“You wouldn't know it from reading the papers, but the favorite to win the Republican presidential nomination is a confirmed right-winger.” So says David Greenberg in his Washington Post article Rudy a Lefty? Yeah, Right. last Sunday. Yes, that David Greenberg, the ultra-liberal Assistant Professor of Journalism & Media Studies and History at Rutgers University. And he has mapped the strategy for the democrats in next year’s presidential election: if not Hillary, then Rudy, which means Hillary. But first, they have to get Rudy nominated. Hence, Rudy must be just to the right of Attila the Hun.

In his article Greenberg qualifies as a contortionist in trying to have us believe that Giuliani is tied to Bush-era conservatism on everything from free speech and religion to civil liberties and pornography. By doing so, he hopes to sway moderates to the new and improved centrist, Hillary Clinton.

Never mind Rudy's liberalism on guns, gay rights and abortion. Those positions, Greenberg claims, “don't render Giuliani a liberal or a moderate so much as an occasional and tepid dissenter from the Republican Party Line.” You see, Rudy had staunch support as mayor for “trigger-happy cops.“ Though Rudy lived with a gay couple after splitting with his second wife, it’s his “policy stands, not private behavior“ that define his ideology. And, of course on abortion, Giuliani is just “technically pro-choice“ but far from liberal.

Greenberg and his ilk believe labels like "liberal" and "moderate" when applied to Giuliani matter less to Republican voters than his stand on crime and his holy grail, 9-11. And they call in the reinforcements. First, George Stephanopoulos, on his ABC News show, brought up a Washington Post/Gallup poll showed that 69 percent of "religious Republican evangelicals" considered the mayor an "acceptable nominee." And Greenberg pulled out the Pew Poll that found that only 7 percent of Republican voters thought abortion important, compared to 31 percent who mentioned Iraq.

The Clinton spin machine, ala David Greenberg, is already distorting political reality. Well, I’m not buying it. Either you are for the second amendment or not. Private behavior has always been the test of a person’s ideology. And there is no such thing as being “technically pro-choice“.

Note to Hillary and Rudy: Edward R. Lyman once said, “Principle - particularly moral principle - can never be a weathervane, spinning around this way and that with the shifting winds of expediency. Moral principle is a compass forever fixed and forever true."

Rudy Giuliani’s support has dropped sharply in the California Field Poll released Thursday. The former New York City mayor claimed 25 percent of the GOP voters, a whopping 10 percent drop from the same poll in August. In a virtual tie for second, Mitt Romney got 13 percent while Fred Thompson and John McCain both got 12 percent. Fourteen percent of the vote was spread among Mike Huckabee, Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter.

We have seen it in Michigan, South Carolina and Florida, and now in California. As more voters compare the Republican field, at first there is an increase in those undecided. Then we see a slow and steady increase in support for Mitt Romney. Since August the percentage of California’s undecided Republican voters has risen from 15 percent to 22 percent.

It seems that the more conservative arm of the GOP is the engine behind this trend.

Among California’s moderate conservatives, Giuliani holds a 16-percentage point lead over Thompson. But among staunch conservatives, Giuliani’s lead over Romney is only 4 percentage points! Yes, things are getting hot in California, and not just from the wild fires.

It started on Tuesday, January 09, 2007. Mark Joseph of Fox news told us that Mitt Romney would likely not win the Republican nomination for President because Evangelicals in states like New Hampshire (20% of voters), South Carolina (34% of voters), and Iowa (37% of voters) would not support a Mormon candidate. Then, Steve McMahon (Dem Strategist), speaking with Chris Matthews, claimed the same thing. Not only was Romney a Mormon, he was really a “Massachusetts Liberal”. Few if any in the MSM and on the professional pundit shows gave Mitt Romney a chance. John King of CNN summed it up for us, “A successful Olympics, one term as governor and 3 percent in the national polls does not give you the nomination.”

My, my . . . things have certainly changed in the past nine months. According to USAElectionPolls.com, Romney’s rise in the national polls has been just short of astounding. Consider these key states:

Arizona 10% in January to 18% in October

California 3% in January to 11% in October

Florida 2% in January to 16.5% in October (wow!)

Iowa 8% in January to 24.3% in October

Michigan 9% in January to 39% in September*

Nevada 11.5% in March* to 23.5% in October

New Hampshire 13% in January to 24% in October

Ohio 4% in January to 8% in October

Pennsylvania 1% in January to 8% in October (wow!)

South Carolina 6% in January to 16% in October

And here are some interesting averages:

Southern States from 4% in January to 16.3% in October

Western States from 7.5% in January to 28.2% in October

Red States from 7% in January to 17.8% in October

Blue States from 6.6% in January to 16% in October (wow!)

Consider that Romney is splitting the polls with up to eight other candidates, and he is leading or a close second in those states that the pundits said he had little chance of winning. For Romney, if the next twelve months is anything like the last nine, they will not call him “Mitt the Mormon” anymore. They’ll be calling him Mr. President.

*polls were not available in for January/October

Every time I believe that the New York Times cannot get more biased, they out do themselves. Michael Luo in today’s edition still claims that Mitt Romney is having problems with conservative Christians. Gee, Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention, Robert R. Taylor (a top official at Bob Jones University, the Evangelical Christian school with a history of anti-Mormon rhetoric), Rev. Rick Warren, Rev. Jerry Falwell, Mark DeMoss, Jay Sekulow, and yes, even Pastor John Hagee do not think so.

Yet, Luo does not claim to have spoken with any of these Evangelical leaders. His only source seems to be Oran P. Smith, president of the Palmetto Family Council, a conservative Christian group in South Carolina.

The over-analyzed Mormon issue and “complaints” against Romney’s sparkling resume’ and family life are getting tedious. Indeed, there is quit a bit of weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth. The idea of a presidential candidate who believes in “being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men” is implausible to liberals and the MSM.

The man does not curse, not even a damn or a hell. His family life has been impeccable. He has (quietly) given much of his time to service in his church and community. His business acumen is incomparable, there never being a report of corporate misdeeds, an unseemly tryst, or misconduct in hiring or HR concerns.

And it’s driving the liberal press crazy! Hordes of “investigative” reporters have been digging, literally, through the Romney family’s trash, past school records, business records, family utility records, even who the sons have dated.

John McCain, meanwhile, has suddenly become a Baptist, leaving the Episcopal faith behind. Rudy Giuliani claims to be a Catholic and Fred Thompson says he goes to church, sometimes, maybe, but neither shows a single sign of their professed dogma.

Now, Michael Luo of the New York Times claims Mitt Romney has the problem with Evangelical Christians. What?

The Republicans Debate in Michigan

Thompson spoke in generic terms and played it safe. Romney and Giuliani clearly outshone the rest of the field while sparring over the economy and their conservative roots. The other candidates were just plain dull, though Huckabee and Hunter made good points. Once again, Ron Paul must have forgot to take his medication. That being said, the best one-liner was the Thompson smack down of Chris Matthews, “That’s your opinion, Christopher”

Now, Romney and Giuliani were the best-prepared Giuliani plied his New York tough guy shtick to no avail when called on the facts by Romney, “Baloney! Get your facts straight Governor.” Of course, Giuliani will never win on the line-item-veto issue; he got hammered.

Romney, well versed on the Michigan economy, was much clearer and spoke with confidence and optimism. His line about Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm. (“I figured she was going to put a tax on the debate before it was finished.”) was classic and got good response from the crowd

Somewhat disappointing was the lack of reference to the greatest danger to our economy;

the democrats and Hillary Clinton. Romney and Giuliani did their part, but the rest of the field seemed to have forgotten the bigger picture. We must keep taxes low, we must bring spending under control for the survival of the economy. Kudos to Romney and Giuliani for attacking Hillary on these issues. That is why they are the front-runners.

The after debate polls mean nothing really. The Ron Paul supporters spammed up the works again, and CNBC and CBN closed their polls down. No one really believes 72 percent of viewers think Ron Paul won anything. The MSNBC poll is so skewed due to the Ron Paul spammers that it’s irrelevant; though, if you throw out the Ron Paul numbers, Romney wins hands down.

CNN believes “The main event during Tuesday night's Republican presidential debate in Michigan is Fred Thompson's debate debut.”

John Gibson on the Fox News Channel believes the anti-Republican bias of debate co-moderator Chris Matthew is the story, “How in the world can NBC put on a fair debate with a moderator like Matthews?”

When the debate starts, smart Republican voters will not care about the endless candidate trivia, or campaign stump theatrics. In order to make a realistic assessment of candidate’s beliefs and values, Republican voters will look for factual information. The sideshows of Thompson’s first debate and Matthew’s bias are inconsequential. The often snide and elitist Chris Matthews will be taken for what he is. Thankfully, we won’t see Wolf Blitzer asking candidates ludicrous questions to be answered a show of hands.

The pertinent subjects for the debate are 1. the war on terror, 2. the economy and how we compete with Asian and European nations, 3. preserving our culture and values, 4. excessive taxes and spending in Washington. The voters will look for the candidate with the experience and ethics covering each of these subjects.

Who will win this and future Republican debates? A forward looking, positive candidate who speaks clearly, in complete sentences, and who is impressive in explaining how he will approach these problems will carry the field. After all, the Republicans are really selecting a candidate that presents a clear choice and credibly to oppose Hillary Clinton on these key issues next year.

As a Sunday morning talk show junkie, I shouldn’t be surprised. I thought the 2008 presidential election was more than a year away. But when I tuned in, believing that the shows would give the usual updates and opinions, I learned that the pundits have already called the race.

On Meet the Press, while feigning tough questions, Tim Russert actually set the stage with lead ins for John Edwards. It was just more of JE’s “Chicken Little” repartee, “The war in Iraq is much worse than it was in 2003 and 2004, and it’s continued. Our healthcare situation is dysfunctional. It does not work . . . Global warming is now, by anybody’s measure, a crisis . . . And we’re becoming a country made up of just a few rich people and everybody else. “ On what planet has this man been living? Exit Edwards.

Next, Tim invited David Broder, David Brody, Margaret Carlson, and Ted Koppel to a Hillary Giuliani lovefest:

MR. BRODER: “Well, she’s in an interesting position, because if you believe the national polls, this election’s over.”

MR. DAVID BRODY: “That’s right. And I was in California with Giuliani about a week, week and a half ago, and this is pretty much what he said to fundraisers, on the trail. I mean, he is talking about Hillary Clinton and nobody else.”

MS. MARGARET CARLSON: “Well, she’s going right at the heart of what looks like her opponent at the moment, Rudy Giuliani. And Rudy and Senator Clinton are in a dance right now, because the stronger she gets, the stronger he gets. Because Republicans want to unite behind a tough person.”

MR. TED KOPPEL: “She’s playing it safe, and, you know, so far ahead right now, . . . We’re—it’s much too early, but she, she is clearly the one to beat.”

Yeah, there was a few rather dismissive remarks about Republican “money” and two national polls, and Russert did mini hit pieces on Romney and Thompson, but the gist of the entire segment was that the Republican field cannot beat Giuliani for the nomination, and Giuliani cannot beat Hillary for president. It’s over, done.

One could turn to This Week with George Stephanopoulos, but it was pretty much the same thing. Never mind that Romney, while third in the national polls, leads in most of the early primary states and has strong support in such diverse places as FL, MI, NV and CA.

Even on Fox News Sunday Chris Wallace had House Speaker Pelosi stammering over the war in Iraq, the SCHIP legislation veto, and dismal approval ratings for Congress. But when it came to politics, it was all Hillary.

Finally, in the three-ring circus known as The Chris Matthews Show, the distinguished panel included Katty Kay, Clarence Page, Norah O'Donnell, and Howard Fineman. These four represent the BBC, Chicago Tribune, MSNBC and Newsweek respectively. Here is my unofficial tally for candidate names mentioned: Hillary Clinton, 32 times; Rudy Giuliani, 23 times; Barack Obama, 11 times; Fred Thompson, 11 times; John Edwards, 3 times; Mitt Romney, 2 times; McCain and Huckabee, 1 time each.

In the political barnyard of the 2008 presidential election, the liberal media have counted all the chickens - and I have yet to even see an egg.

Okay, this is the perfect scenerio: Romney plows through Iowa and NH, ties or comes close to Giuliani in SC and Fl.  By the time NV, MO and MI come around Huckabee drops out and endorses Romney.  Romney then sweeps the field.  Come convention time it's Romney/Huckabee, a perfect fit.  It solves the North/South problem.  The Mormon/Baptist combination energizes the evangelicals.  Both have excellent records as governors, neither has Senate vote baggage.  The leadership is strong, and we don't have to worry about the (ahem) morality issues.

Well, a boy can dream, can't he?

     Lions and tigers and Mormons - oh my! What’s the fuss over Romney and the Mormons? I have not seen a more humble, clean-living, patriotic, law-abiding and civic-minded group of people. So what, they have a few weird beliefs? If you want weird, hang out at some of those snake-handling churches in Upstate South Carolina.  After a little research, this is what I found out about Mormons:

     The Articles of Faith of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons)

1. We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.

2. We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam's transgression.

3. We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.

4. We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.

5. We believe that a man must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.

6. We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth.

7. We believe in the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healing, interpretation of tongues, and so forth.

8. We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

9. We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.

10. We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory.

11. We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

12. We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

13. We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul—We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.

Heck, I would love to have neighbors like these.