2008 Presidential Campaign Blog

2008 Republican National Convention - RNC Headquarters Hotel

The Hyatt Regency Minneapolis will serve as the headquarters hotel for the Republican National Committee (RNC).

Statement by Hillary Clinton on Olympics

Statement by Hillary Clinton on Olympics

The violent clashes in Tibet and the failure of the Chinese government to use its full leverage with Sudan to stop the genocide in Darfur are opportunities for Presidential leadership.  These events underscore why I believe the Bush administration has been wrong to downplay human rights in its policy towards China.  At this time, and in light of recent events, I believe President Bush should not plan on attending the opening ceremonies in Beijing, absent major changes by the Chinese government.

I encourage the Chinese to take advantage of this moment as an opportunity to live up to universal human aspirations of respect for human rights and unity, ideals that the Olympic games have come to represent. 

Americans will stand strong in support of freedom of religious and political expression and human rights.  Americans will also stand strong and root for the success of American athletes who have worked hard and earned the right to compete in the Olympic Games of 2008.

GOP Convention Names Party Headquarters, Delegation Hotels

GOP Convention Names Party Headquarters, Delegation Hotels

Saint Paul's Hilton Garden Inn to Host Minnesota Delegation;
Hyatt Regency Minneapolis to Welcome Republican National Committee

(SAINT PAUL, Minn.) - With less than five months before the 2008 Republican National Convention gets underway at the Xcel Energy Center, the Committee of Arrangements (COA) today announced the host hotels for the 56 Republican delegations that will travel to Minneapolis-Saint Paul to formally nominate Sen. John McCain as the GOP's candidate for President of the United States. The GOP also announced the Hyatt Regency Minneapolis will serve as the headquarters hotel for the Republican National Committee (RNC).

As part of today's announcement, convention President and CEO Maria Cino joined MSP 2008 Host Committee CEO Jeff Larson and Republican Party of Minnesota Chairman Ron Carey at Saint Paul's Hilton Garden Inn to proclaim the hotel's selection as the official delegation hotel for the host Minnesota delegation.

"Today's announcement is an exciting and pivotal step in our preparations for the convention," Cino said. "Our partners in the Minneapolis-Saint Paul hotel community have worked diligently with our convention staff to secure accommodations for the thousands of guests who will be attending the convention, and we're grateful for their efforts.

"We want to congratulate the Hilton Garden Inn for being selected as the official hotel for the Minnesota delegation, and the Hyatt Regency Minneapolis for being selected as our Party's convention-week headquarters," Cino added. "We're confident the Hilton Garden Inn and the Hyatt Regency Minneapolis, along with all the delegation hotels in the Minneapolis-Saint Paul area, will serve as outstanding hosts for our visitors from across the country."

"We're looking forward to establishing our headquarters at the Hyatt Regency Minneapolis, as well as an exciting and successful convention in Minneapolis-Saint Paul, where we will launch Sen. John McCain to the White House," said convention Chairman and RNC Co-Chairman Jo Ann Davidson.

The convention's Delegate Services staff has reserved more than 16,000 hotel rooms in 101 area hotels. Thirty-five hotels will serve as official delegation hotels for the 56 delegations representing states, territories, and the District of Columbia. The remaining hotels will host other visitors during the convention, including media and GOP officials.

"I am thrilled the Minnesota delegation will be staying at the Hilton Garden Inn during the Republican National Convention," Chairman Carey said. "As we nominate Senator McCain to be the next president of the United States, I look forward to showcasing our great state to the entire world. I am certain our delegation will have a world-class experience at the Hilton Garden Inn."
"We know that the hotel industry in the Minneapolis, Saint Paul and Bloomington area will do an amazing job hosting the delegations from around the country," said Jeff Larson, CEO of the Minneapolis Saint Paul 2008 Host Committee. "This is an excellent opportunity to roll out the red carpet and truly demonstrate what 'Minnesota Nice' is all about and we look forward to hosting the delegates, media and visitors who will be in for the convention."

Travel Technology Group, the convention's Official Housing Bureau, will assist convention guests with their travel plans. Travel Tech will manage the official convention hotel block and coordinate a paperless, online reservation system as part of the convention's effort to be more environmentally friendly.

The official delegation hotel assignments for the 2008 Republican National Convention are:
Alabama - The Marquette Hotel
Alaska - Ramada Mall of America
American Samoa - Four Points by Sheraton Minneapolis
Arizona - The Saint Paul Hotel
Arkansas - Embassy Suites Minneapolis-Airport
California - Sheraton Bloomington Hotel Minneapolis South & Sofitel Minneapolis- Bloomington
Colorado - Four Points by Sheraton Minneapolis
Connecticut - Holiday Inn Hotel & Suites Maple Grove Northwest Minneapolis-Arbor Lakes
Delaware - Best Western Normandy Inn & Suites - Minneapolis
District of Columbia - DoubleTree Guest Suites Minneapolis
Florida - Minneapolis Airport Marriott
Georgia - DoubleTree Hotel Minneapolis - Park Place
Guam - DoubleTree Hotel Minneapolis - Park Place
Hawaii - Embassy Suites Bloomington
Idaho - Hyatt Regency Minneapolis
Illinois - Millennium Hotel Minneapolis
Indiana - Embassy Suites Bloomington
Iowa - La Quinta Inn & Suites Minneapolis Bloomington West
Kansas - Country Inn & Suites by Carlson Bloomington at Mall of America
Kentucky - Hyatt Regency Minneapolis
Louisiana - Crowne Plaza Minneapolis North
Maine - Hyatt Regency Minneapolis
Maryland - Embassy Suites St. Paul-Downtown
Massachusetts - Crowne Plaza Bloomington
Michigan - The Northland Inn
Minnesota - Hilton Garden Inn St. Paul City Center
Mississippi - Embassy Suites Minneapolis-Airport
Missouri - Ramada Minneapolis Northwest & Water Park
Montana - Best Western Normandy Inn & Suites - Minneapolis
Nebraska - Best Western Normandy Inn & Suites - Minneapolis
Nevada - The Saint Paul Hotel
New Hampshire - Hilton Minneapolis
New Jersey - Hilton Minneapolis/St. Paul Airport Mall of America
New Mexico - Holiday Inn Minneapolis Metrodome
New York - Minneapolis Marriott City Center
Northern Mariana Islands - Country Inn & Suites by Carlson Bloomington at Mall of America
North Carolina - Holiday Inn Minneapolis Metrodome
North Dakota - DoubleTree Guest Suites Minneapolis
Ohio - Radisson Plaza Hotel Minneapolis & The Marquette Hotel
Oklahoma - Four Points by Sheraton Minneapolis
Oregon - La Quinta Inn & Suites Minneapolis Bloomington West
Pennsylvania - Minneapolis Marriott Southwest
Puerto Rico - Courtyard Minneapolis Maple Grove/Arbor Lakes
Rhode Island - Hyatt Place Minneapolis Airport-South
South Carolina - Hilton Minneapolis
South Dakota - Courtyard Minneapolis Maple Grove/Arbor Lakes
Tennessee - Ramada Mall of America
Texas - Crowne Plaza Hotel St. Paul-Riverfront
US Virgin Islands - Radisson University Hotel-Minneapolis
Utah - Sofitel Minneapolis - Bloomington
Vermont - Hyatt Regency Minneapolis
Virginia - Radisson University Hotel-Minneapolis
Washington - Crowne Plaza Northstar Minneapolis-Downtown
West Virginia - Crowne Plaza Bloomington
Wisconsin - Minneapolis Marriott City Center
Wyoming - Hilton Garden Inn Minneapolis St. Paul-Shoreview

Obama Campaign Airs Ad – “Nothing’s Changed”

Obama Campaign Airs Ad – “Nothing’s Changed”
In new ad, Obama discusses commitment to take on oil companies, curtail rising gas prices

INDIANAPOLIS – Senator Barack Obama’s Presidential campaign began airing a new television ad in Indiana this week.  In the thirty-second spot, entitled “Nothing’s Changed”, Senator Obama discusses his commitment to change Washington so that we can finally break our dependence on foreign oil and curtail rising gas costs.  Since the 1970s, politicians in both parties have made promises about energy independence but failed to make real progress because the oil companies and their lobbyists have a stranglehold on Washington.  Barack Obama is the one candidate in this race who does not take money from special interest PACs or Washington lobbyists.

As President, Obama will stand up to the special interests to:

Force oil companies to pay a penalty on windfall profits
Invest $150 billion in alternative energy
Create 5 million “green collar” jobs

SCRIPT – “Nothing’s Changed”

Barack Obama: Since the gas lines of the 70s, Democrats and Republicans have talked about energy independence… but nothing’s changed…

…Except now Exxon’s making $40 billion a year and we’re paying $3.50 for gas.

I’m Barack Obama.  I don’t take money from oil companies or Washington lobbyists and I won’t let them block change anymore. They’ll pay a penalty on windfall profits.  We’ll invest in alternative energy and create jobs and free ourselves from foreign oil.

I approve this message because it’s time Washington worked for you – not them

Remarks By John McCain To The Members Of The Veterans Of Foreign Wars (VFW)

REMARKS BY JOHN MCCAIN TO THE MEMBERS OF THE VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS (VFW) 

ARLINGTON, VA -- U.S. Senator John McCain will deliver the following remarks as prepared for delivery to the members of the National VFW Headquarters in Kansas City, Missouri, at 9:45 a.m. CST:

Thank you. It is an honor to be here today. I'm always grateful to be in the company of Americans who have had the burden of serving our country in distant lands, and the honor of having proved your patriotism in difficult circumstances. Your example is a constant reminder to Americans that we have obligations to our country that are greater than our personal ambitions, and that our self-respect will owe more to how faithfully we keep those obligations than any other success we achieve in life. Among those obligations is to debate honestly issues that involve America's future security because so many Americans have sacrificed everything to keep us secure. All that is asked of the rest of us is that we do not dishonor their sacrifice by treating the cause they served so bravely as an opportunity to argue without wisdom; to divide us without care for the consequences; to advance our individual or partisan interests at the expense of America's security.

At the beginning of last year, we were engaged in a great debate about what to do in Iraq. Four years of a badly-conceived military strategy had brought us almost to the point of no return. Sectarian violence in Iraq was spiraling out of control, life had become a struggle for survival, and a full-scale civil war seemed almost unavoidable. Al Qaeda in Iraq was on the offensive. Entire Iraqi provinces were under the control of extremists and were deemed all but lost. Faced with the prospect of defeat, we had two fundamental choices. We could retreat from Iraq and accept the horrible consequences of our defeat. Or we could change strategies and try to turn things around. It was, I believe, a critical moment in our nation's history, and a time of testing for our nation's political leadership.

In the year that has passed, our nation showed its strength, and its deep sense of global responsibility. Instead of abandoning Iraq to civil war, genocide, and terror, and the Middle East to the destabilizing effects of these consequences, we changed strategies. We sent to Iraq additional troops, many of them on their third or fourth tour, and a great, seasoned general to lead them, with a battle plan that, at long last, actually addressed the challenges we faced in Iraq.

Within six months, the men and women who have made such enormous sacrifices for the rest of us dramatically turned around the situation in Iraq. From June 2007 through my most recent trip last month, sectarian and ethnic violence in Iraq has been reduced by 90 percent. Civilian deaths and deaths of coalition forces fell by 70 percent. The dramatic reduction in violence has opened the way for a return to something approaching normal political and economic life for the average Iraqi. Political reconciliation is occurring across Iraq at the local and provincial grassroots level. Sunni and Shi'a chased from their homes by terrorist and sectarian violence are returning. The "Sons of Iraq" and Awakening movements, where former Sunni insurgents have now joined in the fight against Al Qaeda, continue to grow.

Iraq's political order is also evolving in hopeful ways. Four out of the six laws cited as benchmarks by the U.S. have been passed by the Iraqi legislature. A law on amnesty and a law rolling back some of the harsher restrictions against former employees of the Iraqi government have made it possible for Iraqis to find genuine reconciliation. They should also encourage both Sunni and Shi'a to feel they have a stake in Iraq's future. The legislature has devolved greater power to local and provincial authorities, where much of the real work of rebuilding Iraqi society is taking place. Much more needs to be done, and Iraq's politicians need to know that we expect them to show the necessary leadership to rebuild their country. For only they can.

The job of bringing security to Iraq is not finished. Iraqi forces recently battled in Basra against radical Shi'a militias, supported by Iran, a fight that showed both the progress made by the Iraqi security forces -- a year ago, they could not have carried out such operations on their own -- and the continuing need for coalition support. The situation in southern Iraq remains unsettled. There continues to be a significant flow of money and weaponry from Iran into Diyala Province, Baghdad, Basra and elsewhere in support of the Iranian-backed Special Groups, the Jaysh al Mahdi, and the Badr Organization. Sunni terrorists and insurgents continue to maintain bases in Mosul and elsewhere in Ninewah Province.

But there is no doubt about the basic reality in Iraq: we are no longer staring into the abyss of defeat, and we can now look ahead to the genuine prospect of success. Success in Iraq is the establishment of a generally peaceful, stable, prosperous, democratic state that poses no threat to its neighbors and contributes to the defeat of terrorists. It is the advance of religious tolerance over violent radicalism. It is a level of security that allows the Iraqi authorities to govern, the average person to live a normal life, and international entities to operate. It is a situation in which the rule of law, after decades of tyranny, takes hold. It is an Iraq where Iraqi forces have the responsibility for enforcing security in their country, and where American troops can return home, with the honor of having secured their country's interests at great personal cost, and helping another people achieve peace and self-determination.

Today these goals are within reach. "Never despair," Winston Churchill once said. And we did not despair. We were tested, and we rose to the challenge. Some political leaders close their eyes to the progress that the surge has made possible, and want only to argue about the past. We can have that debate. I profoundly disagree with those who say we would all be better off if we had left Saddam Hussein in power. Americans should be proud that they led the way in removing a vicious dictator and opening the door to freedom, stability, and prosperity in Iraq and across the Middle East.

But the question for the next President is not about the past, but about the future and how to secure it. Our most vital security interests are at stake in Iraq. The stability of the entire Middle East, that volatile and critically important region, is at stake. The United States' credibility as a moral and political leader is at stake. How to safeguard those interests is what we should be debating.

There are those who today argue for a hasty withdrawal from Iraq. Some would withdraw regardless of the consequences. Others say that we can withdraw now and then return if trouble starts again. What they are really proposing, if they mean what they say, is a policy of withdraw and re-invade. For if we withdraw hastily and irresponsibly, we will guarantee the trouble will come immediately. Our allies, Arab countries, the UN, and the Iraqis themselves will not step up to their responsibilities if we recklessly retreat. I can hardly imagine a more imprudent and dangerous course.

Over the past year, the counterinsurgency strategy of General Petraeus has been based on the premise that establishing greater security in Iraq is indispensable to advancing political reconciliation and economic reconstruction; to making diplomatic progress in the region; and to preparing the Iraqi military to assume its responsibilities to defend the sovereignty of Iraq and the authority of its elected government. Should the United States withdraw from Iraq before that level of security is established those goals will be infinitely harder if not impossible to attain. Al Qaeda in Iraq will proclaim victory and increase its efforts to provoke sectarian tensions in Iraq into a full scale civil war that could descend into genocide and destabilize the Middle East. Iraq would be a failed state that could become a haven for terrorists to train and plan their operations. Iran's influence in Iraq -- especially southern Iraq -- and throughout the r egion would increase substantially and encourage other countries to seek accommodation with Tehran at the expense of our interests. These likely consequences of America's failure in Iraq would, almost certainly, require us to return to Iraq or draw us into a wider and far costlier war.

The American people deserve the truth from their leaders. They deserve a candid assessment of the progress we have managed to make in the last year in preventing the worst from happening in Iraq, of the very serious difficulties that remain, and of the grave consequences of a hasty, reckless, and irresponsible withdrawal. If we are honest about the opportunities and the risks, I believe they will have the patience to allow us the time necessary to obtain our objectives. That honesty is my responsibility, and it is also the responsibility of Senators Obama and Clinton, as well as Democratic and Republican leaders in Congress. Doing the right thing in the heat of a political campaign is not always the easiest thing. But when 4000 Americans have given their lives so that America does not suffer the worst consequences of our failure in Iraq, it is a necessary thing. In such a grave matter, we must put the nation's interests before our own ambitions.

The fact is, we now have a great opportunity, not only to bring stability and freedom to Iraq, but to make Iraq a pillar of our future strategy for the entire region of the greater Middle East. If we seize the opportunity before us, we stand to gain a strong, stable, democratic ally against terrorism and a strong ally against an aggressive and radical Iran.

Over the next 18 months, Iraq will conduct two landmark elections -- for provincial governments and for the national government. On my most recent trip to Iraq, I met dozens of shopkeepers, workers, city council officials and others, who want Iraqis from all backgrounds to elect local leaders charged with making decisions that reflect the needs and desires of the local populations -- not the preferences of Baghdad elites. If we sustain the current progress, those elections can be held in relative freedom and security for the first time since the fall of Saddam. We should welcome a larger United Nations role in supporting the elections under the capable leadership of its Special Envoy, Steffan de Mistura, who is already playing a key role in mediating disputes in areas like Kirkuk.

Throughout this period, we must continue to help the Iraqis protect themselves against the terrorists and the insurgents. We must press ahead against the radical Shi'ite militias and the Iranian-backed Special Groups, and support the Iraqi government's efforts to defeat them. We must continue to support the Sunni volunteers of the Iraqi Awakening as they stand up to Al-Qaeda in Iraq, especially in the ongoing battle for Mosul. And we must continue to build the capacities of the Iraqi Security Forces so that they can play an increasingly strong and neutral role in suppressing sectarian violence.

All this will require that we keep a sufficient level of American forces in Iraq until security conditions are such that our commanders on the ground recommend otherwise. It also means we must increase levels of reconstruction assistance, so that Iraq's political and economic development can proceed in the security that our forces and Iraqi Security Forces provide. Above all, it means we must once again reject, as we did in early 2007, the calls for a reckless and irresponsible withdrawal of our forces just at the moment when they are succeeding.

Economic progress is essential if the security gains in Iraq are to be sustained. The once silent and deserted markets have come back to life in many areas, but high unemployment rates continue to fuel criminal and insurgent violence. To move young men away from the attractions of well-funded extremists, we need a vibrant, growing Iraqi economy. The Iraqi government can jump-start this process by using a portion of its budget surplus to employ Iraqis in infrastructure projects and in restoring basic services. The international community should augment Iraqi efforts by broadly enhancing the proven success of microfinance programs to spur entrepreneurship at local levels throughout the country and Iraq's Arab neighbors should invest in regional stability by using the fruits of their oil exports to directly invest in Iraq. As these efforts begin to take hold in Iraq, it will be -- as in all countries -- the private sector that creates the vas t majority of jobs and propels the growth that will end reliance on outside aid.

I do not want to keep our troops in Iraq a minute longer than necessary to secure our interests there. Our goal is an Iraq that can stand on its own as a democratic ally and a responsible force for peace in its neighborhood. Our goal is an Iraq that no longer needs American troops. And I believe we can achieve that goal, perhaps sooner than many imagine. But I do not believe that anyone should make promises as a candidate for President that they cannot keep if elected. To promise a withdrawal of our forces from Iraq, regardless of the calamitous consequences to the Iraqi people, our most vital interests, and the future of the Middle East, is the height of irresponsibility. It is a failure of leadership.

I know the pain war causes. I understand the frustration caused by our mistakes in this war. And I regret sincerely the additional sacrifices imposed on the brave Americans who defend us. But I also know the toll a lost war takes on an army and on our country's security. By giving General Petraeus and the men and women he has the honor to command the time and support necessary to succeed in Iraq we have before us a hard road. But it is the right road. It is necessary and just. Those who disregard the unmistakable progress we have made in the last year and the terrible consequences that would ensue were we to abandon our responsibilities in Iraq have chosen another road. It may appear to be the easier course of action, but it is a much more reckless one, and it does them no credit even if it gives them an advantage in the next election.

We all respect the sacrifices made by our soldiers. We all mourn the losses they have suffered in this war. But let us honor them by doing all we can to ensure their sacrifices were not made in vain. Let us show an appropriate humility by recognizing that so little is asked of us compared to the burdens we imposed on them, and let us show just a small, but significant measure of their courage, resolve and patriotism by putting our country's interests before every personal or political consideration.

War is a terrible thing. You know that better than most; you who have borne the heartache and deprivations of war so that our country might be secure in its freedom. I hold my position on Iraq not because I am indifferent to the suffering caused by this war but because I detest war, and believe sincerely that should we fail in Iraq we will face an even sterner test in the very near future, an even harder war, with even greater sacrifice and heartbreaking loss than we have suffered over the last five years.

It is every veteran's hope that should their children be called upon to answer a call to arms, the battle will be necessary and the field well chosen. But that is not their responsibility. It belongs to the government that called them. As it once was for you, their honor will be in their answer not their summons. Whatever we think about how and why we went to war in Iraq, we are all -- those who supported the decision that placed them in harm's way and those who opposed it -- humbled by and grateful for their example. We know how little has been asked of others compared to their service, and the terrible sacrifice made by those who have not returned to the country they loved so well. They now deserve the distinction of the best Americans, and we owe them a debt we can never fully repay. We can only offer the small tribute of our humility and our commitment to do all that we can do, in less trying and costly circumstances, to help keep this nation worthy of their sacrifice.

The sacrifices made by veterans deserve to be memorialized in something more lasting than marble or bronze or in the fleeting effect of a politician's speeches. Your valor and devotion to duty have earned your country's abiding concern for your welfare. And when our government forgets to honor our debts to you, it is a stain upon America's honor. The Walter Reed scandal recalled, I hope, not just government but the public who elected it, to our responsibilities to the men and women who risked life and limb to meet their responsibilities to us. Such a disgrace is unworthy of the greatest nation on earth. As the greatest leaders in our history, George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, instructed us, care for Americans who fought to defend us should rank among the highest of national priorities.

Those who have borne the burden of war for our sake must be treated fairly and expeditiously as they seek compensation for disability or illness. We owe them compassion, knowledge and hands-on care in their transition to civilian life. We owe them training, rehabilitation and education. We owe their families, parents and caregivers our concern and support. They should never be deprived of quality medical care and mental health care coverage for illness or injury incurred as a result of their service to our country.

As President, I will do everything in my power to ensure that those who serve today and those who have served in the past have access to the highest quality health, mental health and rehabilitative care in the world. The disgrace of Walter Reed must not be forgotten. Neither should we accept a situation in which veterans are denied access to care due to great travel distances, backlogs of appointments, and years of pending disability evaluation and claims. I believe that we should give veterans the option to use a simple plastic card to receive timely and accessible care at a convenient location through a provider of their choosing. I will not stand for requiring veterans to make an appointment to stand in line to make an appointment to stand in line for substandard care of the injuries you have suffered to keep our country safe. Whatever our commitments to veterans cost, we will keep them, as you have kept every commitment to us. The honor of a gre at nation is at stake.

As we meet, in Iraq and Afghanistan, American soldiers, Marines, sailors and airmen are fighting bravely and tenaciously in battles that are as dangerous, difficult and consequential as the great battles of our armed forces' storied past. Many of them have had their tours extended longer than they were initially told. Others who had already served two or three tours returned to combat sooner than they had been led to expect. It is a sad and hard thing to ask so much more of Americans who have already given more than their fair share to the defense of our country. Few of them and their families would have greeted the news without feeling greatly disappointed, and without offering a few well deserved complaints in the direction of those of us who have imposed on them this additional hardship. Then they shouldered a rifle and risked everything -- everything -- to accomplish their mission, to protect another people's freedom and our own countr y from harm.

It is a privilege beyond measure to live in a country served so well by such selfless patriots. God bless and protect them.

2008 Convention Venues On Display In First Round Of NHL Playoffs

Minnesota Wild to play Colorado Avalanche in Conference Quarterfinals

SAINT PAUL/MINNEAPOLIS, Minn. - The National Hockey League’s (NHL) Minnesota Wild will face Northwest Division rival Colorado in the Western Conference Quarterfinals, after the Avalanche defeated the Wild 4-3 in a shootout at Pepsi Center Sunday afternoon.

The Wild will host Game 1  Wednesday at Xcel Energy Center.

The Xcel Energy Center will host the 2008 Republican National Convention from September 1-4, 2008. The Pepsi Center hosts the 2008 Democratic National Convention from August 25-28, 2008.

STATEMENT BY JOHN MCCAIN ON CHARLTON HESTON

STATEMENT BY JOHN MCCAIN ON CHARLTON HESTON

ARLINGTON, VA -- U.S. Senator John McCain today issued the following statement remembering the life of Charlton Heston:

"Our hearts and prayers go out to the family and friends of Charlton Heston. In taking on epic and commanding roles, he showed himself to be one of our nation's most gifted actors, and his legacy will forever be a part of our cinema. Off-the-screen, Charlton Heston was also a real-life leader. He served his country and proudly gave his voice in support of some of our most basic rights. He was devoted to the cause of freedom for all Americans from the battle for civil rights in the 1960s to protecting Second Amendment rights in the 1990s. At this time of grief, let us honor a life that has truly touched millions."

Remarks By John McCain's During "Service to America" Tour Event In Prescott, Arizona

REMARKS BY JOHN MCCAIN DURING "SERVICE TO AMERICA" TOUR EVENT IN PRESCOTT, ARIZONA

ARLINGTON, VA -- U.S. Senator John McCain will deliver the following remarks as prepared for delivery on the final stop of his "Service to America" tour today at Yavapai County Courthouse in Prescott, Arizona at 10:00 a.m. MST:

Thank you. As everyone familiar with Arizona politics knows, Prescott is where Barry Goldwater formally began his Senate campaigns and his campaign for the presidency on the steps of the Yavapai County Courthouse. As his successor and in deference to his tradition, I have ended all my Senate campaigns here.

Prescott, Arizona's territorial capital, occupies a special place in the history of Arizona, and in the Goldwater legend. Barry's grandfather, Michael, opened a dry goods store here. Mo Udall's grandfather, David, served in the legislature. David Udall was prosecuted for perjury in a land claim dispute. Michael Goldwater posted his bail. The former was the patriarch of what would become the most prominent Democratic family in Arizona. The latter was the patriarch of Arizona's most famous Republican family. The Goldwater and Udall families began with that long ago act of generosity a long friendship. The grandsons of Michael and David, despite differences in political parties and philosophies, were very close friends. The friendship of Barry Goldwater and Mo Udall was based in their mutual respect for each other's character, devoted service to the state they loved, and patriotism. It seems antiquated these days, but however much they might have disag reed with each other's policy views, neither man ever had any doubt that the other acted at all times out of devotion to Arizona and the United States.

Barry Goldwater, conservative icon and authentic maverick, did more than any single person to break the Democratic Party's hold on Arizona politics, and the East Coast's hold on the Republican Party. He was irascible and principled, fiercely independent and deeply patriotic. He was his own man always and his country's loyal servant.

Barry once said he was "better equipped to be a military officer than a politician. There's no greater service to this country than the defense of its freedom." That self-assessment was uncharacteristically mistaken. Barry was a superb military officer, but he was also an extraordinarily accomplished politician. That he was an unusually open, honest and no-nonsense politician did not make him unsuited for the profession, only uncommon. In uniform and in politics, Barry's purpose was the defense of freedom, and nobody before or since managed the task more ably or more colorfully. He was an authentic, original and passionate patriot.

Simply put, he was in love with freedom. He could never abide any restriction on its exercise as long as that exercise did not interfere with someone else's freedom. No matter the prevailing political sensibilities, no matter the personal risk to his career, no political gain was so important to Barry that it was worth infringing on another American's freedom.

Americans conceive of freedom in many ways: the freedom to be left alone or to join with others in a common purpose; the freedom to prosper or to waste; the freedom to worship God in whatever way we choose or not to worship at all; the freedom to say whatever we like or to remain silent; the freedom to succeed or to fail; the freedom to be brave or cowardly; the freedom to be generous or selfish; to be prideful or humble; to be good or not.

Barry defended freedom in all its manifestations because he saw what freedom conferred on America -- self-determination; opportunity; the restless, striving industry that carved a civilization out of the wilderness of the West; and the distinction of being the last, best hope of humanity, the haven and advocate for all who believe in the God-given dignity of the human being.

He rose to prominence in the country he loved; became a great man, without ever losing his authentic identity. He has his own chapter in American political history because he knew where he stood and why, and his example rang as true to his countrymen as it did to him.

Like Barry, Mo Udall rose to prominence in Arizona and the country without ever losing his authenticity. He graced our nation's politics for thirty years with humility, kindness and a legendary wit. Like Barry, he ran unsuccessfully for President. He had known important victories and hard defeats. And like Barry, he was never changed by either. Barry once said Mo was the most popular man in Arizona. Mo described himself as a "One-eyed Mormon Democrat from conservative Arizona, and you can't have a higher handicap than that."

The foundation in Tucson that bears his name took as its motto, "civility, integrity and consensus." Those were the attributes that distinguished Mo Udall in his public and his personal life. He was a man of great accomplishment in a tough business. But he remained throughout his life and career, a man of uncommon decency, with firm liberal principles but intent on finding common ground with people of different political views in order to serve his country better. He was famously funny, which everyone loved about him. He employed humor not simply to entertain, but as a subtle instrument to calm troubled waters; to instruct the uninformed; to humble the arrogant, and to inspire us all to be better and to do better. "The best political humor," he said, "has a little love behind it. It's the spirit of the humor that counts ... over the years it has served me when nothing else could." It served us well, too.

Barry and Mo, a proud conservative and a liberal reformer, went to Washington to fight for what they believed was right for this country. They were more often than not on opposite sides of the great debates of their time. But the personal regard they had for each other, and their deep love of this beautiful state, made it easy for them to work together often on behalf of Arizona. Both men also shared a personal commitment to improving the lives of Native Americans. "Never lie to them," Mo once told me, "they've been lied to enough." One journalist, who described the relationship between another conservative and Mo Udall, could have been describing the friendship of Barry and Mo. "It was one man saying to another, we disagree in politics but not in life. ... Party political differences cut only so deep. Having made that step, they found much to agree on and many useful ways to work together."

Barry Goldwater and Mo Udall were the famous sons of Arizona pioneer families. I was forty-five years old when I moved to Arizona, and finally found a home and the comfortable feeling of belonging to something smaller than a nation. I was introduced to Arizona by my wife, Cindy, whose love for this place I soon shared. Guided by her superior judgment, to which I am always indebted, we made the decision to raise our children here. This place has come to mean so much to me for many reasons. But first among them, is my family, whose happiness and mine is inseparable from our love of life in Arizona.

When I entered politics here, I was viewed with resentment by some for my lack of an Arizona pedigree. And in truth, although I worked hard, I did not know as much about the state as one of its representatives to Congress should know. Moreover, in my two terms in the House, I had the reputation of an often confrontational partisan.

Mo Udall was the Chairman of the House Interior Committee, a Democratic Party elder, accomplished legislator, one of the most respected members of the House, and, of course, a beloved and revered figure in Arizona. In the current political culture, the differences between Mo and me, in our politics, personalities, and backgrounds would make our friendship and occasional political alliance seem an unlikely development. But we were friends, and we did work together to protect the natural heritage and resources of the state we served, and on behalf of the Native Americans who live here. That was almost entirely Mo's doing, and I am as grateful to him as I am to any person for teaching me not only how to be a better public servant, but a better man.

I was the most junior minority member of the Interior Committee. After the first Committee hearing I attended, I was surprised when the Chairman asked to speak to me privately. We talked about some of the issues the Committee would address that year, and he advised me that Arizonans had a tradition of working together in Congress, despite differences in party affiliations, on issues important to the state. He reminded me that he and Barry were good friends, and expressed the hope that he and I would be too. I was bowled over by his gesture and left the meeting convinced that a relationship with Mo Udall would be the biggest break I was likely to receive at the start of my political career. As it turned out, it was one of the biggest breaks of my life.

In the spring of my first year in Congress, Mo invited me to accompany him to Casa Grande, Arizona, where he was going to hold a press conference to talk about issues before the Committee affecting the state. His stature in Arizona was infinitely greater than mine. He could turn out a much bigger crowd than any group willing to waste a Saturday afternoon listening to me. He spoke first and very knowledgably. As he addressed each issue, he would preface his comments with, "Congressman McCain and I are working on this." Of course, we weren't. Not me, anyway, not yet. I barely understood the difference between the U.S, Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management, and couldn't tell a copper mine from a cotton farm. At the end of his performance, he paused and said he was more interested in my thoughts on the issues. I gulped and managed to spend a few minutes faking some competence without completely embarrassing myself.

I knew Mo's affected confidence in me was an act of kindness and offered with the trust that I would eventually learn enough about the issues to warrant his faith. He was deliberately sharing his prestige with me to help me build greater credibility with my constituents, an uncommonly generous thing to do on behalf of a member of the opposite party. But Mo never saw me as a threat or even as an uninformed, inexperienced and somewhat presumptuous politician. To him, I was a well-intentioned servant of my country, and a fellow Arizonan, who might someday be able to help him accomplish important things for our state. He trusted me, and I wanted very much to convince him that he had not made a mistake.

We drove back together to Phoenix that day without our staffs present. I listened to Mo talk about Arizona, about Barry and the territorial politics their families had figured so prominently in. All of it was fascinating and useful to me as I struggled to understand my new profession and my new state. We parted that day as friends, and friends we remained for the rest of his life.

We have many challenges before our country, both at home and abroad: challenges such as entitlement reform, energy security, health care, the housing crisis, and a global threat from Islamic extremists, to name a few of the most important, that require a strict attention to our responsibilities as public servants and our recognition that we cannot discharge those responsibilities to the satisfaction of the people we serve unless we work cooperatively across party lines without compromising our principles. Despite the increasing harshness of our debates, and the lack of respect it often occasions for each side's good will, I still believe we can and must come together on issues that cannot be addressed without our cooperation. Mo Udall and Barry Goldwater taught me to believe that we are Americans first and partisans second, and I want to be a President that honors their faith in us.

We have our disagreements, we Americans. We contend regularly and enthusiastically over many questions: over the size and purposes of our government; over the social responsibilities we accept in accord with the dictates of our conscience; over our role in the world and how to defend our security interests and values in places where they are threatened. These are important questions; worth arguing about. We should contend over them with one another. It is more than appropriate, it is necessary that even in times of crisis, especially in times of crisis, we fight among ourselves for the things we believe in. It is not just our right, but our civic and moral obligation.

But we deserve more than tolerance from one another, we deserve each other's respect, whether we think each other right or wrong in our views, as long as our character and sincerity merit respect, and as long as we share, for all our differences, for all the noisy debates that enliven our politics, a mutual devotion to the sublime idea that this nation was conceived in -- that freedom is the inalienable right of mankind, and in accord with the laws of nature and nature's Creator.

We have so much more that unites us than divides us. We need only to look to the enemy who now threatens us, and the benighted ideals to which Islamic extremists pledge allegiance -- their disdain for the rights of Man, their contempt for innocent human life -- to appreciate how much unites us.

Let us argue with each other then. By all means, let us argue. Our differences are not petty, they often involve cherished beliefs, and represent our best judgment about what is right for our country and humanity. Let us defend those beliefs. Let's do so sincerely and strenuously. It is our right and duty to do so.

Let us exercise our responsibilities as free people. But let us remember, we are not enemies. We are compatriots defending ourselves from a real enemy. We have nothing to fear from each other. We are arguing over the means to better secure our freedom, promote the general welfare and defend our ideals. It should remain an argument among friends; each of us struggling to hear our conscience, and heed its demands; each of us, despite our differences, united in our great cause, and respectful of the goodness in each other.

Ten years have passed since Barry Goldwater and Mo Udall, the best of friends, honorable public servants and Arizona's favorite sons, died in the same year. But their example showed us how to be better Americans, better people. I intend to wage this campaign and to govern this country in a way that they would be proud of me as I have always been proud of them.

Thank you.

Obama campaign manager David Plouffe On Michigan Delegates

Obama campaign manager David Plouffe On Michigan Delegates

“Senator Obama firmly believes that the Michigan delegation should be seated in Denver. A 50/50 split of the delegates is an eminently fair solution, especially since originally Senator Clinton herself said the Michigan primary wouldn’t ‘count for anything.’ It’s now up to the Clinton campaign: they can agree to a fair resolution or they can continue trying to score political points and change the rules. It’s time to move forward. Senator Clinton should accept an equitable solution that allows Michigan to participate fully in the convention,” said Obama campaign manager David Plouffe.

Statement of Jay Carson, Clinton Campaign Spokesman On Senator Hillary Clinton and President Bill Clinton Releasing Their Tax Returns

Statement of Jay Carson, Clinton Campaign Spokesman

Today Senator Hillary Clinton and President Bill Clinton are releasing their tax returns for the years 2000 through 2006, and are providing information regarding their 2007 taxes as well.

The Clintons have now made public thirty years of tax returns, a record matched by few people in public service.  None of Hillary Clinton's presidential opponents have revealed anything close to this amount of personal financial information.

What the Clintons' tax returns show is that they paid more than $33,000,000 in federal taxes and donated more than $10,000,000 to charities over the past eight years.  They paid taxes and made charitable contributions at a higher rate than taxpayers at their income level. 

2000 - 2007 TAX RETURN SUMMARY

HILLARY & BILL CLINTON

TAXES PAID:  $33,783,507

The Clintons paid $33,783,507 in federal taxes – 31% of their adjusted gross income.  According to the most recent data available from the IRS, in 2005 taxpayers earning $10,000,000 or more paid on average 20.8% of their adjusted gross income in taxes.

CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS:  $10,256,741

The Clintons donated $10,256,741 to charity – 9.5% of their adjusted gross income.  According to the most recent data available from the IRS, in 2005 taxpayers earning $10,000,000 or more contributed 3.1% of their adjusted gross income in cash contributions to charity.  Information about the Clinton Family Foundation, including a list of charities to which the Clintons contributed through the Foundation, is available online in the Foundation's publicly available tax returns (www.foundationcenter.org).   

AFTER TAX EARNINGS:  $57,157,297

CUMULATIVE TOTAL(GROSS) INCOME:  $109,175,175

Including, among other items:   

Senator Clinton’s Senate Salary: $1,051,606

President Clinton’s Presidential Pension: $1,217,250

Senator Clinton’s Book Income: $10,457,083

President Clinton’s Book Income: $29,580,525

President Clinton’s Speech Income: $51,855,599

SENATOR CLINTON’S BOOK INCOME: $10,457,083

Senator Clinton’s book income is comprised of earnings for Living History ($10,267,895), including an $8,000,000 advance, and It Takes a Village ($189,188).  The earnings for It Takes a Village were donated to charity.  Since the release of It Takes a Village in 1996, Senator Clinton has donated over $1,100,000 to charity.

PRESIDENT CLINTON’S BOOK INCOME:  $29,580,525

President Clinton’s book income is comprised of earnings for My Life ($23,280,525), including a $15,000,000 advance, and Giving ($6,300,000).  The President donated $1,000,000 of his income from Giving in 2007 to charity. 

PRESIDENT CLINTON’S SPEECH INCOME:  $51,855,599

NOTE:  The figures in this summary include 2007 estimates.