Quotes of the day

posted at 10:59 pm on December 13, 2011 by Allahpundit

“Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney blasted rival Newt Gingrich Tuesday as an ‘extremely unreliable leader in the conservative world’ who has taken positions in this campaign that should give GOP voters pause as they consider their choices for the party’s nomination…

“‘He has been an extraordinarily unreliable leader in the conservative world—not 16 or 17 years ago but in the last two to three years,’ Romney said. ‘And even during the campaign, the number of times he has moved from one spot to another has been remarkable. I think he’s shown a level of unreliability as a conservative leader today.’…

“‘Let’s look at the record,’ he said. ‘When Republicans were fighting for cap and trade and needed a leader to stand up against cap and trade, he did an ad with Nancy Pelosi about global warming,’ he said. ‘When Republicans took one of the most courageous votes I’ve seen in at least a decade to call for the reform of Medicare under the Paul Ryan plan, he goes public and says this is a ‘right-wing social engineering’ plan. Even today he called it ‘suicide.’”

***

“1994 is very tough on Romney. The contrast between Romney and Gingrich in this year of GOP ascendancy and congressional clout unrealized since the days of Eisenhower and Truman that many conservatives may find it disqualifying. Whatever Republicans come to think of Gingrich’s leadership style as speaker, they know Gingrich helped lead the GOP to its first House majority in 40 years and didn’t tinker around the edges with his newly won power. An agenda that achieved spending cuts, sought and over time won a balanced budget, welfare reform, tax cuts, telecommunications reform and congressional reform is not and was not timid…

“At the same time, Romney was running against Kennedy in Massachusetts, a liberal state where a successful Republican had to soften some of the harder edges of the GOP’s anti-Clinton, anti-Democratic rhetoric. Romney softened them past the state of sponginess and came out on the hardened side of opposition…

“Gingrich called the idea of a party committing to an agenda and inviting voters to throw them out if they didn’t follow through ‘revolutionary.’ At an important moment in the party’s history and ideological move toward conservatism, Gingrich and Romney drew very different conclusions about what would work and what would fail. This is known as a contrast and a historical fact.”

***

“Inside D.C., it sounds very strange to say that Gingrich is an ‘outsider.’ Gingrich has eaten from just about every trough imaginable inside the Beltway. And yet, he’s always been very clear that he wants to (‘fundamentally,’ ‘historically,’ ‘categorically’ and ‘radically’) overturn the existing order. Some critics always thought, plausibly, that such pronouncements were part of his act or a sign of his megalomania.

“But there’s another possibility: It’s true. Moreover, the times may be ripe for precisely the sort of vexing, vainglorious and all-too-human revolutionary Gingrich claims to be. That’s the argument a few people have been wrestling with. Gingrich, after all, is the only candidate to actually move the government rightward. While getting wealthy off the old order, he’s been plotting for decades how to get rid of it. To paraphrase Lenin, perhaps the K Streeters paid Gingrich to build the gallows he will hang them on?

“That remains a stretch. Mitt Romney is still the sensible choice if you believe these are rough, but generally sensible, times. If, however, you think these are crazy and extraordinary times, then perhaps they call for a crazy, extraordinary — very high-risk, very high-reward — figure like Gingrich.”

***

“Our world that’s coming is a world of narrowing, not widening, choices. It’s a world that suits Mr. Romney’s skills and history, his knack for operating within constraints and making choices based on data, data, data. Mr. Obama lives in the same world, of course, but is unequipped to deal with it given his dubious gifts for execution, execution, execution. Also, given his inclination to seek refuge in a clueless reverie of big new programs at a time when the resources simply don’t exist.

“Nor is there a Big Idea that can transform our unhappy prospects. Lunar mining will not rescue Medicare. People like Mr. Gingrich play a useful role in politics: It’s good to be able to talk thrillingly about history, civilization. But they make bad—perhaps we should say, unnecessary—presidents. When ideas are new and unfamiliar, they’re not executable. When they’re executable we need people who can execute.

“The consensus for painful reform comes when the status quo hits the wall. It’s a myth that we don’t know what our choices are. That’s the Romney moment. His strong suit has always been to do what everyone else has put off.”

***

“Just as Kerry’s candidacy represented an attempt to effectively out-patriot George W. Bush (‘You have a war president? We have a war hero!’), the former speaker has skillfully played to the Republican desire for a candidate who can finally outsmart and out-orate Obama…

“In reality, Kerry outdebated Bush but did not outpoll him, Al Gore won the 2000 debates on points only to lose them on personality, and Abraham Lincoln lost the Illinois Senate race to Stephen Douglas. When a presidential debate does matter to a campaign’s outcome, it’s usually a passing one-liner (Ronald Reagan’s ‘there you go again’ Walter Mondale’s ‘where’s the beef?’) rather than a Ciceronian performance that makes the difference.

“More important for the Republican Party’s purposes, it isn’t 2008 anymore, and conservatives don’t actually need to explode the fantasy of Obama’s eloquence and omnicompetence. The harsh reality of governing has already done that for them. Nobody awaits the president’s speeches with panting anticipation these days, or expects him to slay his opponents with the power of his intellect. Obamamania peaked with the inauguration, and it’s been ebbing ever since…

“Conservatives may want catharsis, but the rest of the public seems to mainly want reassurance.”

***

“‘The longer this race goes, the more you’re going to see these Republican candidates try to mortgage the general election to try and win the primary campaign,’ said David Axelrod, the chief strategist for the president’s re-election campaign. He added, ‘They’re being tugged to the right every day.’…

“‘Just remember, the higher a monkey climbs on a pole, the more you can see his butt,’ Mr. Axelrod said. ‘So, you know, the speaker is very high on the pole right now, and we’ll see how people like the view.’”

***

“In a written statement, Romney welcomed the endorsement.

“‘Christine has been a leader in the conservative movement for many years,’ Romney said. ‘Christine recognizes that excessive government threatens us now and threatens future generations, and I am pleased to have her on my team.’”


***

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5

John the Libertarian on December 14, 2011 at 12:14 AM

I meant his plan to balance the budget. How long does it take to balance?

FloatingRock on December 14, 2011 at 12:19 AM

Okay. On 2 different threads I’ve tried to link to the latest Newsweek “Newt” cover that looks as photoshopped as when Teevee Guide ran a cover with Oprah’s head on Ann-Margret’s body. Both vanished into the ether. Must be doing something wrong or–aaak!–moderated and rejected. If the latter, after hitting “Submit” I want a pop-up that says, ‘You have been weighed, measured, and found wanting. nyaaah‘.

Yours Truly,
Mrs. Whiny-pants McButthurt
:)

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on December 14, 2011 at 12:19 AM

It’s liberating. Supporting Romney is much easier than supporting a not-Romney — it requires less work, fact-finding, or reason. All I have to do is copy-and-paste whatever Jennifer Rubin, National Review, Glenn Beck, etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum provides me.

Punchenko on December 14, 2011 at 12:18 AM

Well it sounds like a really sweet deal. And you’re getting paid, right? I might like to get in on something like that myself.

cynccook on December 14, 2011 at 12:19 AM

Cindy Munford
Romney doesn’t have anything to hang onto except Romneycare. Mediocre governorship, lots of private business experience that mostly consisted of leveraged buy-outs of failing companies and good hair for his age. Let go of Romneycare and he is pretty much standing out in the prairie alone.

On the other hand, I don’t like Newt. I remember his shenanigans in the ’90′s.

Don’t care for Jubilation T. Huntsman, Santorum, Paul or Perry. Like Michelle Bachmann, but she is slightly nuts.

Sarah and the Herminator are gone.

Glad I am a monarchist and don’t have to sort all this out.

Horace on December 14, 2011 at 12:20 AM

a lover of illegals and muslims.

Igor R. on December 14, 2011 at 12:18 AM

??

John the Libertarian on December 14, 2011 at 12:20 AM

Small, shriveled up, cranky and crazy government FTW!

29Victor on December 14, 2011 at 12:17 AM

Constitutional government is not crazy.

FloatingRock on December 14, 2011 at 12:21 AM

I meant his plan to balance the budget. How long does it take to balance?

FloatingRock on December 14, 2011 at 12:19 AM

I don’t know.

But he’s for a balanced-budget amendment.

John the Libertarian on December 14, 2011 at 12:22 AM

Cindy Munford
Oh, and BTW, don’t sell yourself short. Babery knows no age limits. I am 63 and still a major stud. (However, please don’t tell my kids – they will strain something with their laughter.)

Horace on December 14, 2011 at 12:22 AM

Sarah Palin was not a “top” candidate. She was, is, and remains hopelessly bankrupt in the market of public opinion, fairly or unfairly, and would have fared no better than her Minnesotan avatar, Michele Bachmann.

KingGold on December 13, 2011 at 11:29 PM

This kind of vitriol will not get your candidate any support at all. This is what will get the One re-elected. I certainly hope you are not supporting Perry as that would give me serious pause in supporting him.

abupundit on December 14, 2011 at 12:23 AM

You have been weighed, measured, and found wanting.

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on December 14, 2011 at 12:19 AM

Nice Knight’s Tale reference.

John the Libertarian on December 14, 2011 at 12:25 AM

??

John the Libertarian on December 14, 2011 at 12:20 AM

“heartless”/Aga Khan, Norquist.

Igor R. on December 14, 2011 at 12:25 AM

Newt is a gigantic big headed joke compared to every other candidate including Romney.

akaniku on December 14, 2011 at 12:25 AM

Horace on December 14, 2011 at 12:20 AM

I liked what Newt did while Speaker. If GHW Bush had listened to him he might have had a second term. He is an idea guy and some of them have been real stinkers but implementing them is another story. At least I would trust him not to build a shadow government like The Won has to implement things that the public doesn’t want.

Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 12:27 AM

Well it sounds like a really sweet deal. And you’re getting paid, right? I might like to get in on something like that myself.

cynccook on December 14, 2011 at 12:19 AM

Of course I’m getting paid! When Mitt Romney says ORGANIZATION, he means it!

Organization wins elections, you know. Votes are just a formality that signifies you are either with Mitt or you are lukewarm with Mitt. There is no voting against Mitt since I am told that is impossible and that his organization and money trumps actually voting.

Mitt will also win Iowa since he will have the most money to bus people in to vote for him even if they don’t want to vote for him. I think I learned that from a Republican on CNN who stressed Romney’s superior organization will win him Iowa. We’re just going to bus in the voters.

Organization…

Punchenko on December 14, 2011 at 12:27 AM

(However, please don’t tell my kids – they will strain something with their laughter.)

Horace on December 14, 2011 at 12:22 AM

Oh, please, what do kids know. Not much and most of it’s wrong.

Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 12:28 AM

Where are canopfor, Dire, carbon, ALT, sharrukin, etc.?

cynccook on December 14, 2011 at 12:28 AM

Glad I am a monarchist…

Horace on December 14, 2011 at 12:20 AM

Welcome aboard to Team Romney! :-)

Punchenko on December 14, 2011 at 12:29 AM

“‘Just remember, the higher a monkey climbs on a pole, the more you can see his butt,’ Mr. Axelrod said. ‘So, you know, the speaker is very high on the pole right now, and we’ll see how people like the view.’”

The media w/b all over this and the R who’d have said it w/b fired instantly, alas.

Axelturd is a racist and a dummy.

————-
O’Donnell was really weird on Hannity tonight, ranting against the TEA partiers who opposed her Romney-backing.

Schadenfreude on December 14, 2011 at 12:29 AM

Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 12:09 AM

In the top two right now we’ve got one (Gingrich) who has said many times that FDR was the greatest president of all time and another (Romney) who proudly proclaimed that he was not a partisan Republican, but a progressive. I believe them both, since these pronouncements predated their run for the presidency.

Then, I see the Iowa caucuses and the NH primary, which those kinds of statements/beliefs may not have the kind of impact where you and I live. I honestly worry whether we can stop this bus before it runs off the cliff, giving Obama another term and this nation its grave.

TXUS on December 14, 2011 at 12:29 AM

Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 12:00 AM

Seeeeeeeee!!!! There is the gold standard mentioned!
I can’t say that!
(that’s why some of us have had a “poster” crush with CM)

KOOLAID2 on December 14, 2011 at 12:30 AM

From the Jenkins story in WSJ (4th story listed):

When ideas are new and unfamiliar, they’re not executable.

Glad Jenkins wasn’t around when Orville and Wilbur Wright started tinkering…

Glad Jenkins wasn’t in charge in 1962, and all the followed, NASA, Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, moon, etc…

I think Steve Jobs would have had something to say about that statement too…

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on December 14, 2011 at 12:30 AM

“heartless”/Aga Khan, Norquist.

Igor R. on December 14, 2011 at 12:25 AM

I glanced over some of the Muslim controversy and found it wanting. But I do take a stance on the attack on Perry as being pro-illegal because 97% of his legislature passed the bill to grant in-state tuition to the CHILDREN of illegal aliens who are, bless their hearts, dragged across the border without their consent and who are learning English and trying to get ahead and realize the American dream. Seems they did an economic analysis of the plan and it came up roses.

John the Libertarian on December 14, 2011 at 12:33 AM

Of course I’m getting paid! When Mitt Romney says ORGANIZATION, he means it!

Organization wins elections, you know. Votes are just a formality that signifies you are either with Mitt or you are lukewarm with Mitt. There is no voting against Mitt since I am told that is impossible and that his organization and money trumps actually voting.

Organization…

Punchenko on December 14, 2011 at 12:27 AM

LOL I don’t know where you get the energy to keep going against the Mittbot machinery.

cynccook on December 14, 2011 at 12:33 AM

Nice Knight’s Tale reference.

John the Libertarian on December 14, 2011 at 12:25 AM

I bow to your awesomeness, sir. :)

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on December 14, 2011 at 12:33 AM

Yours Truly,
Mrs. Whiny-pants McButthurt
:)

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on December 14, 2011 at 12:19 AM

Just for you, dear Lady. Click on #2.

Schadenfreude on December 14, 2011 at 12:35 AM

KOOLAID2 on December 14, 2011 at 12:30 AM

Be careful I may not be able to get my fat head through the doors if you keep being so nice.

Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 12:35 AM

But he’s for a balanced-budget amendment.

John the Libertarian on December 14, 2011 at 12:22 AM

Ron Paul is the only candidate that has convinced me that he means it when he says he will balance the budget in his first term. Sure, every other candidate that’s run for office in the last several decades has made the same promise and broken it but I believe Ron Paul actually says what he means and means what he says.

FloatingRock on December 14, 2011 at 12:36 AM

LOL I don’t know where you get the energy to keep going against the Mittbot machinery.

cynccook on December 14, 2011 at 12:33 AM

I don’t know either.

I guess I’m fed up with the groomed Establishment pick being foisted on us every cycle. I’m also let down to see so many folks I used to respect (like Brit Hume) fall in line with Romney and show their true colors. :-(

Punchenko on December 14, 2011 at 12:36 AM

John the Libertarian
Nice grab on Chaucer.
But let us not forget the Wife of Bath’s tale and that memorable line:
“Is it for ye wolde have my queynte allone?”
I wonder if they said “qupid stueyntes” bakc in those days?

Horace on December 14, 2011 at 12:36 AM

cynccook on December 14, 2011 at 12:28 AM

I think canopfer signed off on another thread about an hour ago.
Last night I think he was still on at 2 AM or so…and elsewhere at 6 AM or so.
Just takes long naps!

KOOLAID2 on December 14, 2011 at 12:37 AM

Sure, every other candidate that’s run for office in the last several decades has made the same promise and broken it but I believe Ron Paul actually says what he means and means what he says.

FloatingRock on December 14, 2011 at 12:36 AM

If he continues to do well, what do you think will be the thing they use most against him?

cynccook on December 14, 2011 at 12:37 AM

Palin is a groupie-bilking fruitloop with delusions of grandeur …MelonCollie

She’s done a lot to to shine the spotlight on the evils of Obamacare, both parties rampant cronyism and the need for energy independence.. When she speaks everyone seems interested. If she has “delusions of grandeur” they are not delusions. A lot of blog posters have “delusions of grandeur”.

BoxHead1 on December 14, 2011 at 12:38 AM

TXUS on December 14, 2011 at 12:29 AM

Yes, but that’s the top two now, I’ve spent most of this primary season wondering “what the firetruck!”.

Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 12:38 AM

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on December 14, 2011 at 12:33 AM

I loved that movie, and every time I see Dark Knight, I grieve over Heath Ledger’s passing. What an immense talent.

John the Libertarian on December 14, 2011 at 12:38 AM

Wake up Newt supporters! Only Mitt Romney can lead us to the promised land… which I’m told is Missouri! Only Mitt can shrink government like he did in Massachusetts! Read your Glenn Beck!

Punchenko on December 13, 2011 at 11:50 PM

heh.
“Everyone who’s successfully fought and help defeat government mandated healthcare raise your hand.
You! The one with the magic hair. I said ‘fought and defeat’ not ‘craft and implement.’ You can put your hand down.”

29Victor on December 14, 2011 at 12:38 AM

Mitt Romney went cheap on the Christine O’Donnell and Chris Christie endorsements. I’m told they are being paid in glazed doughnuts and Yoohoo.

Punchenko on December 14, 2011 at 12:38 AM

I glanced over some of the Muslim controversy and found it wanting. But I do take a stance on the attack on Perry as being pro-illegal because 97% of his legislature passed the bill to grant in-state tuition to the CHILDREN of illegal aliens who are, bless their hearts, dragged across the border without their consent and who are learning English and trying to get ahead and realize the American dream. Seems they did an economic analysis of the plan and it came up roses.

John the Libertarian on December 14, 2011 at 12:33 AM

You have a guy who has recently started saying that he’ll deport all illegals, but a short time ago said it was heartless not to educate some of them. These CHILDREN are still illegal. So you have a guy who wants to have it both ways. What would he do: educate them and then deport them? If not, just come out and say it. A typical, lying, pandering politician. If you consider his “bi-national” insurance interest he sounds a lot like an open-borders guy who really likes saying he “wants to secure the border first”. He was supported in the past by large agri-businesses who need illegals, and I don’t trust him one bit.

Igor R. on December 14, 2011 at 12:39 AM

BoxHead1 on December 14, 2011 at 12:38 AM

I’m pretty sure that if someone goes out of their way to make a totally hateful unnecessary remark about a person who isn’t the subject of the thread their goal is to prove their badassery and cannot be convinced of anything positive.

Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 12:40 AM

Sarah Palin was not a “top” candidate.

KingGold on December 13, 2011 at 11:29 PM

I think she might have been able to work into one by this time. Have you seen her recent Fox appearances? She has gotten exponentially tougher and tougher. I’d like to watch her go after Gingrich.
Her values against his values.

DoubleClutchin on December 14, 2011 at 12:40 AM

I wonder if they said “qupid stueyntes” bakc in those days?

Horace on December 14, 2011 at 12:36 AM

Turns out I had one of the leading professors in Chaucer when I took the class in the original Middle English — what a pain in the butt. But he also assigned Boethius, and that book, which is all about the turn of the Wheel of Fortune, blew me away so much that I finally succumbed to go to a professor’s office hours. That’s when he recommended The Cloud of Unknowing.

John the Libertarian on December 14, 2011 at 12:41 AM

I don’t know either.

I guess I’m fed up with the groomed Establishment pick being foisted on us every cycle. I’m also let down to see so many folks I used to respect (like Brit Hume) fall in line with Romney and show their true colors. :-(

Punchenko on December 14, 2011 at 12:36 AM

I’ve thought about that and I’ve come to believe that the people who can support Romney are the ones who’ve never really cared about abortion, gay marriage or small government in the first place. If they had, they’d be a lot more concerned about his flip-flops on those issues. Gingrich isn’t perfect, but I believe that he is at heart a conservative, not just a moderate pretending to be one.

cynccook on December 14, 2011 at 12:42 AM

I’m also let down to see so many folks I used to respect (like Brit Hume) fall in line with Romney and show their true colors. :-(

Punchenko on December 14, 2011 at 12:36 AM

It’s been fun to see him and Krauthammer suffer, nightly, lately. They can’t help themselve. Last night Greta criticized Hume for it.

Schadenfreude on December 14, 2011 at 12:43 AM

Igor R. on December 14, 2011 at 12:39 AM

I thought you’d be bored with this by now. What did you do with your evenings before your Newt Must Be Defeated chip was activated?

cynccook on December 14, 2011 at 12:45 AM

cynccook on December 14, 2011 at 12:42 AM

I don’t know, I believe that since he left Fox full time, Mr. Hume has been going to seminary to be clergy. I wonder if Newt’s personal life is his big problem? I’m speaking completely out of turn but if it is I think he might be a bit to judgmental for that profession.

Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 12:46 AM

These CHILDREN are still illegal.

Igor R. on December 14, 2011 at 12:39 AM

I disagree.

John the Libertarian on December 14, 2011 at 12:46 AM

Cindy Munford

Your right, I missed that. MelonCollie was trying to do it’s badass pose and I took it seriously.

BoxHead1 on December 14, 2011 at 12:46 AM

Igor R. on December 14, 2011 at 12:39 AM

That’s why I’m with Mitt Romney. Mitt will always be straight with you and tell you what he says and what he means when he is saying it at that exact moment. Moments later he will tell you what he meant when he said the things when he was saying them. Saying and meaning are things that will be meant when he says them, but will mean different things when the saying takes on new meanings. This new meaning — with concern to immigration — will have a different saying under the banner of a new, but not so new, meaning. He means well, says well, and will always be straight with you… until he says something else meaning something entirely new.

I hope I didn’t confuse anyone, but Mitt’s my guy! :-)

Punchenko on December 14, 2011 at 12:47 AM

Constitutional government is not crazy.

FloatingRock on December 14, 2011 at 12:21 AM

(I wasn’t talking about Constitutional government. I was talking about Ron Paul)

Dang. Do you have to spell everything out to these Paulnuts?

29Victor on December 14, 2011 at 12:47 AM

I thought you’d be bored with this by now. What did you do with your evenings before your Newt Must Be Defeated chip was activated?

cynccook on December 14, 2011 at 12:45 AM

Watched Fox and read all kinds of websites, which is what I still do although now slightly distracted by posting.

Igor R. on December 14, 2011 at 12:47 AM

I don’t know, I believe that since he left Fox full time, Mr. Hume has been going to seminary to be clergy. I wonder if Newt’s personal life is his big problem? I’m speaking completely out of turn but if it is I think he might be a bit to judgmental for that profession.

Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 12:46 AM

LOL Well, that would be funny if it’s true. I can just imagine all the wives elbowing their husbands awake as Pastor Brit drones on and on from the pulpit in his monotone.

cynccook on December 14, 2011 at 12:48 AM

Gingrich isn’t perfect, but I believe that he is at heart a conservative, not just a moderate pretending to be one.

cynccook on December 14, 2011 at 12:42 AM

I do, too. I think Newt will really shake things up if he wins and that has the status-quo in Washington reeling in fear.

Punchenko on December 14, 2011 at 12:49 AM

Punchenko on December 14, 2011 at 12:47 AM

Yer killin’ me!

29Victor on December 14, 2011 at 12:49 AM

I disagree.

John the Libertarian on December 14, 2011 at 12:46 AM

How can you disagree with facts? Unless they are the anchor babies, and we are not talking about these at the moment, they are just as illegal as their parents. Have you personally legalized them? Or just saying they are not illegal makes them so?

Igor R. on December 14, 2011 at 12:50 AM

BoxHead1 on December 14, 2011 at 12:46 AM

I saw an earlier comment by the same person bragging on how many “Palinistas” and Obamabots she had taken own and the Palinista number was much larger. I think someone has a rather skewed idea of who the real problem is.

Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 12:50 AM

I haven’t even read all the QOTD yet. But I gotta say, seeing O’Donnell’s photo gives me the dry heaves. And the runs. At the same time.

Splashman on December 14, 2011 at 12:51 AM

Just for you, dear Lady. Click on #2.

Schadenfreude on December 14, 2011 at 12:35

I am humbled by your wizardry. :)

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on December 14, 2011 at 12:51 AM

That’s why I’m with Mitt Romney. Mitt will always be straight with you and tell you what he says and what he means when he is saying it at that exact moment. Moments later he will tell you what he meant when he said the things when he was saying them. Saying and meaning are things that will be meant when he says them, but will mean different things when the saying takes on new meanings. This new meaning — with concern to immigration — will have a different saying under the banner of a new, but not so new, meaning. He means well, says well, and will always be straight with you… until he says something else meaning something entirely new.

I hope I didn’t confuse anyone, but Mitt’s my guy! :-)

Punchenko on December 14, 2011 at 12:47 AM

There are other choices besides Grandpa and the studs.

Igor R. on December 14, 2011 at 12:52 AM

cynccook on December 14, 2011 at 12:48 AM

I liked him as a journalist, I don’t think I will be joining his flock.

Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 12:52 AM

Good night all. Hard to get worked up about all this right now with so much left to do for Christmas! Priorities, priorities. Cindy, I hope Mr. Munford gets in tomorrow. Then we could call you guys Ma and Pa Munford!

cynccook on December 14, 2011 at 12:53 AM

An endorsement from O’Donnell isn’t much to hang your hat upon.

specs on December 14, 2011 at 12:53 AM

Splashman on December 14, 2011 at 12:51 AM

You should see someone about your overly delicate constitution. Sounds serious.

Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 12:53 AM

Have you personally legalized them? Or just saying they are not illegal makes them so?

Igor R. on December 14, 2011 at 12:50 AM

I’m saying they should be given special consideration. They are victims of their parents’ transgressions, and I will not punish the children for the sins of their parents.

John the Libertarian on December 14, 2011 at 12:53 AM

I do, too. I think Newt will really shake things up if he wins and that has the status-quo in Washington reeling in fear.

Punchenko on December 14, 2011 at 12:49 AM

Heh heh. Good one! Almost thought you were serious there for a second.

Anyone remember one of the big themes Obama campaigned on? Something about changing the way D.C. operates?

Splashman on December 14, 2011 at 12:54 AM

cynccook on December 14, 2011 at 12:53 AM

I don’t think he plans to comment with a name that will connect us. He’s going to stick with something he uses on other sites.

Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 12:55 AM

29Victor on December 14, 2011 at 12:47 AM

Liar

FloatingRock on December 14, 2011 at 12:55 AM

cynccook on December 14, 2011 at 12:53 AM

Oh! Sweet dreams!!!

Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 12:55 AM

I’m saying they should be given special consideration. They are victims of their parents’ transgressions, and I will not punish the children for the sins of their parents.

John the Libertarian on December 14, 2011 at 12:53 AM

Well, I will follow the law.

Igor R. on December 14, 2011 at 12:56 AM

I am humbled by your wizardry. :)

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on December 14, 2011 at 12:51 AM

Just glad to help. Sometimes different sources are blocked in the HA-mill. At this time no one is there to release them. For ex. all CNN links never make it through right away.

Schadenfreude on December 14, 2011 at 12:56 AM

Barack Obama has been a disaster for the country but a boon to the conservative movement.

While I believe Newt Gingrich would be a far better president than Obama, he would be a disaster to the conservative movement.

I hope I am wrong, but I trust Newt the least of all the GOP contenders.

bw222 on December 14, 2011 at 12:57 AM

Ron Paul is the only candidate that has convinced me that he means it when he says he will balance the budget in his first term. Sure, every other candidate that’s run for office in the last several decades has made the same promise and broken it but I believe Ron Paul actually says what he means and means what he says.

FloatingRock on December 14, 2011 at 12:36 AM

I think he means what he says also which is why I will never vote for him. Last thing we need is a nuclear age Pearl Harbor because we elect someone who’s as naive as he is.

Sultanofsham on December 14, 2011 at 12:57 AM

John the Libertarian
Boethius and his late western empire philosophy of “everything is subject to Providence” is very yawn-producing. No wonder you didn’t care for it.

If you really want to know how life should be lived, read the lyrical poetry of Quintus Horatius Flaccus, a/k/a Horace, my favorite poet. Had two years of Latin and I can still make out most of his writing.

Also, there is Rene Guenon and his great work on the tragedy which occurs when tradition is abandoned, “The Symbolism of the Cross.” Unfortunately, Guenon went nuts late in life and became a mooslim. But his earlier works are sane.

Gotta get to sleep. As a social security retiree, I don’t have to get up at any particular time, but when I do, I thank God for another day and I collectively thank all you taxpayers for another monthly check. Cheers.

Horace on December 14, 2011 at 12:57 AM

I haven’t even read all the QOTD yet.
Splashman on December 14, 2011 at 12:51 AM

DON’T! Just watch the Glenn Beck truth-clip and all will be illuminated for you. Newt Gingrich has somehow managed to rule the ’90s with an iron fist without anyone but Glenn remembering the whole ordeal. Long story short, we must stop Newt before he reinstates his Stalinist regime on the country.

You will need the following:

1.) GBTV All Access subscription.
2.) Glenn Beck’s Own Gourmet Survivalist Meals Ready to Eat.
3.) Glenn Beck’s Survivalist Spork and Emergency Radio.
4.) Glenn Beck’s new book, Being George Washington, on sale at your local Books-A-Million and Barnes and Noble. Buy two now and Glenn will also give you a GBTV T-Shirt and pen.

Punchenko on December 14, 2011 at 12:59 AM

Jailbreak on December 13, 2011 at 11:30 PM
MelonCollie on December 14, 2011 at 12:00 AM

Palin would have beat Romney straight up. Look at how much maneuvering the establishment did to block Palin. They got Michele Bachmann to run because they knew Sarah Palin would kick Romney’s butt. Romney is so damn weak and cowardly that he spent three years trying steal the nomination away from Sarah Palin while she rarely did any campaiging. Romney is pathetic, even with the money and the establishment he was unlikely to beat Sarah Palin. If not for that idiot Rcik Perry, Sarah Palin would have entered the race. However, the sweet part is Mitt Romney is going to lose the nomination and his supporters will cry like the bitches that they are and hopefully Mitt Stassen can finally change his magic underwear after running for the last 6 years.

CoolChange80 on December 14, 2011 at 12:59 AM

Cindy Munford
It’s been real. Gotta get to sleep. Smooch, shooch. Kiss, kiss. Hug, hug. Wink, wink. Nudge, nudge. Know what’ll mean? ‘Night.

Horace on December 14, 2011 at 1:00 AM

You should see someone about your overly delicate constitution. Sounds serious.

Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 12:53 AM

Maybe. Seems to me anyone who doesn’t react to that photo with at least a cold shiver or two, is either blind as a bat or inured to bwitchy hideousness. So I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and suggest you see your optometrist. :)

Splashman on December 14, 2011 at 1:00 AM

“qupid stueyntes” bakc in those days?

Horace on December 14, 2011 at 12:36 AM

As in stunning array of cupid stunts?

John the Libertarian on December 14, 2011 at 1:00 AM

bw222 on December 14, 2011 at 12:57 AM

I can’t speak for anyone else but I don’t give a flying flip about the conservative movement. It’s hardly a monolith as can be seen on this site any time of day. And while I know that Gov. Romney was trying to cater to the people of MA, I have a real problem of his proclaiming himself an “independent” during the Reagan years.

Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 1:03 AM

the lyrical poetry of Quintus Horatius Flaccus, a/k/a Horace, my favorite poet. Had two years of Latin and I can still make out most of his writing.

Also, there is Rene Guenon and his great work on the tragedy which occurs when tradition is abandoned, “The Symbolism of the Cross.” Unfortunately, Guenon went nuts late in life and became a mooslim. But his earlier works are sane.

Horace on December 14, 2011 at 12:57 AM

Thanks for the tips! I’ll add them to my Amazon wish list for Christmas!

John the Libertarian on December 14, 2011 at 1:03 AM

Just watch the Glenn Beck truth-clip and all will be illuminated for you.

Punchenko on December 14, 2011 at 12:59 AM

Ain’t gonna do it. These days, my reaction to GB is only slightly less detrimental than my reaction to CO’D.

Splashman on December 14, 2011 at 1:03 AM

I loved that movie, and every time I see Dark Knight, I grieve over Heath Ledger’s passing. What an immense talent.

John the Libertarian on December 14, 2011 at 12:38 AM

Me too. Can’t believe next month will be 4 years since he died. He disappeared into his characters so well that when my husband said that was him playing Billy Bob Thornton’s doomed son in “Monster’s Ball”, I was ready to challenge him to a cage match until he dragged me to the altar of google.

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on December 14, 2011 at 1:04 AM

Sarah Palin was not a “top” candidate.

KingGold on December 13, 2011 at 11:29 PM

I think she might have been able to work into one by this time. Have you seen her recent Fox appearances? She has gotten exponentially tougher and tougher. I’d like to watch her go after Gingrich.

Her values against his values.

DoubleClutchin on December 14, 2011 at 12:40 AM

Nope. She quit. Twice. That is not what a fighter does. She’s a talking head and she is in the place she belongs, bloviating on TV from Wasilla.

platypus on December 14, 2011 at 1:04 AM

For those Doubting Thomas’ out there who choose to follow Newt off the cliff, here he is cooking his own goose with his own words. Some big conservative Republican, huh??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bob-cehwZGM&feature=related

and

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=T76lD4zV1bo

What’s the matter Newt…no conservative titans to admire? What about Reagan or Lincoln. But FDR?? FDR has made is so our grandchildren’s grandchildren will still be paying for the profligacy and the deranged (and wholly unconstitutional) social programs of the New Deal that he dreamed up. Wilson, FDR and Teddy Roosevelt were perhaps more responsible for our $15 trillion debt as they were the executives who chose to manipulate the intent of the Constitution and do things never dreamed of by the Framers…and they paved the way for the Marxist/socialist Obama and his schemes. And an avowed acolyte of these PROGRESSIVES and enablers is who you want to put in the White House to replace another avowed acolyte?? Really.

It’s not too late! Let’s nominate REAL conservatives rather than a Realpolitik Wilsonian. Good God, didn’t we learn our lesson with John McCain? Must we repeat the mistakes of the past and immediately form a circular firing squad to prove the point? Why not give another look over and some financial support to the REAL conservatives in the race — Bachmann and Santorum. Even Romney is better than Gingrich and would have a better chance against Obama to boot. At least I have never heard Romney sing the praise of FDR to the high heavens. I don’t want to say “I told you so”, but the way things are going I think that I’ll have no other option.

RasThavas on December 14, 2011 at 1:04 AM

Last thing we need is a nuclear age Pearl Harbor because we elect someone who’s as naive as he is.

Sultanofsham on December 14, 2011 at 12:57 AM

The national debt and spending are the greatest national security threat. Generational theft is destroying our future and while you have your sites set overseas our country is being stolen from us right here at home.

FloatingRock on December 14, 2011 at 1:04 AM

Splashman on December 14, 2011 at 1:00 AM

She’s just another human being, if I wouldn’t react that way to liberals why would I react that way towards her? Now why she is being given face time does indeed confuse me.

Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 1:05 AM

I’ve thought about that and I’ve come to believe that the people who can support Romney Gingrich are the ones who’ve never really cared about abortion, gay marriage cutting entitlements or illegals or small government in the first place. If they had, they’d be a lot more concerned about his flip-flops great local board type ideas on those issues. Gingrich Romney isn’t perfect, but I believe that he is at heart a conservative, not just a moderate pretending to be one.

cynccook on December 14, 2011 at 12:42 AM

FIFY

OrthodoxJew on December 14, 2011 at 1:05 AM

Horace on December 14, 2011 at 1:00 AM

Good night, enjoyed your company!!

Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 1:06 AM

that was him playing Billy Bob Thornton’s doomed son in “Monster’s Ball”

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on December 14, 2011 at 1:04 AM

I even love him in The 10 Things I Hate About You.

And I’m not even ghey!

John the Libertarian on December 14, 2011 at 1:08 AM

RasThavas on December 14, 2011 at 1:04 AM

You got that right. Newt fundamentally doesn’t understand conservatism. As a proud historian Newt knows exactly what FDR was all about. Expressing admiration for him is inexcusable.

Igor R. on December 14, 2011 at 1:09 AM

cynccook on December 14, 2011 at 12:42 AM

FIFY

OrthodoxJew on December 14, 2011 at 1:05 AM

Cyn is a very confused lady. She means well, but that’s neither here nor there.

Igor R. on December 14, 2011 at 1:11 AM

Inside D.C., it sounds very strange to say that Gingrich is an ‘outsider.’ Gingrich has eaten from just about every trough imaginable inside the Beltway. And yet, he’s always been very clear that he wants to (‘fundamentally,’ ‘historically,’ ‘categorically’ and ‘radically’) overturn the existing order. Some critics always thought, plausibly, that such pronouncements were part of his act or a sign of his megalomania.

I couldn’t have said it better myself. Of course Gingrich may have different goals than many D.C. politicians. But to position himself as an outsider is beyond parody. It’s exactly what Obama did in the 2008 race. That proud product of the Chicago machine — the filthiest machine in the nation — proclaimed himself the savior and sanctifier of national politics.

Splashman on December 14, 2011 at 1:11 AM

And I’m not even ghey!

John the Libertarian on December 14, 2011 at 1:08 AM

‘Course you aren’t! Else you would have said Bare-er-Brokeback Mountain. :)

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on December 14, 2011 at 1:12 AM

How did Sarah Palin get pulled into this conversation any how? She’s hasn’t endorsed anyone and is pretty much staying away from the circus that is the Republican primary race. I know some here think that her staying out of the race was a good thing, but if they were truly honest they’d admit that if her Oct 5th announcement had been she was in that she’d be crushing the field by now. Crony capitalism/political ‘featherbedding’ would be her theme and none of the other candidates would be busy trying to change the subject, all tainted to some degree, their ‘sticky fingers’ for all to see. You Mittbots, Newtboys, Perrites, Paularions and the rest have to thank your lucky stars that Mrs. P decided to stay out. But then there is still time for her to change the dynamic of the race. Maybe she wanted one more Christmas will the family and enjoy it in peace before joining the fray.

Tarnsman on December 14, 2011 at 1:15 AM

I couldn’t have said it better myself. Of course Gingrich may have different goals than many D.C. politicians. But to position himself as an outsider is beyond parody. It’s exactly what Obama did in the 2008 race. That proud product of the Chicago machine — the filthiest machine in the nation — proclaimed himself the savior and sanctifier of national politics.

Splashman on December 14, 2011 at 1:11 AM

Newt is a smooth liar, almost as good as Obama and almost as sincere-sounding.

Igor R. on December 14, 2011 at 1:15 AM

She’s just another human being, if I wouldn’t react that way to liberals why would I react that way towards her? Now why she is being given face time does indeed confuse me.

Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 1:05 AM

*sigh*

Look, I was just trying to have a little fun with the fact that I find her repulsive, as I do many Libs. If you want to play it straight, be my guest.

Splashman on December 14, 2011 at 1:15 AM

Cyn is a very confused lady. She means well, but that’s neither here nor there.

Igor R. on December 14, 2011 at 1:11 AM

The Gingrich local boards immigration great great great idea, is the most stupid thing i have heard in a long time,

And this and some similar ideas is what we will get with Mr. great ideas,

OrthodoxJew on December 14, 2011 at 1:16 AM

It’s not too late! Let’s nominate REAL conservatives rather than a Realpolitik Wilsonian. Good God, didn’t we learn our lesson with John McCain? Must we repeat the mistakes of the past and immediately form a circular firing squad to prove the point? Why not give another look over and some financial support to the REAL conservatives in the race — Bachmann and Santorum. Even Romney is better than Gingrich and would have a better chance against Obama to boot. At least I have never heard Romney sing the praise of FDR to the high heavens. I don’t want to say “I told you so”, but the way things are going I think that I’ll have no other option.

RasThavas on December 14, 2011 at 1:04 AM

Yes! YES! A MILLION TIMES, YES!

Mitt Romney is the true conservative choice for the truest of conservatives!

Mitt has said repeatedly that he support a woman’s right to choose until he decided he no longer supported it. It was then when he decided he did support it, became governor supporting it, and then stopped supporting it once he decided he no longer supported it.

Supporting or not supporting is not the issue. The real issue is… electability. The only candidate who can win is a candidate who supported it, didn’t support it, supported it again, and then stopped supporting it. We won’t go into detail what “it” really is other than that “it” is a choice — still is a choice! — and a choice that Mitt no longer supports (but did support!) when he did in fact support “it” during his run for the Senate and Governor.

We can trust Mitt, those who support Mitt, and can always rely on Mitt to be open and honest with us about his record. It Mitt doesn’t support “it” he would tell us, right? RIGHT?!

Right

Punchenko on December 14, 2011 at 1:16 AM

I think he means what he says also which is why I will never vote for him. Last thing we need is a nuclear age Pearl Harbor because we elect someone who’s as naive as he is.

Sultanofsham on December 14, 2011 at 12:57 AM

As the man said, “It’s all relative”. At least he is not as fracken cluster stupid as our Pentagon Generals, and their enablers and fans, with their Great Islamic Society Nation Building with all their respecting of Islam and the unholy Koran and all their throwing away of American Treasure and Lives and Limbs down a Big Mohammedan Rat Hole.

VorDaj on December 14, 2011 at 1:17 AM

Splashman on December 14, 2011 at 1:11 AM

I don’t believe that Newt is trying to portray himself as an outsider, people are just confused by many in the Tea Party appear to be embracing him.

Cindy Munford on December 14, 2011 at 1:17 AM

FloatingRock on December 14, 2011 at 12:36 AM

The House sets the budget. The only way Paul can balance it is to keep vetoing it until the house gives in. More likely the house overrides the veto and then what? He talks a good game but without a very conservative house and senate it isn’t going to happen.

chemman on December 14, 2011 at 1:18 AM

Oh, and this is the reaction most of us on the conservative side have when we face up to the realization that we’ll probably end up with Mitt or Newt.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbOjS0Ah7_o

Tarnsman on December 14, 2011 at 1:20 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5