“Tell me, anyone see an answer to my original question in there? Does anyone see a promise in there to the question I asked? Does anyone see ANYTHING in there on illegal alien amnesty, the original topic?…This is like a Bible preaching Pastor given a zoning ordinance to influence what he preaches from his pulpit.”
We get campaign folks reaching out to us all the time – in the last few years the New Media has become more important in shaping and reporting on the news. Certainly to the latter, we try to get off the proverbial couch and get out to the local events and provide coverage (part of our citizen journalism here at the ‘Grok). To the latter, I still think that I like Jon Henke’s description of political bloggers and the advice he gives to politicians in dealing with bloggers (paraphased):
“Bloggers are like Pastors with a flock in their church. That Pastor has sole control of that pulpit and does influence all those that come to listen to him make pronouncements and giving opinions that they will listen to. Why? They keep coming back, Sunday after Sunday, to listen for more. They have learned to take those words and evaluate them for truthfulness; the fact that they keep coming back means they have vetted those words.
So too with bloggers – they are not your followers and they are not your staffers. Yes, they make like (or tolerate) you, but their first calling is to their readership and their independence. They are the gatekeepers to the folks you are trying to reach. Approach them as you would a Pastor – or you may not like the result.”
Tommy Schultz, the NH Romney Victory Fund Communications Director (and yes, that is how he signs his emails; I asked if he wanted to be called Tom, Tommy or something else – he said Tommy) should have been given that advice before he called me. He also should have listened better when I told him:
“Remember, I warned you that we go after both Rs & Ds (and savor every moment doing so).“
He had called a few days ago to introduce himself (“the advice of a few folks around here was that I should reach out to GraniteGrok”) and we had a pleasant chat even as I remarked “Really? Given how we abuse Rs and Ds indiscrimately?” and continued to describe our outlook here at the ‘Grok. We agreed to stay in touch and see if there might be common grounds (even as I let Tommy know that NONE of us supported Romney either last cycle or in this Primary) on some things (given we get out and around). Hmmm, based on the following, am not going to run to the mailbox to see if any invites have come. So, what was the hand grenade that went off?
As long term readers know, illegal immigration and ANY attempt to grant any kind of amnesty sets off an extremely short fuse with us. Most of it is from the aspect of our belief in a large pillar that holds up the concept of American Exceptionalism – The Rule of Law. We hold that all people are equally subject to the laws passed by our representatives – no one should get a “pass” from them. We have laws on the books as to what constitutes lawful and legal immigration and they should be followed not only to the Letter of the law but the Spirit as well. A very important example of this is our own Groksters, Mike and Mar-Mar Rogers. Coming here 20 years ago, they are both going through the long, expensive, and frustrating process of becoming a naturalized citizen. I don’t care if illegal aliens are adults or kids – what amnesty does is to codify “jumping the line” which is extremely unfair to all those that have obeyed our laws from the get go.
We are NOT anti-immigration; we are PRO-LEGAL immigration (as we should be).
We’ve all been abuzz (and not positively) about Obama unilaterally putting the thrice-legislatively shot down DREAM Act (and I am proud that we were part of that movement that melted down the Congressional switchboard in registering our extreme disapproval of it ) via Executive Order. While I understand that Romney has to thread the needle on the topic, I’ve been underwhelmed with the response. Thus when I read this from a UK paper
Sidenote: Is it just me, or is anyone else starting to figure out that the UK based papers are starting to do a better job at reporting on US stories than….US media? Naw, can’t be…
Top Hispanic adviser says Romney would KEEP Obama’s ‘Dream’ plan to allow 800,000 illegal immigrants to stay in U.S
A top Hispanic adviser to Mitt Romney’s campaign has said that the presumptive Republican nominee would keep in place President Barack Obama’s controversial order to halt the deportation of up to 800,000 young illegal immigrants.
For the past week, Romney has repeatedly declined to say whether or not he would repeal the order, based on the DREAM Act and allowing to stay those under 30 brought into America illegally by their parents but who have since led productive lives.
Speaking to the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) annual conference on Thursday, he again sidestepped the issue.
Exactly what I didn’t want to see from yet another Republican (i.e., John McCain, George Bush, et al) – based from the stance of either we have the Rule of Law or we don’t. So, given that Tommy had reached out, I decided that the best thing to do would be to ask first, blog later. Mmmmmm, yeah. So I emailed him:
On 6/22/2012 11:28 PM, Skip Murphy wrote (Subject: really? REALLY??)
This could be a “sit own our hands” and a “Oops, its voting day and my car isn’t working….” moment.
I had told him, during our phone conversation, that most of us “voted for Sarah Palin and that old white guy” last time around and as TEA Party type, ‘we’d drag Romney over the finish line hopefully faster than the others would drag Obama over the line” to give him an idea that there is an enthusiasm problem there – and I was trying to convey that this would not help. I also wanted to find out what the official line is from the campaign. After all, the campaign can’t officially be that Romney would both keep ObamaAmnesty and kill it at the same time, right? Well, shiver me timbers, I was not amused with the answer (emphasis mine):
Subject: Re: really? REALLY???
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 07:35:29 -0400
From: Tommy Schultz – Victory <tschultz@rnchq.org>
To: Skip@GraniteGrok.com <Skip@GraniteGrok.com>
Just read through the article, and an unpaid advisor said that, not Romney. Another advisor said the exact opposite earlier.
As if I hadn’t already read the article? Of, taking the opposite read on “read”, it was that he had just read it. In either case, it was a non-answer:
Subject: Re: really? REALLY???
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 09:21:57 -0400
From: Skip Murphy <Skip@GraniteGrok.com>
Reply-To: Skip@GraniteGrok.com
Organization: GraniteGrok
To: Tommy Schultz – Victory <tschultz@rnchq.org>
I did. I wrote to confirm one or the other.
We led part of that revolt that melted the congressional switchboard every time amnesty has been proposed – this is a BIG issue for us. You have confirmed neither position (bolded, below). As an engineer who has written a couple of computer language compilers in the past, parsing correctly is just part of the process of writing that compiler. As an activist, I’ve been involved with politics long enough to learn that part of speaking Politicalese is learning how to say the unparsable.
The blogger part of me has learned to call BS and snag on like a pit bull to get an answer: so here’s the chance before fingers go to keyboard: what’s his stand, Stan?
Remember, I warned you that we go after both Rs & Ds (and savor every moment doing so).
He had the chance to say, straight forwardly, “we aren’t saying” or “we are still formulating our plan; standby” or something similar. But yeah, that started to set me off: a simple question was asked – I got a brushoff that didn’t even address the question. So, is that a way to follow Jon Henke’s advice? I do wonder what was said by those who said to contact me – did they give him the right info? Or did he not believe my phone warning of “and savor every moment doing so”.
So I waited for the next response….and waited….and waited…..
Subject: Re: really? REALLY???
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 11:30:01 -0400
From: Skip Murphy <Skip@GraniteGrok.com>
Reply-To: Skip@GraniteGrok.com
Organization: GraniteGrok
To: Tommy Schultz – Victory <tschultz@rnchq.org>
Tommy,
Two hours have now passed; are you going to answer my request to flesh out your response?
-Skip
Well, I got an answer – yet another brushoff:
Subject: RE: really? REALLY???
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 11:38:35 -0400
From: Tommy Schultz – Victory <tschultz@rnchq.org>
To: Skip@GraniteGrok.com <Skip@GraniteGrok.com>
Hi Skip,
Governor Romney is focused on turning around our economy and the President has utterly failed on this issue. The issue most pressing for every American is the economy. Under President Obama the unemployment rate for Hispanics as of May 2012 sat at 11%, 13.2 million Hispanics were considered in poverty, and the childhood poverty rate for Hispanics is at an all-time record high. Governor Romney will keep his promises when he says that he will get people working and create a long-term solution by working with Democrats and Republicans to supersede President Obama’s temporary, stop-gap measure.
Tommy
Tell me, anyone see an answer to my original question in there? Does anyone see a promise in there to the question I asked? Does anyone see ANYTHING in there on illegal alien amnesty, the original topic? Utter dribble. This is like a Bible preaching Pastor given a zoning ordinance to influence what he preaches from his pulpit.
I tried one last time but didn’t expect much in return:
Subject: Re: really? REALLY???
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 14:42:48 -0400
From: Skip Murphy <Skip@GraniteGrok.com>
Reply-To: Skip@GraniteGrok.com
Organization: GraniteGrok
To: Tommy Schultz – Victory <tschultz@rnchq.org>
Nice boilerplate. The fact that you sent it is insulting, too. It still doesn’t answer the question.
Let’s recap:
- Romney has one aide saying he will do away with this, and another that says he won’t.
- Doesn’t matter if one is paid or not.
- I’ve asked a direct question.
- Given my proclivities on this issue, I am going to assume the worst.
- Why?
- YOU won’t answer with a direct answer after being asked TWICE.
Here are the possibilities – your response as an official messaging agent for the Romney campaign (or non-response) will determine my decision.
- I can ignore the whole thing and accept the stupid boilerplate (a non-answer). Fair warning – as a blogger, this NOW is highly unlikely.
- I can just go with my gut and assume that Romney WILL not change this unilateral policy change concerning illegal aliens. However, with the way that Obama has put this into play, the issue has changed from just being about kids to one that has added about the unconstitutional process that has been used – the worst place for Romney to be in with this stance for people like me and in this State (ask Bill Binnie about his really bad answer on a Constitutional issue asked of him during a Senatorial Primary debate held by the Rochester 9/12 Project).
- This would start the firing up the anti-illegal folks here in NH, to both the detriment of Obama and Romney (but will hurt Romney more), as I can’t get a simple answer to a simple question
- I can post this whole email string. You’ll look like a good guy doing his job for the campaign to the campaign higher-ups but still get a black eye from the activists that you are trying to reach out to for not being honest.
- You can come clean and give me an simple answer.
That last one will do you better here in NH than not. Why? Electoral voting.
I’m already in a battle with a lot of my Libertarian Rs / Ron Paul supporter friends that are already not of a mood to vote for Romney out of “purity issues” – this non-answer will be taken by them and they will go “See I told you so – I was right!” (except for the true Libertarians who want open borders; thankfully, they are far and few between). There is a large enough percentage of them to lose the State for Romney (and the polls say he’s close enough to win.) But he won’t win if they write in Ron Paul in large enough numbers and that could give Obama the State by default.
YOU know that they’ll do exactly that, too. Your answer will just give them that extra push over the edge over Romney’s cliff.
I will give you one more chance and I counsel you to NOT send me any more boilerplate. I also view a non-response as a valid (albeit, null) response.
– Skip
Well, I got my non-response. Now we get to play the very slim percentage game…Am most happy to hear if other bloggers got the same brushoff?
