Quotes of the day

posted at 9:30 pm on January 29, 2012 by Allahpundit

“Mitt Romney’s goal in Florida is no longer just winning.

“After Gingrich Newt scored a surprise blow-out victory in South Carolina last week, the former Massachusetts governor not only unleashed a political broadside of epic proportions.

“‘It not about winning here anymore,’ one Romney staffer told BuzzFeed. ‘It’s about destroying Gingrich — and it’s working.’”

***

“It’s clear that the negative attacks on Gingrich have been the major difference maker over the last week. His net favorability has declined 13 points from +23 (57/34) to only +10 (50/40) in just five days. Romney has pretty much stayed in place. At the beginning of the week he was at +31 (61/30) and now he’s at +33 (64/31)…

“Voters in South Carolina who were most concerned about electability voted for Newt, and our first post-South Carolina Florida poll showed equal numbers of voters seeing Gingrich and Romney as the candidate with the best chance of defeating Barack Obama. Those numbers have shifted in a major way over the last five days with 50% now seeing Romney as most electable to only 23% for Gingrich. Whether it’s the attacks on Newt or a slew of polls released this week that showed Romney’s competitive in Florida and Gingrich is not, he lost a lot of ground on that front.”

***

“‘You cannot debate somebody who is dishonest. You just can’t,’ [Gingrich] said. ‘The people say I’m a good debater. I can’t debate somebody who won’t tell the truth.’

“Gingrich said he admittedly backed down at Thursday’s debate. He went back and watched the last two debates and was not happy with either one of them.

“‘A couple scenes you can go back and replay, I’m staring in amazement. I know what he’s saying is untrue. And I also know that in that particular audience it would not have worked to take him head on,’ Gingrich said.”

***

“‘He’s on TV this morning going from station to station complaining about what he thinks were the reasons he thinks he’s had difficulty here in Florida,’ Romney told an audience of roughly 2,000 at an outdoor rally. ‘But you know, we’ve got a president who has a lot of excuses, and the excuses are over, it’s time to produce.’…

“‘If we failed somewhere, if we failed the debate, if we failed to get the support of people, it’s time to look in the mirror. And my own view is the reason that Speaker Gingrich has been having a hard time in Florida is that people of Florida have watched the debates, have listened to the speaker, have listened to the other candidates and have said, ‘You know what, Mitt Romney’s the guy we’re going to support,” he said.”

***

“If [the establishment] had a real understanding of why Newt surged, and why their preferred candidate has failed to connect with voters, they would have kept McCain and Dole as far from cameras and microphones as possible. To many, Romney is the best Republicans have in their current field of candidates, but to openly associate him with the same tired, uninspiring cast of characters of elections past is more than just bad political strategy. The tone-deafness of the Republican establishment could not be more astounding.

“The voters want someone who understands their frustration, anger, and concern for the future of the country. They are tired of candidates too timid to say it like it is, candidates so afraid to offend the smallest of minorities with uncomfortable truths they instead exasperate the majority through monotonous political-speak, media-safe answers, and unfulfilled promises.

“The stakes are higher than ever. The Republican base is ready. Their message is loud and clear.”

***

“Romney says he understands the conservative reluctance about him, and he names its source: Romneycare. ‘I think what happened between four years ago and today is that President Obama took his 2,700-page Obamacare bill and tried to stretch the sheep’s clothing of the Massachusetts health-care plan around it,’ he says. ‘I think that to some Republicans that meant that I was somehow responsible for what he did. And that allowed some people to characterize me as being moderate, because it sounded like the president and I were on the same page.’…

“Meanwhile, Romney works on regaining his inevitability. He went to Florida fully aware of the concern that he’d not be able to make a forceful case against Obama this fall. ‘I’m not worried about the attacks that come my way,’ he said. ‘If I can’t handle what’s coming now, when I face the onslaught of a billion dollars from the Democratic National Committee and President Obama’s campaign, I’d wither.’”

***

“‘I believe the Republican Party will not nominate a pro-abortion, pro gun-control, pro-tax increase moderate from Massachusetts,’ the former House speaker said.

“Gingrich repeated the phrase ‘pro-abortion, pro gun-control, pro-tax increase’ again during a 10-minute gaggle with reporters. He also began Sunday to wrap Romney’s ties to Wall Street into his attacks on the former Massachusetts governor…

“This is a campaign about the future of America and the future of the Republican party. Do you want an insider who’s part of the system, who’s been accepting huge amounts of taxpayer money to prop up giant institutions?” Gingrich said, making another reference to Wall Street. ‘Or do you want someone who’s prepared to challenge that system head on and insist on very dramatic change in Washington?”

***

“Electability, being able to beat President Obama, mattered most to GOP primary voters — and those voters chose Romney. That could be why a majority — 55 percent — said they wanted the nomination fight to be over quickly. Forty-three percent said they would like to see someone else run; just 52 percent said they were satisfied with the current crop of candidates.

“‘This speaks to a lack of enthusiasm,’ Miringoff said. ‘People are a little fatigued with the process.’”

***

Via Mediaite.

***

“We need somebody who is engaged in sudden and relentless reform and isn’t afraid to shake up that establishment. So, if for no other reason, rage against the machine, vote for Newt; annoy a liberal, vote Newt. Keep this vetting process going, keep the debate going.”


Related Posts:

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 4 5 6

She’s not married to either of them. Is there some law that women have to be outraged at every man who ever cheated on his wife? I’m not speaking for all women, but I think most stick to worrying about their own husband. I have worked with men who have cheated on their wives. I don’t like it but I don’t feel the duty to call them out on it or try to get them fired. Or is that just a convenient stick to beat the opposition with since apparently Romney isn’t guilty of that particular sin?

Night Owl on January 30, 2012 at 12:15 AM

Guess when we were outraged with Bill Clinton it was all BS. The President of the USA isn’t just any job. I think we are entitled, indeed obligated to look at the moral character of the people who we are considering electing.
You have that and the fact that she keeps prattling on about how she doesn’t want the process to end yet she whines about the attacks from the “establishment”. Doesn’t she think that the Obama campaign is capable of that and much more? She of all people should realize that and realize what is at stake.

V7_Sport on January 30, 2012 at 3:27 AM

V7_Sport on January 29, 2012 at 11:52 PM

Geez some people are world beatingly stupid. She’s totally right. Hugh Hewitt is right now saying that if Romney wins Florida it’s over. Why do you think these people are so aggressive about it? They’re trying to place Romney there without little opposition.

The process should run out. Do you like not having a voice?

If Romney is indeed the candidate, then have him earn it. Do you really think she’s enamored with Cain or Gingrich? Seriously? Or is just your bias speaking?

It’s becoming so tiresome to read this garbage. So many people so few wits and ability to use them.

kim roy on January 30, 2012 at 1:43 AM

Good of you to assert yourself. She complains that the “establishment” is “attacking” Gingrich; isn’t people expressing their opinion a part of the process that she wants to keep going for months and months so she can hear from everybody? Did she expect that the Obama campaign would just blow it off? (Probably)
She has spoken about voting for people specifically to keep this going which is a stupid idea. There is a point where the returns diminish. If it goes on for a while the candidates get vetted and improved, if it goes on until the convention it’s going to produce nothing but bitterness and division. We are getting to the point where the longer this goes, the more people are going to get disgusted with the process and the candidates.
No one is forcing you to read anything. There’s an x at the top of the page anc clicking on it makes it all go away.

V7_Sport on January 30, 2012 at 3:39 AM

All Romney had to do to broaden his base was to say,” hey, it’s not working out like it was supposed to.” That’s all he had to do, according to dozens of blogs for months. Intead, Romneycare is the FOUNDATION of his candidacy, and he’ll ride that horse into the ground. Meanwhile the Obama machine, and the MSM, will portray Mitt as the evil rich banksters who got us into this DEPRESSION. Or am I delusional? Is the economy going to be all hugs and puppies for eyeryone in November?

bigmike on January 30, 2012 at 4:27 AM

this election cycle is starting to really depress me. I dont like romney, he is as liberal as obama with the disadvantage of being a elitist, heir of a political dynasty, and too rich to the point of being out of touch. also, he more liar and fake than obama. obama at least maintained more consistency on his positions. even if you have some liberal opinions, its better to stand by them like hunstman did, than to flip flop like romney.
Newt is flawed alternative with streaks of brilliance. I would take the risk of nominating him, but, the establishment is killing him.
As the campaign descends to the gutter, and the establishment shows its hand to destroy one of their own in favor of another flawed candidate, I am more than unhappy.
i think i will vote for ron paul as protest in the primaries and vote republican only for congress. As for the presidential, i will just write some other name. i wont vote for romney.

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 5:07 AM

She has spoken about voting for people specifically to keep this going which is a stupid idea.

Not to those of us who want to watch the two alpha RINOs cut each other’s throats and the establishment continue to soil itself at the sight of it…all the while exposing itself for what it really is: A machine interested only in maintaining the status quo to the benefit of the few and powerful.

If it goes on for a while the candidates get vetted and improved, if it goes on until the convention it’s going to produce nothing but bitterness and division.

We passed bitterness and division around the time 40 something percent of the party would still rather someone else was running…

We are getting to the point where the longer this goes, the more people are going to get disgusted with the process and the candidates.

That’s the point and, I believe, Gov. Palin’s goal: Get everyone to realize that the process is rigged from the starting blocks and the candidates are all terrible.

People SHOULD be disgusted with the pile of crap the GOP both as a party and through it’s “Next in Line”/”Establishment Approved” system has reduced the field to from the septic tank it started out as.

The GOP establishment is exposing itself for what it is as this goes on: An entity that demands that it’s members shut up and accept the status quo.

That’s not a political party. That’s an oligarchy.

“Vote for us or else!” seems to have become the clarion call of the GOP ‘thinkers’.

Is that what the GOP has been reduced to? Fear as it’s greatest asset? Coronation of a selected candidate, one selected by the few as opposed to one NOMINATED by the many?

Has the GOP officially adopted the Democrat model of party politics?

If it has, there’s nothing left to fear because the sum of all fears has come to pass: A two party system where neither party is distinguishable from the other and the results are always the same for anyone outside the party spheres of power.

That’s not America, that’s feudal Europe.

I was under the impression we had that whole revolution thing for the express purpose of creating something different, a country where government is of the people, for the people and by the people, not of the powerful, for the interests of the powerful, for the sake of the powerful.

I believe Governor Palin wants people to see it for what it is:

We have two parties, headed up by entrenched aristocracies that have neatly carved up The People into two camps that are regularly set upon one and other at 2 and 4 year intervals to see which set of entrenched aristocrats gets to hold the big gavel and control the coffers and make the rules for the rest of us, while extorting both the people and the private enterprise of The Republic to make themselves wealthy and maintain their hold on power for however long they can.

Here’s where the real class struggle exists in The U.S., and it ISN’T between rich and poor:

It’s between the powerful and the powerless.

The People, since the foundation of The Republic were meant to be the powerful and the government was meant to be the powerless, powerless to do a damned thing without the consent of The People.

That is NOT the situation we currently find ourselves in.

We live in a country of three classes:

The Entrenched Ruling Elite: Washington D.C., the state houses, the governor’s mansions and city/town hall.

The Parasites: The bought and paid for supporters of the Ruling Elite; the people who depend on a massive government at every level for their very survival, be it through public sector jobs or through direct payment via entitlement programs. The unions that require government protection to continue their rackets and a good sized chunk of Wall Street that requires it’s own government protection to continue it’s own rackets.

The Taxpayers: The worker who is taxed to pay for his lazy neighbor. The entrepreneur who is extorted by the powerful elites with threats of regulation, higher taxation or other ‘complications’ (government investigations, congressional hearings and ‘oversight’, etc…) that the elites who hold power can bring to bear upon anyone who doesn’t ‘get with the program’. The People who’s hard earned personal wealth is wrenched from their wallets on a daily basis to keep The Machine running.

I should think that most folks would rather we live in a country where the government does not and CANNOT act without the consent of the people, does not and CANNOT entrench themselves to make ‘public service’ a career and personal ATM and does not and CANNOT run the lives of the governed.

The biggest problem facing the small government, free market, personal liberty conservatives in this day and age is no longer simply the Democratic party, it is, in fact, BOTH parties.

Sooner conservatives wake up to that reality, the sooner we can stop pretending that the only thing we have to fear is [Insert Democrat Here] and start working on a solution to The Two Party Deception.

SuperCool on January 30, 2012 at 5:20 AM

She has spoken about voting for people specifically to keep this going which is a stupid idea.

Not to those of us who want to watch the two alpha RINOs cut each other’s throats and the establishment continue to soil itself at the sight of it…all the while exposing itself for what it really is: A machine interested only in maintaining the status quo to the benefit of the few and powerful.

I’s the illuminati NWO, Joo world order establishment… Right?

If it goes on for a while the candidates get vetted and improved, if it goes on until the convention it’s going to produce nothing but bitterness and division.

We passed bitterness and division around the time 40 something percent of the party would still rather someone else was running…

Obama must be pleased. This was supposed to be about getting rid of Obama, remember?

We are getting to the point where the longer this goes, the more people are going to get disgusted with the process and the candidates.

That’s the point and, I believe, Gov. Palin’s goal: Get everyone to realize that the process is rigged from the starting blocks and the candidates are all terrible.

That ought to get rid of Obama.. Oh wait, no it wont.

People SHOULD be disgusted with the pile of crap the GOP both as a party and through it’s “Next in Line”/”Establishment Approved” system has reduced the field to from the septic tank it started out as.

Sooo where are all these rock ribbed conservatives? The establishment keeping them locked away? Or did they just not run for office? if so, who’s fault is that?

We have the candidates that we have. There isn’t a cavalry coming to save us. We need to do the best with what we have and then make sure they do the right thing while in office. It’s not some mythical “establishments” fault, (did the “establishment” stop Sarah from running?) it’s life.

V7_Sport on January 30, 2012 at 5:40 AM

The GOP establishment is exposing itself for what it is as this goes on: An entity that demands that it’s members shut up and accept the status quo.

When exactly did the demand go out for me to shut up and accept the status quo? I must have missed the email.

That’s not a political party. That’s an oligarchy.

Darn right! Instead of the current system where the Establishment gets together in their Establishment Building and act all Establishmenty and then they pick the nominee what we should do is some sort of election. A nationwide election. A nationwide election where all Republicans get to vote for who they want the nominee to be and whoever gets the most votes is the one who gets to be the Republican candidate. That would be fair if they did it that way. We still might not like the candidate who wins every time but it would be the fairest way to do it. Oh, if only such a system were ever to be used….

I should think that most folks would rather we live in a country where the government does not and CANNOT act without the consent of the people, does not and CANNOT entrench themselves to make ‘public service’ a career and personal ATM and does not and CANNOT run the lives of the governed.

Darn right again! Technically we’re a republic so the elected representatives of the people have to act without our explicit consent but what we should do is make those elected representatives accountable by making them stand before the voters and run for re-election every couple years. Let them know that if they’re ever doing something with power which we (and by “we” that means a majority) disapprove of enough that we’ll take power from them. That should do it.

alchemist19 on January 30, 2012 at 5:56 AM

We have two parties, headed up by entrenched aristocracies that have neatly carved up The People into two camps that are regularly set upon one and other at 2 and 4 year intervals to see which set of entrenched aristocrats gets to hold the big gavel and control the coffers and make the rules for the rest of us, while extorting both the people and the private enterprise of The Republic to make themselves wealthy and maintain their hold on power for however long they can.

Here’s where the real class struggle exists in The U.S., and it ISN’T between rich and poor:

It’s between the powerful and the powerless.

very much agree.

The People, since the foundation of The Republic were meant to be the powerful and the government was meant to be the powerless, powerless to do a damned thing without the consent of The People.

That is NOT the situation we currently find ourselves in.

We live in a country of three classes:

The Entrenched Ruling Elite: Washington D.C., the state houses, the governor’s mansions and city/town hall.

DC is the worst by far.

The Parasites: The bought and paid for supporters of the Ruling Elite; the people who depend on a massive government at every level for their very survival, be it through public sector jobs or through direct payment via entitlement programs. The unions that require government protection to continue their rackets and a good sized chunk of Wall Street that requires it’s own government protection to continue it’s own rackets.

sometimes there are services that all of us need and we have to pay someone to do them. i not so much against public services if they were well done and at a reasonable price. however, how things are, i prefer no service and an libertarian approach to government.

The Taxpayers: The worker who is taxed to pay for his lazy neighbor. The entrepreneur who is extorted by the powerful elites with threats of regulation, higher taxation or other ‘complications’ (government investigations, congressional hearings and ‘oversight’, etc…) that the elites who hold power can bring to bear upon anyone who doesn’t ‘get with the program’. The People who’s hard earned personal wealth is wrenched from their wallets on a daily basis to keep The Machine running.

you miss something. the fact is that tax payers are not really paying. everybody is in the hook for the debt of the country. when the bubble bursts. the parasites will lose their parasitic job and find a real job, they will have to pay taxes too.
to ones that really win are a small section of the political\business elite that made enough money to set them up for life with the debt of the country.

I should think that most folks would rather we live in a country where the government does not and CANNOT act without the consent of the people, does not and CANNOT entrench themselves to make ‘public service’ a career and personal ATM and does not and CANNOT run the lives of the governed.

The biggest problem facing the small government, free market, personal liberty conservatives in this day and age is no longer simply the Democratic party, it is, in fact, BOTH parties.

i agree very much.

Sooner conservatives wake up to that reality, the sooner we can stop pretending that the only thing we have to fear is [Insert Democrat Here] and start working on a solution to The Two Party Deception.

SuperCool on January 30, 2012 at 5:20 AM

i agree also so much. this obama hatred is but a deception. obama is but a piece of a machine that would be replaced easily by romney. the machine would keep humming very much the same way in either case.

I have more to add. each party has factions in them that care about this issue. but they present different solutions:
-republicans: small government to remove power from the oligarchs.
-democrats: statist solutions to remove money from politics trough regulations.

I say this, its good to be for small government and it IS a path for the solution, but knowing that DC IS divided and this wont happened anytime soon, it also good to support some statist solution to regulate the political process, so that, until we have a smaller government, political power stops being so corruptible.
however a faction of the republican party so demonizes the left, that no even consensus on this issue can be found.

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 6:00 AM

SuperCool on January 30, 2012 at 5:20 AM

Wow! Thank you!
Never have I heard the whole problem stated so clearly and succinctly.

saspepper on January 30, 2012 at 6:04 AM

V7_Sport on January 30, 2012 at 3:27 AM

I was continually outraged that Clinton held himself to be above the law, and that was long before Lewinsky. I had no sympathy for Hillary and none for him. And for that matter, none for Monica Lewinsky either.

What tripped him up was lying under oath. It’s such a simple concept that I don’t know why it’s beyond the grasp of so many. Cheating on a spouse is not a felony. Lying under oath is. How others conduct their marriage is not my problem. How they conduct authority over my country is different.

Oh, and I was also outraged that congress lacked the courage to remove him from office and he didn’t have the decency to remove himself. But then we’d have had a President Gore [shudder] and he could have won reelection. Bush was far from my favorite president but he was a far sight better than Gore would’ve been.

Eren on January 30, 2012 at 6:06 AM

We passed bitterness and division around the time 40 something percent of the party would still rather someone else was running…

Obama must be pleased. This was supposed to be about getting rid of Obama, remember?
alchemist19 on January 30, 2012 at 5:56 AM

for me it is not. obama is just a piece of the machine and replacing him with someone like romney would not change much.
there are lots of partisan hack in HA that love to hate the candidate of the opposition but i never bought that narrative.
the republican party either presents that either takes on the dc corruption or dont count with my vote.
guess what, the establishment was never interested in promoting such candidate. i response, i will also not be deceived and sheepishly vote on whatever the GOP finds just to beat obama.

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 6:08 AM

as i’ve said before, if mitt is the nominee he’d better go after dear leader just as much as he is with newt….

no mambi pambi wishy washy nominee, let’s all get along general campaign

cmsinaz on January 30, 2012 at 6:09 AM

as i’ve said before, if mitt is the nominee he’d better go after dear leader just as much as he is with newt….

no mambi pambi wishy washy nominee, let’s all get along general campaign

cmsinaz on January 30, 2012 at 6:09 AM

who cares about “dear leader”? this hatred of the O only benefits the republican establishment that gains easy votes no matter who in the republican party gets nominated.

WE should want real change, not this turd sandwich that is Romney.
I wont vote for Romney in the general because I am convinced now that it does not make a difference if Romney or O are in power.

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 6:18 AM

“The voters want someone who understands their frustration, anger, and concern for the future of the country. They are tired of candidates too timid to say it like it is, candidates so afraid to offend the smallest of minorities with uncomfortable truths they instead exasperate the majority through monotonous political-speak, media-safe answers, and unfulfilled promises.

If this ain’t Mitt, I don’t know who is.

Mitt will convince independents that it’s okay to vote for Obama, because Mitt’s just a richer, whiter Obama. Newt or Santo will convince independents that Obama shouldn’t be the national dog catcher.

I will be so uninterested in the 2012 if Romney’s the GOP candidate.

BuckeyeSam on January 30, 2012 at 6:19 AM

If this ain’t Mitt, I don’t know who is.

Mitt will convince independents that it’s okay to vote for Obama, because Mitt’s just a richer, whiter Obama. Newt or Santo will convince independents that Obama shouldn’t be the national dog catcher.

I will be so uninterested in the 2012 if Romney’s the GOP candidate.

BuckeyeSam on January 30, 2012 at 6:19 AM

How?

alchemist19 on January 30, 2012 at 6:22 AM

How?

alchemist19 on January 30, 2012 at 6:22 AM

Because their records are considerably less liberal than Romney’s, which gives them more credibility. The part of Buckeye Sam’s comment you didn’t bold is the part you should have paid attention to: there’s not a whole lot of difference between Romney and Obama.

Eren on January 30, 2012 at 6:29 AM

GALLUPUSATODAY POLL OF SWING STATES:

Obama 47% Romney 48%
Obama 50% Paul 43%
Obama 51% Santorum 44%
Obama 54% Gingrich 40%

Yes, I can see Dr. Tesla’s point about Newt being the best Republican nominee to defeat Obama./s

talkingpoints on January 30, 2012 at 6:30 AM

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 6:18 AM

i’m noting that our folks go for the jugular in the primaries, and become lambs during the general….

it’s infuriating…

cmsinaz on January 30, 2012 at 6:31 AM

My take.

kingsjester on January 30, 2012 at 6:32 AM

Instead of the current system where the Establishment gets together in their Establishment Building and act all Establishmenty and then they pick the nominee what we should do is some sort of election. A nationwide election. A nationwide election where all Republicans get to vote for who they want the nominee to be and whoever gets the most votes is the one who gets to be the Republican candidate. That would be fair if they did it that way. We still might not like the candidate who wins every time but it would be the fairest way to do it. Oh, if only such a system were ever to be used….
Aalchemist19 on January 30, 2012 at 5:56 AM

Now that was just hilarious.

V7_Sport on January 30, 2012 at 6:38 AM

There may be a different strategy. Many of the people that were attracted to Obama, but now see that he is incapable of running the country, will see some of the things they liked about Obama in Romney, but in a competent businessman. It’s hard for people to argue that Obama is governing well, so his former supporters are likely to go for something different, if it’s not too threatening. That’s how Romney got elected as a Republican in a heavily Democratic state.

A lot of people find Newt pretty unpalatable. My guess is that many Obama voters would not be able to vote for Newt, even if they wanted Obama replaced. To get the Republican elected, we’ll either need to get Obama voters to vote for the Republican or to stay home. Romney is more likely to do that than Newt, IMHO.

talkingpoints on January 30, 2012 at 6:39 AM

Guess when we were outraged with Bill Clinton it was all BS. The President of the USA isn’t just any job. I think we are entitled, indeed obligated to look at the moral character of the people who we are considering electing.
You have that and the fact that she keeps prattling on about how she doesn’t want the process to end yet she whines about the attacks from the “establishment”. Doesn’t she think that the Obama campaign is capable of that and much more? She of all people should realize that and realize what is at stake.

V7_Sport on January 30, 2012 at 3:27 AM

I agree with you that we should look at everything about a candidate and that it’s not just any job. My point was that it’s not Sarah Palin’s job to be the character police. That’s up to us. I think making marital issues the ONLY criteria is very naive. She never said Newt was perfect, in fact she said he wasn’t. If it ends after Florida, we still have 46 states worth of people who have no say at all in who we select. You must live in one of the first four. The rest of us never have a say in who the candidate is. Maybe it is messy, but until some other system for nominating someone is established, it is what it is. Alot of people held their nose and voted for McCain, vowing that was the last time they would do that. Here we are again, and a lot of the same people who made that vow are now saying, okay, we’ll do it one more time, but after this, never again. Why would anyone take us seriously? It’s going to be unpleasant to change things, but if we aren’t willing to go through that we deserve what we get. Hanging that threat of Obama re-election over our heads is a really good scare tactic. It looks like it might work. But just maybe…

Night Owl on January 30, 2012 at 6:40 AM

i’m noting that our folks go for the jugular in the primaries, and become lambs during the general….

it’s infuriating…

cmsinaz on January 30, 2012 at 6:31 AM

our folks? what makes you think I own blind loyalty to any party?
I could even vote for dems if I am totally disgusted with the GOP.
I haven’t been indoctrinated in hating the O as many on this site. I hate the establishment and the elites of either party. The GOP should give an viable alternative or dont count on the votes of republican leaning voters like me.

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 6:43 AM

cmsinaz on January 30, 2012 at 6:31 AM

Morning darlin’

kingsjester on January 30, 2012 at 6:32 AM

I see it stayed nasty again overnight…

OmahaConservative on January 30, 2012 at 6:51 AM

I see it stayed nasty again overnight…

OmahaConservative on January 30, 2012 at 6:51 AM

Yep. Pitiful.

kingsjester on January 30, 2012 at 6:54 AM

There may be a different strategy. Many of the people that were attracted to Obama, but now see that he is incapable of running the country, will see some of the things they liked about Obama in Romney, but in a competent businessman. It’s hard for people to argue that Obama is governing well, so his former supporters are likely to go for something different, if it’s not too threatening. That’s how Romney got elected as a Republican in a heavily Democratic state.

what i dont like about this approach is that Romney will for sure be more efficient, but in making sure he implements the program of the people that payed for his campaign.
more or less what obama is doing with less efficiency.
As conclusion, Romney is just more of the same and i dont want it.

A lot of people find Newt pretty unpalatable. My guess is that many Obama voters would not be able to vote for Newt, even if they wanted Obama replaced. To get the Republican elected, we’ll either need to get Obama voters to vote for the Republican or to stay home. Romney is more likely to do that than Newt, IMHO.

talkingpoints on January 30, 2012 at 6:39 AM

but if Romney is just like O but with an R before his name, why should a weakly partisan voter care?
i wont. i will write in someone as protest.

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 6:56 AM

A lot of people find Newt pretty unpalatable. My guess is that many Obama voters would not be able to vote for Newt, even if they wanted Obama replaced. To get the Republican elected, we’ll either need to get Obama voters to vote for the Republican or to stay home. Romney is more likely to do that than Newt, IMHO.

talkingpoints on January 30, 2012 at 6:39 AM

Obama’s already out there dangling carrots (or candy when ma belle isn’t watching) to students and illegals. There is no way in hell his base will switch or stay home. There are some, like that casino owner in LV, who might do that. The independents I know are not leaning toward Romney. A few have mentioned write-in ballots.

Eren on January 30, 2012 at 7:00 AM

My take.

kingsjester on January 30, 2012 at 6:32 AM

My good friend, Gene Hoyas, The Bulldog Pundit, has been writing for a while now, that Mitt Romney was going to be the Republican Candidate, no matter what. It’s not that he’s a big fan, quite the opposite. He knew, early on, that the Political Chicanery brought to bear by The Establishment would symbolically tar and feather Gingrich’s Campaign beyond redemption.

Unfortunately, so far, the Former Col. Manly Rash is turning out to be a prophet.

And ain’ t it a cotton-pickin’ shame.

what will happen? they pushed their candidate in but also gained the hatred of the base.

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 7:02 AM

Uggggggggggggh, Palin giving campaign analysis when she wasn’t willing to run her own?

Heard new video or audio about Newt supporting ObamaCare mandate. And Palin wants us to vote for that serial adulterer and liar? If she really was rogue she’d be supporting someone that might be a Conservative consistently.

2 HUGE big gov loving Progressives (Newt and Mittard)

1 big gov loving Conservative (Rick).

and one great on the Fed and deficit spending but whack on Defense and Foreign Affairs guy (Paul).

THIS is the best we could get?

God help us !!!!!!

PappyD61 on January 30, 2012 at 7:05 AM

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 6:43 AM

it’s your vote, do with it what you will, i’m just pointing out an observation

dear leader has run roughshod on this country and i want someone who will fight for us…

cmsinaz on January 30, 2012 at 7:07 AM

I’ve been for Mitt, then Newt, I don’t know. Now the NYT has an article written by one of Romney’s economic advisors (according to the NYT) that calls for a $2 a gallon gas tax, because gas is not a “good,” but a “bad.”

Gas is already sky high too expensive, need I say that. And… the tax, he says, will help combat.. global warming. This is just too much, it seems. Can we get a clear slate please. Reset.

http://twitter.com/#!/RL_Miller/status/161303691729702913

anotherJoe on January 30, 2012 at 7:07 AM

OmahaConservative on January 30, 2012 at 6:51 AM

mornin’ OC :)

cmsinaz on January 30, 2012 at 7:07 AM

Hey talkingpoints, Do you REALLY think that people who voted for Obama last time, and have not run away from him since can be persuaded to vote for the evil, white, rich banker when the MSM spin him as an evil man responsible for their present lack of jobs, etc?

bigmike on January 30, 2012 at 7:08 AM

i wont vote for romney.

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 5:07 AM

Another vote for Obama.

but if Romney is just like O but with an R before his name, why should a weakly partisan voter care?
i wont. i will write in someone as protest.

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 6:56 AM

Really ? So Obama will work to end most of Obamacare? That is news to me.

Turn Medicaid over to the states.
Give seniors money to use for Medicare or to use with a private company.

Promises to issue executive order to start process of overturning Obamacare.

Also regarding Romney:

Supports expanding health savings accounts.

Would lower individual and corporate tax rates.

Eliminate the estate tax and capital gains tax.

He would work to change the Dodd-Frank law.

Proposes a zero dollar regulator cap meaning any new regulations have to e offset by lowering other regulations.

He would have the states handle worker retraining programs rather than the fed.

Now how many of those will Obama work for?

CW on January 30, 2012 at 7:10 AM

Correction…should have been in the quoted area. As Romney supports the following.

Turn Medicaid over to the states.
Give seniors money to use for Medicare or to use with a private company.

Promises to issue executive order to start process of overturning Obamacare.

This grand lie that Romney equals Obama is just that…a lie.

CW on January 30, 2012 at 7:13 AM

it’s your vote, do with it what you will, i’m just pointing out an observation

dear leader has run roughshod on this country and i want someone who will fight for us…

cmsinaz on January 30, 2012 at 7:07 AM

fight for us? romney is a spineless man that when in the private sector did everything he could in the name of $$ and when in political game, flip floped on everything as long as that would get him elected. if elected now, he will do the same, he will appease all the interest groups he can in order to secure his power.
Romney wont fight for us! romney will fight for romney.

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 7:18 AM

Romney has demonstrated that he will say anything to get the nomination. Then he will run to the center. Mitt is the perfect DEMON for Obama to run against.

bigmike on January 30, 2012 at 7:18 AM

i wont vote for romney.

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 5:07 AM

Another vote for Obama.

or one less vote for the establishment and obamney.

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 7:19 AM

Santorum?

anotherJoe on January 30, 2012 at 7:24 AM

BREAKING NEWS!

The rank and file gop voters are NOT THAT CONSERVATIVE. This is one reason why they pick the next in line and whoever Kristol and the other TV talking heads tell them too. Sorry folks most voters DON’T listen to the talk radio outrage promoters.

And apparently people in the party DON’T KNOW what a Socialist is. And most republican voters are fine with the Bushes visiting their soul mate Obama and saying “he’s a nice man, but we need to change civil when we disagree, etc”

VIVA the gop!!!!

The SELF CASTRATED PARTY!!!!

PappyD61 on January 30, 2012 at 7:25 AM

As for the presidential, i will just write some other name. i wont vote for romney.

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 5:07 AM

Another Republican for Obama!

I’m a Romney kind of guy. I think Newt is a bad choice, and would make a problematic president. But if Newt’s my nominee, I’ll clench my jaw and pull his lever, click his button, and hang his chad. Because if you don’t vote for the Republican, you’re voting for the Democrat.

Bartrams Garden on January 30, 2012 at 7:26 AM

We need to be civil when we disagree…..and change the tone….

PappyD61 on January 30, 2012 at 7:28 AM

Nathor, lay off the caffeine buddy :)

I don’t know who the nominee will be but whoever it is,I want them to fight obama just as hard or even harder than the primary

cmsinaz on January 30, 2012 at 7:28 AM

Santorum?

anotherJoe on January 30, 2012 at 7:24 AM

the issue with santorum is that the only thing he has been steady was in his social conservatism. on the remainder of his positions, he is unreliable has the rest.
and since i am not a social conservative, he has very little appeal to me.
i am now still in the newt field. but if he implodes, i move back to ron paul.

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 7:30 AM

I could even vote for dems if I am totally disgusted with the GOP.
I haven’t been indoctrinated in hating the O as many on this site. I hate the establishment and the elites of either party.

[...]

i am now still in the newt field. but if he implodes, i move back to ron paul.

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 7:30 AM

Never mind, then. You’re not a Republican, conservative, or libertarian. Maybe you’re a Populist? No reason you shouldn’t be for Obama or Ron Paul.

Bartrams Garden on January 30, 2012 at 7:39 AM

What tripped him up was lying under oath. It’s such a simple concept that I don’t know why it’s beyond the grasp of so many. Cheating on a spouse is not a felony. Lying under oath is. How others conduct their marriage is not my problem. How they conduct authority over my country is different.

Eren on January 30, 2012 at 6:06 AM

Thank you. I don’t understand why it’s so difficult for people to grasp this.

William Jefferson Clinton was not impeached for getting a bj in the oval office. He was impeached for perjuring himself during his deposition in the Paula Jones sexual harassment lawsuit.

While the whole episode did bring embarrassment upon the office of the POTUS, the only people that he needed to seek forgiveness from were God, his wife and his daughter.

Those inside the beltway types who are now insinuating that it is somehow hypocritical to support Gingrich because of the Clinton connection, are some of the same insiders who were discussing the matter with a *wink and a nudge* while the matter was unfolding.

And some of the comments I’ve seen here from some Romney supporters look like they’ve been copied and pasted directly from Daily Kos or Mother Jones.

What’s even more telling is that when I’ve posted this excerpt from a 1999 Washington Post article, it is completely ignored.

During the investigation and impeachment of Clinton, Gingrich generally refrained from specific criticism of the president’s personal behavior.

Flora Duh on January 30, 2012 at 7:40 AM

Another Republican for Obama!

or one more republican against the establishment and obamney!

I’m a Romney kind of guy. I think Newt is a bad choice, and would make a problematic president. But if Newt’s my nominee, I’ll clench my jaw and pull his lever, click his button, and hang his chad. Because if you don’t vote for the Republican, you’re voting for the Democrat.

Bartrams Garden on January 30, 2012 at 7:26 AM

however voting for a bad republican, you are also voting for the same establishment that you hate.
I refuse to be marshaled into voting for a republican just because unhinged hate for the O.
his presidency was not the prophetized disaster. it was just a mediocre presidency. GOP has to show me a candidate that you can contrast with obama or else, it will get the same despise.

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 7:41 AM

Uggggggggggggh, Palin giving campaign analysis when she wasn’t willing to run her own?

PappyD61 on January 30, 2012 at 7:05 AM

Yeah, how dare she perform the duties that FOX News pays her to perform!

Flora Duh on January 30, 2012 at 7:42 AM

My take.

kingsjester on January 30, 2012 at 6:32 AM

I, for one, always wear dresses with tightly cinched waists and heels to do my housework in. George Will is a moron. We may not be rustling steer, but we do work on cars, cut the grass, chop wood, scrub the tub and the floor, etc. I wonder when the last time was he did any of those things?

Night Owl on January 30, 2012 at 7:45 AM

Never mind, then. You’re not a Republican, conservative, or libertarian. Maybe you’re a Populist? No reason you shouldn’t be for Obama or Ron Paul.

Bartrams Garden on January 30, 2012 at 7:39 AM

do i need to be a social conservative to be a conservative?
i am not an populist, but i am also not an elitist. meaning that for me to support the “elites”, they have to prove themselves worthy.
they are not! they are crooked! both dems and reps.
if being against this “establishment” makes me a populist, so be it. no shame in that.

i am libertarian and you can thank ron paul from moving me from some moderate positions into very conservative positions. especially in fiscal policy.

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 7:48 AM

cmsinaz on January 30, 2012 at 7:28 AM

I was curious if Morning Joke is going to whip out the conga drums ala Ricky Ricardo since they look like they’re in Miami today. Mika would look more appropriate with a bowl of fruit on her heard.

TxAnn56 on January 30, 2012 at 7:52 AM

Hey Night Owl, George probably gets up in the middle of the night, puts on a shirt and tie, and suit jacket, to go to the bathroom.

bigmike on January 30, 2012 at 7:53 AM

his presidency was not the prophetized disaster. it was just a mediocre presidency.

What part of 8.5% unemployment don’t you understand? What part of a dead-slow economy caused by slam-the-barn-door legislation which makes it almost impossible for banks to lend, don’t you understand?

Clinton administration foreign policy seemed okay in the 1990s. It was only after 9/11 that we realized they had been ignoring the growing problem of violent Islamic extremism and Al Qaeda, and the next administration had to deal with it. What smoldering issues is this administration pushing under the carpet? We may not find out for a decade, but we know what the last Democratic administration did.

If nothing else, look at the Supreme Court appointments. In Sotomayor, Obama has put on the highest court in the land the first openly racist justice since the Civil War.

Do you really imagine that a solid Republican businessman, with a record of saving failing enterprises, will be no better than a liberal Democratic lawyer? Really?

Bartrams Garden on January 30, 2012 at 7:56 AM

Gingrich is desperate and looks like a deer in the headlights. This weekend he only emphasized how much a whining cry-baby he is, and can only critize Romney in big, unbelievable ways that can’t withstand the smell test. It is time that he goes away along with Palin.

Palin is only going to do what is necessary for her to stay in the spotlight and make more money which is also why she resigned as Governor. She knows that once the GOP primay candidate is selected, she will have no relevance. Can’t wait to no longer hear that screaching voice!

I have been a long-time Foxnews fan but am no longer as it has become obvious they are doing exactly the same as Palin. For the last month or more, it has looked like Foxnews has endorsed Gingrich, providing him with free air time.

Santorum is getting some attention now since Gingrich is failing, but no one has vetted the guy and the major candidates have ignored him. He can’t withstand the scrutiny.

Paul is cause, not a candidate by his own admission.

That only leaves the best conservative choice: Mitt Romney who is the only candidate that can beat Obama, has qualities of intelligence, real concern for this county, humility, and humor, and is the only candidate qualified to bring this country out of our current economic condition.

lhuffman34 on January 30, 2012 at 7:57 AM

kingsjester on January 30, 2012 at 6:32 AM

Another good one KJ. Whenever I see or read about George Will, Dr. K, etc. getting their “panties in a wad”, I’m reminded of this…

“Innocence seldom utters outraged shrieks. Guilt does.” ~ Whittaker Chambers

Flora Duh on January 30, 2012 at 7:58 AM

So how would this play out in the general-election campaign, assuming Romney is the nominee? It would still be awfully hard for Obama to gain a health-care advantage; of the universe of people voting on health care, I’m sure more will be voting against him than for him. But Romney as the nominee means that the issue can be neutralized. “Governor,” the president can say, “if you’re going around bragging about how many Bay Staters your plan ensured, how in the world can you criticize my plan, which will do exactly the same thing? And don’t give us that you-didn’t-raise-taxes line. The only reason you didn’t is that you didn’t have to, because your friend and mine, Ted Kennedy, got the funding wired in Washington.” Et cetera. Romney’s vows to repeal the Affordable Care Act could end up sounding pretty hollow.

congma on January 30, 2012 at 8:01 AM

Flora Duh on January 30, 2012 at 7:58 AM

Thank you, ma’am. Thanks, Night Owl.

kingsjester on January 30, 2012 at 8:02 AM

Thanks, bigmike.

kingsjester on January 30, 2012 at 8:03 AM

Romney clearly is the fave in the general with the citizens of the critical SWING states-see Gallup- so keep looking for your Vast right wing conspiracy all you spurned OWS conservatives, firing oblamer is top priority.

FlaMurph on January 30, 2012 at 8:06 AM

Lol txann
:)

Libs are focusing on mitts money helping dear leaders strategy

Don’t talk about dear leaders failed leadership

cmsinaz on January 30, 2012 at 8:08 AM

posted at 9:30 pm on January 29, 2012 by Allahpundit

“Mitt Romney’s goal in Florida is no longer just winning.
“After Gingrich Newt scored a surprise blow-out victory in South Carolina last week, the former Massachusetts governor not only unleashed a political broadside of epic proportions.
“‘It not about winning here anymore,’ one Romney staffer told BuzzFeed. ‘It’s about destroying Gingrich — and it’s working.’”

Hello? Romney’s campaign strategy is not about winning; it’s about destroying another rival. Definitely Saul Alinsky tactics being used. Romney/Obama II?

Wow. This revelation alone should be enough to cause even the most devout Mittster supporter to actually stop and think about what their totally dishonest candidate is all about.

IndeCon on January 30, 2012 at 8:13 AM

Gingrich is desperate and looks like a deer in the headlights. This weekend he only emphasized how much a whining cry-baby he is, and can only critize Romney in big, unbelievable ways that can’t withstand the smell test. It is time that he goes away along with Palin.

Palin is only going to do what is necessary for her to stay in the spotlight and make more money which is also why she resigned as Governor. She knows that once the GOP primay candidate is selected, she will have no relevance. Can’t wait to no longer hear that screaching voice!

I have been a long-time Foxnews fan but am no longer as it has become obvious they are doing exactly the same as Palin. For the last month or more, it has looked like Foxnews has endorsed Gingrich, providing him with free air time.

Santorum is getting some attention now since Gingrich is failing, but no one has vetted the guy and the major candidates have ignored him. He can’t withstand the scrutiny.

Paul is cause, not a candidate by his own admission.

That only leaves the best conservative choice: Mitt Romney who is the only candidate that can beat Obama, has qualities of intelligence, real concern for this county, humility, and humor, and is the only candidate qualified to bring this country out of our current economic condition.

lhuffman34 on January 30, 2012 at 7:57 AM

I absolutely adore these neatly packaged round-ups posted so frequently by the Romney campaign here at HotGas.

Romney has never done anything remotely conservative under his governance while advancing progressivism in Mass.

And now we know he is tied to systematic defrauding of the medicare system


Oh that olympics saving, businessman, family guy Romney sure has great hair!

tom daschle concerned on January 30, 2012 at 8:15 AM

all you spurned OWS conservatives

FlaMurph on January 30, 2012 at 8:06 AM

Ok, you’ve convinced me. I’ll get on the phone right now and tell all 400+ of my immediate family members to join me tomorrow in voting for Mitt Romney!!

Flora Duh on January 30, 2012 at 8:16 AM

Don’t talk about dear leaders failed leadership

cmsinaz on January 30, 2012 at 8:08 AM

We have sorta let that get pushed aside lately, haven’t we?

DOJ dodges, won’t say if Holder knew ‘Fast and Furious’ gun killed border guard

A document the Department of Justice sent to Congress Friday shows that Eric Holder’s deputy chief of staff was made aware on the day of U.S. border Patrol Agent Brian Terry’s murder that a weapon traced back to Operation Fast and Furious killed him. But when asked Sunday, a Justice spokesperson would not would not answer The Daily Caller’s question about whether Attorney General Eric Holder himself was informed of the connection on that day.

Flora Duh on January 30, 2012 at 8:19 AM

Hey Night Owl, George probably gets up in the middle of the night, puts on a shirt and tie, and suit jacket, to go to the bathroom.

bigmike on January 30, 2012 at 7:53 AM

**snort**

Night Owl on January 30, 2012 at 8:20 AM

his presidency was not the prophetized disaster. it was just a mediocre presidency.

What part of 8.5% unemployment don’t you understand? What part of a dead-slow economy caused by slam-the-barn-door legislation which makes it almost impossible for banks to lend, don’t you understand?

the fault of our current situation is not just of the O, but of the selfserving establishment in congress. both dem and repub. convince me that Romney will be a true small goverment fiscal conservative! if not, i guess we will be the same as O.

Clinton administration foreign policy seemed okay in the 1990s. It was only after 9/11 that we realized they had been ignoring the growing problem of violent Islamic extremism and Al Qaeda,

i though clinton tried to kill osama?! anyway, you know that dems will rub it repubs face that their president was the one that indeed killed the al qaeda lider.

and the next administration had to deal with it. What smoldering issues is this administration pushing under the carpet? We may not find out for a decade, but we know what the last Democratic administration did.

and repubs did not pushed anything under the carpet? or did bush had balanced budgets in his 8 years?
i dont blame republicans, because dems also voted for the deficits. and that is why i hate them both.

If nothing else, look at the Supreme Court appointments. In Sotomayor, Obama has put on the highest court in the land the first openly racist justice since the Civil War.

I wont have my presidential vote be hostage of Supreme court appointments.

Do you really imagine that a solid Republican businessman, with a record of saving failing enterprises, will be no better than a liberal Democratic lawyer? Really?

Bartrams Garden on January 30, 2012 at 7:56 AM

ah, lets see romney “stellar” economic record:

ECONOMIC ISSUES
 State spending increased at well over rate of inflation under Romney’s watch, estimated at 24% – more than
$5 billion – over Romney’s final three years.
 Under Romney, Massachusetts dramatically underperformed the rest of the nation in terms of job growth.
 Romney has been criticized by experts for failing to deliver on issues of business development and economic
growth after selling himself as the “CEO governor.”
 2006 report issued by quasi-public Massachusetts Technology Collaborative warned the state was losing its
grip as leader in “innovation economy” and that tech job was alarmingly slow.
 Romney left his successor to fill a budget deficit exceeding $1 billion.
 Romney raised state fees and taxes more than $700 million per year, according to independent experts.
 Romney raised fees by roughly $500 million in his first year alone, a figure that was highest in the nation.
 Romney quadrupled gun licensing fees and raised fees on first responders, real estate transactions, the blind,
golfers and many others.
 Massachusetts’ state and local tax burden rose more than 7% during Romney’s administration.
 Romney refused to endorse the Bush tax cuts in 2003, telling the state’s all-Democrat congressional
delegation he wouldn’t be a cheerleader for the plan.
 Romney implemented three rounds of tax changes (which he referred to as “closing loopholes”) which
increased business taxes by an estimated $400 million per year.
 Massachusetts’ corporate tax climate now ranks 47th in the nation, according to the Tax Foundation.
 Romney proposed – then backed away from – a new internet tourism tax that would levy higher taxes on
users of sites like Orbitz and Travelocity.
 Romney enrolled Massachusetts in multistate compact aiming to end moratorium on internet sales taxes.
9
 Romney took no position on estate tax issue in 2002 and signed 50% increase in state cremation fee, which
observers called “hidden tax on the dead.”

pffff. even in this romney is a bit of a dud.

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 8:21 AM

his presidency was not the prophetized disaster. it was just a mediocre presidency.

What part of 8.5% unemployment don’t you understand? What part of a dead-slow economy caused by slam-the-barn-door legislation which makes it almost impossible for banks to lend, don’t you understand?

the fault of our current situation is not just of the O, but of the selfserving establishment in congress. both dem and repub. convince me that Romney will be a true small goverment fiscal conservative! if not, i guess we will be the same as O.

Clinton administration foreign policy seemed okay in the 1990s. It was only after 9/11 that we realized they had been ignoring the growing problem of violent Islamic extremism and Al Qaeda,

i though clinton tried to kill osama?! anyway, you know that dems will rub it repubs face that their president was the one that indeed killed the al qaeda lider.

and the next administration had to deal with it. What smoldering issues is this administration pushing under the carpet? We may not find out for a decade, but we know what the last Democratic administration did.

and repubs did not pushed anything under the carpet? or did bush had balanced budgets in his 8 years?
i dont blame republicans, because dems also voted for the deficits. and that is why i hate them both.

If nothing else, look at the Supreme Court appointments. In Sotomayor, Obama has put on the highest court in the land the first openly racist justice since the Civil War.

I wont have my presidential vote be hostage of Supreme court appointments.

Do you really imagine that a solid Republican businessman, with a record of saving failing enterprises, will be no better than a liberal Democratic lawyer? Really?

Bartrams Garden on January 30, 2012 at 7:56 AM

ah, lets see romney “stellar” economic record:

ECONOMIC ISSUES
 State spending increased at well over rate of inflation under Romney’s watch, estimated at 24% – more than
$5 billion – over Romney’s final three years.
 Under Romney, Massachusetts dramatically underperformed the rest of the nation in terms of job growth.
 Romney has been criticized by experts for failing to deliver on issues of business development and economic
growth after selling himself as the “CEO governor.”
 2006 report issued by quasi-public Massachusetts Technology Collaborative warned the state was losing its
grip as leader in “innovation economy” and that tech job was alarmingly slow.
 Romney left his successor to fill a budget deficit exceeding $1 billion.
 Romney raised state fees and taxes more than $700 million per year, according to independent experts.
 Romney raised fees by roughly $500 million in his first year alone, a figure that was highest in the nation.
 Romney quadrupled gun licensing fees and raised fees on first responders, real estate transactions, the blind,
golfers and many others.
 Massachusetts’ state and local tax burden rose more than 7% during Romney’s administration.
 Romney refused to endorse the Bush tax cuts in 2003, telling the state’s all-Democrat congressional
delegation he wouldn’t be a cheerleader for the plan.
 Romney implemented three rounds of tax changes (which he referred to as “closing loopholes”) which
increased business taxes by an estimated $400 million per year.
 Massachusetts’ corporate tax climate now ranks 47th in the nation, according to the Tax Foundation.
 Romney proposed – then backed away from – a new internet tourism tax that would levy higher taxes on
users of sites like Orbitz and Travelocity.
 Romney enrolled Massachusetts in multistate compact aiming to end moratorium on internet sales taxes.
9
 Romney took no position on estate tax issue in 2002 and signed 50% increase in state cremation fee, which
observers called “hidden tax on the dead.”

pffff. even in this romney is a bit of a dud.

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 8:22 AM

And now we know he is tied to systematic defrauding of the medicare system

Oh that olympics saving, businessman, family guy Romney sure has great hair!

tom daschle concerned on January 30, 2012 at 8:15 AM

Gift to the left. Rich man made money defrauding medicare…now wants to save it…

yes mitt can win/

tinkerthinker on January 30, 2012 at 8:22 AM

Do you really imagine that a solid Republican businessman, with a record of saving failing enterprises, will be no better than a liberal Democratic lawyer? Really?

Bartrams Garden on January 30, 2012 at 7:56 AM

Under Mitt, MA 47th out of 50 states in job creation due to Rpmney’s going back on his campaign promises to demagogue corporations, and he was only that high because of Katrina.

ebrown2 on January 30, 2012 at 8:23 AM

“We need somebody who is engaged in sudden and relentless reform and isn’t afraid to shake up that establishment. So, if for no other reason, rage against the machine, vote for Newt; annoy a liberal, vote Newt. Keep this vetting process going, keep the debate going.”

Thanks again Sarah.

Rage Against The Machine, Vote Newt

Annoy the liberals, the republican dictatorial establishment, and their lap dogs in the media.

IndeCon on January 30, 2012 at 8:25 AM

That only leaves the best conservative choice: Mitt Romney who is the only candidate that can beat Obama, has qualities of intelligence, real concern for this county, humility, and humor, and is the only candidate qualified to bring this country out of our current economic condition.

lhuffman34 on January 30, 2012 at 7:57 AM

Mitt has basically a very vocal outspoken loyal activists that are the same faith as him, much like Obama had the black vote, Mitt has the Mormon vote…the difference is that the Mormon’s are more likely to be on conservative blogs posting away.
Unfortunately, they have lost their way…to support a pro-abortion, pro-mandated health care, a man who uses lies from Tom Brokaw for ads, a man caught lying publicly in a debate and was not man enough to apologize.
Mitt’s top 10 (and 18 of his top 20) financial supporters are all TARP recipient, the TARP that Mitt so heavily supported, and was such an economic disaster…so much for his econ I.Q.
Mitt is a Wall Street puppet, and at the same time embraces the worst of the liberal ideals…it’s on record, he has never been an conservative when it has counted…only when it is convenient.
That’s his record…it can’t be changed, it is video taped, and played over and over…it can only be ignored.
Much like faith is ignored when it is inconvenient, being a conservative and with integrity can be ignored when you want your “man” to win…

right2bright on January 30, 2012 at 8:38 AM

It’s important to remember who cheered the sacking of the GM CEO, an d was at best, indifferent at first to the Green Revolution, it wasn’t Newt.

narciso on January 30, 2012 at 8:39 AM

Do you really imagine that a solid Republican businessman, with a record of saving failing enterprises, will be no better than a liberal Democratic lawyer? Really?

Bartrams Garden on January 30, 2012 at 7:56 AM

There are tens of thousands businessman more successful, and not many more have lost more elections than Mitt.
He won one election, as a liberal,anti-conservative, anti-Republican, anti-Reagan…that is it, he won his only election as a liberal…that’s the record.
Do you want the videos? The interviews? Look at his record….
No conservative appointments
Support of abortion
Support of Gun laws
Appointment of Planned Parenthood activist
Fee (tax) increases
Low economic growth
…nothing in his record at Mass speaks of his “great” business record.

right2bright on January 30, 2012 at 8:45 AM

Uggggggggggggh, Palin giving campaign analysis when she wasn’t willing to run her own?

Heard new video or audio about Newt supporting ObamaCare mandate. And Palin wants us to vote for that serial adulterer and liar? If she really was rogue she’d be supporting someone that might be a Conservative consistently

We need to be civil when we disagree…..and change the tone….

PappyD61 on January 30, 2012 at 7:28 AM

Yeah, good call.
//

Garym on January 30, 2012 at 9:07 AM

Good Morning!

JonBGood on January 30, 2012 at 9:09 AM

Mitt has never believed in anything, but his bottom line,

narciso on January 30, 2012 at 9:24 AM

Mitt has never believed in anything, but his bottom line,

narciso on January 30, 2012 at 9:24 AM

Isn’t that what conservatives want?

libfreeordie on January 30, 2012 at 9:35 AM

For nathor,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/jan/29/us-politics-vote-money-wins

libfreeordie on January 30, 2012 at 9:16 AM

i like this quote:

Money in American politics was already an elephant in the room. Now the supreme court has given it a laxative, taken away the shovel, and asked us to ignore both the sight and the stench.

i actually like maccain position on the issue. if only obama the liar maintain true to his principles and took the public financing of his campaign in 08, maybe i would believe dems were any better than rebubs. disgraceful liars, all of them.

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 9:37 AM

Not when there are principles, of liberty at stake, do you think he would fight for any of us, his man Murphy was entirely willing to lay down during the hard times, when the Tea Party arose,

narciso on January 30, 2012 at 9:44 AM

No ,it doesn’t because it makes the MSM, Soros’s lackies, the Fenton archipelago of agitprop, the drivers of the campaign, recall the Disclose Act, that Castle and Murkowski were for.

narciso on January 30, 2012 at 9:47 AM

Isn’t that what conservatives want?

libfreeordie on January 30, 2012 at 9:35 AM

some conservatives want to beat the zero so much, they are willing to eat any turd sandwich to do it.
we can beat the dems with a small goverment\balanced budget platform. but we need some one credible to do it. and what we got? too depressing to contemplate :(
by the way? hows that change working for you? the change man has 1 billion to beat up the repubs turd sandwich. i wonder how much lobbyists butts the O had to kiss for fortune.

PS: would you vote for ron paul?

nathor on January 30, 2012 at 9:48 AM

Night Owl

I think making marital issues the ONLY criteria is very naive.

I never said it was the only criteria.

If it ends after Florida, we still have 46 states worth of people who have no say at all in who we select.

It isn’t going to end, there will be elections all the way to the convention. The idea that we should be voting for people in order to keep the battle going though is stupid.

You must live in one of the first four.

Nope.

Alot of people held their nose and voted for McCain, vowing that was the last time they would do that.

And a lot stayed home, according to Karl Rove it was 4 and a half million. Others voted for some obscure party and all that did was help elect Obama. I’de love to see better candidates. I think we have the choice between a weasel and a lying blowhard, but better candidates didn’t run. Until they decide to do so we are stuck with the least bad choice. I have examined the situation and have reasoned out it’s the weasel.

Here we are again, and a lot of the same people who made that vow are now saying, okay, we’ll do it one more time, but after this, never again.

Who out there did you want? Personally I could have rattled off a half dozen people who I would have rather have seen run against Obama but they didn’t join the race. That isn’t some establishments fault or the people in the primaries fault. They didn’t want to run. We have who we have.

Hanging that threat of Obama re-election over our heads is a really good scare tactic. It looks like it might work. But just maybe…

It’s so important that we get rid of Obama that it has to work. If we don’t repeal or eviscerate Obama care we are locked into the same path as all the other failing socialist states and if we don’t get a handle on our debt then we are through. That’s all, just finished.

V7_Sport on January 30, 2012 at 9:52 AM

So yet another lie, I could sort of understand if one was for Santorum, but Romney is just a useless cipher;

http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/01/no-newt-did-not-endorse-the-obamacare-mandate/

narciso on January 30, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Igor R. on January 30, 2012 at 1:45 AM

I didn’t mean during the debates, but prior to those and prior to when he started running for Pres again. Ever since 2008 and forward, Palin has been the most vocal against B.O. Others also, like Jim DeMint and other Congresspersons. Just didn’t hear anything from Romney.

bluefox on January 30, 2012 at 11:59 AM

Rage against the machine…and Rage as pictured by s.e. Cupp.

Very funny if you have not read it. I love her wit.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/newt-gingrich-natural-woman-article-1.1005912?localLinksEnabled=false

Fleuries on January 30, 2012 at 1:43 PM

The more I read, the more I think Dr. Planters is as close as is on the ballot to a man of character, sad to say. As President, his hands would be tied somewhat on matters both foreign and domestic, as I suspect he would behave as a President, instead of trying legislate by fiat. Couldn’t be any worse than the last few. I’ll be voting straight anti-Dem ticket no matter what, though.

Sammich/Paul 2012

S. D. on January 30, 2012 at 7:29 PM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6