No, Senator Santorum, Obama and Romney aren’t the same

posted at 8:40 am on March 23, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

As someone who supports Rick Santorum for President, and who will caucus tomorrow in the next phase of Minnesota’s political process as a delegate, I understand the need to replace Barack Obama in 2012 in order to right the American ship of state and address the serious problems that Obama has either created, amplified, or ignored over the last three years.  I do, however, wonder whether Senator Santorum understands that need.  Yesterday, as Allahpundit noted with excellent analysis, Santorum told a Louisiana audience that if Mitt Romney won the nomination, we’d be better off sticking with what we’ve already got:

“You win by giving people a choice. You win by giving people the opportunity to see a different vision for our country, not someone who’s just going to be a little different than the person in there. If you’re going to be a little different, we might as well stay with what we have instead of taking a risk with what may be the Etch A Sketch candidate of the future,” Santorum told a crowd at USAA.

Er, no, we wouldn’t be better off with Obama than with Romney, for many reasons.  Before we get to those reasons, let’s note that Newt Gingrich, at least, does get this right:

“I may have some very substantial disagreements with Gov. Romney. There is no doubt in my mind that if the choice was Gov. Romney or Barack Obama, we would have no choice,” Gingrich said. “The danger of Obama is so great that I would hope that every candidate running – Ron Paul, Gov. Romney and Sen. Santorum – that we would all agree that whoever becomes the Republican nominee, we have one common goal and that is to defeat Barack Obama.”

While Gingrich finds faults with his GOP rivals, he has told crowds throughout his campaign that any of the other candidates are superior to the current president.

It seems that Senator Santorum has forgotten the purpose of the Republican primary.  It’s to choose the most successful candidate to beat Obama in the general election.  It isn’t to test a few candidates to see whether the goal of beating Obama is worth the bother.

And why do we need to beat Obama?  The economic policies of this administration have been an utter disaster.  The Senate won’t pass any budgets, not even the President’s, while he’s in the Oval Office.  Energy prices are going through the roof thanks to the massive regulatory hurdles his administration has created to production and refining, especially on federal lands.  An ObamaCare repeal will only happen if Obama is no longer President, assuming that the Supreme Court doesn’t throw the whole law out this summer.

Most of all, a second Obama term would be infinitely worse than the first.  We have already had a taste of what this will be like over the last few months, as Obama unveiled his class-warfare core.  We’ve also seen Obama’s commitment to limited government as he has tried to manipulate the law to bypass Congress on policy, and openly bragged about it.   Imagine an Obama who no longer needed to worry about his next election, and what that Obama might do in office.

In fact, imagine how many Supreme Court openings there will be in the next term of office, and then tell me there’s no difference between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama being in the White House to make those appointments, Senator Santorum.

I will go to the caucuses tomorrow.  I expect Senator Santorum to have recovered his sense of reality and apologize for that statement by that time.  If not, I may end up arguing for another candidate when we meet to discuss the next phase at our Republican caucus.

Addendum: One last point.  People who enter primary contests should be prepared to support the eventual product of that primary and unite behind that candidate.  If a candidate can’t do that, he has no business asking his party for the nomination in a primary contest in the first place.  Santorum didn’t explicitly say he wouldn’t support Romney if Romney won, but that statement comes pretty close to the mark.

Update: Don’t forget why I endorsed Santorum in the first place when considering this piece.  I disagree with Santorum on some issues, notably DADT and a few others.  However, I thought he conducted himself with integrity during the campaign and stayed out of the immature (and worse) sniping in which Romney and Gingrich engaged.  I find this very, very disappointing, and potentially nullifying on those points.  I will, however, be open to whatever explanation Senator Santorum offers today.


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 7

and people who thought it was such a grand idea are going to act so surprised!

JannyMae on March 23, 2012 at 12:00 PM

Because well-meaning, gullible liberal voters who only see the stated intentions of it as supportable (“free health care for everyone!”) aren’t grown-up enough to look under the hood and see how far-reaching the (un)intended consequences of it will be.

Right Mover on March 23, 2012 at 12:12 PM

when your guys quote is micconstued its bad. when the other guys(remember etch-a-sketch) its good.

LOL

gerrym51 on March 23, 2012 at 12:00 PM

Romney says what he’s supposed to say to win, whether he means it or not. He’s kind of a freak.

He put the family dog on the top of the car for a very long ride. It’s not as if he couldn’t afford a bigger car or an RV. He’s just cold, and a freak.

Lightswitch on March 23, 2012 at 12:13 PM

My comment was a general comment, and not meant as an attack on you.

JannyMae on March 23, 2012 at 12:09 PM

According to buymoredanishstuff, anything that isn’t supportive of buymoredanishstuff is an attack against buymoredanishstuff.

You have to understand the nuball buymoredanishstuff mindset.

cozmo on March 23, 2012 at 12:13 PM

Obama: stage 4 brain cancer, 4 weeks to live
Romney: stage 3 lung cancer, 6 weeks to live

Yep, much better.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 12:14 PM

I’d consider selling out my principles exactly that. I will stand on them, I will die with them, alone if I must. There are many things worse than death, and many more things far more important than living.

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Still melodramatic, I see. Stepping inside a voting booth and pulling the lever for the eventual GOP nominee–probably Romney–is not a Patrick Henry moment. You’re only allowed a Patrick Henry moment should someone forcibly try to prevent you from casting that vote.

More importantly, if a political party is not in accordance with your most dearly held principles, don’t belong to it. Some of you most vociferous about not voting if your guy doesn’t win claim to be ‘true’ conservatives. I question that. Seems to me many of you hold beliefs not conservative at all, as ‘conservatism’ is commonly understood. When I think ‘conservative’ I use Ronald Reagan and the late Bill Buckley as guideposts: both were irrefutably conservative; they define modern conservatism. I don’t know who you’re looking at.

troyriser_gopftw on March 23, 2012 at 12:16 PM

He put the family dog on the top of the car for a very long ride. It’s not as if he couldn’t afford a bigger car or an RV. He’s just cold, and a freak.

Lightswitch on March 23, 2012 at 12:13 PM

ROMNEY / MICHAEL VICK 2012!!

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 12:16 PM

When I think ‘conservative’ I use Ronald Reagan and the late Bill Buckley as guideposts: both were irrefutably conservative; they define modern conservatism.

troyriser_gopftw on March 23, 2012 at 12:16 PM

Get real, those guys were posers doncha’ know.

Only birthers can determine who is conservative and more importantly, all those who ain’t.

cozmo on March 23, 2012 at 12:19 PM

Obama: stage 4 brain cancer, 4 weeks to live
Romney: stage 3 lung cancer, 6 weeks to live
Yep, much better.
angryed on March 23, 2012 at 12:14 PM

Has anyone ever told you you’re a drama queen?

jawkneemusic on March 23, 2012 at 12:21 PM

I give you credit, you at least try to make an arguement why romneycare is better than obama.

At best, per your post, Romney is liberal but not as liberal as obama.

My problem is, based on Romney’s record as governor, he is MORE liberal than you say. On HC, Judges etc. romney’s record is terrible.

But again, I praise you for at least trying to make an arguement. I’m only sad you can’t see that his words mean nothing, his deeds are far left!

Danielvito on March 23, 2012 at 11:14 AM

I appreciate it.

As for his record, maybe my take is the product of me having lived in the Northeast my whole life, but it is literally almost impossible to have a different record in MA.

Think of the most conservative politician you can imagine. Now imagine him in MA, with a Legislature that is over-whelmingly liberal (not Democrat, liberal).

milcus on March 23, 2012 at 12:21 PM

I give you credit, you at least try to make an arguement why romneycare is better than obama.

At best, per your post, Romney is liberal but not as liberal as obama.

My problem is, based on Romney’s record as governor, he is MORE liberal than you say. On HC, Judges etc. romney’s record is terrible.

But again, I praise you for at least trying to make an arguement. I’m only sad you can’t see that his words mean nothing, his deeds are far left!

Danielvito on March 23, 2012 at 11:14 AM

Sorry, I pressed enter by accident. As I was saying..

Think of the most conservative politician you can imagine. Now imagine him in MA, with a Legislature that is over-whelmingly liberal (not Democrat, liberal). If you can, with a straight face, tell me that your preferred conservative would have governed more to the right than Romney, than I will agree Romney is a liberal.

The problem though, is that neither Santorum, his biggest suppoters, or really anyone, for that matter, can say that with any amount of honesty. As a result, I do not look at Romney’s record as Governor any differently than I do when I look at Reagan’s. And because of that, I dont think his record is any more reflective of him than what he says today is. I think the truth is somewhere in the middle, maybe just to the right of that. Which makes him, at worst George W. Bush. And again, Bush is infinitely better than Obama.

milcus on March 23, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Think of the most conservative politician you can imagine. Now imagine him in MA, with a Legislature that is over-whelmingly liberal (not Democrat, liberal).

milcus on March 23, 2012 at 12:21 PM

This is precisely why this New Jersey resident believes Chris Christie is the best we can do for NJ as a Governor, but I would hate the idea of Christie as a candidate on the national stage. Same general principle.

Right Mover on March 23, 2012 at 12:26 PM

Think of the most conservative politician you can imagine. Now imagine him in MA, with a Legislature that is over-whelmingly liberal (not Democrat, liberal).

milcus on March 23, 2012 at 12:21 PM

Now imagine the “most conservative politician” saying his #1 concern after winning the governorship is “crossing the aisle”.

Oh that’s right, we don’t have to imagine, Romney already said it.

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on March 23, 2012 at 12:27 PM

What in Romneycare’s background tells you he’ll be less liberal than Obama…

You do understand Obama modeled Obamacare after romneycare w/the help of romney’s advisors

You are aware that romneycare appointed two radical gay rights activist as judges in massachusetts

etc. etc.

Danielvito on March 23, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Every single one of our candidates have said or done things that are questionable and that I don’t agree with, but “class warfare” Obama is an Alinsky disciple that wants to radically transform America in his image. If you don’t see the difference … well then you’re just BLIND.

redridinghood on March 23, 2012 at 12:28 PM

LOL @ Ed for supporting this toolbag.

rubberneck on March 23, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Danielvito on March 23, 2012 at 11:14 AM

Dude, I can’t think of a delicate way to say this, so I’ll just say it.

If you’re not prepared to join the fight, then get the f*** off the battlefield. You’re just gonna be in the way.

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Oh that’s right, we don’t have to imagine, Romney already said it.

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on March 23, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Every candidate who wants to win has done it. Every president, or governor, except Carter and Obama have done it. What’s your point?

cozmo on March 23, 2012 at 12:30 PM

What in Romneycare’s background tells you he’ll be less liberal than Obama…

Danielvito on March 23, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Maybe the fact that he actually vetoed some of the most egregious legislation his rabid-as-a-dog legislature pushed through? Very few governors have the balls to smash down a veto knowing they will be overruled.

Archivarix on March 23, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Got back from the Doctor’s this morning, the folks who do talk politics there are still talking about Obamacare. If the liberals were right and folks really wanted this?

Then why are people in doctors offices, patients and staff, scared to death of the coming Obamacare changes? Terrified by what’s going to happen. I’m way past concerned, my family is in Obama’s bullseye, so it’s gotta be repealed.

Given his pledge, I don’t see how Romney could renege on that, it’d be too costly, like HW Bush’s “read my lips” pledge.. the dems promised him, they would not run against him on that broken promise..

they lied like a sh*tty old carpet.. completely broke their word.

Romney has to know that history. To go against a major pledge like that, with the dems givingn him cover.. They’ll lie again, he can’T trust them, so he’s pretty much gotta repeal.

I hope to God he does.. I just have no faith now any others in the remaining candidates can win a general. The MSM has distorted them too much to let them survive even a minor gaff.

mark81150 on March 23, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Support Governor Romney! He’s the cleanest pig in the GOP sty this year! /

Ugh. I think I’m going to need a break from politics.

Aitch748 on March 23, 2012 at 12:39 PM

EDYou are wrong! This election is not just about who can beat Obama; it is about who can actually save this country from it’s downward progressive spiral.

Tell me Ed, can you say for sure that Romney will repeal ALL of Obamacare? Can you say for sure that he will not give Wall Street any more bailouts. Can you say with certainty that he will appoint conservative judges and that he will not push for Cap and Trade or amnesty? No, you can’t and neither can anyone else.

Romney will not win. The general populace is not going to go vote for ABO in equal numbers to those who will vote for Obama. We need a candidate that can generate excitement and loyalty. Mitt is not it.

Santorum just said out loud what many of us already know.

fight like a girl on March 23, 2012 at 12:39 PM

Ed,

I agree with your sentiments. I am a Rick supporter but this behavior on Senator Santorum’s part has given me pause, too.

Romney is NOT Obama! He has his faults and they are notable but Romney is far better than Obama. I’d rather have Rick though but this antic is ironically narrowing the choice difference between himself and Mitt.

I vote June 5 in California but I wonder if Rick will not make it past Pennsylvania especially if he chooses to continue with this talking point.

Defeat Obama in November.

islandman78 on March 23, 2012 at 12:40 PM

let’s note that Newt Gingrich, at least, does get this right:

For God’s sake, how many times does Newt have to be quoted as being right on issue after issue after issue after issue before he is recognized as the only candidate who can stay on target and beat Obozo? USE YOUR BRAINS PEOPLE!

Hang in there, Newt…!!!

NOMOBO on March 23, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Now imagine the “most conservative politician” saying his #1 concern after winning the governorship is “crossing the aisle”.

Oh that’s right, we don’t have to imagine, Romney already said it.

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on March 23, 2012 at 12:27 PM

With all due respect, do you know how legislation is made?

Seriously. Do you know that to get things done you need majorities. And in MA, that means working with Democrats. You cant pass legislation by only working with your own party unless your party controls a fillibuster proof majority.

Again 171 of 200 members of the MA House were liberal. Think about that. 171 of 200. And to get something done, he had to cross the aisle. He could not do anything by simply relying on his 29 supporters.

milcus on March 23, 2012 at 12:41 PM

ROMNEY / MICHAEL VICK 2012!!

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 12:16 PM

Heh. Romney’s not that bad, but since the VP candidate is usually the more intense one, that’s a pretty good ticket. ;o)

Lightswitch on March 23, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Tell me Ed, can you say for sure that Romney will repeal ALL of Obamacare? Can you say for sure that he will not give Wall Street any more bailouts. Can you say with certainty that he will appoint conservative judges and that he will not push for Cap and Trade or amnesty? No, you can’t and neither can anyone else.

fight like a girl on March 23, 2012 at 12:39 PM

Can you say with any certainty that he won’t. No. You can say that anymore than I can say he will. But what we both know what Obama will do. So when given a choice, I’ll 50/50 odds over the 100% sure thing.

What about you?

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 12:44 PM

No, Senator Santorum, Obama and Romney aren’t the same

Yes they are Ed, and you know it.

Dunedainn on March 23, 2012 at 12:44 PM

*can’t

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 12:44 PM

LOL @ Ed for supporting this toolbag.

rubberneck on March 23, 2012 at 12:28 PM

It’s rude to insult the host. Why is your neck rubber?

Lightswitch on March 23, 2012 at 12:45 PM

let me try that again since my last post was typo city.

Can you say with any certainty that he won’t. No. You can’t say that anymore than I can say he will. But what we both know what Obama will do. So when given a choice, I’ll take 50/50 odds over the 100% sure thing.

What about you?

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 12:44 PM

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 12:45 PM

No, Senator Santorum, Obama and Romney aren’t the same

Yes they are Ed, and you know it.

Dunedainn on March 23, 2012 at 12:44 PM

No they aren’t. You just cannot figure that out.

cozmo on March 23, 2012 at 12:47 PM

I see. Your principles are all about you. You would rather feel all righteous and indignant and holier than thou while you sit at home fuming that your guy didn’t get the nomination than go vote to stop the guy who will do the most damage to the principles you claim to hold more dear than life itself.

fadetogray on March 23, 2012 at 11:48 AM

Allow me to correct some of your assumptions – this will keep you from looking stupid in the future.

1: For some time now, it’s been apparent that I don’t have a “guy” in the race.

So did I always not have a “horse in the race?” No. I did in the beginning, but as time progressed, it became obvious that he is a Statist in his own way, and I just could not support someone who is hellbent on forcing his conscience on others.

2: I am a true blooded conservative, with a strong libertarian streak.

What that means is, I love God, I love my freedoms, I love my rights, and I love OTHER PEOPLE’S RIGHTS JUST AS MUCH. I find the concept of forcing my social views on anyone outside of my children abhorrent. I thing homosexuality is wrong and deviant. However, I do not think that it is society or the government’s job to legislate or bother with such matters. If the government can tell a gay man what he can do in his bedroom, he can tell a strait man as well. The government has no place – check that SHOULD have not place in the matter. And “society” should keep it’s nose outta people’s bedrooms.

My belief is, so long as you are not causing demonstrative, direct and material harm to another person’s liberties, then you should be left alone by society and the government. I have very strong social beliefs, this is true, but I would die before I would demand that anyone that I did not bring into this world adhere to them.

My rights end where your nose starts, and vice versa.

3: This isn’t about “my guy not getting in.”

That is an ignorant assumption. This is about a political party which has run amok, and not only takes people such as myself for granted, but outright abuses them at every opportunity.

The Republicans have spent the better part of 40 years denigrating, trying to hide from, talking down to, and destroying conservatives. Then they demand we vote for them, giving us this:

“Well, yeah, our candidate is bad, but if you don’t vote for us, you’re voting for the worse guy!”

This routine no longer carries weight with me. The RINOS have bludgeoned me with this for so many decades, that it has lost it’s sting.

Not helping matters, the moderate candidates have been a progression of steadily more liberal progs, each one more of a statist hack than the last, culminating in Willard Fillmoure Romneycare – a man so democrat that the Montana’s Democrat govenor looks like Jim DeMint in contrast. He is the grandparent of Obamacare, and I consider that piece of legislation to be nothing less than a true and utter death blow to this republic.

Romneycare and Obamacare are unforgivable sins in my world. They are the penultimate destruction of freedom and liberty. Even more maddening, because he is the grand architect, Willard cannot attack the greatest weakness of Obama – the thing even the liberals hate – without the media playing him for a titanic hypocrite. (And they’d be right).

Not helping matters is how insulting the Romney supporters have been towards conservatives such as myself. From the Weekly Standard, to the Fox News staff, to Mattt Drudge, to the commentators on this site. I didn’t start off nasty, it’s been a steady downhill slide, and it’s been entirely in response to the Mitt Romney supporters belligerence and arrogance.

Like hell I will vote for that man after having to endure months of abuse from his supporters.

4: I hold the 2nd amendment to be the most important of them all.

It was inserted in the constitution not to protect us from rapists and home invaders, and not to put tasty meat on the table. It was included in the constitution as a last ditch fail-safe against an over-reaching government. 2A as a protection from from gang bangers is laughable – it is there to protect us FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. And Willard made numerous assaults on that one special right, given to us by God, that liberty which is the TEETH for all other freedoms we enjoy.

Romney’s bans and eager support for more bans on these weapons I can also never, ever forgive. Banning any weapons not classified as a weapon of mass destruction or top-end modern field artillery, is a vote for tyranny in my mind.

5: A bad Republican is worse than a democrat in many ways.

We have a congress of feckless, gutless, mushes. They are lead by callow, simpering jackasses. They won’t even stand up to King Barry Hussain in any measurable way.

Based on their history of cowardice, capitulation, and appeasement, why would any reasoning human being assume these witless wonders would turn Willard to the right when they can’t even be bothered to fight OBAMA!!!

No, they will allow Willard Romneycare to steer them even more to the left, and he will enact truly damning legislation, which our congress-critters won’t have to “pretend” to oppose. You see, right now, despite largely being on the same page as the democrats, the republican leaders have to “save face” and offer at least some wishy-washy opposition, lest they face an open revolt in their base, (which is coming regardless, thanks to Romney, but I digress).

With Romney at the helm, under the cover of “team elephant” they will be free to indulge their baser instincts to their heart’s content – and hey, we are all on the same “team” so it must be ok…

5: Is Romney better than Obama?

Yes. But that’s a bullsh*t question. It’s a distraction. The REAL question, the one that matters, is:

“Is Romney good enough to save America.”

The answer to that question, based on his words, his beliefs, and his actions, is, in my opinion, a resounding NO!!!

Romney is a caretaker.
He is a maintenance man. He will make sure all of the Democrat’s policies and legislation is well oiled and maintained, so when they once again sweep back into power, they can pick up right where they left off,secure in knowing that Willard did nothing to unwind the doomsday clock.

If he’s not going to unravel this tapestry of death, what the hell is the point? Romney is AIDS. Obama is Bushmaster Venom. Both are terminal.

I refuse to participate in such a Faustian nightmare. I will find a new political party to represent me, and support them.

I won’t choose between Screwtape and Malbolgia.

My support is earned by merit, or it is not given.

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Support Governor Romney! He’s the cleanest pig in the GOP sty this year! /

Ugh. I think I’m going to need a break from politics.

Aitch748 on March 23, 2012 at 12:39 PM

Me too. Lucky I have to go now.

Lightswitch on March 23, 2012 at 12:50 PM

What evidence do you have that electing Romney over Obama would actually reduce the levels of government spending? This is the same guy whose own health insurance legislation is the father of Obamacare, and whose record already tells us he’s more than willing to compromise with liberals and let them drive us off the cliff with their reckless financial policies.

The best you could hope for with Romney would be a slower increase in the rate of government spending, which would merely push our financial collapse out a few months or years. This is not a true solution to the problem. The only way to stop getting the McCains and the Romneys of the world nominated, is to have them NOT win. Until the Republican party is willing to nominate a different type of candidate, why should I reward them with my vote?

soladoras on March 23, 2012 at 12:54 PM

Santorum just said out loud what many of us already know.

no, it’s what you believe,.. not necessarily the same.

fight like a girl on March 23, 2012 at 12:39 PM

I like Rick, was a supporter of him in the Ohio primary, but he’s hurt himself alot with this statement which the Obama crew will make him and Romney eat in the general.

Romney has his flaws, but at heart I believe he like Rick is a good man. Obama whatever his family thinks of him, is trying to detroy America as it is, and was to recreate a new America in his image. One where cronyism and patronage are the only way to advance, and the common citizen is just another sheep/cog to be used up and thrown away, with a Cuban style healhcare system that is among the worlds worst in terms of low quality care.

Nobody believe Romney wants America to become another third world cesspool..

nobody… as a Santorum voter I never believed that, most won’t. You have to let go thinking the opposition always eats babies, just being opposed to somebody doesn’t make them evil, just opposed.

You risk alienating potential allies by trying to paint that picture.

mark81150 on March 23, 2012 at 12:54 PM

That’s your problem, the “all or nothing” approach. This always guarantees disappointment.

It’s not selling your soul if you accept the fact that you can’t always get everything you want, everytime you want. It’s called facing reality. Reality can be a harsh mistress.

So, in life, you are usually faced with two options, you can either trudge ahead and keep fighting with what you can get, or cry and pout about what you can’t get.

It’s obvious who’s chosen to do what by reading these posts.

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 12:04 PM

I don’t settle for “what I can get.” I make, take, or buy what I WANT. If that ain’t for sale, I save my time, my money, and my effort until it IS.

If other people were as discriminating, then the Republicans would not offer us human garbage every election. But instead they “sell out” they settle.

F*&^ That.

I won’t reward them for giving me a crap sandwich by eating it.

This is no different than going to a restaurant, and and after having been served literal s(*& on a moldy bun, returning the next day, expecting that the NEXT meal is going to be better somehow…

… it won’t be – in fact, by buying another hunk of s*&^ on mold covered buns, you are incentivising the restaurant to keep serving you this dish – HEY, THESE PEOPLE LIKE IT! THEY KEEP BUYING IT!!!

That is not compromise. No sir, that is the text-book definition of INSANITY.

I reward GOOD behavior. Sometimes that involves sacrifice.

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 12:57 PM

Still melodramatic, I see. Stepping inside a voting booth and pulling the lever for the eventual GOP nominee–probably Romney–is not a Patrick Henry moment. You’re only allowed a Patrick Henry moment should someone forcibly try to prevent you from casting that vote.

You will not dictate when and where I will draw a line in the sand. I will make that decision and probably die on that day – and do so with pride.

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 12:59 PM

More importantly, if a political party is not in accordance with your most dearly held principles, don’t belong to it. Some of you most vociferous about not voting if your guy doesn’t win claim to be ‘true’ conservatives. I question that. Seems to me many of you hold beliefs not conservative at all, as ‘conservatism’ is commonly understood. When I think ‘conservative’ I use Ronald Reagan and the late Bill Buckley as guideposts: both were irrefutably conservative; they define modern conservatism. I don’t know who you’re looking at.

My guy? I don’t have a guy. That don’t mean I will sit down quietly and eat another s*&^ sandwich. The mushes are going to get an earful. And none are more keenly aware that the Republicans have abandoned conservatives than myself.

Ronald Reagan who was opposed violently by the Republican establishment hacks, and Buckley who tried to unseat Republican John Lindsay?

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 1:03 PM

The best you could hope for with Romney would be a slower increase in the rate of government spending, which would merely push our financial collapse out a few months or years. This is not a true solution to the problem. The only way to stop getting the McCains and the Romneys of the world nominated, is to have them NOT win. Until the Republican party is willing to nominate a different type of candidate, why should I reward them with my vote?

soladoras on March 23, 2012 at 12:54 PM

So many WAITING FOR SUPERMAN when we ROBBINGHOOD in the White House.

redridinghood on March 23, 2012 at 1:04 PM

So many WAITING FOR SUPERMAN when we have ROBBINGHOOD in the White House.

redridinghood on March 23, 2012 at 1:04 PM

redridinghood on March 23, 2012 at 1:07 PM

You will not dictate when and where I will draw a line in the sand. I will make that decision and probably die on that day – and do so with pride.

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Not dictating anything, SD. Merely pointing out there’s a time and place for bold talk and heroics. Deciding not to vote out of churlishness and spite isn’t one of them.

As to your second point, you–like me and most other ordinary people–will probably leave this life like most other ordinary people do: without much flash or fanfare, killed by accident, old age, or disease. Not very dramatic, but that’s usually the way of it.

troyriser_gopftw on March 23, 2012 at 1:10 PM

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 12:47 PM

So we know you’re opinions. I respect that even though we disagree. But here’s a question:

Do you accept the premise that you could be wrong and none of us really know exactly how he’ll will be as president?

And isn’t that uncertainty a better option that what we know we will get with Obama?

Okay so that’s two questions, but the point’s the same, everyone has a history we can judge from but know of us know what the future holds. Obama could see the light and become a Republican tomorrow (highly unlikely) but we already know what he’s like as president now. Being president is harder than being a governor.

What if you’re wrong?

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 1:13 PM

If other people were as discriminating, then the Republicans would not offer us human garbage every election. But instead they “sell out” they settle.

F*&^ That.

I won’t reward them for giving me a crap sandwich by eating it.

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 12:57 PM

nobody cares what you do or what you think…it’s not that your are the only pathetic deranged individual out there, yet people on our side have won elections despite imbeciles who talk the way you do…and btw, ‘human garbage’ are actually people who act and talk like you do, but the irony of this is lost you…

jimver on March 23, 2012 at 1:15 PM

Ronald Reagan who was opposed violently by the Republican establishment hacks, and Buckley who tried to unseat Republican John Lindsay?

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Reagan was not opposed ‘violently’ by fellow Republicans. He was just opposed. Buckley mounted a protest campaign against John Lindsey, going so far as to publicly announce his was a protest candidacy with no hope of winning. I doubt Buckley would’ve made his protest had Lindsey’s Democratic opponent, Abe Beame, been a stealth socialist intent upon destroying the city.

troyriser_gopftw on March 23, 2012 at 1:18 PM

.I will make that decision and probably die on that day – and do so with pride.

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 12:59 PM

let us know…

jimver on March 23, 2012 at 1:18 PM

I don’t settle for “what I can get.” I make, take, or buy what I WANT. If that ain’t for sale, I save my time, my money, and my effort until it IS.

If other people were as discriminating, then the Republicans would not offer us human garbage every election. But instead they “sell out” they settle.

F*&^ That.

I reward GOOD behavior. Sometimes that involves sacrifice.

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 12:57 PM

You don’t have that luxury anymore.

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 1:20 PM

As to your second point, you–like me and most other ordinary people–will probably leave this life like most other ordinary people do: without much flash or fanfare, killed by accident, old age, or disease. Not very dramatic, but that’s usually the way of it.

troyriser_gopftw on March 23, 2012 at 1:10 PM

Nothing wrong with that.

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 1:20 PM

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 12:57 PM

then why are you still here, if you aren’t a republican anymore, nor supporting the propable nominee?

You can play Noah standing at the door of the Ark denouncing the wicked with a zeal that smites the unfaithful all you like, it changes not one damn thing. You simply are not the last honest man, it’s so beyond hubris that you seem to think so, that NOBODY can be as PURE as you are in your chest thumping rage agianst all that is impure.

We’re all sinners here.. we’ve all enabled the politicians to make these choices by holding back from criticising them. You yourself admitted you voted for them in the past. Did you not?

Then you have to know, even God took 6 days to create the Earth.. he didn’t do in in a snap of his fingers,. we can’t undo everthing in one election. It’s beyond childish impatience to demand it. We aren’t asking you to trust him, but to help watch him as we are.

We’ll have far greater impact on the way Romney governs from inside the loop, than by climbing up on a hill top a hundred miles away and screaming at him, with a vote he knows you’ll never give.

You think it’s a principled stand, no, it’s not.

A principled stand is to stay and fight for what you believe in, not by walking away with whomever you can convince. I’d much sooner die in a charge, than a retreat.. and you are retreating.

Romney is like us, a good man at heart flawed, but trying in his own way to make America a better place than it was when he found it. Aren’t you trying to do the same?

Then stand with us against Obama, and win the fight we can win.

Romney would be greatful for our support, and that is a favor to prescious to squander. One we can use to advance the cause. Leaving just weakens us when we need every vote for the mandate he’ll need to claim to govern as a conservative, without a sizable mandate, the MSM will make everyday a struggle, a fight, that’s something we can help Romney with by giving him a mandate big enough so he can accomplish something for us, and the movement.

The third party way, is a garunteed way to get Obama another four years. you won’t have “punished” the rinos”

You will have “punished” the American people, and our children for your over zealous pride.

I refuse to trade my childrens future over something as selfish as that.

mark81150 on March 23, 2012 at 1:25 PM

then why are you still here, if you aren’t a republican anymore, nor supporting the propable nominee?

mark81150 on March 23, 2012 at 1:25 PM

Because its lonely in martyrville.

cozmo on March 23, 2012 at 1:30 PM

mark81150 on March 23, 2012 at 1:25 PM

There is nothing about Romney that is conservative. The best one can hope for with him is that a conservative Republican Congress might drag him, oh so grudgingly, to the right. The danger is that a “moderate” Congress will give him all the progressive crap he desires and we end up where Obama would take us, only more slowly. Where’s the payoff in that? If some conservatives cannot bring themselves to vote for a wisp of smoke of a hope, who are you, anonymous fellow, to try to shame them into doing otherwise? Petulant nagging such as yours is not argument and you gain nothing with that.

swinia sutki on March 23, 2012 at 1:47 PM

A humble man fight wherever he has to with whatever he can get.

A man filled with hubris only fights when he has the best stuff to fight with in the most ideal conditions.

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 1:58 PM

swinia sutki on March 23, 2012 at 1:47 PM

I would rather be moved slowly in one direction and have a chance to make a course correction that to be rushed into that direction without any brakes.

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 2:01 PM

Support Governor Romney! He’s the cleanest pig in the GOP sty this year! /

Ugh. I think I’m going to need a break from politics.

Aitch748 on March 23, 2012 at 12:39 PM

Sorri … I can not do it … will write in a name in the primary …

will vote for the nominee in the general … ABR / ABO

conservative tarheel on March 23, 2012 at 2:01 PM

With all due respect, do you know how legislation is made?

Seriously. Do you know that to get things done you need majorities. And in MA, that means working with Democrats. You cant pass legislation by only working with your own party unless your party controls a fillibuster proof majority.

Again 171 of 200 members of the MA House were liberal. Think about that. 171 of 200. And to get something done, he had to cross the aisle. He could not do anything by simply relying on his 29 supporters.

milcus on March 23, 2012 at 12:41 PM

ABRtards are ignorant about how American governments (State and Federal) work.

They think that a Governor is really a dictator that can ignore the law and do what they want.

Reality is not their strong suit.

Gunlock Bill on March 23, 2012 at 2:03 PM

The third party way, is a garunteed way to get Obama another four years. you won’t have “punished” the rinos”

I will say this about 3rd parties … if they try and shove Jeb on us in 16 ….
I WILL be going 3rd party …. write what you want about it ….
that will be a bridge to far ….

conservative tarheel on March 23, 2012 at 2:06 PM

You will not dictate when and where I will draw a line in the sand. I will make that decision and probably die on that day – and do so with pride.

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 12:59 PM

One thing for sure, Hot Gas is the right place for you.

fadetogray on March 23, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Santorum is correct, both Romney and Obama are the same.

One of great things about our country is our right to individual liberty. Romneycare and Obamacare trample on that right.

RedRobin145 on March 23, 2012 at 2:20 PM

You don’t have that luxury anymore.

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Wanna bet?

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 2:55 PM

So we know you’re opinions. I respect that even though we disagree. But here’s a question:

Do you accept the premise that you could be wrong and none of us really know exactly how he’ll will be as president?

And isn’t that uncertainty a better option that what we know we will get with Obama?

Okay so that’s two questions, but the point’s the same, everyone has a history we can judge from but know of us know what the future holds. Obama could see the light and become a Republican tomorrow (highly unlikely) but we already know what he’s like as president now. Being president is harder than being a governor.

What if you’re wrong?

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 1:13 PM

I entertained that notion for Bush I, Bush II, Dole, and McWeenie. I gave them their shot, I gave them my money, I worked phones, wrote op-eds in the newspaper, and extolled their virtues at church and amongst my workers.

And I got bit in the ass for my troubles.

I gave the moderate wings their chances for most of my life. And I got tax hikes, Tarp bailouts, the TSA, and Automobile bailouts, and a war in Iraq that didn’t really strike me as being all that necessary, and in many ways, I felt that the war in Afghanistan, one I felt was necessary, suffered for it.

In a universe of infinite possibilities, yeah, I could be wrong.

But as you mentioned, just like Obama changing his stripes is an unlikely event, I don’t expect Romney to suddenly become a strong constitutional conservative. He’s a Mass. Republican, which is more liberal than the college professors we call pinkos over at MSU.

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 3:03 PM

nobody cares what you do or what you think…

jimver on March 23, 2012 at 1:15 PM

Then why are you so concerned over our refusal to vote to Willard Romneycare.

Please come to a consensus – either us loathsome conservatives are irrelevant and should just – to quote a poster yesterday – die flaming deaths – or your need us to suck down our morals, principles, and beliefs and vote for Willard McS*&t-Sandwhich.

Which is it?

Get back to me when you’ve made up your collective minds on the subject.

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 3:06 PM

Romney is like us, a good man at heart flawed, but trying in his own way to make America a better place than it was when he found it. Aren’t you trying to do the same?

Romney is asking too much. Romneycare and his stand on guns are such fundamentally disqualifying elements that I could never look past them. I could forgive everything else. Those two things are so antithetical to what I believe that nothing can reconcile them.

“The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 3:23 PM

ABRtards are ignorant about how American governments (State and Federal) work.

They think that a Governor is really a dictator that can ignore the law and do what they want.

Reality is not their strong suit.

Gunlock Bill on March 23, 2012 at 2:03 PM

It’s just baffling how the ABR crowd ignores reality. They pretend that Romney was this liberal in a conservative state, that the legislature was conservative, that Romneycare was unconstitutional, and that Romneycare is hated by the people of MA. They do that while largely ignoring Santorum’s record and without wondering what Santorum would do as president.

I have literally not heard one ABR person make a solid argument for why they think Romney is the liberal devil that they pretend he is. And to make it worse, they are pushing arguably the worst presidential candidate I have ever seen as the ABR-alternative, while refusing to give him any money to run his campaign.

milcus on March 23, 2012 at 3:24 PM

Please come to a consensus – either us loathsome conservatives are irrelevant and should just – to quote a poster yesterday – die flaming deaths – or your need us to suck down our morals, principles, and beliefs and vote for Willard McS*&t-Sandwhich.

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 3:06 PM

the first, you, loathsome person (btw, you are not conservative by any definition) are irrelevant, and frankly I don’t give a damn about how or who you vote for…my point was spare us the long pontifications and the crappola about principles and stuff, you are not ‘principled’, you are just immensely obsessed with your self your self-aggrandizing persona cannot bare/cope with your own irrelevance in matters political since this country does not elect presidents through direct vote…you are obsessively fixated on things that have been debunked times and again, blindly prejudiced and childishly petulant when obviously things don’t go your way… all these above do not a principled person make…

jimver on March 23, 2012 at 3:26 PM

4 more years of Obama & we may not have Rush, Fox News or Hot Air … Just Sayin’.

redridinghood on March 23, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Conservatives and near Conservatives will be sporting the deer in the head lights look after the election if Romney is selected. It will be another Scott Brown moment.. You thought you were doing good when a Republican was voted in, but then you find out you are getting a little “R” and not a capital “R”.

We are going to continue with Obama’s plan for our future, it will just take a little more time to get there.

SGinNC on March 23, 2012 at 3:31 PM

This… this is one thing that makes me angry, the ppl of the country are saying that they think Mitt is answer to our nightmare called Obama. The ppl who consider themselves conservative and repeat again and again “I won’t vote for Mitt” for whatever reason they have in their head that day are fooling themselves by thinking Obie is better than anyone running. You anti Mitt ppl need to unite behind the republican that is nominated, even if ppl like bluegrill is a jerk.
Repeat after me,”I WILL UNITE BEHIND THE REPUBLICAN NOMINEE” !!!!!!!!!!!

angrymike on March 23, 2012 at 10:13 AM

I am not a republican. I am a conservative.

Give me a conservative. Then I’ll vote for him.

Deal?

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 10:17 AM

True dat.

But as you mentioned, just like Obama changing his stripes is an unlikely event, I don’t expect Romney to suddenly become a strong constitutional conservative. He’s a Mass. Republican, which is more liberal than the college professors we call pinkos over at MSU.

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 3:03 PM

Don’t you love how these CINOs and RINOs come along with their stupid Jedi mind tricks: Conservatives not voting for Willard = a vote for Oboobie. E1venty!11!! Repeating that adnauseum for the past 9 months does not make it in the least bit true. Not even libtards can come up with that for a strawmandoll. And if it were, we’d never have had the C!v!l War and we’d still have slaves past 1864.

Here’s a quick definition of a conservative

A conservative seeks to re-establish the limits and boundaries of Government as framed by the Founding Fathers of the United States of America. In God we trust, not the Government. Conservatives want to impose fiscal discipline, restrain the reach of the federal government as outlined in the Constitution and defend America’s traditional family values.

The American two-party system is broken. It has become a system of elite political insiders who only serve the special interest groups that help keep them in control. Some elites call themselves “Democrats” while others call themselves “Republicans”.

The elite of the two major parties continue to fail America based on our spiraling national debt, trillion-dollar annual budget deficits, off-budget Earmarks, escalating illegal immigration, weakening Dollar and loss of traditional American values. They are stealing America’s future because they are only dedicated to getting re-elected.

Forget the Mittbots, but for all you ‘conservatives’ that plan to hold your nose, ask yourself if the above summarizes how you view yourself. If it doesn’t then you are NOT a conservative and by all means do BOHICA.

In that sense, why on earth would I WANT Oboobie whe is the polar opposite of the above statement? Why on earth would I WANT Mittwit, who fancies himself to be an expert manager that can “repair” the entitlements and fix the agencies?

90% of our Federal Agencies have no raison d’etre other than to grow government and leech my tax dollars on socilaized charity and provide the Feds with a venue to exert control over us. Aboslutely NONE of the entitlements are derived from the Constitution and should have never been brought forth in the first place.

But like frogs, we were slow cooked to believe that somehow these enhancements were practically free. Name one program that ever came under budget, let alone on budget?

Above all else, conservatives value self-reliance over govt assistance. Name one thing that Mittness favors that expemplfies self-reliance? No, he just wants to fix and strengthen big govt.

As far as the GOP is concerned, we are rapidly reaching a tipping point and I can only hope it happens sooner than later. Conservative voters have been MIA from the GE off and on ever since at least 1992. There is only so many crap-sandwiches shoved down their gullet before they explode. I’ve been voting since 1980 and I’ve had enough. Actually, since ’76 if you count my dad polling the kids and voting accordingly – we voted for Carter cause he was a Christian and Ford pardoned Nixon, lesson learned. Now comes a man who denounced Reagan and even Pappy Bush then compares himself to RWR without even renouncing, let alone retracting his earlier putdown. Excuse me?

Way I see it, there are four types of disgruntled Republican conservatives:

1) ===========================
Leaning towards voting for Oboobie in the GE to protest Willard: they are forced, albeit reluctantly, to do so in the hopes of saving the GOP, from the elites deadly intent on blurring the line between the two parties. That way under Oboobi, the democrats get the blame and during the finger-pointing, some of the RINOs get tossed from office. Hopefully, then the conservatives can rebuild the party from within to be resurrected in 2016.

I can totally understand their reasoning because they love this country above all and are trying to figure out how to reverse the course we’re on, not slow it down while fixing Big Govt.

Only downside is they get counted as dems as a ratio of turn-out

2) ===========================
Some that plan to stay home, than vote for the lesser of two evils. Not voting is indeed a valid way of expressing your choice, as in “I don’t care about either one, so let the country get the POTUS they deserve.

Again, I can understand this viewpoint, because I’ve done it before. This is a fine way to express digust at the system in the past few cycles where the country wasn’t on the brink of ruin. This time, I hope they really should reconsider their options. 2000 was a good example where many sat out, thinking Dubya was a chip off the old block.

The downside is We know they exist and have since 1992, but in a way have shortchanged themselves in the final tally because there is no accurate way to quantify their ‘NO’ votes, other than knowing that voting was statistically depressed. Again with 2000, had they not done so, Bush would have been the clear winner, chads and margin of error calulations notwithstanding. The point is these voters spoke and the GOP almost lost as a result. Yet they come back and give it to McVain, not out of principles, but because it’s his turn. Bleah.

3) ===========================
Some do vote but leave the top blank. They too refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils, but decide to vote down ticket. Also a rational way of expressing their choices.

Going back to my 2008 vote, I planned to do to do just that with my absentee ballot, but waited to just before the deadline to see what might happen, plus mulling who to write in. With Palin as VP, I changed my mind at the last minute and sent in my absentee ballot. At that point, we still hadn’t hit the crisis point. Then came the suicidal flop of McVain and I regretted my ballot. Had I been home on GE-day, I would have written in either Fred Thompson, Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo or even Bob Barr to register my utter disgust for McVain.

Election results-wise, there’s no downside since one’s choices are tallied (over 700k voted L or C, with another x voting with top blank or written in)

4) ===========================
Last but not least — hopefully more voters this time around than the other thre groups of Not-Mitt above. There are those who are absolutely done with voting for the lesser of two evils. Like them, I’m leaning towards just washing my hands of both parties and going with either the conservative party or writing in a conservative like Palin. Win or lose, we will have made our voices heard and will have to be factored into any political calculation in the aftermath of the GE. In my case, I’m holding out till the convention to see if it’s cream or crud that rises to the top. The convention is the last chance for the party to right itself or find itself irrelevant in 2014/16

The upside is that this is the best way to give final notice to the establishment to count our votes as standing athwart of this progressive and doomed destiny, declaring that like 1856/60, there is a third way that can and will get us out of this mess, if they won’t.

+++++++++++++++++++++

So when you CINO/RINOs insinuate that you are conservatives, and that we’re just dem trolls, just what is it that are you defending in the GOP? The party that betrays you over and over again or the country over party. Especially those putting party over country, some of you are even party hacks astroturfing here and what drives your rage is that by our saying no to the party, it threatens your own personal standing and/or ambitions within the party apparatus.

Whatevs, cause you sound like batterd wives, desperately wanting to believe the lies you tell yourselves.

AH_C on March 23, 2012 at 3:34 PM

Romney is constantly pointing out that Santorum lost his Senate seat and that somehow disqualifies him, but what he doesn’t say is that America chose McCain over him and he still thinks he is the best choice for America. We need a Social Conservative not a partial Conservative.

SGinNC on March 23, 2012 at 3:41 PM

the first, you, loathsome person (btw, you are not conservative by any definition) are irrelevant, and frankly I don’t give a damn about how or who you vote for…my point was spare us the long pontifications and the crappola about principles and stuff, you are not ‘principled’, you are just immensely obsessed with your self your self-aggrandizing persona cannot bare/cope with your own irrelevance in matters political since this country does not elect presidents through direct vote…you are obsessively fixated on things that have been debunked times and again, blindly prejudiced and childishly petulant when obviously things don’t go your way… all these above do not a principled person make…

jimver on March 23, 2012 at 3:26 PM

1: Nothing I have said about Romney has been debunked.

2: If you don’t like what I write, tough, nobody is holding a gun to your temple and making you read it. Don’t like, don’t read.

3: I certainly won’t stop posting anytime soon. Again you don’t like, don’t read.

4: Ok so that’s one vote from this schizophrenic mass of Romney supporters in the “conservatives are irrelevant box.”

5: Since you feel point 4 is the case, then I wonder why you are bothering to reply to me at all. If I am a non-threatening outlier, then clearly the logical course of action would be to ignore the irrelevant whelp.

6: You and I do not share the same definition of conservative – then again, Romney called himself “severely conservative” so if that Democrat in moderate’s clothing is conservative then I am certainly not.

7: Petulant? I give as good as I get. I am a reflection of the manner in which I have been treated. My initial good natured and civil forays into this topic were attacked viciously by Romney supporters from the very first post, and I am simply returning what I was given.

Funny, how Willard ran his campaign exactly the same way… I seem to remember Newt wanted some nice civil debates, and Willard Fillmoure Romneycare responded with millions of dollars in disingenuous attack ads. Really pissed me off too, because I ended up having to defend Newt… and I don’t LIKE Newt…

So then, it’s settled?

Conservatives – real conservatives – not whatever “brand” of conservatives that Mitt Romney is “Severely a part of” are irrelevant.

We are not wanted folks. Our presence is unnecessary, so don’t bother showing up in November. The Republican party, under luminaries like jimver have no need of our support, money, and ballots.

Oh, and they don’t particularly like us very much when we get all “uppity” either. Serfs should know their place after all.

I will convey your message on behalf of the Republican establishment to our congregation. I am sure it will be met with the sort of response it deserves.

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 3:41 PM

In my opinion Santorum completely jumped the shark yesterday. How he can go on and rail about how Obama is ruining this country becuase he doesn’t know what he’s doing and then insult an accomplished guy like Romney (not my first choice) is why the Republican party can’t seem to get out of its own way. I am a die hard conservative and will support anyone over Obama, but this clip will be used against Romney in the general. Santorum should now get out before he embarrasses himself further. He could’ve won more primaries if he kept his mouth shut.

jrfromdallas on March 23, 2012 at 3:51 PM

jrfromdallas on March 23, 2012 at 3:51 PM

Meh, not only are you from Texas, but the worst city in the worst state in the whole country (unless you are from Dallas Nebraska then all is forgiven), what do you know?

cozmo on March 23, 2012 at 3:55 PM

Okay so that’s two questions, but the point’s the same, everyone has a history we can judge from but know of us know what the future holds. Obama could see the light and become a Republican tomorrow (highly unlikely) but we already know what he’s like as president now. Being president is harder than being a governor.

What if you’re wrong?

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 1:13 PM

If we’re wrong, what a pleasant surprise. If you’re wrong, it’s all over.

Reagan was not opposed ‘violently’ by fellow Republicans. He was just opposed. Buckley mounted a protest campaign against John Lindsey, going so far as to publicly announce his was a protest candidacy with no hope of winning. I doubt Buckley would’ve made his protest had Lindsey’s Democratic opponent, Abe Beame, been a stealth socialist intent upon destroying the city.

troyriser_gopftw on March 23, 2012 at 1:18 PM

Not as ‘violently’ as if the interwebs were around back then. But we had the following vehement opposition all aided and abetted by the establishment
–Voodoo-Economics: curtesy of Papa Bush
–interrupting his debate when he paid for it in NH
–Bedtime for Bonzo, dunce, warmonger, cowboy naive ad nauseum
–speculating on his mental capacity
–resisting tax cuts and downsizing of Big Govt
–John Anderson breaking and running independent, drawing 8%. But consider this, Reagan still won, so who did Liberal (R) Anderson hurt?

There’s more:
endless movies/TV shows on homeless and/or nuclear winters, with the establishment repeating the mems
–shock, horror outrage over speeches and or quips at various summits, ‘evil empire’, ‘tear down this Wall’ etc

AH_C on March 23, 2012 at 4:00 PM

Mr. Quick is in fire today…

And Now For the Horse Race: Cancer vs. Cholera!
Bill Quick
March 23, 2012

http://www.dailypundit.com/2012/03/23/and-now-for-the-horse-race-cancer-vs-cholera/

Dear Conservatives: Romney Isn’t One of Us But We Still Hold The Power If… | Wizbang

Romney claims to stand on Constitutional principles with Romneycare claiming that it is a 10th Amendment issue. Technically, Romney is right that the 10th allows the states to experiment in ideas like Romneycare, but that fact isn’t at issue. What is at issue is that Romney thought these horrid ideas might be good ideas in the first place! The fact that he went for these ideas to begin with shows he is no conservative.

OK, Romney’s not anywhere near a conservative. But he certainly is scads more conservative than the most Marx-inspired president in American history and we have to work to defeat this man and put Romney in his place if Romney proves to be the “Mr. Inevitable” he was portrayed as being last year.

So, how do we conservatives stomach him?

One thing we should note is that Romney is pushed by the electoral tides. If he thinks it will benefit him, he’ll go conservative. We just need to keep the pressure on to make sure he understands it behooves him to go with conservative ideas. He may be unmoored to conservative ideals, but he’ll likely stick with them if he’s pushed that way.

Uh huh. “Push” implies some sort of leverage. But how do you have any leverage if he knows you “conservatives” are gutless p*****s who will gobble his entire banquet of sh*t sandwiches, simply because he’s the Republican?

Anyway, I expect to see lots more from the conservative blogosphere along this vein. Apparently bloggers are beginning to understand the Romney is going to be the next sh*t sandwich on the cafeteria line served up by the Gentry GOP Ruling Class, and so now they are trying to explain why he’s really not as stomach-churningly repulsive as he appears to be.

What a great campaign slogan: VOTE FOR MITTENS ROMNEYCARE! HE’S NOT AS VOMITOUS AS HE APPEARS TO BE!

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 4:02 PM

It’s just baffling how the ABR crowd ignores reality. They pretend that Romney was this liberal in a conservative state, that the legislature was conservative, that Romneycare was unconstitutional, and that Romneycare is hated by the people of MA. They do that while largely ignoring Santorum’s record and without wondering what Santorum would do as president.

I have literally not heard one ABR person make a solid argument for why they think Romney is the liberal devil that they pretend he is. And to make it worse, they are pushing arguably the worst presidential candidate I have ever seen as the ABR-alternative, while refusing to give him any money to run his campaign.

milcus on March 23, 2012 at 3:24 PM

There is a reason why Richard Sanctimonious was the LAST not-Romney to rise (and fall). It is because he is the worst.

It is almost humorous to watch the ABRtard’s spinning to save Richard for himself.

Almost.

Gunlock Bill on March 23, 2012 at 4:04 PM

I screwed the formatting of the above post up – note that Bill quick of Daily Pundit wrote it, not me, the formatting did not make that clear, and I’d never want steal credit for his wonderful words.

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 4:04 PM

Santorum is on the phone with Cavuto right now. I have never heard him so animated. He is very adamant his words were twisted. He is fervently walking back HOW he said what he said. Cavuto is reminding him of his exact words.

Now that he has calmed down a bit, his tone is more modulated. Anyone else hearing this right now?

karenhasfreedom on March 23, 2012 at 4:08 PM

Danish, I don’t go out of my way to not get along with anyone here. I don’t think anyone believes you need to feel guilty about any of your associations. I’ve wondered out loud why folks seem so tolerant of the tone that’s taken over the site. It’s not much more complicated than that. The jerks thing, you’re inventing things I haven’t said. I certainly haven’t ever thought or said you were a jerk.
hawkdriver on March 23, 2012 at 12:09 PM

First, they’re not my associations. That’s the point! I’m minding my own business, commenting on topic to threads and the next thing I know I have Bmore and her bff Cozmo sniping at me about Bluegill and other commenters I don’t have a damn thing to do with. Cozmo goes on to make false accusations about the level of my interaction with them (which is close to zero), and when I ask her to back it up she resorts to obnoxious, juvenile games. As for calling me a jerk, I don’t mean to say you said that. But I’m tired of being asked to speak for other commenters I don’t engage with, and the assumption seems to be that because they like Romney they’re my responsibility. That is an impossible demand.

Buy Danish on March 23, 2012 at 4:09 PM

OMG…Santorum just came utterly unglued talking to Cavuto on Fox. His campaign just ended, whether or not he knows it yet.

ConservativeLA on March 23, 2012 at 4:10 PM

Karen, I heard it before I saw your post. He’s done now. Completely and utterly done.

ConservativeLA on March 23, 2012 at 4:11 PM

Stick a fork in him. He lost it on Cavuto.

mr.idaho on March 23, 2012 at 4:12 PM

WTH. He blamed the Romney Campaign for what he said

mr.idaho on March 23, 2012 at 4:14 PM

The problem with this whole campaign season has been that Romney very strategically used his millions PER STATE to laser like focus and take out the highest polling ABR candidate with unrelenting, negative campaign ads and robocalls, etc. Hardly any of those millions of dollars were spent to tell any of us voters WHY we SHOULD vote FOR Romney. Nada. At least not in MI and based on what I am reading here, the pattern has been the same everywhere.

So Romney has had a monetary and thus the organizational advantage over his opponents, he thus, he has cleared the field, one by one as time has gone by.

Granted Perry and Cain and Bachmann practically cleared themselves, however it is interesting that the bimbo eruptions completely ceased once Cain withdrew.

Why didn’t Romney spend his money telling us WHY we should vote for him? Why hasn’t Romney spent his money on anti-Obama ads? Why hasn’t Romney walked back Romneycare?

THIS is why he has very tepid support in this primary season. He gets enough people to show up at the polls who support him (about 1/3 of the base), and enough more people who are going for the “electability” that the polls are not really supporting. He is doing just enough to rack up these delegates on his way to 1144. Just like a typical MBA approach to any project.

Romney is doing NOTHING to warm up the base. He is going to need some foot soldiers and volunteers in the fall to counter Obama’s massive machine (and voter fraud).

If Romney is turning off at least half of the voters in most primary states (he hasn’t grabbed 50% in any red or purple state, has he? and where he has garnered over 50%, they are in states that are going for Obama in the fall), how is Romney going to get the manpower to get out the vote?

Romney has to run against the Obama machine, the chicago corruption, wide spread voter fraud in many states, the unions – both public and private, the media, the popular culture, the numbskull youth, the different “victim” groups the Dems whip up into frenzies, etc.

Massive and daunting task ahead. He can not get it done just with his deep pockets. He needs people. If he can’t get the passion of the base, who is he going to get? Moderates, in general, don’t go and knock on doors, stuff envelopes, etc.

THIS is what has those of us who have Romney, at the most an ambivalent choice, and at the least, the last choice excluding Ron Paul, in this election cycle.

He can’t afford to have people skip the top of the ticket if they show up to vote the down ticket. He can’t afford to alienate the base so they stay home, thus the down tickets suffer.

Romney has some serious angst to overcome with the base.

He is too eager to reset the etch a sketch to run to the left once he gets the nomination, to do what he needs to do to make sure the base doesn’t leave him in November.

karenhasfreedom on March 23, 2012 at 4:28 PM

I hear immature snipping of Romney in really bad “I’m Rick Santorum and I approve this message” commercials during every commercial break on the radio. The commercials are very bad. I actually need to shut the radio off for a minute or two.

Tuari on March 23, 2012 at 4:35 PM

We are not wanted folks. Our presence is unnecessary, so don’t bother showing up in November. The Republican party,

SilverDeth on March 23, 2012 at 3:41 PM

Ok Debbie Downer we get it you’re not voting in the general if Romney’s the nominee. My candidate is Newt, but if Romney is the nominee I will vote for him and continue to push him towards the right. The Tea Party Conservatives will hold his feet to the fire- you can just stay home.

redridinghood on March 23, 2012 at 4:42 PM

I don’t know what other people see in Santorum. I see is a religious fanatic lightweight whose view are at odds with a free, secular society. His statement that “we need to get the libertarian streak out of the GOP” is ridiculous. So he would have opposed Barry Goldwater’s nomination apparently.

Craig Nelson on March 23, 2012 at 4:44 PM

No, Senator Santorum, Obama and Romney aren’t the same
posted at 8:40 am on March 23, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

To be fair, Progressive Cameleon Romney has more in common with Obama than he does with ANY Conservative.

In fact, in previous Mass elections, Romney has stated that he has nothing in common with Conservatives.

Some can believe what Romney claims today, but that is unlikely to mean anything to what a President Romney will do in office.

Freddy on March 23, 2012 at 4:53 PM

assuming that the Supreme Court doesn’t throw the whole law out this summer.

From your mouth to gods ears, Ed…..

Hawkerflyer on March 23, 2012 at 5:14 PM

I will, however, be open to whatever explanation Senator Santorum offers today.

Sounds like he only managed to make it worse, Ed.

I am a long-time Romney supporter, going back to the 2008 race. But as I have said here, I was more than willing to support Santorum if he were the eventual nominee (notwithstanding my serious reservations about whether I’d be able to convince any independents to vote for him). Looks like he was never willing to return the favor.

I think Rick had a failure of discernment today, or sinned in pride, one or the other.

DrSteve on March 23, 2012 at 5:36 PM

Ed,

How ya liking your boy now?

MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 5:42 PM

I hate being redundant, BUT when a piint needs clarification ….

In fact, imagine how many Supreme Court openings there will be in the next term of office, and then tell me there’s no difference between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama being in the White House to make those appointments, Senator Santorum.

OK! Let’s DO take a look at RonMe court apointees:

Governor Mitt Romney, who touts his conservative credentials to out-of-state Republicans, has passed over GOP lawyers for three-quarters (75%) of the 36 judicial vacancies he has faced, instead tapping registered Democrats or independents – including two gay lawyers who have supported expanded same-sex rights.

Of the 36 people Romney named to be judges or clerk magistrates, 23 are either registered Democrats or unenrolled voters who have made multiple contributions to Democratic politicians or who voted in Democratic primaries, state and local records show. In all, he has nominated nine registered Republicans, 13 unenrolled voters, and 14 registered Democrats.

So we should embrace the liberal RINO over 0bama and let the Republican Party take the hit when RonMe AGAIN raises taxes, ‘repairs’ 0bamacare, and supports Planned Parenthood? Yeah, cutting off our noses to spite our faces ALWAYS works so well . . .; /s

DannoJyd on March 23, 2012 at 7:12 PM

They are not the same.

Obama is a socialist

Romney is just a left wing Democrat.

joey24007 on March 23, 2012 at 7:25 PM

Now let’s review RonMecare and 0bamacare for a second:

Romneycare Becomes Obamacare, Then Coultercare

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.

Yep! 0bama is nothing like RonMe. /s

DannoJyd on March 23, 2012 at 7:55 PM

While I am certainly no supporter of Santorum I could at least vote for the guy.

A vote for RonMe is just asking for more of the same under the Republican banner.

Easy peasy Beasly.

DannoJyd on March 23, 2012 at 7:57 PM

I appreciate your intellectual honesty, Ed. Just don’t hold your breath waiting for Santorum to apologize.

captn2fat on March 23, 2012 at 10:32 PM

“I find this very, very disappointing, and potentially nullifying on those points. I will, however, be open to whatever explanation Senator Santorum offers today.”

Well, it’s been a day and not much happened on Santorum’s end other than a lot of classic Santorum whining. He said what he said. It wasn’t taken out of context. Maybe he was frustrated or tired when he said it, but that just means his brain-to-mouth filter wasn’t working at full speed, so we were able to catch a glimpse into what he really thinks.

NealK on March 24, 2012 at 1:21 AM

Sorry, I pressed enter by accident. As I was saying..

Think of the most conservative politician you can imagine. Now imagine him in MA, with a Legislature that is over-whelmingly liberal (not Democrat, liberal). If you can, with a straight face, tell me that your preferred conservative would have governed more to the right than Romney, than I will agree Romney is a liberal.

The problem though, is that neither Santorum, his biggest suppoters, or really anyone, for that matter, can say that with any amount of honesty. As a result, I do not look at Romney’s record as Governor any differently than I do when I look at Reagan’s. And because of that, I dont think his record is any more reflective of him than what he says today is. I think the truth is somewhere in the middle, maybe just to the right of that. Which makes him, at worst George W. Bush. And again, Bush is infinitely better than Obama.

milcus on March 23, 2012 at 12:25 PM

So who made Romney run for governor of Massachusetts? He was a free man, and certainly not hard up for money. He could have run for governor of a less left-wing state, if it really bothered him.

No, the truth is that Romney was very comfortable in Massachusetts. He was perfectly fine with distancing himself from Reagan and Bush 41, and calling himself an independent.

Since he chose to live in Massachusetts and run for governor of Massachusetts, he can’t just turn around and say, “they made me.”

His record is his record. Only when he decided to run for president did he see the need to sell himself as a conservative. If Obama should be held to account for his record, then Romney should be held to account for his. Ignoring his record is insane. Excusing it is … an excuse.

Even the fact that he described himself as “severely conservative” tells you just how negatively he views being conservative.

There Goes The Neighborhood on March 24, 2012 at 2:00 AM

Some of us conservatives do have our eyes on the bigger prize-a reversal of the progressive/socialist course of action undertaken by Obamao,and the ultimate advancement of a conservative agenda.We are not convinced that the moderate wing of the GOP,led by the likes of Romney,Boehner and McConnell will accomplish this.Some of us are conservatives first and Republicans only to the extent that the party provides us an effective vehicle for the advancement of our cause.It is clear that it no longer does.Conservatives now have two obstacles in our path.The Gop must be destroyed before the Progressives can be defeated.You squishy moderates are giving us our opportunity-the nomination of Etchy-Sketch Mitt Romney.We will stay home and Obama will win,destroying the GOP once and for all.Out of its ashes will spring a new Conservative Party that will take on and defeat the socialists in 2016mand save this great nation.Thanks squishes!

redware on March 24, 2012 at 5:29 AM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6 7