that Howard Dean is attempting to pull off a dirty trick that would result in McCain not having a fair chance to compete.

The fact that Dean, himself, did the same thing makes it all the more hypocritical. And the fact that Dean argues that it was okay for him — because the FEC voted to allow him to opt out — while knowing the FEC cannot meet to vote to allow McCain out, should they want to — makes this look politically expedient, and too cute by half.

I was able to sit in on Sen. McCain’s blogger conference call this morning. Here are the highlights:

• The Senator was pleased by last night’s results, having won VA by 9 points despite severe weather in the portions of the state where his base support lies, and carrying Maryland by over 20%. Happy that he won the majority of “conservative” voters.

• He had a nice conversation with Gov. Huckabee last night who congratulated him on his victories. There is obviously no acrimony between the two men. McCain went out of his way to never say that he has “won” the nomination in deference to Huck for the entire course of the call.

• He had a meeting with the House GOP conference earlier today and received their endorsement. He assured them that he will contest all 50 states and will work hard to take back Congress.

• The Senator understands that he has a lot of work to do to unify the party and stated that it is his duty should he win the nomination.

• He believes that over the course of the campaign, Americans will realize that there are stark differences in the visions for the future between both parties nominees. One party envisions higher taxes, more government regulation, socialized medicine, more power for government, and less control over their own destiny for American families.

• Taking note of the progress made by the Iraqi Government on the political front yesterday, McCain noted that the same people that said The Surge would never work are the same people who now state that the prospects of political gains in Iraq are hopeless.

• The Senator will be campaigning in Rhode Island and Vermont tomorrow, and Wisconsin on Friday.

• Jennifer Rubin then asked if in light of Sen. Obama’s votes on FISA, does Sen. McCain believe that Obama possesses the right judgement to be Commander-in-Chief. Sen. McCain would not comment on Obama’s judgement, but said that each candidate will held accountable for their record.

• Sen. McCain was then asked to comment on the rumors swirling on Arizona blogs that he will soon resign from the Senate and be replaced by Rep. John Shadegg. McCain stated that he has no plans to resign from the Senate until he has won the nomination and will make the decision then.-(FYI-Arizona law requires the governor of the state to appoint a replacement of the same party as the resigning Senator.-KWN)

• Matt Lewis asked if it would be fair at this point to ask Gov. Huckabee to leave the race. Sen. McCain replied that he “will not in any way try to dissuade Gov. Huckabee from staying in the campaign.” Lewis then followed up with a question regarding potential Vice Presidential candidates, specifically Sen. Tom Coburn and Gov. Mark Sanford. McCain responded that they have not even began to think about the Veep process since the campaign is still underway (insinuating that he did not want to do so and show any disrespect for Gov. Huckabee who is still in the race). McCain said there is plenty of time to begin that process. He did state that he has great respect for Sanford and Coburn and that they are both “great conservatives”.

• In response to another question on the Veep slot from Jim Geraghty, Senator McCain said that they will look back on the Veep selections that they feel were good choices and emulate the process in which those selections were made.

• Regarding the six terrorists who are facing the death penalty, McCain stated that they are “some of the most evil people on Earth” and has no problem with them receiving the death penalty should they be found guilty.

• Responding to a question by Captain Ed, McCain stated that his staff and the staff of Gov. Romney are in discussions to set up a good time for them to meet and discuss Gov. Romney’s future role in the 2008 campaign.

Senator McCain told us that he intends to keep on doing these blogger conference calls, which is really amazing considering the increasing demands on his time as the campaign progresses.

I was unable to participate in the McCain blogger conference call this morning. So here are some recaps from around the blogosphere-

Jennifer Rubin for AmSpec Blog:

McCain just completed his blogger conference call. He described himself as “very pleased to basically be in a tie for third” and joked he had called Fred Thompson to demand a recount. He touted his town hall with Joe Lieberman, remarking it was perhaps the first time an Independent/Democrat had appeared with a Republican. In answer to the first question he said that one of the first lessons of Iowa is that negative advertising doesn’t work. He said that he has and will continue to respond to Romney’s barrage by quoting local media including Romney’s “hometown” newspapers, the Boston Herald and Boston Globe. As for Independents, he acknowledged that Obama would draw on them heavily but that it was noteworthy and important for the general election that he was the only candidate who was discussed as a draw on the GOP side for Independent voters. Throughout the call he talked about his credentials as an “agent of change” –changing the Iraq war strategy and attacking earmarks. Perhaps most interesting he placed great emphasis on his conservative credentials, twice referring to himself as a foot soldier in the Reagan Revolution and reminding those on the call that he had voted for the Reagan tax cuts which also included spending cuts. He talked about his position on immigration –sounding not too different frankly from other GOP contenders — which recognizes that the borders must first be closed and then remaining firm that those here “can’t be rewarded and move ahead of other who are here or who have been waiting.” ( He also spoke in favor of a Rudy sounding biometric card and employer identification system.) On the money front, he contends that money is coming in as he rises in the polls and that he has funds to go up on the air in SC and Michigan and is working to get funds to pay for expensive Florida media.

Brainster:

What a difference a month makes! Senator McCain (or Senator Lazarus as I referred to him) was upbeat and confident, and the callers were much more positive in their questions. One caller even asked him about potential running mates!

I told him he was the “eat your peas” candidate for the “eat your peas” party. My question was whether the money spigot had opened. He expressed satisfaction with his money situation, saying he has enough to compete in New Hampshire , South Carolina and Michigan , and that if he continues to do well, the money will follow.

He did show a little of his fighting side when the questions turned to whether he could sell himself as the agent of change that Iowa voters said they want, pointing out that he was a lonely voice for change in Iraq, supporting the surge and saying that the Rumsfeld plan wasn’t working.

Matt Lewis:

Regarding the Surge, McCain argued he was a reformer:

Ask the other candidates, what did they say when the Rumsfeld strategy was failing. I’ll tell you what they said: Nothing. … Edwards used to call it the “McCain Strategy” or the “McCain Surge.” … I was the agent of change.

When asked about the Bush tax cuts vote, he also stated he was a reformer on that issue, as well:

I was a foot-soldier in the Reagan Revolution. … Ronald Reagan wouldn’t have just proposed tax cuts, in fact, Ronald Reagan demanded we have spending cuts … and I’m the one who fought against this spending … and led the fight against pork-barrel spending, with guys like … Tom Coburn.” … I cant tell you how many times I called over to the White House and said, ‘Veto these bills,’ ‘Veto these bills.’ I tell you, it ain’t going to happen when I’m in the White House.

When asked about Joe Lieberman (who has endorsed McCain), he responded:

“I would definitely want Joe Lieberman to play a part — particularly in national security issues — in my administration.”

I’ve probably been on a dozen, or so, calls with McCain, and I’ve never heard him this fired up, and this passionate about defending his positions.

Erick Erickson:

McCain says that, like in Iowa, negative ads by Mitt Romney will not work. He thinks that Romney is going to go more negative. McCain’s response will be to go back on Romney with what both Boston newspaper and both major New Hampshire newspapers have said about Romney.

Then I had to jump off for another call. All in all though, McCain sounds charged and ready to win.

The Los Angeles Times:

The Arizona senator, in comments to bloggers during a conference call, said he was ‘very proud’ that he had pushed and pushed and pushed President Bush’s administration to adopt what became known as the ‘surge’ strategy. He returned to that theme frequently during the conversation, at one point saying the changed policy had ‘saved America ‘s most precious resource’ — the lives of soldiers.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Photo courtesy of McCainBloggette.

I was unable to attend this morning’s conference call with Sen. McCain. However, here are recaps that you should definitely peruse:

• Soren Dayton
• Jennifer Rubin
• Phillip Klein
• Captain Ed
• Jim Geraghty
• Bulldog Pundit
• Patrick Bell

Read them all.

Unfortunately, I had to miss Sen. McCain’s blogger conference call this morning. However, there are several good recaps that are definitely worth your time:

• Soren Dayton:
  

  “John McCain has made clear repeatedly that he would do more than the Bush administration to communicate. He would talk more about Iraq. About the deficit. About immigration. About global warming. About judges. He believes that he would be able to get through to people if he just explained. In that sense, he seems much more like Reagan or (Bill, but not Hillary) Clinton. (Hillary seems to prefer the Bush model)”

• Powerline:
  

  “[Sen. John McCain] began by discussing the two major votes in the Senate yesterday — the confirmation of Judge Southwick and the failure of the Democrats to force a vote on the Dream Act. McCain returned to Washington to help get Southwick confirmed, but left for Iowa before the Dream Act vote, in order to attend an event at which he gave what he described as a major speech about what’s next in the entire Middle East region now that “we’re succeeding in Iraq.”

• Jim Geraghty:
  

  “(McCain on Southwick) …If the standard becomes, this individual “appears to have the intention of intolerance” – what’s that all about? I voted for Ruth Bader Ginsberg, not because I agreed with her philosophy, for God’s sake, but because I believed elections have consequences… The Gang of 14 worked because Republicans were in the majority, and we could find seven reasonable Democrats who would agree to only filibuster in extraordinary consequences. I’m proud that we were able to get Roberts, Alito and many judges at appellate and circuit court through under that agreement.

• Philip Klein:
  

  “Those with military experience understand that torture is a “notoriously unreliable” way obtain information, McCain said, because if you inflict enough pain on somebody, that person will tell you what you want to hear.”

• Captain Ed:
  

  “The decline of casualties in Iraq — “I hope Harry Reid pays attention to it, who declared the war lost.”

• Robert Bluey:
  

  “McCain would oppose Law of the Sea Treaty”

• James Joyner:
  

  “McCain Calls for ‘League of Democracies’”

Be sure to read them all.

This morning, I participated in a live blogger conference call with Fred Thompson’s campaign manager, Bill Lacy. There were quite a few people participating, including David Brody, Jim Geraghty, Erick Erickson, and even a representative from IMAO. Here is a recap of the conversation:

Online campaign manager, John Henke, will be live blogging the debate at the Fredfile. In opening, Lacy said that the reason the debate was being held at 4 pm is because it is when the markets close, which ties it in to it being broadcast on CNBC. Lacy said that the campaign feels that they are in a strong position, and the challenge is to translate that into the early states. One point he made is that Thompson polls best in states that Bush carried in 2004, which are awarded over 300 bonus delegates for the convention. He repeatedly brought up the fact that although the MSM has been critical, Thompson has seen an upswing in Iowa, according to the last few polls. He noted that it doesn’t matter if Thompson walked on water at the debate, the MSM would still be critical of him. He needs a strong showing in the debate, but doesn’t need to showboat. He will emphasize on his small town roots and his record on financial and management abuse/waste while in the senate.

Points made during the questions:

Lacy, speaking for himself, believes that the Republican Party is at a crossroads, and Thompson believes in taking in a “Goldwater direction,” with emphasis on government reform. He has done a number of mock debates and a lot of prep. He said that he learned in 1994 that one good thing about Thompson is that he was a very successful trial lawyer and knows how to prepare himself for debates.

Lacy doesn’t see him directly going after Giuliani or Romney tonight. It’s going to be focused on defining him, and may not be a time to throw darts.

On Chris Matthews: Lacy said that everyone is entitled to their own opinions, including Matthews, but there isn’t a need for the candidates to attack the moderator.

They were extremely pleased with the fundraising for the third quarter. Lacy pointed out that the campaign raised over 5 million dollars in the three weeks after he announced, and more importantly, signed up over 80,000 new donors. He reiterated that the campaign was focused on financial responsibility in getting Thompson’s message out.

On Dr. Dobson’s comments, he said that they have been very encouraged by the support they have gotten. He said that “Thompson has a set of principles, and that he doesn’t compromise on those ideals.”

The organization is very focused on the South Carolina primary. The challenge is going to be having momentum going into it. They plan to “build a strategic bridge” to South Carolina by being competitive enough to still be considered a viable candidate. He stated that he doesn’t have to win the earlier primary states, but that they need to do well enough to still be considered a factor in the race going into the south, where Thompson is his strongest. Note: Their internal polling must be producing some very solid results in the region.

There are no dates set to unveil specific plans, but they are coming. He said Thompson will eventually begin taking part in the Sunday morning talk shows, but that Thompson is at his best when he is among voters.

They are happy Darrell Hammond is playing Fred on SNL.

Overall, it seemed to go well. After the conference was over, David Brody told me that it was “very genuine and real” and he enjoyed it.

I was able to sit in on a bloggers conference call with Ann Romney to announce the launch of her new website, AnnRomney.com.

Here are the highlights:

Be sure to head on over to AnnRomney.com today and check out the new site.

I sat in on Sen. McCain’s blogger conference call this afternoon. Here are the highlights:

That’s it for this week. Sen. McCain stated he will try to do another blogger call next Friday.

I sat in on Team Romney’s blogger’s conference call yesterday with Policy Director Sally Canfield. The topic was the unveiling of Gov. Romney’s, “Strategy for a Stronger America.”

Due to reception problems, my cellphone disconnected me three times during the call, so I was forced to miss large chunks of the proceedings. Here are the highlights I was able to catch:

That’s all I was personally able to catch of this call. However, please head over to Jim Geraghty’s blog for a complete recap.

Also, be sure to check out Mitt’s “Strategy for a Stronger America” 70 page policy statement. You can download it in its entirety here.

I sat in on Sen. McCain’s blogger conference call this afternoon hosted by Ankle Bitings Pundit’s Patrick Hynes.

Sen. McCain was in Iowa this afternoon on his multi-stop “No Surrender” tour. He will head out to New Hampshire later this evening.

Here are the highlights:

Clear in this call is that fact Sen. McCain intends to make the case that he is the most qualified Republican in the field to be Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Military during this time of global conflict. He does have quite a stake to that claim in his past repudiation of Rumsfeld Doctrine, as well calling for the what has come to be called “The Surge” as early as 2003.

Rep. Hunter was kind enough to take a short break from his duties tonight in order to field some questions. He was working late to fight for his amendment to the transportation bill under debate which block the implementation of the NAFTA Superhighway. The proposed highway would form a corridor which would unite Mexico, the U.S. and Canada.

Here are some highlights:

Many thanks to Rep. Hunter and John Hawkins of Right Wing News for making this conference call happen tonight.

The Rudy Giuliani team held a conference call Thursday to tout their fundraising numbers which by now are familiar to political junkies — $33M total funds raised, over $17M for Second Quarter, zero debt, cash on hand of $18M, and doubling the number of donors. It is not unusual for a campaign to extend a story line by holding a press conference to repeat good news. However, aside from a few tidbits — they have yet to galvanize their small donor outreach program which they expect will significantly boost their number of donors — the call was more significant for what else they focused on.

Both in remarks and responses to questions Campaign Manager Mike DuHaime spent quite a bit of time talking about another set of numbers — electoral votes. DuHaime hammered home the list of Blue States he contends Giuliani could win in November — Connecticut, New Jersey, Michigan, Oregon and Washington — and offered up New York, Illinois and California as states where he believed Giuliani could be competitive. By forcing the Democrats to spend time and money defending their own turf in expensive media markets he argued that Giuliani, and only Giuliani, offered Republicans the chance to hold states narrowly won in the past (e.g. Ohio and Florida) and expand their geographic base.

On a slow news day the Giuliani camp clearly wanted to use the opportunity to drive home what they consider a major selling point for their candidate — electability. As a new GOP candidate enters the race, one arguably a more traditional Republican both in geographic base and political appeal, Giuliani?s team did not want Republican voters and future financial supporters to forget one of their key messages. They want to reiterate that while Giuliani?s politics may be less conventional, he carries the promise of victory in a year in which traditional Republicans may find it tough sledding.

In this messaging he may be aided by the fortunes of Hillary Clinton. As she pulls away in the polls and the specter of a Hillary nomination grows clearer, the Giuliani team hopes that Republican primary voters do not search for the most conservative candidate, but rather for the most conservative, electable candidate. If so, the man who would arguably be the most unconventional Republican in a generation may be the ?safest? choice for Republicans. That, as much as the fundraising figures, is what the Giuliani team would like voters to remember this week.

I was able to sit in on a conference call with Rudy Giuliani Campaign Director Michael DuHaime and Deputy Campaign Manager for Finance Anne Dunsmore. Here are the highlights:

For other roundups of the conference call see:

Eye on ’08
Captains’ Quarters
Ian Schwartz
Jim Geraghty
Michael Goldfarb

I was fortunate to be able to sit in on Gov. Huckabee’s bloggers conference call today, which featured Dr. James Robison of LIFE Outreach International and Michael Farris who is Chancellor of Patrick Henry College (Christian) and the Home School Legal Defense Fund.

Dr. Robison began by discussing his impression of Ronald Reagan describing him as, “a communicator that could move the American people and help them understand the importance of right choices, resolve, character, and principles.” Dr. Robison stressed that Gov. Huckabee is the candidate in this race who is best able to communicate with voters in that manner.

Michael Farris believes that Gov. Huckabee is the most able political communicator he has ever met in his life, which includes over twenty-years in Washington D.C. Farris stressed his opinion that every Republican who has ran as a conservative (Reagan in ’80 and ’84, Bush I in 1988, and Bush II in ’00 & ’04) they have won; while those who have ran as a moderate (Ford in ’76, Bush I in ’92, and Dole in ’96) have lost, stating, “When the American people want to elect a Democrat, they will elect the real thing. When they want to elect a fake one…they never elect a fake version of it.”

I have to agree with Farris’s assessment of Huckabee’s communications skills. The Governor is eloquent, thoughtful, and downright funny no matter what the setting. And may I mention how much I love his support of the Fair Tax?

Team Huckabee has promised that this is the first of many conference calls to come-and I sure hope that it’s true. These calls are a wonderful opportunity to spotlight a remarkably talented candidate.

I had the privilege of sitting in on my first blogger conference call this afternoon with the Romney campaign. Former Senator Jim Talent (R-MO) and former New Hampshire Attorney General and RNC Committeeman Tom Rath were hosting the call along with Stephen Smith, Romney’s online communications director. Rath was described as their go-to guy for all things New Hampshire, and Talent is serving as Romney’s domestic policy taskforce chairman.

The purpose of the call was to specifically discuss tonight’s debate, so it was pretty short. Here’s some highlights:

• Romney will hit on a couple themes tonight during the debate. Tom Rath pointed out that two nights ago on the same stage, 8 people with completely different views of the world debated; Romney will be making a contrast “in sharp relief” of the choice American voters will have come next November. Also, Romney will be hitting his major campaign theme of American strength – strong economy, strong military, and strong families – again tonight.

• Jim Talent spoke of Romney’s ability to unite the GOP coalition (presumably with strength in those three areas) and his ability to persuade other people to his ideas as strong points heading into tonight’s debate.

• One of the questions brought up the fact that McCain has challenged his opponents to come up with something better if they don’t like his immigration plan, and whether or not we can expect to hear Romney’s immigration plan tonight. Talent and Rath said that Romney’s been clear on his immigration plan in the past: first, secure the border; second, put in place an employer verification system; third, do not give amnesty to illegal immigrants currently here; and fourth, strengthen the legal immigration system so we have more legal immigrants coming in that have the skills we need.

  They decried some of the supporters of the bill for saying the current Senate immigration plan was a “common sense conservative solution that was the best we could do,” saying it is not common sense, it’s not conservative, it’s not a solution, and it’s not the best we can do. Don’t be surprised to hear that line from Romney tonight.

• Someone asked if Romney’s rise in poll numbers and McCain’s fall in poll numbers was primarily based on the immigration flap. Talent and Rath pointed out that Romney’s numbers have been on the rise long before this immigration bill came into play, and the main reason for his rise in the polls is that people are getting to know Romney and getting comfortable with him.

• In response to a question about whether immigration will be a big issue during the debate tonight, both Talent and Rath took the opportunity to criticize the format of these debates. They pointed out that having one or two issues dominate a two-hour debate doesn’t allow any of the candidates to talk about their overall philosophy, and also pointed out that despite being at the top of American’s concerns, health care hasn’t been discussed at any of the debates thus far.

• A question was asked about what, if any, milestones does New Hampshire have leading up to the primaries there that would be comparable to the Ames Straw Poll in Iowa. There isn’t anything specific to New Hampshrie, but the Romney campaign will continue to track fundraising numbers as an important indicator as to how the campaign is going, as well as public polls. They both pointed out that they will not be taking the polls really seriously until September, however, and pointed out that Ames will cause at least a couple candidates to drop out. They said how a race looks in June is very different than how it will look in September and then at the primary itself.

• The last question asked whether or not Mitt was frustrated with the fact that Fred Thompson was getting a ton of free press and had high poll numbers despite not even entering the race yet. Their response was the Romney campaign is very realistic about this entire process, and the fact of the matter is poll numbers will go up and down a lot over time. They pointed out Thompson is subject to scrutiny just like the rest of the candidates now, and ended by saying that you can’t get frustrated in this business and succeed.

Yours truly did not ask any questions; this being my first blogger conference call, I just hung around in the background taking it all in. As the Romney campaign does more of these, I will certainly get more involved – and perhaps ask you for help choosing what questions I ask.

I was able to sit in on this afternoon’s bloggers conference call with Mayor Giuliani. Here are the highlights:

As evidenced in last night’s debate and this afternoon’s conference call, Mayor Giuliani transcends the rest of the candidates in the GOP field when discussing the GWOT. The passion, thoughtfulness, and determination that is evidenced in his voice when he discusses how we in the modern world need to come to grips with the threat that Radical Islam presents to our way of life and the future of our civilization is truly inspirational.

I sat in on this afternoon’s blogger’s conference call which was hosted by Patrick Ruffini and featured Giuliani Campaign Manager Michael DuHaime and Communications Director Katie Levinson.

Here are the highlights:

All in all, it was a fairly informative call. Team Giuliani has stated that this is just one of many blogger conference calls to come. I will continue to provide the recaps as they happen.

I sat in on Sen. McCain’s blogger conference call this afternoon hosted by Ankle Bitings Pundit’s Patrick Hynes.

Sen. McCain was in Iowa this afternoon on a multi-stop announcement tour that has traversed South Carolina & Iowa, and will conclude with a visit to Nevada before he finally ventures home to Arizona tomorrow.

Here are the highlights:

It’s really remarkable how open and accessible Sen. McCain is with the new media. He spent nearly an hour with us bloggers today (staying long after the call was suppose to end) and answered every question candidly and in his usual affable manner.

The next conference call is scheduled in two-weeks. I will be posting a recap of the call as soon as it concludes.

I sat in on Rep. Hunter’s bloggers conference call today which was hosted by Right Wing News John Hawkins. Rep. Hunter was in Iowa today touring a Rockwell-Collins defense plant.

My impression of Rep. Hunter has always been as one of the few honest and yes “real” politicians. This conference call only served to reinforce that impression. Rep. Hunter was quite and friendly and open with all of us, and he stayed until every question was answered.

Here are the highlights:

-Rep. Hunter plans to run on a platform of strong national defense, enforcing our borders, and making trade a “two-way” street between the United States and our trading partners.

-Rep. Hunter’s trade plan would serve to “level the playing field” in international trade by renegotiating or withdrawing the United States from GATT which prevents the US from refunding the taxes that manufacturing firms pay as other countries do for their own domestic manufacturer’s.

Currently, nations such as China refund the 17% domestic manufacturing firms pay in taxes (VAT’s), while assessing a 17% penalty on goods imported from the United States (the rate is 15% for Mexico and 18% for England). This disparity has led countries with even higher labor costs to enjoy a trade surplus with the United States. Rep. Hunter proposes leveling the same kind of protective tariffs on goods imported into the US which he believes would lead to the return of higher paying manufacturing jobs and stop the outsourcing of R&D which follows firms overseas.

-Hunter condemned the Pelosi “shadow presidency” and stated that he concurs with former Democratic Senate legend Scoop Jackson that foreign policy should leave US shores with “one voice”.

Hunter’s staff indicated that this would be the first of many blogger conference calls. As someone who deeply respects Rep. Hunter, I look forward to future opportunities to present his views to my fellow GOP’ers who may not have had a chance to get to know him.