Angry Santorum: I never said I’d vote for Obama over Romney!

posted at 6:00 pm on March 23, 2012 by Allahpundit

Twelve minutes from today’s Cavuto. I agree, he never said he’d vote for Obama over Romney. What he said was that “we” the electorate might collectively conclude that there’s not enough difference between them to justify replacing the incumbent, the implication being that that would be a perfectly reasonable conclusion. Right? Read his comments from yesterday again or watch the video; the clear impression I got was “I wouldn’t blame anyone who thought that way,” an impression apparently shared by Santorum supporter Ed Morrissey. There are a lot of ways to hit Mitt for being a squish, first and foremost that America can’t afford one when bold action on entitlements is desperately needed, but anything that legitimizes the idea that the differences between Romney and The One are too “little” to justify a strong preference for one or the other is poisonous to the larger Republican effort. What he said yesterday did that, and his spokesman doubled down on it this morning by calling Romney a “mirror image” of O before adding the perfunctory bit about supporting the nominee. They’re not mirror images; there are hugely compelling reasons to strongly prefer one to the other, as I’d expect any committed pro-lifer who pays attention to Supreme Court vacancies to understand. I don’t mean to begrudge a guy a line of attack when he’s desperate to get traction somehow, but the attack on Romney from the right should never go beyond arguing that America needs a strong conservative to achieve meaningful improvements in policy. If you’re a prominent Republican with a big soapbox and you’re comparing Romney to Obama generally — even in the context of how “we,” not you, might feel — you’re playing with matches. (The only exception I can think of is on the specific issue of “ObamneyCare” because it’s hugely relevant to the primary and, let’s face it, there’s really no way around the mirror-image conclusion. But even in that case, the more likely it is that Romney will be the nominee, the more counterproductive that argument is.)

Interestingly, it’s Gingrich who’s made a bigger deal about this today than Romney. Statement one from Team Newt:

Newt 2012 Campaign Chairman Rep. Bob Walker released the following statement today criticizing Sen. Santorum’s comments about the possibility of an Obama reelection:

“As a former Pennsylvania colleague of Rick Santorum in the Congress, I am stunned by his statement that if he is not the Republican nominee, we might be better off with the reelection of President Obama. An Obama reelection would assure full implementation of Obamacare, a continuation of the assault on American energy production, more economic policies that destroy American jobs and the appointment of more radically leftist judges including perhaps to the Supreme Court. Whatever our differences inside the Republican primaries, no candidate should be suggesting that Barack Obama is a reasonable alternative.”

And statement two, a letter to RNC chief Reince Priebus (slightly edited):

Republicans must not lose sight of our ultimate goal in 2012: defeating President Obama in November. While we may disagree on which candidate will be the strongest opponent to the President in the general election, we can agree that any of the current Republican candidates would be a better president than Barack Obama.

As chairman of the Republican National Committee, you are in a position to focus our candidates on this goal. I request that you issue a pledge asking all the Republican presidential candidates to support our eventual nominee. It is imperative that Republicans unite once the nomination process is complete in order to defeat President Obama. We cannot afford four more years of his leadership.

Newt’s angle here, I assume, is to paint Santorum as a traitor to the cause so that voters will turn away from Team Sweater Vest in disgust and back to Newt as the designated Not Romney for the eleventh or twelfth time in the race. (I’ve lost count.) Mitt’s angle is not to mention what Santorum said anymore lest he end up repeating the “Romney = Obama” message inadvertently.



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 7 8 9 10

I get the distinct impression that a number of the ABR crowd are Media Matters shills. They support Obama, so they just want to create havoc on this “conservative” website. The ABR mantra seems to be to throw the GOP and conservatives who disagree with them under a bus. Media matters is out to destroy conservatism and the GOP. It sounds to me like the ABR crowd and Media Matters have the same objective.

NuclearPhysicist on March 24, 2012 at 10:40 AM

LOL
Thanks for the Daily Chuckle.
If we real conservatives are shills for Media Matters that must mean you are a shill and fellow planetary traveler of Willard and his ex-pat clan.
Rots o’ruck.

Gingrich / Perry 2012
§§§§§§§§§§ ~(Ä)~ §§§§§§§§§
GOP Attack Squad Since 1972

Karl Magnus on March 24, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Danielvito on March 24, 2012 at 10:07 AM

Blah. Blah. Blah.

Balls, wood, yeah, got it. Clever. What’s it like to always lose?

M240H on March 24, 2012 at 10:29 AM

if your a republican you know what it is like to lose ….
everytime you nominate a :moderate” “progressive”
or whatever you call them time year …
you lose … Dole / Ford / McVain
most likely you will find out again this year …
Mittens knows that this is his last best shot ..
he has been running for 6 years now …
he is counting on anger against Obama
to carry his sorry progressive a$$ across the
finish line ….

conservative tarheel on March 24, 2012 at 11:28 AM

all the establishment candidates also went on to not only NOT endorsing the winners in the case of NY 23 she (and her union management husband) endorsed the Dem … she was pro obamacare … she was pro tax increase she was pro everything Obama wanted … yeah she was a big time Republican ….
the fact Newt supported her Killed Newt for me …. and I stopped writing checks to the GOP after they attacked the only conservative running …

if you think Santorum would get ripped up … wait till you see what Obama and company have planned for mittens ….
youtube is going to get a lot of play coming up ….

conservative tarheel on March 24, 2012 at 11:20 AM

If you really feel this way, then you need to get over your deep resentment for Newt. He is the only guy with a half of chance.

DDay on March 24, 2012 at 11:28 AM

There’s fear on all sides.

No fear here. Just a whole lot of optimism and anticipation!

Mitt Romney disgusts me like few politicians have in my lifetime, but I don’t fear him. He’ll probably win the nomination, he will do so without my help, and then I move on to the general election to vote for the not-Obama, whoever that happens to be. But I don’t fear him like some ABR’s do.

As long as you don’t make like Santo and vote for Mitt over PBHO you’re OK with me.

Conversely, it looks to me like some folks seek to help Romney by redefining conservatism.

I prefer to look at it as restoring conservatism to it’s more traditional (prior to the 80′s), laudable and effective form. Either way, I am loyal to my country, not to a party or to an ideology. Mitt is what this nation needs and that is why I support him. Call his politics what you will.

Those folks don’t do themselves or the country any kind of service either. If Romney has it wrapped up, why am I a bad person for refusing to support him? I may be foolish and irrational, I may even be putting principle above the future of my country(!) according to some of you, but honestly, who cares? Romney’s the nominee…right?

I don’t act out of fear. Disgust? Loathing? Yeah. But not fear.

gryphon202 on March 24, 2012 at 11:20 AM

Good for you, oh courageous one, and I never called you a bad person (foolish and irrational, sure, but not bad). One quick scan of this message board will show you to be the exception among the ABR’s. Their fear is so palpable they attract hungry jackals curs wherever they go.

MJBrutus on March 24, 2012 at 11:32 AM

That’s why i’m saying it. It needs to be said. All of you who are screaming against Mitt are putting conservatism first, country second.

Pcoop on March 24, 2012 at 9:58 AM

Utter rubbish. I am not a Kool-aid drinking liberal drone that votes brainlessly for a mascot. It’s your “party over country” mentality that has lead America to the waist-land it currently resides in. And that’s what you are demanding.

Sorry, Willard Fillmoure Romneycare is a pile of s*&^, and he stinks. Unless the conservatives take a stand now, and drive a stake through the establishment’s heart, they will forever marginalize us, the same way the Romney supporters have spent the last 6+ months on this site hurling abuse and derision on those free-minded serfswho won’t “do as they are told.”

I don’t blindly grand support to people simply because they have the right mascot and team color. Who cares if your sports team wins the “pennant” when they don’t represent your core values and beliefs?

In fact, I can’t think of anything more cowardly than checking your brain at the door, and just going along with the herd. Particularly when the herd is supporting something or someone that is antithetical to your belief system.

It certainly does not help that the very people demanding that you peasants “obey” have spent the better part of a year linguistically trashing the concepts you hold dear. This is not politics – this is a spousal battery. They punch you in the mouth, time and time again, then, demand you fix them supper.

“Kitchen B*&ch!”

Guess what?

Until you take a stand, and drive home the point that you will NOT vote for McS*&^Sandwitches, they will keep giving them to you. Without fail. Why would they change? You keep eating what they are serving… and it’s even more disgusting that they would pull this game of chicken when the stakes are so high.

The republican establishment and moderate hacks have just raped you in the prison shower conservatives. Now, as you walk into the prison cafeteria, they flash you a slasher smile, and they pat the lunch table bench next to them, and want you to come sit – their position of dominance over you solidified – now that they have taken you in the shower, they expect you to be their subservient little b*&^%$s, to use as they see fit.

I can’t speak for anyone else. But I am nobodies prison b(*&^.

SilverDeth on March 24, 2012 at 11:33 AM

I can’t speak for anyone else. But I am nobodies prison b(*&^.

SilverDeth on March 24, 2012 at 11:33 AM

OIC! You too are working to be a delegate at the National GOP
Convention, right? If not then you might be a “prison b(*&^.”

DannoJyd on March 24, 2012 at 11:40 AM

Here is the question the RonMJeBots all fear:

Romneycare Becomes Obamacare, Then Coultercare

From the article:

Ann Coulter has now written an unqualified defense of Romneycare. What she doesn’t appear to realize is how useful her column will be to defenders of Obamacare.

Now answer this question. Wwhy is it that RonMeBots all support 0bamacare? Are they simply socialists in dire need of sucking away at the public teat?

DannoJyd on March 24, 2012 at 11:42 AM

I’m really really sorry that rombots are so butthurt that Mitt isn’t getting my primary vote. But I’m still not voting for him in the primary. Period. It’s not because Romney is my “enemy,” as you so elegantly and wrongly put it. It’s because he’s an opportunistic Northeastern blue-blooded pseudoconservative whose entire campaign is predicated on his ability to redefine conservatism. I’ll vote against Obama when the time comes. For now, we’ll see if Mitt can get to that magic 1144.

gryphon202 on March 24, 2012 at 3:50 AM

You are bacteria. No one needs your vote, as Romney has the math on his side. We would like the party to rally around the nominee and oust Obama in November, of course, so that is why people still insist you vote for him in the general.

If you decide to not vote for the Republican nominee you are saying Obama isn’t that bad, which undercuts every conservative pundit’s (Rush’s) argument against Obama. You will be asked, “Why do you hate Obama so much if you don’t think he is worth removing from office?” You will not be able to explain because, for you, it is all emotional. Rush maintains social issues are good for Republicans to campaign on because it gets the easily manipulated voters to the polls, much in the same way the “War on Women” gets liberals to the polls.

You are also fighting a battle that ended 150 years ago and a demographic shift that occurred over 100 years ago. You can’t win the country excluding everyone who lives in the suburbs or Northern states from your idea of TruAmerica.

antisense on March 24, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Good for you, oh courageous one, and I never called you a bad person (foolish and irrational, sure, but not bad). One quick scan of this message board will show you to be the exception among the ABR’s. Their fear is so palpable they attract hungry jackals curs wherever they go.

MJBrutus on March 24, 2012 at 11:32 AM

Yep. You just love everybody, Moby.

PBHO is completely ungracious and petty, to be sure. But he’s nothing compared to the typical H/A commenter he’s the height of benevolence and altruism. Just consider all the remarks made right here on this blog from people attempting to themselves politicize and deny him any credit whatsoever for the successful operation. OBL sleeps with the fishes because of both Bush and PBHO.

MJBrutus on May 9, 2011 at 8:29 AM

kingsjester on March 24, 2012 at 11:45 AM

(The only exception I can think of is on the specific issue of “ObamneyCare” because it’s hugely relevant to the primary and, let’s face it, there’s really no way around the mirror-image conclusion. But even in that case, the more likely it is that Romney will be the nominee, the more counterproductive that argument is.)

I know it is hard to go beyond the obvious for many people. You would think someone making their living blogging would have a deeper vision.

Obama likes higher gas prices, Romney said he wanted higher gas prices.

Obama is trying to destroy our energy production, as governor, Romney created a CAP&TRADE program, when it failed he replaced it with a Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.

Obama rails on energy producers as evil. Romney rails on energy producers as people killers.

Obama does not allow we the peons to see what he is doing while being paid by our taxes. Romney went so far as to take the hard drives on his government computers because he did not want anyone to know what was going on behind the scenes. He used non government approved methods of communications for government work to prevent others from having access to his behind the scenes work.

Obama nominates progressives to the bench. Romney nominated progressives to the bench.

Obamacare, Romneycare already noted.

Obama forcing religious hospitals to provide birth control against their beliefs. Romney forcing religious hospitals to provide the birth control and even abortions against their beliefs.

Obama blames everyone for his failures, takes total credit for anything positive. Romney blames everyone for his failures and takes total credit for anything positive.

You know, I just really have trouble figuring out what is worse, Romney’s conservative record or people like the original author who cannot see what is plainly written right before their eyes.

astonerii on March 24, 2012 at 11:46 AM

You know, I just really have trouble figuring out what is worse, Romney’s conservative record or people like the original author who cannot see what is plainly written right before their eyes.

astonerii on March 24, 2012 at 11:46 AM

LOL … your going to make mitwitts heads explode … they will be calling you names shortly ….

conservative tarheel on March 24, 2012 at 11:50 AM

LOL … your going to make mitwitts heads explode … they will be calling you names shortly ….

conservative tarheel on March 24, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Being the grown up and facing reality has never been a popular position in life.

astonerii on March 24, 2012 at 11:55 AM

Please explain to me Mitt fans, “why are we continuing the primary if Mitt has it won already?”

DDay on March 24, 2012 at 11:59 AM

Being the grown up and facing reality has never been a popular position in life.

astonerii on March 24, 2012 at 11:55 AM

IMHO, that remains dependent on the sort of people you associate with.

You would be LOVED in the TEA Party.

DannoJyd on March 24, 2012 at 12:01 PM

You are bacteria. No one needs your vote, as Romney has the math on his side. We would like the party to rally around the nominee and oust Obama in November, of course, so that is why people still insist you vote for him in the general.

If you decide to not vote for the Republican nominee you are saying Obama isn’t that bad, which undercuts every conservative pundit’s (Rush’s) argument against Obama. You will be asked, “Why do you hate Obama so much if you don’t think he is worth removing from office?” You will not be able to explain because, for you, it is all emotional. Rush maintains social issues are good for Republicans to campaign on because it gets the easily manipulated voters to the polls, much in the same way the “War on Women” gets liberals to the polls.

You are also fighting a battle that ended 150 years ago and a demographic shift that occurred over 100 years ago. You can’t win the country excluding everyone who lives in the suburbs or Northern states from your idea of TruAmerica.

antisense on March 24, 2012 at 11:42 AM

What a pantload. If anbody is emotional here, it’s you.

Go back to the drawing board. Your talking points are boring as all get out.

JannyMae on March 24, 2012 at 12:02 PM

SilverDeth on March 24, 2012 at 11:33 AM

Precisely.
How many times does a Republican have to bend over and pick up the soap in the shower before it occurs to them that something bad always results?
(unless of course yer a ‘log cabin’ type)
Obviously, they learned nothing from 2008, 1996, 1976, 1964, etc.
The sheeple cycles … they be getting closer together.
Principles, the backbone of the Grand Old Party, is now just a distant memory.

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on March 24, 2012 at 12:04 PM

Look, my friends on the Santorum side, and you are still my friends.. stop listening to the Romney voters who are being heartless jerks about this.

I’m at peace with deciding last Tuseday to support Romney, because you have to consider bigger things are more important than our issues with Romney.

Obama is the real enemy here.

Obama is not just a big government nanny stater, not just another uber spending liberal, not just another arch liberal with a sneer and a need to tell you what to do.

Obama is the only one who terrifies me, and he should terrify you. His being a red diaper baby, then educated by communists, mentored by communists and black racist liberationists, the reparations crowd, the campus socialists, the street communists.. all this is true about him, and they say..

no no,.. he’s just a democrat, you’re being way to over the top.. no my wife is a democrat, her sisters are, but they are not anything like the progressives you see documented everyday. He’s devastated our energy capaacity, shutting down the south’s oil drilling in the gulf, denying permits to drill, shutting down production, pipelines.. then telling us he isn’t about screwing this country for his green nazi friends..

Nobody can seriously say Romney would even think of being anything remotely like Obama, the very thought is irrational, and driven by anger, anger at the party, anger at the voters, anger at Santorum, for putting you in this indefensible position.. anger at the “bots” who are laughing themselves stupid when they should be offering you their hand,… I would,.. please, my friends, I’m not your enemy, and neither are these voters.. the moby’s may want division among us, buut we sure don’t.

A hand shake, among people who love this country, and a promise that we’ll take this up later, after the threat to America is removed from office is the best option left to us. We can always revisit our debates about you’s the better man later, and work to find the candidates who best represent that..

But the country is bleeding out, and we’re screaming at each other over wether to use a belt or a torn shirt to stanch the flow of blood…

Please, let’s rally around the last man standing, and get ready for the real fight. It’s that, or continue the Polish firing squad..

I know you’d rather eat dirt than vote another squish, we can argue over wether Mitt is or not, but we know there is no debate Romney is the vastly superior man between he and Obama..

Please my friends, put aside the hurt and the anger, and koin with us, he can’t defeat us if we join together.. and to my friends among the Romney voters.. I’m asking you to let go of your pride for just a second, and join me in calling on our friends to join.

The need to gloat may be human, but it’s counter productive and it’s dividing us. Give your pride a reality check, it’s getting in the way, it’s being petty.. I know some are being totally outrageous on the Rick side, but you have to understand the need to win is greater than our need to slap each other.

We can pull together because there are good and fine people on both sides, the ones who shout don’t always speak for any of us as they wish to think.. I was reminded a short time back, that anger is no way to live, and it clouds you from seeing the good folks on the other side.. From heroes in the field, to heroes who work terribly long hours to feed and clothe their loved ones,.. Mom’s keeping their families safe, people working to educate amd improve the lives of others,.. common people, and wealthy folks who attempt to help others up the ladder they used..

We aren’t bad people, any of us.. and we can do this..

Mitt is a good man, agree with his policies or not, Rick, is a good man too, just one who speaks without considering the impact his words have, a good but flawed man.. Mitt doesn’t have that fault, which we desperately need to win in this nation with a statist media, and the pop culture waging war against us..

There are patriots, and we have to put aside our differences for the good of our children, our families..

please, let go the rage for awhile.. and think of our best interests.. if we could hear Reagan again, you know, you kow in your soul, he’d want us to unite.. Breitbart said that as well… we don’t have the luxury of being short sighted anymore..

If we win, we can sort this out, our arguments about government.

If Obama wins, we may have to put other concerns to the front, like survival.

We have no sidelines to stand and watch safely from anymore.. so sitting this out is to pick a side. No one is nuetral, no one is left unaffected..

please, join with us.. we can always get back to slapping each other later.. but please, today we have to be stubborn and resist the small minded and petty..

We are better than this.

mark81150 on March 24, 2012 at 12:18 PM

IMHO, that remains dependent on the sort of people you associate with.

You would be LOVED in the TEA Party.

DannoJyd on March 24, 2012 at 12:01 PM

Not really. I quit associating myself with the Tea Party. The only aspect of conservatism that the Tea Party is concerned with is really the fiscal aspect.

The world has learned through 5,000 years of known history that a people without good morals cannot restrain themselves from self destructive ways. The Tea Party very specifically has no desire to address the moral decline in the nation and somehow imagines that the immoral people will chose to live fiscally wise. It just is not possible. But there they are with it.

Things that should change, but the Tea Party will never address are.

Marriage laws. Divorce should be made extremely hard to get. Next to impossible if you have children.

Welfare. Social security and medicare/medicaid need to be either ended, or payments from based on the old end of life insurance premiums people paid. In other words, if you chose not to have children and raise them to be productive citizens, then you can expect to have an extremely meager allowance. If you have many children, and teach them all to be successful wealth creating citizens, you will live in abundance.

Defending marriage. No, same sex couples do not need marriage, they do not produce the next generation and thus are not worthy of being exalted with such a title as married. There is plenty in contract law to allow them all the things they need.

If you allow society to degrade as far as we have already, there should be no wonder what-so-ever about why we cannot get control of our budget. People who have no self control will not practice self control.

astonerii on March 24, 2012 at 12:24 PM

This is what Santorum gets for being a “literalist” for sound bites he hears others say according the media. He doesn’t like it when someone quotes him verbatim, and he wants a chance to interpret what he meant. So he might stop that now?

Fleuries on March 24, 2012 at 12:29 PM

mark81150 on March 24, 2012 at 12:18 PM

There are patriots with the Mitt supporters who are posting here, Mark. However, there are also those who formerly posted at dKos, and are ideological chameleons, or Mobys, who have come here to disrupt both Conservative Discussion, and the political ideology, itself.

If Romney reaches the required delegates needed for the nomination, I will reluctantly pull the lever for him…but, not until then.

He is not a Conservative, and those who came here in the last registrations, who publicly express their undying devotion to him, are not all who/what they claim to be.

kingsjester on March 24, 2012 at 12:30 PM

mark81150 on March 24, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Very valid points, but I’ve been barking at those windmills for three days. It’s not going anywhere.

We’re destined to be Venezuela.

Pcoop on March 24, 2012 at 12:33 PM

Precisely.
How many times does a Republican have to bend over and pick up the soap in the shower before it occurs to them that something bad always results?
(unless of course yer a ‘log cabin’ type)
Obviously, they learned nothing from 2008, 1996, 1976, 1964, etc.
The sheeple cycles … they be getting closer together.
Principles, the backbone of the Grand Old Party, is now just a distant memory.

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on March 24, 2012 at 12:04 PM

Lol.

KickandSwimMom on March 24, 2012 at 12:33 PM

The movie “Field of Dreams”,this is Romney. Just as in the movie, build it and they will come, select Romney and they will come. This is utter nonsense, voters just aren’t that interested in this guy. The Romney crew espouses math as their reason for future victory, well they should look into to the math that really counts. Its called the voting booth and it is seriously down. Yes, he may be winning the primaries, but this is not the Presidency.

DDay on March 24, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Giuliani never had a chance, whether evangelicals liked him or not. McCain hated evangelicals, and it probably cost him the election. It certainly handed the 2000 election to Bush.

The evangelicals you so despise were doing what we all do: trying to pick the best possible candidate, who they thought was McCain based on electability, even though McCain hated them.

Not true. Rudy was ahead of Obama and Hillary in the polls. He had greater name recognition than any other candidate. He still polls strongly across the nation. And there was a built-in constituency of millions of Italian-Americans–one twelfth of the electorate, equal in size to Obama’s black vote–and concentrated in key swing states like FL, PA and OH that put him ahead of either Democratic candidate by double digits. So it’s false that he never had a chance in a general election. His problem was getting through the primaries, not winning a general. He was blocked from the start by politically dim-witted evangelicals who didn’t understand politics–and still don’t. Had they studied the polls and understood how McCain was faring in the swing states and in the Midwest generally, they would have realized he was not a strong candidate. And he was woefully ignorant about economics–by his own admission. Yes, McCain probably hated evangelicals–but he catered to them just the same and they bought into his candidacy. They gave us McCain–and rejected a man far better prepared to lead America out of the fiscal mess that faced us in 2008–just as they’re rejecting the man far better prepared than Santorum to lead us out of the fiscal mess we’re facing in 2012.

It’s necessary to understand the past in order not to repeat the same mistakes. Evangelicals show no such understanding.

writeblock on March 24, 2012 at 12:37 PM

and those who came here in the last registrations, who publicly express their undying devotion to him, are not all who/what they claim to be.

kingsjester on March 24, 2012 at 12:30 PM

I always love the hysterical girls who make sweeping generalizations without one shred of proof. “Because I say so it is true”
And you call others delusional? HA!

Bradky on March 24, 2012 at 12:38 PM

mark81150 on March 24, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Valiant effort to mend fences, Mark. However, wouldn’t it have been much more productive to try to persuade Romney doubters all along instead of hurling insults at them? It’s a bit too convenient for the Romney camp to be reaching out now because they know they are going to get hammered by Obama without the conservative base they have trashed all these months giving them grassroots support. Romney will not have my money nor will I volunteer for him. IF he chooses a conservative VP I may pull the lever for him. Otherwise, I’ll concentrate on down ticket races.

KickandSwimMom on March 24, 2012 at 12:38 PM

It’s necessary to understand the past in order not to repeat the same mistakes. Evangelicals show no such understanding.

writeblock on March 24, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Yep. We all walk on our knuckles and marry our cousins. Stereotype much?

The’s a great, big, America full of Christians out there (78%). You need to see it sometime,

kingsjester on March 24, 2012 at 12:40 PM

KickandSwimMom on March 24, 2012 at 12:38 PM

HA 35 member #27

Bradky on March 24, 2012 at 12:41 PM

I always love the hysterical girls who make sweeping generalizations without one shred of proof. “Because I say so it is true”
And you call others delusional? HA!

Bradky on March 24, 2012 at 12:38 PM

You’ve been here for years, and are well known as a Moby. Try something else, Skippy.

kingsjester on March 24, 2012 at 12:42 PM

he’s a great, big, America full of Christians out there (78%). You need to see it sometime,

kingsjester on March 24, 2012 at 12:40 PM

And of course you claim to speak for every one of them as well as tell them who to vote for…. /sarc

Bradky on March 24, 2012 at 12:42 PM

And of course you claim to speak for every one of them as well as tell them who to vote for…. /sarc

Bradky on March 24, 2012 at 12:42 PM

Nope. Never have. Just stating a fact that you would rather ignore.

kingsjester on March 24, 2012 at 12:44 PM

HA 35 member #27

Bradky on March 24, 2012 at 12:41 PM

I was going to respond to this, but I’ll let this guy do it, instead:

I always love the hysterical girls who make sweeping generalizations without one shred of proof. “Because I say so it is true”
And you call others delusional? HA!

Bradky on March 24, 2012 at 12:38 PM

You are a parody of yourself.

JannyMae on March 24, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Okay, so I did my own research, and here’s what I found. According to wikipedia (I know, but I had to start somewhere), Santorum joined the Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC) in or around 2007. Although Santorum’s role there related to Middle East issues, I found an EPPC article from September 2007 regarding what the author called the “GOP health care consensus.” An excerpt from that article:

Republicans have also proposed allowing states more latitude in using Medicaid dollars that now pay for “uncompensated care” (which mostly covers care for the uninsured who do not directly qualify for Medicare) to provide subsidies for the uninsured to help them buy their own private coverage. As governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney used such an approach. But rather than a national version of his state’s plan, in August Romney proposed giving each state the ability to design its own approach to the problem. (In the same speech, he also lined up behind a tax reform proposal and consumer-driven health care.) The Massachusetts model, he suggested, could help other states. But for the federal government, his preferred solution is much like Bush’s and, by all indications so far, like those of all the prominent Republican presidential candidates. It is the new GOP health care consensus.

Read more here: http://eppc.org/publications/pubID.3108/pub_detail.asp

While I realize many may dispute that there is or was a “GOP consensus,” my point is that the organization with which Santorum was associated essentially lauded Romneycare as a solution to the health care issue. To my knowledge, Santorum never disavowed that position. Until recently, that is.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 12:51 PM

he’s a great, big, America full of Christians out there (78%). You need to see it sometime,
kingsjester on March 24, 2012 at 12:40 PM

Do the math-
78% would be a good percentage to wrap yourself up with if it meant something.

Let us know what percentage of those are Obama Christians.

FlaMurph on March 24, 2012 at 12:52 PM

JannyMae on March 24, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Go back to study hall

Bradky on March 24, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Let us know what percentage of those are Obama Christians.

FlaMurph on March 24, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Don’t you realize that Kingslamest is the chief spokesman for Christ appointed by none other than JC himself

Bradky on March 24, 2012 at 12:55 PM

I’m just waiting for someone to tell me why, if Romney already has the nomination, he needs my support. No one has even attempted to address this question yet.

gryphon202 on March 24, 2012 at 1:01 PM

Bradky on March 24, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Hey! I see what you’re doing here Bradky, and I aim to put a stop to it. I know that Kingjester isn’t very good at what he does. That he’s not quite right, if you know what I mean, wink, and that he doesn’t make any sense. Sure, I know that he’s nothing to look at and not very interesting or entertaining or any of that other stuff. But darn it, I raised him from a maggot. He’s my troll and you can’t have him!

MJBrutus on March 24, 2012 at 1:01 PM

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 12:51 PM

The interesting thing is that if you take the uncompensated care numbers… About $40B a year and compare them to medicare/medicaid fraud losses, about $80B a year you could actually figure out that the uninsured are not the ones driving the cost of health care up. Romneycare was a massive intrusion into the personal lives of the Citizens of Massachusetts, I know they claim to love the law by wide margins, and it was all based on lies and propaganda; lies and propaganda that Willard Mitt Romney bought into, hook, line and sinker.

astonerii on March 24, 2012 at 1:02 PM

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 12:51 PM

The extremist ABRs have convinced themselves beyond all reason, that there is nothing wrong with HC and that there isn’t any need of some type of Health Care Reform. /Head in Sand

FlaMurph on March 24, 2012 at 1:03 PM

I also found this little gem, from Santorum’s 2009 CPAC speech:

I would say to economic conservatives, I would say to economic conservatives that we cannot have small, limited government; low taxation; and a free economy when we have a country that is in moral disarray.

Link to the transcript: http://eppc.org/news/newsID.3732/news_detail.asp

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 1:04 PM

The movie “Field of Dreams”,this is Romney. Just as in the movie, build it and they will come, select Romney and they will come. This is utter nonsense, voters just aren’t that interested in this guy.

If voters aren’t interested, why is he the frontrunner and why is he polling strongly nationally? You may not be interested–but you’re not the party and don’t speak for the party–and you’re certainly not swing state America. A lot of you so-called “true conservatives” really aren’t conservative at all. If you were, you wouldn’t dream of voting for either Santorum or Gingrich.

writeblock on March 24, 2012 at 1:05 PM

Bradky on March 24, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Hey! I see what you’re doing here Bradky, and I aim to put a stop to it. I know that Kingjester isn’t very good at what he does. That he’s not quite right, if you know what I mean, wink, and that he doesn’t make any sense. Sure, I know that he’s nothing to look at and not very interesting or entertaining or any of that other stuff. But darn it, I raised him from a maggot. He’s my troll and you can’t have him!

MJBrutus on March 24, 2012 at 1:01 PM

Yeah. Let’s talk about Trolls. Bradky, you stalked several of the HA female posters on Facebook a couple of years ago. Bruti, in 2008, your were giving advice to Obama on Daily Kos.

You’re both Mobys and the only maggots here are you.

Put you both together and you have a whole wit.

kingsjester on March 24, 2012 at 1:08 PM

kingsjester on March 24, 2012 at 1:08 PM

I knew you wouldn’t leave me. Why in just a few more days you’ll back to your old self again. Digging through the internet dumpsters, devoting untold hours of your life researching and hanging on my every word. It’s so gratifying to know that I complete you. No thanks are needed, your continued loyal devotion is all you need to give.

MJBrutus on March 24, 2012 at 1:12 PM

I’m just waiting for someone to tell me why, if Romney already has the nomination, he needs my support. No one has even attempted to address this question yet.

gryphon202 on March 24, 2012 at 1:01 PM

sigh …. it is his turn … and he is the most electable … sigh

at least that is what they are saying ….

so we are going to nominate the guy
go against the guy who beat the guy
who beat him the last time around ..
brilliant

You are bacteria. No one needs your vote, as Romney has the math on his side.

then you won’t mind that I don’[t vote FOR your guy since you don’t need me …
and since you or him have made the sale as to why I should vote FOR your guy
lets see how that math works for you …

conservative tarheel on March 24, 2012 at 1:13 PM

The extremist ABRs have convinced themselves beyond all reason, that there is nothing wrong with HC and that there isn’t any need of some type of Health Care Reform. /Head in Sand

FlaMurph on March 24, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Actually, I think there is something wrong with health care. The thing that each and every single founding father would find wrong with it if they were able to speak up today about it. The money paying for health care is coming out of the wrong pockets. Almost every dollar of healthcare, beyond plastic surgery, comes from a third party pocket (yes I know the money comes from other people). This means that there are not proper incentives involved in delivering, pricing and accepting medical care. This causes a massive distortion in the market. What Romneycare did was to cause distortion in the market to be increased significantly by forcing people to use third parties for all their medical care. It is moving things in the wrong direction. Romney still totally supports it.

astonerii on March 24, 2012 at 1:15 PM

MJBrutus on March 24, 2012 at 1:12 PM

It really bugs you that you can’t lie your way into acceptance, doesn’t it?

kingsjester on March 24, 2012 at 1:15 PM

Romneycare was a massive intrusion into the personal lives of the Citizens of Massachusetts,

astonerii on March 24, 2012 at 1:02 PM

Romneycare requires people who were previously uninsured to purchase health insurance and provides subsidies for them to do so. The economics may be out of whack, but the idea was that, when people are uninsured and they can’t afford to pay for their health care, the taxpayers are forced to pick up the cost.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 1:15 PM

I’m just waiting for someone to tell me why, if Romney already has the nomination, he needs my support. No one has even attempted to address this question yet.

gryphon202 on March 24, 2012 at 1:01 PM

Please explain to me Mitt fans, “why are we continuing the primary if Mitt has it won already?”

DDay on March 24, 2012 at 11:59 AM

Me too.

DDay on March 24, 2012 at 1:16 PM

DDay on March 24, 2012 at 1:16 PM

It’s like this guys. Remember after WW II, when the Japanese retreated from all of those islands in the Pacific. A few stragglers were isolated and left behind, living in caves. They went on for years not know that it was all over and were hostile long after the rest of the Japanese accepted the fact.

MJBrutus on March 24, 2012 at 1:21 PM

I would say to economic conservatives, I would say to economic conservatives that we cannot have small, limited government; low taxation; and a free economy when we have a country that is in moral disarray.

Why not? When have we not been in moral disarray?

writeblock on March 24, 2012 at 1:21 PM

DDay on March 24, 2012 at 1:16 PM

It’s like this guys. Remember after WW II, when the Japanese retreated from all of those islands in the Pacific. A few stragglers were isolated and left behind, living in caves. They went on for years not know that it was all over and were hostile long after the rest of the Japanese accepted the fact.

MJBrutus on March 24, 2012 at 1:21 PM

So Romney is Japanese? And all this time I thought he was a RINO.
Silly stupid me.

DDay on March 24, 2012 at 1:24 PM

Romneycare requires people who were previously uninsured to purchase health insurance and provides subsidies for them to do so. The economics may be out of whack, but the idea was that, when people are uninsured and they can’t afford to pay for their health care, the taxpayers are forced to pick up the cost.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 1:15 PM

Romneycare requires people to purchase health insurance
Now there is a conservative idea.

Romneycare provides subsidies.
Now there is a conservative idea.

Romneycare’s economics are WAY out of whack
Yes, that is very true, it also creates bad incentives.

Romneycare’s The idea was that, when people are uninsured and they can’t afford to pay for their health care, the taxpayers are forced to pick up the cost.
Now this one is easy to argue against. Taxpayers are paying for the subsidies. In fact, those subsidies are probably far in excess of the cost of uninsured non-compensated care. Remember that for the entire United States of America, only about $1.90 per $100 of healthcare is uncompensated of which not even all of it is from the uninsured. All this trouble to prevent a 1.9% loss, which is half of the value of what the government loses in medicare/medicaid fraud. Sure seems like there are some exceptionally stupid people in the world, and a very large proportion of them reside in Massachusetts and are voting for Willard Mitt Romney in the primary, and for Obama in the general.

astonerii on March 24, 2012 at 1:26 PM

DDay on March 24, 2012 at 1:24 PM

OK, so analogies aren’t your thing.

MJBrutus on March 24, 2012 at 1:28 PM

astonerii on March 24, 2012 at 1:26 PM

So, what is the “conservative” solution? Apart from rooting out waste, fraud and abuse?

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 1:38 PM

It’s like this guys. Remember after WW II, when the Japanese retreated from all of those islands in the Pacific. A few stragglers were isolated and left behind, living in caves. They went on for years not know that it was all over and were hostile long after the rest of the Japanese accepted the fact.

MJBrutus on March 24, 2012 at 1:21 PM

So Romney doesn’t need my vote at all. All of this blather about how foolish I am to put my principles before my country(!) is just strum und drang. Thanks for clarifying that. I’ll remember this the next time someone whines about disaffected ABR’s.

gryphon202 on March 24, 2012 at 1:41 PM

astonerii on March 24, 2012 at 1:26 PM

So, what is the “conservative” solution? Apart from rooting out waste, fraud and abuse?

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 1:38 PM

How about following the constitution, Champ? That’s a solution we haven’t tried in at least 50 years.

gryphon202 on March 24, 2012 at 1:41 PM

gryphon202 on March 24, 2012 at 1:41 PM

By doing what? It’s easy to say, but what does that entail?

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 1:43 PM

Romneycare requires people who were previously uninsured to purchase health insurance and provides subsidies for them to do so. The economics may be out of whack, but the idea was that, when people are uninsured and they can’t afford to pay for their health care, the taxpayers are forced to pick up the cost.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 1:15 PM

You know what the real difference between Romneycare and Obamacare is? Intent. Romney saw a political opportunity to pass a popular bill in Mass-uh-chewsits, and he ran with it. Obama saw a political opportunity to build on the concepts in that popular bill and work towards a single payer system. And you know what they say about the road to hell, don’t you?

gryphon202 on March 24, 2012 at 1:43 PM

gryphon202 on March 24, 2012 at 1:41 PM

By doing what? It’s easy to say, but what does that entail?

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 1:43 PM

Well, reading the constitution’s plain language is a good start. And then recognizing that the federal government only has those powers delegated specifically and expressly to it. I am well aware that would make 99%+ of what government currently does unconstitutional, but so be it. Tear the mofo down and start from scratch.

/idealist

gryphon202 on March 24, 2012 at 1:45 PM

DDay on March 24, 2012 at 1:24 PM

OK, so analogies aren’t your thing.

MJBrutus on March 24, 2012 at 1:28 PM

No, I’m okay with analogies. Heck, I’ll even provide one for you.

You know how when you go to dinner and order a steak and they bring you fish. Well they are both meals, but it’s not what you asked for.

DDay on March 24, 2012 at 1:54 PM

gryphon202 on March 24, 2012 at 1:45 PM

So, no idea, then, huh? The U.S. Constitution doesn’t prohibit states from enacting health care legislation.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 1:55 PM

First off, I’m all for weakening Romney. He doesn’t deserve the nomination and he should have to work for it every step of the way. He’s not even halfway to 1144, and I’m supposed to believe it’s as good as over? (Bleep!)

gryphon202 on March 23, 2012 at 11:24 PM

.
What gryphon’ said.

I reject the premise that Newt and Rick staying in, is going to cause the GOP candidate (presumed to be Romney at this point) to lose the General in November.

listens2glenn on March 24, 2012 at 1:55 PM

So, no idea, then, huh? The U.S. Constitution doesn’t prohibit states from enacting health care legislation.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 1:55 PM

I didn’t say it did. I said that Romney’s not conservative and I don’t trust him to follow the constitution. In fact, I trust him not to. But I misunderstood the question anyway. The solution to the problems that government has created is not more government. That is exactly what Romney did — a big-government solution. To say that what Romney did was constitutional, though true, does not address the fact that it’s not conservative and it will be just as bad for Mass-uh-chew-sits as it will be for greater America.

gryphon202 on March 24, 2012 at 1:59 PM

gryphon202 on March 24, 2012 at 1:45 PM

So, no idea, then, huh? The U.S. Constitution doesn’t prohibit states from enacting health care legislation.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 1:55 PM

.
That’s right.

If the “Peoples Republic Of Massachusetts” likes their State run healthcare, let ‘em have it.

listens2glenn on March 24, 2012 at 1:59 PM

You know how when you go to dinner and order a steak and they bring you fish. Well they are both meals, but it’s not what you asked for.

DDay on March 24, 2012 at 1:54 PM

Oh, quit it, DD. You know that cod is totally red meat. LOL

/rombots

gryphon202 on March 24, 2012 at 1:59 PM

I know being just one noob on this thread carries no weight at all.. and there are a few, small few who are bad faith actors here just to provoke an angry response..

I know that the tit for tat is an adictive game anyone can play. I just have faith that people are in general acting in good faith, and I swore off deliberately insulting anyone here ever again when I made the break and decided to support Romney.

I’m a team kind of guy, family was always my first loyalty after God, family, and the men who I came to know as brothers when bearing arms in this country’s name. They were a diverse group too.. but we never shrank from loyalty to the unit, the squad. My fireteam was like family, and there was no black or white.. just team Blue for the uniform color we shared.. and team red, since we all bled the same color too. We shared everything, chow, off time, even our money when a guy was short, we would badger each other, even sometimes step outside to have an airman’s “disagreement”.. but we always shook hands after.. and there wasn’t a man there who wouldn’t act to save another.

Maybe I’m far too literal in making that assumption, that we in the end will always pull together. Maybe I’m terribly wrong about human nature..

But I don’t think so.. so, I’ll keep trying to reach as many as I can.

I have faith in you,.. faith in conservatives, faith in republican moderates, that we share much more in common than we have in differences. I’m not totally trusting Romney either, but I do believe he has our best interests at heart, it’s just a disagreement over wether he views conservatism as the guiding principle, or follows a purely moderate path. But even if he does.. I would support a republican moderate over a known danger to this country like Obama.. who is openly disdainfull of the Constitution and it’s restraints on his whims.

I do believe the good people, the patriots in both the moderates and conservative camp will find common cause. We have too..

My biggest worry is Obamacare.. I always needed to work, and while I’ll never again be making my living with my back unloading trucks, and handling tons of merchandise.. I may be able to retrain, and hold a desk job. Obamacare threatens that, with their Obama themed scheme of just throwing pills at people to shut them up, and never trying to repair people to where they can at least hope to work again someday.. A man needs hope, he needs to not have the government crush that hope of being independent again.

I put that aside, and made a leap of faith to trust Romney at his word.. The friends I have here have promised to support me on the Obamacare issue..

I do deeply repect the principled stand on conservative values.. I honestly do.. but we failed to find the strong candidate we needed.. failed to convince enough people in enough states.. so we have to keep up our end of the coalition, as honest players acting in good faith. We can’t just walk away when it goes against us this time.. that’s not an honorable choice to me.. we signed on as partners in Reagan’s coalition, we can’t back out when the voters (reffs) make a call we don’t like.. not and stay a voice people will listen too when they need us.

We’re all in general patriots.. and we have to stand togther on this election even if we didn’t get our choice as leader of the party. We can have enfluence, if we stay.. but we have to stay inside to do that…

Raging alone on a hill wins us nothing..

Please,.. we can be a party, can beat Obama, and we need you with us.. all of you. This election is make or break for Obama, they will be ugly and savage in their dirty tricks and bad reporting.. the attrition rate will be high, as it already has been.

we need you my fellow conservatives, we really do.. don’t listen to our fools,, as we will ignore yours.. but we con’t do this without you.

mark81150 on March 24, 2012 at 1:59 PM

we need you my fellow conservatives, we really do.. don’t listen to our fools,, as we will ignore yours.. but we con’t do this without you.

mark81150 on March 24, 2012 at 1:59 PM

Romney has it wrapped up, Mark. He doesn’t need my primary vote. Or anyone else’s that hasn’t already voted for him. Eye on the prize, friend.

/rombots

gryphon202 on March 24, 2012 at 2:00 PM

You are also fighting a battle that ended 150 years ago and a demographic shift that occurred over 100 years ago. You can’t win the country excluding everyone who lives in the suburbs or Northern states from your idea of TruAmerica.

antisense on March 24, 2012 at 11:42 AM

this is exactly right… take a look at the stats of all US children under 5 yo nearly half of them are minorities, do you think they will ever vote for/with the crazy segment of the Republican party? and by that I mean the fundamentalist evangelicals and the other tools, the purists, the uncompromising, etc… the good news is that these minorities actually gave the US a very good birth rate, as compared to Europe and others from the ‘old world’ and not only (some Asian countries halted their growth birth-rate wise abruptly), and that ensure our future as a nation, we will still count…the bad news for the loony segment of the GOP and their ilk, is that there’s a gap the size of a crashed asteroid crater between them and their dying worldview and these new generations of young people that will come into play in approximately 10-12 years, so basically 2,3 elections cycles…so, let them dream on and inhabit their grand illusion (or better yet, the little world in their heads), but it’s also good to wake up sometimes…and when they wake up they will realize that they are actually in the 21st century, and that they are a tiny, insignificant bitter minority, isolated and removed from reality and the world around them…till then they can still make noise and vent your hysteria and tantrums on hot gas, I suppose :-)…

jimver on March 24, 2012 at 2:03 PM

If the “Peoples Republic Of Massachusetts” likes their State run healthcare, let ‘em have it.

listens2glenn on March 24, 2012 at 1:59 PM

Yep. Except that it’s not state-run health care.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Raging alone on a hill wins us nothing..

Please,.. we can be a party, can beat Obama, and we need you with us.. all of you. This election is make or break for Obama, they will be ugly and savage in their dirty tricks and bad reporting.. the attrition rate will be high, as it already has been.

we need you my fellow conservatives, we really do.. don’t listen to our fools,, as we will ignore yours.. but we con’t do this without you.

mark81150 on March 24, 2012 at 1:59 PM

.
But until there’s a clear winner in the delegate count, it’s OK to support Rick Santorum, right?

listens2glenn on March 24, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Yep. Except that it’s not state-run health care.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 2:07 PM

But that’s where Obama is going with what Mitt started. Like I said before, the road to Hell is paved in good intentions.

gryphon202 on March 24, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Yep. Except that it’s not state-run health care.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 2:07 PM

.
By all means, continue; it sounds like you know something I don’t.

listens2glenn on March 24, 2012 at 2:10 PM

mark81150 on March 24, 2012 at 1:59 PM

.
But until there’s a clear winner in the delegate count, it’s OK to support Rick Santorum, right?

listens2glenn on March 24, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Being condescended to pisses me off almost as much as being preached to. But he gets a good solid C for effort.

gryphon202 on March 24, 2012 at 2:10 PM

mark81150 on March 24, 2012 at 1:59 PM

What part about every American’s right to vote as they please, don’t you understand?

If Mitt ever reaches 1144, then we’ll talk.

kingsjester on March 24, 2012 at 2:16 PM

By all means, continue; it sounds like you know something I don’t.

listens2glenn on March 24, 2012 at 2:10 PM

As I mentioned above, Romneycare requires those who were previously uninsured to purchase health insurance and provides subsidies to help them do that. The government doesn’t “run” health care.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 2:19 PM

gryphon202, good luck. This simpleton is calling it quits for the day. Man if I was only as smart as some of these Mitt fans, I could probably be a very successful business owner.

DDay on March 24, 2012 at 2:20 PM

take a look at the stats of all US children under 5 yo nearly half of them are minorities, do you think they will ever vote for/with the crazy segment of the Republican party? and by that I mean the fundamentalist evangelicals and the other tools, the purists, the uncompromising, etc… the good news is that these minorities actually gave the US a very good birth rate, as compared to Europe and others from the ‘old world’ and not only (some Asian countries halted their growth birth-rate wise abruptly), and that ensure our future as a nation, we will still count…the bad news for the loony segment of the GOP and their ilk, is that there’s a gap the size of a crashed asteroid crater between them and their dying worldview

jimver on March 24, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Except, our “dying” worldview is shared by a great many Catholic hispanics who do share our love of family and our social conservatism much more than the supposedly “enlightened” moderates, who treat Hispanics as a voter atm and all around in general baby making industry..

That was an absurd arguement to make, and a bit offensive..

There is no reason to believe Hispanics are violently hostile to conservative values, none at all. You make some wild assumptions that Hispanics are a potential baby boom in the making,.. then cynically want to exploit that..

and where do you get the idea, that anything social cons have said is offensive to hispanics.. when you just essentially said.. lets rope em in and let them out breed everyone else?

That was your quote was it not?

You really don’t understand social cons at all.. and there is a rising Hispanic evangelical population, growing much faster than it’s Catholic counterpart. So your argument isn’t much of one.. The reason republicans have some problems with Hispanics aren’t for social con ones.. but the perception among hispanics that the strict anti-immirgrant stance of some in the GOP is hateful to hispanics.. fostered and fed by the democrats and their lapdog MSM..

Hispanics can be reached, but as easily through the social cons as any other means.

I say this as a Romney conservative.. you’re simply wrong that social cons are toxic to Hispanics.. it’s the anti-imirgrant stand among some that grates on them.

mark81150 on March 24, 2012 at 2:21 PM

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 2:19 PM

When Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts in April 2006, he signed a health care reform bill that required all adults in that state to purchase health insurance by July 1 of the following year.
Under Romneycare, people making up to 300 percent of the poverty level get a subsidy — i.e., wealth redistributed from others — to help them pay for their state-government-required insurance plan.

Barack Obama thought this was a good idea. The federal plan he signed in 2010 requires all American adults to purchase health insurance by 2014 and provides that people making up to 400 percent of the poverty level will get a subsidy — i.e., wealth redistributed from others — to help them pay for their federal-government-required insurance plan.

kingsjester on March 24, 2012 at 2:24 PM

So, what is the “conservative” solution? Apart from rooting out waste, fraud and abuse?

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 1:38 PM

I would get rid of Medicare and Medicaid for one. Completely. Return it where it belongs, the family and private charities. I would get rid of the tax deduction for medical insurance covered by employers. It should be counted as income and taxed as such.

astonerii on March 24, 2012 at 2:27 PM

By all means, continue; it sounds like you know something I don’t.

listens2glenn on March 24, 2012 at 2:10 PM

As I mentioned above, Romneycare requires those who were previously uninsured to purchase health insurance and provides subsidies to help them do that. The government doesn’t “run” health care.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 2:19 PM

.
Now that I know the State of Massachusetts “doesn’t”, who does?

listens2glenn on March 24, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Barack Obama thought this was a good idea.

kingsjester on March 24, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Yes, he did. Problem is, notwithstanding his alleged “constitutional scholar” status, he either failed to recognize or deliberately ignored the distinction between state and federal government enacting such legislation.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 2:30 PM

As I mentioned above, Romneycare requires those who were previously uninsured to purchase health insurance and provides subsidies to help them do that. The government doesn’t “run” health care.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Actually it does. It controls what medications can be allowed on the market, and even continuously extends patents on medications keeping the prices high, creating winners and losers in the market place. It then also controls the requirements to perform medical procedures, no matter how trivial the procedure, once again, keeping prices high. It then controls the required coverage of insurance, adding in many procedures that are typical, but expensive and that most people would refuse to partake in, once again driving prices higher. Because people know they are paying for these insurance premiums, they are incentivized to use them to their full potential, driving up usage and do to an increase in demand and a limited amount of government approved supply, driving even higher the prices.

astonerii on March 24, 2012 at 2:32 PM

astonerii on March 24, 2012 at 2:27 PM

That sounds good to me. Too bad there don’t seem to be any candidates advocating for that.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 2:32 PM

…between state and federal government enacting such legislation.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Because the Massachusetts Government doesn’t run Romneycare but the Feds would run Obamacare?

Explain that one. But count to 10 first, so that I can grab some popcorn.

kingsjester on March 24, 2012 at 2:34 PM

That sounds good to me. Too bad there don’t seem to be any candidates advocating for that.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 2:32 PM

That goes back to moral decline.
But the one thing that can be said is that one candidate in fact promotes exactly the opposite. Romney.

astonerii on March 24, 2012 at 2:34 PM

mark81150 on March 24, 2012 at 1:59 PM

.
But until there’s a clear winner in the delegate count, it’s OK to support Rick Santorum, right?

listens2glenn on March 24, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Being condescended to pisses me off almost as much as being preached to. But he gets a good solid C for effort.

gryphon202 on March 24, 2012 at 2:10 PM

I’m asking for your support,.. in no way demanding it.. and if you win the day, I’ll support you and be glad too.. I’m unopposed to letting the primaries play out, brokered convention or not,.. the voters decide.

and

gryphon202 on March 24, 2012 at 2:10

I’m sorry you think I’m being condescending,.. I in no way claim superiority to anyone here.. It’s just my view this constant smashing of each other is unhelpful.. I dod understand you were attacked, I saw it, and I’m sorry about that too.. I’m not your enemy, never wanted to be..

As for preaching,.. sorry, I can go there, it’s in the blood.. my great great great great grandfather..

Jonathan Edwardsa direct descendant.. Mom tracked that down, and I was brought up in the church of my mother. It’s not I think I have all the answers, I don’t, but when I say I respect your stand, it’s not being just polite, I really do strongly believe in conservative principles, so I’m not trying to play anyone. I’m the most literal person I know, and subtle things like some sarcasm are going right over my head sometimes. I miss things, and if my wife isn’t there to nudge me, I’d miss much more. I’m great at memory, at deduction, but I suck at the more nuanced and subtle..

so it wasn’t my intention to be condescending.. if I really was, I’m sorry about that.

mark81150 on March 24, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Explain that one. But count to 10 first, so that I can grab some popcorn.

kingsjester on March 24, 2012 at 2:34 PM

No, because the U.S. Constitution provides that those powers not expressly granted to the federal government are reserved to the states.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 2:38 PM

So, then, Romneycare is a State-run Healthcare System?

kingsjester on March 24, 2012 at 2:39 PM

No, because the U.S. Constitution provides that those powers not expressly granted to the federal government are reserved to the states.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 2:38 PM

All that means is that there’s lots of stupid crap the states can do that the federal government can not. That doesn’t make Romnecare conservative in principle or in practice.

gryphon202 on March 24, 2012 at 2:40 PM

mark81150 on March 24, 2012 at 2:36 PM

.
I have stated multiple times that I will vote for the GOP candidate in November, no matter who it is.
They’re ALL better than “Obama part II”.

All of them will pick better SCOTUS nominees than Obama ever will.
Just the SCOTUS is worth voting GOP, if nothing else.

In short; it sounds like we agree.

listens2glenn on March 24, 2012 at 2:41 PM

No, because the U.S. Constitution provides that those powers not expressly granted to the federal government are reserved to the states.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 2:38 PM

.
Still waiting for an explanation as to WHO is running Healthcare in Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . .

listens2glenn on March 24, 2012 at 2:43 PM

Picture of the Day: Freedom’s Just Another Word For … Wealthy, White Men

Resist We Much on March 24, 2012 at 2:33 PM

.
Your link is giving me the “404 Not Found” message.

listens2glenn on March 24, 2012 at 2:46 PM

It controls what medications can be allowed on the market, and even continuously extends patents on medications keeping the prices high, creating winners and losers in the market place. It then also controls the requirements to perform medical procedures, no matter how trivial the procedure, once again, keeping prices high. It then controls the required coverage of insurance, adding in many procedures that are typical, but expensive and that most people would refuse to partake in, once again driving prices higher.

astonerii on March 24, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Are you saying Romneycare does all those things?

But the one thing that can be said is that one candidate in fact promotes exactly the opposite. Romney.

astonerii on March 24, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Not sure how you reach that conclusion. Romney supports Paul Ryan’s budget plan, which doesn’t go far enough, IMO, but it’s a start.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 2:46 PM

listens2glenn on March 24, 2012 at 2:43 PM

Massachusetts subsidizes health care in that state by requiring health insurance. I can’t imagine that you don’t really understand how health care works…..

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 2:49 PM

Because people know they are paying for these insurance premiums, they are incentivized to use them to their full potential, driving up usage and do to an increase in demand and a limited amount of government approved supply, driving even higher the prices.

astonerii on March 24, 2012 at 2:32 PM

yeah, like people who are otherwise perfectly healthy, would go in and request a CT-scan and expose themselves to an unhealthy dose of radiation, or request an MRI and a bunch of invasive tests (colonoscopy, endoscopic ultrasound, or hey, to please Santorum, trans vaginal ultrasounds :-) just because they, ummm, can and because they pay high premiums…really? what planet do you live on…you know, most people actually have a brain and wouldn’t put themselves and their body at risk through unnecessary testing or an intake of every single medicine in the pharmacopoeia just because they happen to pay a high health premiums…

jimver on March 24, 2012 at 2:51 PM

So, then, Romneycare is a State-run Healthcare System?

kingsjester on March 24, 2012 at 2:39 PM

No more so than the healthcare system in any other state.

Syzygy on March 24, 2012 at 2:51 PM

Because the Massachusetts Government doesn’t run Romneycare but the Feds would run Obamacare?
Explain that one. But count to 10 first, so that I can grab some popcorn.
kingsjester on March 24, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Not initially, but the goal of ObieCare is to drive out ALL private HC Insurance companies- which can be a popular idea depending on individual personal situations. MittCare has no goal of evolving into a centralized european model that destroys the private side of HC delivery as we know it.
BIG difference.

Question: Why is there Medicare withholding $$ taken from my paycheck every week and yet NOT considered a mandate? Can I opt out ? What if I don’t make it to age 65- does my wife get a refund ?
What’s the deal with that ?

FlaMurph on March 24, 2012 at 2:52 PM

In short; it sounds like we agree.

listens2glenn on March 24, 2012 at 2:41 PM

we do, and I’m not suggesting the primaries end.. I’m only trying to get folks here to not hit each other like they have been.. Trolls are trolls and nobody can get them to stop, I just figure we don’t have to be so hostile. You certainly have been more than reasonable, and fair minded.

mark81150 on March 24, 2012 at 2:54 PM

Comment pages: 1 7 8 9 10