Open thread: Sunday morning talking heads

posted at 8:00 am on December 18, 2011 by Allahpundit

A near-Christmas miracle, my friends: Not only are the Sunday shows actually interesting this morning, two of them qualify as bona fide must-sees. First, Romney will try to explain to Chris Wallace on FNS why he’s the ideal tea-party candidate in his first Sunday-show appearance since, no joke, March 2010. Meanwhile, on “This Week,” some ideological bloodsport to enjoy with your Cheerios — it’s Paul Ryan and George Will debating Barney Frank and Robert Reich on the proper role of the federal government. I like these odds.

Not enough? You’ve also got Newt on FTN and Bachmann on MTP, with awkward subjects in both cases bound to be broached. The full line-up via WaPo:

NBC’s Meet the Press: Rep. John Boehner (R-OH), Speaker of the House; Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN); Gov. Nikki Haley (R-SC); E.J. Dionne, Brookings Institution and Washington Post columnist; Mike Murphy, Republican strategist.

CNN’s State of the Union with Candy Crowley: Jon Huntsman, Republican presidential candidate; Paul Bremer, former presidential envoy to Iraq; Gen. James Cartwright (Ret.), Former Vice-Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff; Robin Wright, Woodrow Wilson Center…

CBS’ Face the Nation: Newt Gingrich

ABC’s This Week: “The Great American Debate” series debuts with Rep. Paul Ryan, (R-WI); George Will, ABC News and The Washington Post; Rep. Barney Frank, (D-MA); Robert Reich, University of California-Berkeley.

Fox News Sunday: Mitt Romney, Republican presidential candidate

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

Barney Frank is the most boorish human being in this universe. Can’t he ever stfu and listen to someone?

NOMOBO on December 18, 2011 at 11:01 AM

His lower pie hole is always stuffed, so his upper pie hole has to do double time.

msupertas on December 18, 2011 at 1:08 PM

The clever Perry voters never cease to amaze me.

rubberneck on December 18, 2011 at 11:44 AM

WRONG assumption, rubber. I will vote for whomever wins the nomination, but I prefer that it not be Milquetoast Mitt.

SheVee on December 18, 2011 at 1:13 PM

Esoteric on December 18, 2011 at 1:01 PM

Baloney. That’s not the idea of Newt’s statement at all. Just yours.

BetseyRoss on December 18, 2011 at 1:16 PM

Romney is coming out of the closet to do the talk show circuit because he is desperate to get above 25%….and can’t.

The Tea Party won’t vote for Romney and neither will Evangelicals.

Romney is a whiny, petulant, Wall Street, Republican elitest RINO.

Does America really Obama Lite?

Sparky5253 on December 18, 2011 at 10:03 AM

Uh-huh, Romney has the backing of the republican establishment/media, but not 70% to 75% of the voters. Hey, that doesn’t matter to the repub elites. They’ll just destroy all of his rivals for the nomination, one by one. Couldn’t believe it when I read what Romney said about how the Tea Party would dump Gingrich and vote for Romney when they realized he is the best man for the nomination.

I agree that Tea Party patriots and Evangelicals will not vote for Romney. His liberal policies and wishy washy flip flops breed an aura of untrustworthiness.

While Romney seems to have gotten a pass for the most part on his religious beliefs, I find it hard to believe that any committed Christian would vote for him. Oh-oh, here come the bricks flying at me. Ouch, that one hurt. Incoming charges of bigotry and non-political correctness!

I don’t care, fire away. Romney’s The Church of Latter Day Saints is a cult; this is a theological fact. Look it up for yourself. They do not believe in the deity of Jesus. They have their own bible; the Book of Mormon. Their ‘god’ was a man living on another planet with his ‘goddess’/ Joseph Smith (their proven false prophet) will sit on the throne and judge us all/they will all be gods/on and on and on.

You can be 100% sure that Obama’s surrogates will use the cult card in the general election if Romney (shudder) wins the nomination. Then you can say hello to four more years of Obama.

IndeCon on December 18, 2011 at 1:21 PM

I’m sure I’m not alone in this one, but I am going to find it very, very difficult to make my way to the polls if Romney is the nominee. There’s not much difference between Romney and Gingrich when you break it down to particulates, but there’s even less difference between Obama and Romney. Neither will do the right thing, opting for special interests over anything. Toss Gingrich on that pile too. Of the three I can’t decide who is worst when I consider that none of them want the office to effect actual positive change, instead they simply ‘want to be president’ and that’s that.

My enthusiasm for any of them is in the negatives. I can’t stand Obama, but we aren’t getting any viable alternatives either. We’re going to have a very bad time the next 4 years when Obama wins lame duck status and completely destroys every god given right we have left.

Wolfmoon on December 18, 2011 at 1:24 PM

You can tell when Romney is nuancing his previous comments. He can’t get a word out without stuttering. It really bugs me how liberal he is/was on accepting the mandate. But I realize that what bothers me does appeal to the indies in many cases. So, it appears that no one else in the field is sufficiently conservative enough and can beat Obama as Romney is. Irrespective of his weaknesses, I believe he will sign GOP passed conservative bills and Obama will not.

csdeven on December 18, 2011 at 12:27 PM

He had a veto-proof Democratic legislature in Massachusetts, and a state constitution that clearly allows for such mandates. I don’t know what people think he should have done. He could have vetoed the bill 100 times and it would have been overridden. If he had not tried to help shape the bill it would have been a single-payer state takeover of health care.

Conservatives do not want to believe that the goal posts have been moved on this issue, but they have. It was the Heritage Foundation that first proposed a mandate for all individuals to purchase health insurance. Democrats are not lying about this. This is why Newt Gingrich was talking it up years ago and why Romney did not expect a backlash from conservatives for agreeing to it in Massachusetts.

What Romney can attack Obama on is that Obama expressly campaigned AGAINST an individual mandate, because it was part of Hillary Clinton’s plan. He lied to the Democratic voters and again to the general voting population on this, just one of many issued he lied about to get elected.

rockmom on December 18, 2011 at 1:29 PM

I’m sure I’m not alone in this one, but I am going to find it very, very difficult to make my way to the polls if Romney is the nominee. There’s not much difference between Romney and Gingrich when you break it down to particulates, but there’s even less difference between Obama and Romney. Neither will do the right thing, opting for special interests over anything. Toss Gingrich on that pile too. Of the three I can’t decide who is worst when I consider that none of them want the office to effect actual positive change, instead they simply ‘want to be president’ and that’s that.

My enthusiasm for any of them is in the negatives. I can’t stand Obama, but we aren’t getting any viable alternatives either. We’re going to have a very bad time the next 4 years when Obama wins lame duck status and completely destroys every god given right we have left.

Wolfmoon on December 18, 2011 at 1:24 PM

I just don’t see how anyone can really say that with a straight face. Romney has said over and over again that he actually cares about the 25 million who are unemployed and has a plan to do something about it. he has said the U.S. is in danger of becoming Greece if we do not get a handle on the debt. Obama doesn’t care about either the debt or about the massive numbers of unemployed, and has no plan except more stupid boondoggles like high-speed rail and Solyndra-style industrial policy. Gingrich has embraced the flat tax, while Obama seems to be perfectly content with out horrible and distortive tax system, as long as he can make it more punitive for those who are successful.

These are really big issues that matter to the future of this country, and there are huge differences between any Republican and Obama on them.

rockmom on December 18, 2011 at 1:34 PM

I don’t care, fire away. Romney’s The Church of Latter Day Saints is a cult; this is a theological fact.

Ok, you are a bigot. I’m sure an atheist would all religious people are cultists.

rubberneck on December 18, 2011 at 1:35 PM

While Romney seems to have gotten a pass for the most part on his religious beliefs, I find it hard to believe that any committed Christian would vote for him. Oh-oh, here come the bricks flying at me. Ouch, that one hurt. Incoming charges of bigotry and non-political correctness!

I don’t care, fire away. Romney’s The Church of Latter Day Saints is a cult; this is a theological fact. Look it up for yourself. They do not believe in the deity of Jesus. They have their own bible; the Book of Mormon. Their ‘god’ was a man living on another planet with his ‘goddess’/ Joseph Smith (their proven false prophet) will sit on the throne and judge us all/they will all be gods/on and on and on.

You can be 100% sure that Obama’s surrogates will use the cult card in the general election if Romney (shudder) wins the nomination. Then you can say hello to four more years of Obama.

IndeCon on December 18, 2011 at 1:21 PM

So you would rather have as President for the next four years the man who sat in Jeremiah Wright’s “church” for 20 years, who was raised as a Muslim, who does not celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ, who refused to issue a statement on Easter but always does for Ramadan.

Or you would prefer the man who was raised as a Baptist but cheated on and left two wives, and now claims to have become a Catholic.

rockmom on December 18, 2011 at 1:38 PM

IndeCon on December 18, 2011 at 1:21 PM

+10

MNH on December 18, 2011 at 1:39 PM

What Romney can attack Obama on is that Obama expressly campaigned AGAINST an individual mandate, because it was part of Hillary Clinton’s plan.

And?
These progressives couldn’t care less about things like that. Matter of fact, I think they get a kick out of conservatives who think things like honoring your words means anything. To them its just a con game. They view the world much like many of the Arabs do. They’ll lie to get their way and then laugh at you for falling for the lie…and then lie to you again with a straight face to see if you’ll fall for that lie.

Isn’t that obvious at this point??

Mimzey on December 18, 2011 at 1:40 PM

I support Romney because of his silky hair, because he is polished, and because he can speak 500 words in one minute and confuses me more than ever. When I choose a candidate the minimum requirement is that he should speak at least 250 words in one minute and gets me confused but Romney speak at least twice that and gets more confused then ever so I cannot find a better candidate.
No I am not worried that Romney is the dream candidate for Obama because Romney is tailored to fit Obama class warfare strategy which would be the main re-election strategy for Obama. No I am not worried that Romney the Wall Street Financier and CEO of Bain capital is a major issue for us in this elections where a majority of voters hate Wall Street. No I am not worried at all that Romney has zero charisma, does not excite anyone, and 70% of Republicans cannot stand him because Romney is going to make up for this by winning the independents who majority of them hate Wall Street but at the same they are so eager to support a literally a Wall Street man like Romney for President.
No nothing to worry about if Romney is the nominee.
The above was super extreme sarcasm.

mnjg on December 18, 2011 at 1:40 PM

Hey, I’m not thrilled with Mitt. But he’s got the best chance of beating Obama, & he’s more conservative than any president we’ve had in the last 80 years except for Reagan.

itsnotaboutme on December 18, 2011 at 8:28 AM

That one cracked me up……

There Goes The Neighborhood on December 18, 2011 at 1:43 PM

While I’m greatly concerned about the SCOTUS, and its appointments, the need for ABO (Anybody But Obama) goes deeper because it’s the only way to undo some of the damage he’s done.

RedCrow on December 18, 2011 at 9:20 AM

For my part, I’d prefer to vote for someone who would, you know, actually undo some of the damage Obama has done.

Mitt would just manage it on a more professional level.

There Goes The Neighborhood on December 18, 2011 at 1:44 PM

When the Tea Party decided to take over the Republican Party, they always knew that the biggest challenge would be the Establishment and elites like Rove, Ingraham, Coulter and Will, et al. The Tea Party needs to stand up to them because they are under the impression that they can be used as useful idiots. I don’t believe the Tea Party should endorse a candidate, but watching the Republican Establishment and elites purposely destroy their own Republican candidates one by one should be unacceptable.

lea on December 18, 2011 at 1:45 PM

Failure to come out and vote for the GOP nominee should be punishable by having to go to dinner with Barack and Michelle…after he gets reelected. You can call Romney “Obama Lite” all you want. If you like looking stupid then that’s your prerogative. Instead of attacking Romney you’d be more useful spending your time, energy and money toward making sure Republicans keep the House and take the Senate.

cicerone on December 18, 2011 at 1:50 PM

It’s a shame we couldn’t get better candidates this cycle. :-(

Obama will most likely get another four years with the money he has on hand, a bouncing back economy, and the fact Romney will struggle to take Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and North Carolina. Virginia has a high Evangelical population in the Southwest — Falwell & Co. — and I don’t think they’re going to be sold on the Mormon thing once Obama Inc. ratchets up the attacks (remember: the creators of South Park hit Broadway gold with a musical lampooning Mormonism, we all know what’s coming.) Obama was even snapped with the family attending church last Sunday to get the narratives ready.

What a shame. :-(

Punchenko on December 18, 2011 at 1:51 PM

I really enjoyed the seldom mentioned “Reliable Sources” program today. Of special interest on the panel was Ramesh Ponnuru of National Review, on why his publication and he, himself eviscerate Mr. Gingrich when he knows Team Obama will make hay (and attack ads) using their most malevolent quotes if Gingrich wins the nomination.

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on December 18, 2011 at 1:59 PM

Watched “THIS IS WEAK” and Ryan was great,but..GAH..Barney fillibustered 45 min. of an hour show.Business as usual.

SMACKRUNNER on December 18, 2011 at 1:59 PM

Why do extremist kooks think there’s some big movement of Republicans who are going to sit home if Romney is nominated? It didn’t happen with Bush or McCain and it’s not going to happen with Romney. 90 plus % of Republicans are going to vote for the GOP candidate.

If you’re going to vote Obama just because your favored candidate doesn’t win, thats fine..but youre in a distinct minority.

therightwinger on December 18, 2011 at 10:40 AM

That’s what the GOP always counts on: You’ll have to vote for our candidate or else. It’s the whole reason they spend so much more time demonizing the opponent than trying to promote their candidate. Eventually, it’s bound to backfire. Some would argue that it already has.

There Goes The Neighborhood on December 18, 2011 at 2:05 PM

It will take more than one election for the Tea Party to have the numbers in the GOP to really influence votes.

Getting conservatives into the senate seats of Ben Nelson, Bill Nelson, and Claire McCaskill this term would help, along with primarying Lugar. Snowe will probably survive.

Boehner now either has to deal with the conservative caucus or the Dems to get a majority. Holding or increasing the caucus will help, along with a bigger conservative group in the senate GOP.

With Obama rushing the country to economic ruin and weak defense, it’s hard to be patient, but one has to do as much as possible each election cycle.

Wethal on December 18, 2011 at 2:13 PM

You can tell when Romney is nuancing his previous comments. He can’t get a word out without stuttering. It really bugs me how liberal he is/was on accepting the mandate. But I realize that what bothers me does appeal to the indies in many cases. So, it appears that no one else in the field is sufficiently conservative enough and can beat Obama as Romney is. Irrespective of his weaknesses, I believe he will sign GOP passed conservative bills and Obama will not.

csdeven on December 18, 2011 at 12:27 PM

It’s touching how you thread your way through Romney’s negatives and yet still wind up deciding he’s the only possible choice. Like the other 43 times you’ve tried this tactic.

IT’S A CHRISTMAS MIRACLE!!!

Or laughable. But definitely predictable.

There Goes The Neighborhood on December 18, 2011 at 2:19 PM

Romney is Obama lite!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!Anti-Romney snarler Says eternally

The 2011 Obama family Christmas vacation will cost American taxpayers $4 million. Romney’s gubernatorial salary was $1.00 per year.

I guess it depends on how you define lite.

Basilsbest on December 18, 2011 at 2:21 PM

The 2011 Obama family Christmas vacation will cost American taxpayers $4 million. Romney’s gubernatorial salary was $1.00 per year.

I guess it depends on how you define lite.

Basilsbest on December 18, 2011 at 2:21 PM

Yeah! That’s what I’m looking for! A president who doesn’t cost as much money!

There Goes The Neighborhood on December 18, 2011 at 2:24 PM

Where was Rick Santorum?

At the bank next to the HyVee supermarket in Council Bluffs, IA.

I got to meet him and others today.

He is the most consistent of the current crop of GOP Primary candidates.

Romney – If I have to explain why he’d be a disaster for the country and GOP then you ain’t worth wasting a minute explaining it and you need to move to another blogsite.

Huntsman – He went to work for the most anti-American President in US history like it was nothing. Automatic disqualification.

Bachmann – Too little experience, and none of it is in a leadership mode or getting things done. She is a good firebrand for social conservatism. She was never tea party to begin with despite her claims. However, the media will be able to focus on her and it would be tough to get the focus on Obama’s record.

Paul – Good on economic issues and limited government (the best). However, his foreign policy views are much too extreme for the GOP let alone the country.

Gingrich – Ideas man. Great 10 point plan of his but he lacks the ability to consistently carry ideas through and lacks consistent solid judgement in his actions and decisions. Also, he endorsed Dede Scozzafavva in 2009 for the NY23 race. Absolute disqualification as dede was so far left she challenged even Obama.

Perry – Open border, crony-capitalist who just comes off as too Texan for the rest of the 49 states. We’ve had enough of Texans in the White House for one lifetime. Plus, he has a lot of trouble on the camera.

Palin – Should have run as she had nothing to lose. Oh yah, how about the daily death threats on her and her family, and the media stirring up so much hate you know there would have been more than one attempt on her. Plus, she ain’t running anyway, so stop with the foolish attempts to help her reconsider.

Santorum – GOP winner by process of elimination. His conservatism is rock-solid, and it would a lot easier to get Rick to bend more on reducing the size of government than it would be getting Romney to simply promis and repeal all of Obamacare. The Catholic vote in the midwest will be easier to win with Santorum as opposed to Romney.

Not much of a group overall, but I’ll take Santorum over O anyday. No way can I vote for the mod/left Romney or Huntsman.

It is still anybody’s caucus in Iowa.

KirknBurker on December 18, 2011 at 2:34 PM

The 2011 Obama family Christmas vacation will cost American taxpayers $4 million. Romney’s gubernatorial salary was $1.00 per year.I guess it depends on how you define lite. Basilsbest on December 18, 2011 at 2:21 PM

Yeah! That’s what I’m looking for! A president who doesn’t cost as much money!* There Goes The Neighborhood on December 18, 2011 at 2:24 PM

When you’ve been around as long as I have you will come to understand that people are creatures of habit. Romney understands the value of money and will spend our money wisely.

Basilsbest on December 18, 2011 at 2:37 PM

Just watched FNS with Romney. He did not reveal anything I hadn’t already heard, but I was very taken aback at the softball questions Wallace lobbed at him. No confrontation like with Newt, or bimbo comments like with Bachmann.

Wallace is becoming less and less of a non-partial journalist as time progresses. Disgusting.

NOMOBO on December 18, 2011 at 2:39 PM

lampooning Mormonism, we all know what’s coming.) Obama was even snapped with the family attending church last Sunday to get the narratives ready.

What a shame. :-(

Punchenko on December 18, 2011 at 1:51 PM

Absolutely.
The late night shows will be doing skits about talking hats and magic underwear etc.
As unjust as that is, these people have no shame. Justified or not, a Romney nominee will be a goldmine of deflection and humiliation for conservatives. All the energy will be spent on defending the attacks and wagging fingers at the NeoComs.

Psssst…They don’t care. They love it.

Mimzey on December 18, 2011 at 2:40 PM

Obama will most likely get another four years with the money he has on hand, a bouncing back economy, and the fact Romney will struggle to take Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and North Carolina. Virginia has a high Evangelical population in the Southwest — Falwell & Co. — and I don’t think they’re going to be sold on the Mormon thing once Obama Inc. ratchets up the attacks (remember: the creators of South Park hit Broadway gold with a musical lampooning Mormonism, we all know what’s coming.) Obama was even snapped with the family attending church last Sunday to get the narratives ready.

Romney/Huckabee

gerrym51 on December 18, 2011 at 2:42 PM

The 2011 Obama family Christmas vacation will cost American taxpayers $4 million. Romney’s gubernatorial salary was $1.00 per year.I guess it depends on how you define lite. Basilsbest on December 18, 2011 at 2:21 PM

Yeah! That’s what I’m looking for! A president who doesn’t cost as much money!* There Goes The Neighborhood on December 18, 2011 at 2:24 PM

When you’ve been around as long as I have you will come to understand that people are creatures of habit. Romney understands the value of money and will spend our money wisely.

Basilsbest on December 18, 2011 at 2:37 PM

You sure know how to miss the point. There’s no connection between a candidate’s personal wealth and his ability to be an effective president. Romney turning down a salary as governor just means he wanted the bragging point because he had his eyes on a presidential run, and didn’t need the money.

Nobody really cares about it when it comes to voting for a president to put us back on a solid footing as a nation.

The bottom line is that I don’t trust Romney to undo anything Obama instituted. And it must be undone!

After Carter II, we need Reagan II. Not George Bush I.

There Goes The Neighborhood on December 18, 2011 at 2:44 PM

he knows Team Obama will make hay (and attack ads) using their most malevolent quotes if Gingrich wins the nomination.

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on December 18, 2011 at 1:59 PM

Bingo. The most effective ads against any conservative will come from the republican status quo.

Mimzey on December 18, 2011 at 2:46 PM

Yeah! That’s what I’m looking for! A president who doesn’t cost as much money!

There Goes The Neighborhood on December 18, 2011 at 2:24 PM

You can go ahead and vote for Perry or Gingrich, both of them are/were bought for the right price,

Of all the problems with Romney, it safe to say that he is the least likely to be bought, i have never heard any story in MA where someone got a government loan or kickback because they helped Romney’s campaign,

Yes, Romney is probably more rich then any president in the last 50 years, and maybe its time for a president who can’t be bought

OrthodoxJew on December 18, 2011 at 2:46 PM

Where was Rick Santorum?
At the bank next to the HyVee supermarket in Council Bluffs, IA.
I got to meet him and others today.
He is the most consistent of the current crop of GOP Primary candidates.

Santorum has the least chance of any candidate. This is good because the presidency is not an entry level executive position.

Being a conservative is not the primary qualification. Executive skill is more important. Our nominee still needs to be electable. It will take serious executive skill to change the direction we are going. If only we could find someone who is extremely well educated, with great private sector and gubernatorial executive experience, the wonkish understanding of a Paul Ryan of the financial facts, a Norman Rockwwell family life and the good looks of a Hollywood actor.

If we ever find such a candidate some people will still need to be hit over the head to realize how fortunate we are.

Basilsbest on December 18, 2011 at 2:55 PM

Punchenko on December 18, 2011 at 1:51 PM

I’m no Romneybot — I’m voting for the guy who isn’t Obama. Period. — but I think you are overstating Romney’s vulnerabilities against Obama. Obama isn’t going to win playing the Mormon card, or the rich card, and no one is falling for the “nice Christian family” narrative the Obamas are trying to craft this year. The national desire to vote Obama out of office is much stronger, I think, than many people understand. Romney, Newt, they are a serious threat to Obama. Very serious. Will he run a billion dollar smear campaign? Of course he will. And his favorability rating will go down to the levels of his job performance rating. The question always comes back to: Are you better off now than you were four years ago? And the answer is such a strong no that almost anyone could beat Obama. He’s been playing class warfare and negative campaigning for months now, and his approval ratings just keep going down. The country is over this guy, wants him gone. Religious bigotry isn’t going to save him.

Rational Thought on December 18, 2011 at 2:56 PM

The question always comes back to: Are you better off now than you were four years ago? And the answer is such a strong no that almost anyone could beat Obama.

Well the professional students, the OWSer types, the unions, the enviro-fetishists and all the dead are much better off than they were 4 years ago.

He’s been playing class warfare and negative campaigning for months now, and his approval ratings just keep going down. The country is over this guy, wants him gone. Religious bigotry isn’t going to save him.

Rational Thought on December 18, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Those are good points, but there is the fact of how many of the disgruntled and disillusioned will go and vote. Of those that do..how many will make “protest votes”?
If Maobama plays his cards right, he will appear to “come around” before election..suddenly drilling, mining, the Keystone etc will start to make sense…he will speak out against the EPA and over regulation etc…he’ll cut loose some of the sweet “Obama money” thats left over from the stimulus and spread it around etc. Don’t underestimate the gullibility of the public. 45% still think that he’s just a swell guy.

Also..religious bigotry will have its demographic.

Mimzey on December 18, 2011 at 3:23 PM

The bottom line is that I don’t trust Romney to undo anything Obama instituted. And it must be undone!

After Carter II, we need Reagan II. Not George Bush I.

There Goes The Neighborhood on December 18, 2011 at 2:44 PM

Bush lost control of the purse strings because he needed Congressional support for the war in Iraq which caused him to break his previously unused veto pen when the Pelosi House went on a spending rampage. If the Republicans keep the House and win a super majority in the Senate and win the presidency they will be able to undo Obama without cooperaton from the Democrats.

If however, as is more likely, the Republicans win the presidency and keep the House but have only a bare majority in the Senate they will need someone with excellent political skills to undo Obama. Someone who understands that you are more likely to convince people to accept your position if you don’t insult them. Someone like Romney. Oh, and Romney will have no trouble using a veto pen to keep spending under control.

Basilsbest on December 18, 2011 at 3:25 PM

The country is over this guy, wants him gone. Religious bigotry isn’t going to save him.

Rational Thought on December 18, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Agreed. He is already trying to essentially draw an inside straight by running a class-warfare campaign, but while this will fire up his own base is is even more of a turnoff to independent voters. People who are unemployed for two or three years are over looking for someone to blame, they want someone to fix the damn economy already. Obama’s had four years to do it and has failed. Any Republican who appears to have a remotely credible plan and doesn’t appear to be a scary “oogedy-boogedy” right-winger will beat him like a drum.

rockmom on December 18, 2011 at 3:34 PM

If Maobama plays his cards right, he will appear to “come around” before election..suddenly drilling, mining, the Keystone etc will start to make sense…he will speak out against the EPA and over regulation etc…he’ll cut loose some of the sweet “Obama money” thats left over from the stimulus and spread it around etc. Don’t underestimate the gullibility of the public. 45% still think that he’s just a swell guy.

Also..religious bigotry will have its demographic.

Mimzey on December 18, 2011 at 3:23 PM

He won’t. Because he is an ideologue who actually believes all that Keynesian crap and has made too many promises to the liberal interest groups to walk away from them, no matter how much it is going to cost him. He is no Bill Clinton or even George Bush.
There will be Democrats screaming at him to run to the center and stop killing jobs, but he is not going to listen to them.

rockmom on December 18, 2011 at 3:37 PM

One more shot for Paul…to even up the debate… :-)

If Obama wins another election it is because people have compromised their vote for the establishment and those that the corrupt media have already chosen for us to follow.

Dr. Paul will beat Obama no problem head to head because Obama has a terrible record these last few years and has broken a lot of promises to a lot of people. People are ready for that Hope and Change that he promised and it won’t come until he is out of office and Dr. Paul is in.

When are you folks going to wise up? These are the same people who brought us the Iraq war on false pretenses. We now have thousands dead and many more wounded, and we are closer to bankruptcy.

Be assured that they will come to us with a case for invading Iran. As for Israel, they have 300 nuclear devices. If Iran, becomes a problem for them, the Israelis can decimate every Arab city and army in the middle east. Let the Israelis fight their own war.

Show me a candidate that supports the Constitution (all of it) and understands free market economics and he/she will have my vote.
There is only one candidate that does, and that is Ron Paul.

If we’re going to say that Ron Paul is not a conservative because he doesn’t believe in entangling alliances, doesn’t want to intervene in the affairs of other countries, and feels that by doing so we face serious blow-back consequences, then sign me up as a non-conservative as well!

By the way, you’ll also need to exclude many of our founders from your so called “conservative” club.

What does this reveal? Just that those who have yet to discover what liberty IS have no idea how to approach the topic of Ron Paul.

Stop listening to all the Progressives and Neocons and the LSM on what they say Pauls policy would be. They lie to you as they always have when a great candidate comes up out of the mire.

In a nutshell, he is saying that the biggest threat to our country right now is the economy. If the economy falls, we as a Nation are no more, then how do we protect ourselves?

If our security, from another countries actions, is in jeapordy, Ron Paul would go to Congress and ask for a declaration of war. That is the Constitutional way which puts the power back on us and not one man or the U.N.

If we the people, through our Congress, decide to go to war, we go in with everything we have to get the job done quickly, then get out and not do any nation building. He is not weak on Natl defense. Doing Natl defense by the Constitution will make us stronger.

Is that the only defense many of you have that Pauls foreign policy views are too extreme? How come a vast majority of his supporters are Military? Do you not think that they alone would know and understand exactly where Paul is coming from? I find little if anything extreme in being Constitutional about going to war, do you? Really?

We do not need all of our precious sons and daughters husbands and wives, our troops all over the world, we have subs and unmanned jets that can strike anywhere in the world within 30-60 minutes.

Hannity and Limbaugh and Beck et al are gonna take sound bites from Ron Paul and play them over, and over, and over, not actually giving anyone the real information one needs to make a truly informed decision. This might sting a bit for the Paul campaign, but it won’t put him down and out unless you let it!

Either we return to a Constitutionally sound government or have Obama look alikes until we are all toast!

Wake up America! Pull your head out of your backside before it’s too late!!

Dr. Paul is already sending out letters warning people that the corrupt media is switching tactics, their coverage of Dr. Paul is going to be negative or will try to paint him in a negative light in order to stop the bleeding and waning of support of their beloved Gingrich or Romney the RINO (about whom you are all arguing about) whom they have pre-chosen as acceptable candidates for you to think you have a choice to support when they and Obama are one in the same.

Who would have ever thought that Ron Pauls Constitutionally consistent viewpoint would be considered the radical viewpoint? I used to call myself a conservative until the day I realized they are no longer the party that supports the constitution.

It’s extremely sad that you would call a champion of the constitution a looney nutjob. Not that it makes Ron Paul look like one, but rather makes all of you look like nutjobs.

Brief overview of Congressman Ron Paul:

He has never voted to raise taxes.

He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.

He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.

He has never voted to raise congressional pay.

He has never taken a government-paid junket.

He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.

He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.

He voted against the Patriot Act.

He voted against regulating the Internet.

He voted against the Iraq war.

He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.

He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

Congressman Paul introduces numerous pieces of substantive legislation each year, probably more than any single member of Congress.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ron_Paul

What is it you Conservatives/Republicans disagree with again?

Right, whatever the LSM tells you is wrong, right?

Get a brain and mind of your own and truly act and think like Conservatives who truly believe in the Constitution, or get out of the way…quit yer b***hing about Ron Paul and b***hing at those of us who truly believe he is the one candidate who can get this country back on track.

That IS what you all want isn’t it? Lord I sincerely hope it is…

Scrumpy on December 18, 2011 at 3:39 PM

He won’t. Because he is an ideologue who actually believes all that Keynesian crap and has made too many promises to the liberal interest groups to walk away from them, no matter how much it is going to cost him. He is no Bill Clinton or even George Bush.
There will be Democrats screaming at him to run to the center and stop killing jobs, but he is not going to listen to them.

rockmom on December 18, 2011 at 3:37 PM

I’m not suggesting that he’ll actually move to the center..he’ll just act that way, and right after the election he will not only revert to his true self..he’ll do something so outrageous in order to let the people who were conned know that they were conned in no uncertain terms. Then he’ll just smile and ignore any opposition. He has nothing to lose…no election image to fake.

I really don’t think that people know exactly what we’re dealing with here.

Mimzey on December 18, 2011 at 3:47 PM

That IS what you all want isn’t it? Lord I sincerely hope it is…

Scrumpy on December 18, 2011 at 3:39 PM

A noble effort Scrumpy, and hats off to you!

See..the problem is that Ron Paul is nuts, and thats likely to cut into his number of potential votes.

Mimzey on December 18, 2011 at 3:52 PM

If however, as is more likely, the Republicans win the presidency and keep the House but have only a bare majority in the Senate they will need someone with excellent political skills to undo Obama. Someone who understands that you are more likely to convince people to accept your position if you don’t insult them. Someone like Romney. Oh, and Romney will have no trouble using a veto pen to keep spending under control.

Basilsbest on December 18, 2011 at 3:25 PM

All it takes is one look at Romney’s record in Massachusetts to find your whole argument laughable. Did Romney move Massachusetts to the right?

It’s easy to claim you’re “getting things done” with the Democrats when you’re always giving them everything they want.

All you do is reinforce that people who care about undoing the Obama administration need to look to someone else besides Romney. Gingrich is roughly 3 times more likely to stand up to the Democrats, and he’s not exactly a pillar of strength.

There Goes The Neighborhood on December 18, 2011 at 3:59 PM

Scrumpy on December 18, 2011 at 3:39 PM

Not a chance. Foreign interaction is MUCH too important, right now.

Love his domestic ideology.

But right now, that’s not good enough.

listens2glenn on December 18, 2011 at 4:03 PM

I can think of a few judges that need to be brought before Congress then impeached!! They are not to make laws and they are now doing it all the time. Guess they can’t read what the Constitution says

Bullhead on December 18, 2011 at 4:28 PM

All it takes is one look at Romney’s record in Massachusetts to find your whole argument laughable. Did Romney move Massachusetts to the right? 1.

It’s easy to claim you’re “getting things done” with the Democrats when you’re always giving them everything they want.

All you do is reinforce that people who care about undoing the Obama administration need to look to someone else besides Romney. Gingrich is roughly 3 times more likely to stand up to the Democrats, and he’s not exactly a pillar of trength. 2.

There Goes The Neighborhood on December 18, 2011 at 3:59 PM

1. Romney ran surpluses in Massachusetts with legislatures which were 85% Democrat.

2. When we have the majorities in both houses of Congress after the 2012 election we will not need someone to stand up to the Democrats. We will need someone who can persuade some of them to support our reforms.

You are thinking with your stomach. You need to think with your brain to appreciate Mitt.

Basilsbest on December 18, 2011 at 4:34 PM

The bottom line is that I don’t trust Romney to undo anything Obama instituted. And it must be undone!

After Carter II, we need Reagan II. Not George Bush I.

There Goes The Neighborhood on December 18, 2011 at 2:44 PM

Bush lost control of the purse strings because he needed Congressional support for the war in Iraq which caused him to break his previously unused veto pen when the Pelosi House went on a spending rampage. If the Republicans keep the House and win a super majority in the Senate and win the presidency they will be able to undo Obama without cooperaton from the Democrats.

If however, as is more likely, the Republicans win the presidency and keep the House but have only a bare majority in the Senate they will need someone with excellent political skills to undo Obama. Someone who understands that you are more likely to convince people to accept your position if you don’t insult them. Someone like Romney. Oh, and Romney will have no trouble using a veto pen to keep spending under control.

Basilsbest on December 18, 2011 at 3:25 PM

TGTN referred specifically to G.H.W.B (Bush I), by my reading implying that Romney might be a “stay the course” type of leader, and not a dramatic reformer. That’s just my interpretation. I don’t think Pelosi was around during Gulf War I, and you might have missed his reference.

You are thinking with your stomach. You need to think with your brain to appreciate Mitt.

Basilsbest on December 18, 2011 at 4:34 PM

The difficulty might be that in the voting booth people do tend to go with their gut, especially regarding their presidential selection.

I haven’t settled on a candidate yet, but I am watching closely.

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on December 18, 2011 at 5:21 PM

Okay, Pelosi was around (since 1987) but probably not big mover and shaker in her 3rd and 4th year in congress I would assume.

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on December 18, 2011 at 5:24 PM

Want a nice metaphor for 2012 Republican primary voters:

Brownian motion or pedesis (from Greek: πήδησις “leaping”) is the presumably random drifting of particles suspended in a fluid (a liquid or a gas) or the mathematical model used to describe such random movements, which is often called a particle theory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownian_motion

It makes me cry just to think who’s laughing now. The Obamas just had a new official family portrait taken (a great use of tax payer money, I am sure), because the girls have grown so much since the last one. I wish them all the best as a family, but I want to be sure daddy is a former president by the time the girls enter high school.

Captain Obvious on December 18, 2011 at 7:11 PM

There Goes The Neighborhood on December 18, 2011 at 2:19 PM

See, you Romney haters just wont be satisfied until everyone hates him with the same level as derangement as you do.

You engaged in the opposite idiocy when you were worshiping St Palin the Victimized. If any Palin supporter mentioned one single criticism of her, you denied them the sacrament and banished them from the congregation.

Nothing will satisfy you snotty recalcitrant spoiled brats.

csdeven on December 18, 2011 at 10:34 PM

I think it is fascinating that the Palin haters can dish it but sure don’t like it when folks don’t genuflect to their favorite candidate. Loving it!!!

Cindy Munford on December 18, 2011 at 11:16 PM

There Goes The Neighborhood on December 18, 2011 at 2:19 PM

See, you Romney haters just wont be satisfied until everyone hates him with the same level as derangement as you do.

You engaged in the opposite idiocy when you were worshiping St Palin the Victimized. If any Palin supporter mentioned one single criticism of her, you denied them the sacrament and banished them from the congregation.

Nothing will satisfy you snotty recalcitrant spoiled brats.

csdeven on December 18, 2011 at 10:34 PM

Hate. Derangement. Idiocy. Irrelevant reference to Palin. Snotty. Recalcitrant. Brat.

But I’m the one who’s not being reasonable.

No, I’ve just got your number. Back when you were claiming you weren’t a Romney supporter, I knew you were just lying low so you could criticize anyone who might be a threat to him without being seen as partial.

And inevitably, you were always planning to support Romney. You still play the same game to this day, reluctantly concluding in spite of your personal disappointment with this or that, that there is no other choice, because only Romney can win, and so, once again, goshdarnit, it looks like Romney is the only choice.

And anyone who doesn’t agree with you is a hateful, deranged, idiot worshipper of “St. Palin the Victimized,” which I can only presume you consider to be clever.

On the other hand, Palin never drove a red truck, so at least we don’t have to hear that bit of babbling anymore.

There Goes The Neighborhood on December 18, 2011 at 11:39 PM

You are thinking with your stomach. You need to think with your brain to appreciate Mitt.

Basilsbest on December 18, 2011 at 4:34 PM

Your condescension is noted and mocked.

There Goes The Neighborhood on December 18, 2011 at 11:47 PM

TGTN referred specifically to G.H.W.B (Bush I), by my reading implying that Romney might be a “stay the course” type of leader, and not a dramatic reformer. That’s just my interpretation. I don’t think Pelosi was around during Gulf War I, and you might have missed his reference.

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on December 18, 2011 at 5:21 PM

Exactly correct. It would have made a better parallelism if I referred to Carter II, Reagan II, and Bush II, but it was Bush I that was the alternative to Reagan. And it was Bush 41 that was like Romney, except for being more accomplished, better equipped on foreign policy, better prepared on intelligence, and being a far better politician. In fact, Bush 41 had “the best resume in politics.” But Reagan was a far better president.

After the disastrous Jimmy Carter administration and way too much Keynesian thinking even in the Nixon administration, that gave us wage and price controls and the EPA, just for a couple of examples, we really needed a president to roll back the excesses of previous Democratic AND Republican administrations and fix things.

I give no credit for brilliance to a man that wants to take the same failed policies that brought us to this place and simply manage them better. Bush 41 was one of the most accomplished people in Washington, but he was incapable of correcting the course of the nation after Carter. That fell to Reagan.

There Goes The Neighborhood on December 19, 2011 at 12:09 AM

See, you Romney haters just wont be satisfied until everyone hates him with the same level as derangement as you do.

csdeven on December 18, 2011 at 10:34 PM

the good news, a small, unsignificant minority suffer from that form of derangement, however intense…the bad news, they are all posting on HA :-)…

jimver on December 19, 2011 at 1:12 AM

quote, not strike, that is :-)…

jimver on December 19, 2011 at 1:12 AM

If I follow the *logic* of the Romtards correctly what I am seeing is.
Romney is conservative just ask him.
Romney had to pass healthcare, cap and trade, fee hikes and tax increases because the liberals made him do it.
Ignore all the videos of Romney parroting liberal talking points he is just lying to the dumbacrats to get elected. He is being honest with you… *wink*
His 34% approval rating at the end of his term was because people liked him. They wanted to vote for him but he decided he had more important things to do.
Even though he changes his positions with each mornings shower you can be confident that what he says today is a rock solid committment. *We reserve the right to change without notification any position, stance or pledge should we deem it is not polling at a level that merits our further support*
Romney is the best at economics, his 47th out of 50 rating is because of all the liberal policies he was forced to pass. It will be different when he is president just ask him.

A Romney speech:
*insert what you need me to say to get your vote here* and that’s a *pledge,promise,commitment or whatever you believe is strongest* sincerely Mittens

Meanwhile on the other side of the country…..
Rick Perry Delivers Results In Texas

iidvbii on December 19, 2011 at 2:16 AM

I can’t understand all this carping about Romney. I have watched all the debates. Romney not only looks like a President he acts like one and his command of the issues is clear. I might not agree with everything he says or some of his past positions but he has the best chance of beating Obama hands down. In every state poll I have looked at he runs better than Gingrich against Obama and that includes a new poll out today from Georgia (the Mason Dixon Poll) which is, after all, Gingrich’s home state. I get the distinct impression some of you would rather have four more years of Obama. You forget that we might not have a country left. There is also the Senate to consider. In all these close races Romney will be a help to the ticket and may pull some of these candidates over the line, especially with independents that decide these races. Gingrich has been compared to Reagan and believe me he is no Reagan. He is actually the mirror image of Obama. They are both professors, both egotists and neither cares very much what the public thinks. Obama’s from the left and Gingrich is from the right but really they are in the same mold. Romney is by far the better candidate to go up against Obama. Economics are going to decide this election and it’s Romney’s strength. If you want Obama to be picking the next two or three Supreme Court Justices, then go ahead an nominate someone who can’t possibly win. Otherwise, choose Romney, get a Republican Senate and House and enjoy the victory. Stop Whining!!

jake22 on December 19, 2011 at 5:33 AM

I can’t understand all this carping about Romney. I have watched all the debates. Romney not only looks like a President he acts like one and his command of the issues is clear. I might not agree with everything he says or some of his past positions….

Why change? I’ve got all that with the dude there now.

Cindy Munford on December 19, 2011 at 8:18 AM

Why change? I’ve got all that with the dude there now.

Cindy Munford on December 19, 2011 at 8:18 AM

‘Zactly.

We say we want something different.

People stand up.

We say: You don’t look like a president. (Sits.)
We say: You don’t dress like a president. (Sits.)
We say: You don’t sound like a president. (Sits.)
We say: You don’t have the military/family/work history of a president. (Sit, Sit, Sit.)

By the time we’re done, we’ve filtered out every different we might have had.

All this is our doing. It’s not like we the people are somehow victimized. We’ve explicitly chosen all these jackasses, one at a time.

Axe on December 19, 2011 at 9:15 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3