Posts Tagged Massachusetts Gov

Mitt Romney’s Remarks to AIPAC: Iran ”Unalloyed Evil”

Mitt Romney addressed the American-Israel Public Affiars Comittee (AIPAC) this morning in San Diego.  Mitt had some harsh words for Iran, and for President Obama for his lack of spine in dealing with Iran.

Here is a short take from Chris Cilliza on The Fix.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) condemned the Obama Administration’s approach toward Iran, a republic he described as “unalloyed evil” and controlled by “ruthless and fanatical” leaders in a speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee today in San Diego.

“Stop thinking that a charm offensive will talk the Iranians out of their pursuit of nuclear weapons,” said Romney. “It will not.” Later in the address, he punctuated that sentiment by noting: “Once an outstretched hand is met with a clenched fist, it becomes a symbol of weakness and impotence.”


Here is the full text of Governor Romney’s address to AIPAC:

Romney-on-Foreign PolicyIt is a pleasure to participate in this national summit. The work you do has always been important— working to make Israel more secure, ensuring that American support remains strong, and confirming that Israel and America stand shoulder-to-shoulder in an increasingly dangerous world. I believe that your work is about to become far more important. It is for that reason that I flew here today to speak with you.

I have been to Israel twice – mostly recently in 2007. I came away encouraged by what I saw. On that last trip, I traveled (with some of the people in this room) by helicopter to Al-Fay Menasha. It was to tour a strategic span in the security fence, standing between the center of Israel and the West Bank. It is at that point that one can see just how narrow the waist of Israel actually is.

I was struck during that tour by the IDF officer that was briefing us. He bent over backwards to explain how low and how unobtrusive the fence was—how much effort had been expended to keep it from being too imposing. At one point, I respectfully interrupted him to explain that he didn’t need to apologize…at least not to this American. Because if America lived in a neighborhood like Israel’s, with suicide bombers crossing into our country to kill children in school buses, we’d be building a fence that was higher, thicker and hard as concrete. Israel should be proud that it values the blood of its countrymen—of its children—above the approbation of foreign bureaucrats.

During my last trip, I was impressed with the business community. As you know, my career was in business, as a management consultant, a venture capitalist and as a private equity investor. While in Israel, we met with entrepreneurs and business people. Their ingenuity demonstrated why it is that Israel has the highest density of start-ups in the world, and more companies on NASDAQ than all of India, China, Korea, Japan, and Europe combined. I understand that there is talk among some European organizations about boycotting Israeli products and barring Israeli academics. If they do, they will be punishing themselves more than they hurt Israel. Brilliant innovation and technology have always been able to penetrate the walls built by the uninformed, protectionist and prejudiced, and they always will.

Most of all, I was impressed with the people of Israel. That people actually immigrate to Israel, rather than fleeing from the threatening and violent neighborhood of the Middle East, is a testament to their courage, faith and character. It is an inspiration to an often self-indulgent world.

America and Israel are bound together by common commitments and shared values. We believe in representative democracy and human rights. We believe in the rule of law–in learning, scholarship, and free inquiry. We believe in the dignity of the human soul and in its God-given right to ascend above government domination… with freedom to speak, worship, associate and think as one desires.

And because we share the same values, we also share many of the same adversaries. We reject oppression, terrorism, authoritarianism. Violent Jihadists have referred to America as the “great Satan” and to Israel as the “little Satan.” Of course, they don’t recognize the irony, committed as they are to the imposition of power over others, to violence, to brutality, to the subjugation of women and girls and to bigotry and racism.

Israel has been fighting all of these things from the moment it was born. As the United States carries on that fight in countries scattered across the globe, we know that Israel is America’s most ardent ally in the Middle East.

The world is fast becoming a more dangerous place. Liberty and peace are threatened in new and frightful ways. Russia is returning to its authoritarian ways, fueled by its energy stranglehold on Europe. China has married the power of free enterprise with the oppression of Communist rule. Violent Jihadists are fighting to crush people and nations across the globe. And rogue nations with maniacal autocrats are recklessly pursuing nuclear capabilities that puts the world in jeopardy. Left unchecked, a nuclear race will be joined by many, many others.

For all these reasons, America needs strong allies. This is one reason why I am so very concerned by the current drift in our government’s relationship with Israel. In pursuit of a peace process, the United States today has exerted substantial pressure on Israel while putting almost no pressure on the Palestinians and the Arab world.

Consider how little we ask of the Arab world. Why is it that only Egypt and Jordan have peace agreements with Israel? What about Saudi Arabia? The Saudi government will not even sit in the same room as the Israelis, let alone normalize relations or work towards a realistic peace agreement. In 2007, at the height of the Olmert-Abbas peace track, the Saudis were demanding that more U.S. companies comply with their boycott of Israel.

Israel, on the other hand, has repeatedly demonstrated its commitment to a lasting and realistic peace. As you know well, in 2005, for example, Israel handed over the Gaza strip to the Palestinians. This generous, unilateral act was met in return with rockets fired into Israel, with a coup by Hamas in Gaza, and with two wars – one on the Lebanese border and another in Gaza.

Inexplicably, the United States now places the burden on Israel to make still more unilateral concessions. At the United Nations, we decried the building of new Israeli settlements but ignored the launching of Palestinian rockets. How is this possible? Have we not yet learned from the concessions in Gaza, as well as from all recorded history, that giving in to the demands of oppressors always and only leads to more demands, not to peace?

We can encourage both parties in the conflict, but we must never forget which one is our ally. Nor must we forget that Hamas, like other violent Jihadists, does not have a two-state solution as its objective—it has the conquest and annihilation of Israel as its objective. The notion that Hamas and violent Jihadists are motivated by “shared interests” and “common goals” is naïve in the extreme and dangerous to the entire free world.

This is one reason why America must never cede to the United Nations our commitment to Israel, our leadership of the free world and our defense of liberty. I will happily agree that the UN has done some good in its history. But I will also insist that it has also done terrible damage to the causes it claims to uphold. And on no issue has it been more irresponsible and morally reckless than when considering the fate of Israel.

Time and time again, the UN has become a forum for invective against the Jewish state. We saw it in 1975, when the UN passed an anti-Semitic resolution that condemned Israel as racist. And we have seen it in just the last few weeks, when the UN gave a platform to a Holocaust-denier who has pledged over and over again that he will wipe out Israel. It was a grotesque moment and another stain on the reputation of the United Nations. And congratulations to Prime Minister Netanyahu for having the moral courage to say what needed to be said to those members of the United Nations who stayed to listen to Mahmoud Achmadinejad—”Have you no shame!”

But the outrage did not stop there. A report, titled “United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict,” was the latest in a long line of infamous acts. The so-called Goldstone Report took Israel to task for defending itself after being pummeled by more than 7,000 missiles fired on Israel by Hamas. Hamas not only was targeting innocent civilians — it was also using innocent Palestinians as human shields. Israel took extraordinary measures to prevent civilian casualties. Yet who did the UN Human Rights Council see fit to condemn? Israel. Again, the words of Prime Minister Netanyahu, “A democracy legitimately defending itself against terror is morally hanged, drawn and quartered, and given an unfair trial to boot.”

A world in which America is more attuned to the approbation of the United Nations than to its ally Israel is a world in peril. May this never be so.

My concern extends to our entire foreign policy. If the U.S. Government engages tyrannies and autocracies – countries like Iran and North Korea, Syria and Russia, Sudan and Zimbabwe – based on the conviction that we are dealing with common interests more than competing interests, it will not end well.

Dean Acheson, President Truman’s Secretary of State, offered wise and timely counsel. Following the 2nd World War, America had recognized that not every power on this planet shared our goals and values. And this realization is what shaped the foreign policy that has guided us for 60 or so years. Truman, he said, had been “released from the acceptance of a dogma that builders and wreckers of a new world order could and should work happily and successfully together, [Truman] was free to combine our power and coordinate our action with those who did have a common purpose.”

Our approach to international relations must continue to adhere to the vision of Truman and Acheson. First, we should treat our allies like the allies they are. That means, for starters, not being harder on them, or demanding more from them, than we do from our adversaries. It means treating them with respect rather than offense. It means striving to make their lives easier rather than harder.

In short, we should honor the basic rules that govern state-to-state affairs. “Foreign policy commitments are not to be made and unmade at will,” Margaret Thatcher once said. “We cannot expect others to keep their word to us, unless we keep our word to them.”

Keeping our word to our allies is a matter of honor, but it is also a matter of self-interest. The United States needs allies for economic, political, and national security reasons. Good allies and strong alliances allow us to share the burdens we carry, complement and supplement our efforts, and present a united front against those who wish us harm.

When we treat any ally in a desultory manner – and especially if we act in a way that causes them to question our reliability, our resolve, our commitment and staying power – then they as well as our other allies, all of whom are watching very closely, will turn to others for their security.
When Poland and the Czech Republic are humiliated by us, they lose confidence in America’s support for them, and they may decide that they must incline more toward Russia.

If our friends in Latin America like Colombia become convinced that we are turning our back on them, they may feel compelled to become more accommodating to Hugo Chavez.

If Japan believes the United States is weakening its commitment in the Pacific, it may distance itself from America and draw closer to China.
When defenders of democracy and the rule of constitution and law in Honduras find that we have sided with their pro-Chavez illegal opposition, freedom fighters across the world, re-calculate their chances for success.

And if Arab nations believe that we will accommodate Iran’s ambition to dominate the Middle East with nuclear weapons, they will move closer to that very nation.
Whenever or wherever America steps away from one of its friends and allies, or shrinks in the face of belligerent tyrants, those who are allied with us may understandably or inevitably step closer to our foes. The advance of human rights and the defense of liberty demand that America stands firm with its allies—all of them.

I now want to say more about Iran. The Iranian leadership is the greatest immediate threat to the world since the fall of the Soviet Union, and before that, Nazi Germany. Mr. Ahmadinejad, has gone well beyond the boundary of outrage — beginning with his calculated desecration of history. When he denies the Holocaust, he could care less about history. His point is about the present and the future. His purpose is not merely to deny the Holocaust, but also to deny Israel. He is testing the waters. He wants to know who will object. And how they will register their objection.

The Iranian regime threatens not only Israel, but also every other nation in the region, and ultimately the world. It is a repressive regime… an intractable enemy of liberty and human rights… the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism and subversive war. The threat it poses to the world would take on an entirely new dimension if Iran were allowed to become a nuclear power.

Earlier this month, senior staff members of the U.N. nuclear agency concluded in a confidential analysis that Iran has acquired “sufficient information to be able to design and produce a workable” atom bomb. We also learned of a previously secret, illegal uranium enrichment facility that the Iranians had been hiding near Qom. A nuclear Iran would be a tipping point in the proliferation of nuclear regimes. It is beyond the scope of this address to provide a detailed tactical and strategic approach to Iran, as I endeavored to do at the Herzylia conference two years ago. In that address, I detailed the six critical steps that would have to immediately be taken to dissuade Iran from nuclear folly. Not a single one of them has been taken by America.

At this late stage I would simply say that it is long past time for America to recognize the nature of the regime we are dealing with. The Iranian regime is unalloyed evil, run by people who are at once ruthless and fanatical. Stop thinking that a charm offensive will talk the Iranians out of their pursuit of nuclear weapons. It will not. And agreements, unenforceable and unverifiable, will have no greater impact here than they did in North Korea. Once an outstretched hand is met with a clenched fist, it becomes a symbol of weakness and impotence. President Eisenhower said it well: “the care of freedom is not long entrusted to the weak and timid.”
The President of the United States can employ his admiration and good will to actually accomplish something meaningful and real in Iran– comprehensive, withering sanctions, diplomatic isolation, and international support for the forces of freedom within Iran. The people of Iran represent a major source of strength. By and large, they have not been radicalized by their government and clerics; in fact, the regime’s effort to crush the uprising against it has only alienated the people of Iran. They fear economic stagnation and they hate political repression. Most are not seeking a military confrontation with the West. Indeed, most want greater engagement with the West.

And the military option must remain on the table – and that threat needs to be credible. Unfortunately– for reasons that are unfathomable to me – our Government has signaled that the military option is effectively off the table. How can that be countenanced when an ally of the United States faces an existential threat?
I don’t pretend for a moment that the course of action to take with Iran is easy or obvious; there are costs to anything we do – but there are even greater costs if we do nothing at all. If we allow Iran under the rule of the mullahs to get a nuclear weapon, it will make the problems America faces today look like a walk in the park.
The clock is ticking, with no real progress to show for the precious time that has already lapsed.

Earlier I mentioned President Truman. I’d like to end my remarks by recounting a remarkable day in the history of our two nations, as told by Michael Oren – Israel’s ambassador to the United States. He tells how word of Israel’s birth reached Washington on May 14, 1948. At that moment, the armies of Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq were mobilizing for war against the nascent state. The question on everyone’s mind was whether the United States would recognize this new nation of Israel and its self-proclaimed government.

Alone in the White House, with much of the world and many in his own Administration against recognizing Israel, Truman pondered the ramifications of his decision. At eleven minutes past six in the evening, an administration spokesman appeared before reporters at the White House. “This Government has been informed that a Jewish state has been proclaimed in Palestine and that recognition has been requested by the provisional government thereof.” Then, reading from a printed text, understating the momentousness of his message, the spokesman said, “The United States recognizes the provisional government as the de facto authority of the State of Israel.”

Truman never regretted his decision or the key role he played in mid-wifing the birth of the Jewish state. He understood how on every level – moral and geopolitical, cultural and historical – it was right for America to stand with Israel. Harry S. Truman was a wise and courageous president, a person of unshakeable principles, and a man who helped bend history in the direction of justice. Truman was a great president – in part because he was deeply committed to our friends, to our national character, and to the State of Israel. As it was, let us hope it shall be again.

Thank you very much.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Mitt Romney Visits Milwaukee For Promoting His New Book and Fundraising

Mitt-Romney-No-Apology-The-Case-For-American-Greatness

MILWAUKEE — Former Massachusetts Gov. and potential presidential candidate Mitt Romney visited Milwaukee Thursday.

He promoted his new book and held a fundraiser for his political action committee.

He also sat down for a one-on-one interview with WISN 12 News’ Mike Gousha for this weekend’s edition of Upfront.

Gousha: I’m sure there are people who say he’s obviously running for president again; he’s just getting an early start on it.

Romney: I’m doing what’s necessary if you will; keep options open. But the decision to actually go ahead with a presidential run, that’s not something that I would really contemplate until after the November ’10. At that point you begin thinking about what’s the right thing to do.

Romney: Clearly if President Obama happened to be doing a great job as I hoped he would do when he got elected, that would influence my thoughts. But he’s taken this country in a very dangerous direction, and that makes it far more likely that folks are going to think about getting in and removing him from office.

Romney: Look, the fact that this recession is going to end and we’re going to come out of it is something every economist in America and in the world has said is going to happen. The question is did the stimulus work as well as it could have worked, and the answer is no.

Romney doesn’t believe that the president deserves credit for the economic recovery.

He also called Obama an apologist for the U.S.

Romney said that his political action committee will use the money it raised in Milwaukee to support Republican candidates across the country, in particular a couple of key governor’s races, Wisconsin’s not included.

To listen to the inerview, click here.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Mitt Romney Goes on Fundraising Tear

What better way to develop great clout with the Republican party than to be all over helping other candidates get elected?

the-hill

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) is fundraising his way across the country, raising suspicions that the 2008 presidential contender is gearing up for another run.

Romney held fundraisers for his Free and Strong America political action committee in three states and the District of Columbia in September, and he will hold two more in Texas and Missouri this week, a spokesman confirmed to The Hill.

“Mitt Romney is doing what he can to strengthen the Republican Party nationally and help its candidates be successful, and that is going to take up more and more of his time as we get deeper into the 2010 cycle,” spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom said.
Romney has made his presence felt in Virginia and New Jersey, two states where Republicans believe they have the chance to pick up governor seats.Romney hosted fundraisers for Virginia governor candidate Bob McDonnell, Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling and state delegate candidate Barbara Comstock in September, and he will host an event for the Republican Governors Association and former U.S. Attorney Chris Christie (R) in New Jersey on Oct. 12.

Last month, Romney also held a fundraiser for Republicans running for the Georgia state House. In a western swing, he raised money for his PAC by surrounding himself with prominent Republicans; Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), the man who beat Romney in the 2008 primary, hosted a fundraiser with Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) in the Copper State, while Gov. Gary Herbert (R) hosted Romney in Utah.

On Friday, Romney will join Gov. Dave Heineman (R) for the Nebraska Republican Party’s Founder’s Day celebration. Later this month, he has a fundraiser planned for House Republicans in Massachusetts, and he will raise money for ex-Rep. Rick Lazio (R), who is running for governor of New York.

Romney will also assist one of his early backers in the presidential contest, Sen. Bob Bennett (R-Utah). Bennett’s reelection is in jeopardy thanks to the Beehive State’s convention system, and several more conservative candidates are considering running against the three-term Republican. Romney will hold a fundraiser for Bennett on Oct. 26 in Boston.

Should the former Massachusetts governor decide to run for president a second time, his team from the 2008 race would be largely intact. Veterans of the first race have stayed close, and they frequently get together when their former boss is in town.

But elsewhere, that team spirit is generating some concern. State-level strategists question whether Romney has understood what went wrong during the first race, and they insist some problems need to be addressed.

“I like Romney,” said one strategist from the 2008 campaign who has yet to sign up with a 2012 contender. “But a lot depends on what changes he makes to his team, and changes are absolutely necessary.”

Read more at The Hill.
Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Mitt Romney: Obama Acting ‘Above’ World Stage

The Gloves Are Off

Mitt Romney spoke at the biennial Mackinac Republican Leadership Conference on Mackinac Island, Michigan last Saturday. He didn’t mince words.  Mitt said:

After listening to Obama and Netanyahu, many bloggers have pointed out that many people are wondering who is the real leader of the free world?

CNN reported this:

MACKINAC ISLAND, Michigan (CNN) – Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney had sharp words for President Barack Obama’s handling of foreign relations Saturday, saying that the president is “above” the world stage and acting too much as a “neutral arbiter” who uses only words to tell other nations what’s right and what’s wrong.

Referring to the first months of Obama’s presidency, the former Republican presidential candidate said there’s been a “dramatic shift,” with that shift going in the wrong direction.

“America has always been a ardent supporter of democratic efforts and protecting and defending American values and western values,” Romney said, “but this president seems intent to step back to — if you will — lift himself above the world stage and say we’re not a player down there with everybody else between the democracies and the autocracies.”

“Instead we’re going to become the neutral arbiter,” Romney continued. “We’re going to be above everybody. Almost like the United Nations, sort of telling people what’s right and what’s wrong, instead of coming down firmly, solidly, and vehemently in favor of democracy.”

Romney pointed to Obama’s handling of ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya’s return to Brazil last week to illustrate one example of the president’s poor judgment when it comes to world affairs.

“Honduras…tosses out their president who’s trying to violate the constitution,” Romney began. “This was a person who was a pro-[Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, anti-American president. And then they installed instead an acting president [Roberto Micheletti] who will follow a democratic process, [a] pro-U.S. individual. Barrack Obama comes out for the pro-Chavez president and says put him back in charge.”

Romney was speaking at the biennial Mackinac Republican Leadership Conference on Mackinac Island, Michigan. Romney has been widely suspected to be laying groundwork for another run at the White House.

A few of his comments were aimed at the specific economic woes of Michigan — a state Romney’s father governed.

Romney, and his wife Ann, heaped love on the state, saying he was “heartbroken” to see so many people out of a job but that it “doesn’t have to be that way.” He said one of the first things needed is a “Giuliani-style” cleanup of Detroit

One of the bigger applause lines of the night came when Romney said the state should do a few things to help attract more business folks, including lowering business taxes.

“Another thing to do would be to say we’re going to make this a state which is a right to work state,” he said to thunderous applause. “Of course the most convincing thing you could do would be to throw the democrats out of [the capital city of] Lansing.”


Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Romney Way out Front among New Hampshire Republicans



Populous Research New Hampshire 2012 Republican Primary

  • Mitt Romney -50%
  • Mike Huckabee -17%
  • Sarah Palin -17%
  • Newt Gingrich -13%
  • Tim Pawlenty -3%

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney leads four other Republican presidential candidates in New Hampshire in an exclusive Now Hampshire/Populus Research poll to be released on Wednesday.

Romney, who came in second in the 2008 New Hampshire presidential primary, leads all potential candidates with just over 50-percent of Republicans saying they would vote for him if the primary were held today.

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee are neck-and-neck with almost 17-percent each. Newt Gingrich earned roughly 13-percent. While Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty is supported by 2.7-percent of the Granite State Republicans.

The poll was conducted exclusively for NowHampshire.com by Populus Research of Alexandria, Va. Between August 10th and 11th among 403 likely Republican primary voters. The poll carries a margin of error of 5%.

Mike Dennehy, a veteran of Sen. John McCain’s two campaigns in the Granite State, is not surprised by the result. “Gov. Romney worked very hard here in 2008. He maintains a lot of support.”

Related:  The Hill Also Reported on this.

Romney Dominant in New Hampshire Poll

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney leads the Republican presidential field in the home of the nation’s first primary, according to a new poll.

Romney is the preferred choice of just over 50 percent of New Hampshire voters, according to the poll. Romney easily led former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who clocked in at 17 percent.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich pulled 13 percent of the vote, and Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who has set himself up as Romney’s main opponent so far, won just 3 percent.

Romney’s early lead comes a year and a half after the one-time governor of the neighboring Bay State finished second in the New Hampshire GOP presidential primary, taking 32 percent of the vote to Sen. John McCain’s (Ariz.) 37 percent.

The survey, conducted Aug. 10-11 among 403 Republicans who said they were likely to vote in the 2012 primary, was taken for Now Hampshire, a conservative Granite State news site, by Virginia-based Populus Research.
Romney has positioned himself for a 2012 White House run, though he and his advisers insist he has no plans for another presidential campaign.

Romney will publish No Apology: The Case for American Greatness in March, which is intended to contrast his views with President Barack Obama, whom Romney criticized for apologizing to foreign countries for America’s actions.

Romney’s political action committee also pulled in $1.6 million in the first six months of the year, enough to begin handing out money to local officials who would play a role in Romney’s race if he decides to run.

He’s also made a point of hammering the president’s national security stances, along with the economic stimulus package that he told The Hill in an April interview should have been targeted more at tax breaks than new spending.

Instead of the outsider role he played in the 2008 GOP primary, Romney is set in 2012 to serve as a possible establishment candidate. He led the pack in a Gallup Poll released in mid-July that showed him winning 26 percent of the vote compared with 21 percent for Palin, 19 percent for Huckabee and 14 percent for Gingrich. Just 3 percent wanted to see Pawlenty get the nomination, and 2 percent chose Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour.


Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • Live
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,