« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Please Shut Up With Your Incessant Whining

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  December 14th, 2011 at 01:01 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Please shut up. Just stop.

I am so damn tired of getting whining little tweets and angry emails from people because I’ve dared to say something they perceive as an attack on their candidate. Sometimes I get those just for — horror of horrors — pointing out their actual voting record. Yes, in fact, Mitt Romney did say he supported abortion rights by saying his mother did and yes his wife did give money to Planned Parenthood. Deal with it.

OMG THE HORROR!!!!

Shut up.

Seriously.

The supporters of the various candidates for President are under some deluded notion that the way you win a primary is to focus on the Democrat. While it is true that the candidates must focus on the Democrat, the way you actually win the primary is to also convince voters you are the best guy to beat the Democrat.

The way you accomplish that is typically to show just how seriously defective the other guys are by trolling their record and various skeletons in their closet.

You may not like it, but since the Federalists first pointed out Thomas Jefferson might have an illegitimate black child, that’s kind of been the way things have worked around here.

Lately, the Romney supporters have been most unhinged. How dare I point out that Mitt Romney called himself a progressive. That must make me an anti-Mormon bigot. No, it makes me an anti-opportunist bigot. If you really think someone’s dislike of Mitt Romney comes from hating Mormons, you are probably a moron.

How dare I point out that Newt Gingrich really is not the conservative so many are suddenly convinced he is!!! Well, the truth hurts.

How dare I point out Rick Perry has yet to prove he won’t trip over the nearest polysyllabic world . . . errr . . . word. OMG how dare you!!!

Folks, if you cannot handle me or anyone else daring to be critical of the various candidates and you cannot handle someone discussing the various candidates’ actual, factual records, you might as well go hold up in a cave somewhere until December of 2012, because your heart will not be able to take what the hell the Democrats will unleash on the chosen nominee. Nothing anyone has said so far about any of the candidates will compare to the unmitigated hell and lies the Democrats will unleash.

And if you think raising criticisms, records, and weaknesses now somehow will feed the Democrats, you are a naive fool who has never heard of opposition research. What we know, they know. What we don’t use, they will.

So go put on your big boy pants, sit back, and suck it up for the next few weeks. And if you can’t, please just shut up.

Tags:

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • http://twitter.com/bdomenech Ben Domenech

    I’m thinking Cave.

  • znjs

    Hopefully this ends the whole ‘You’re violating the 11th commandment” and “we’re doing the left’s work for them” nonsense that some use to deflect criticisms of their candidate when they can’t argue against the logic. The 11th commandment isn’t for primary season, and as you said hiding our heads in the sand by ignoring issues that candidates have won’t work in the general election.

  • christopherestep

    Because you’re critical of Huntsman too!

    And you’re ALWAYS critical of Harry Reid!!

    BIGOT!!!!!

    (ok, j/k)

    Chris
    (The anti-Mitt Mormon)

  • Bill S

    ..

  • clowngirl

    He seems to be the only candidate polling as well as he is who is escaping scrutiny and able to present himself just as he likes without challenge.

    It gives him a far greater appearance of legitimacy than is warranted.

  • robbyshankar

    It’s better that these issues get brought up now as opposed to later. Whoever the eventual nominee is, it’s best they and their supporters start formulating answers to these issues now, so they can swat them away easier during the general.

  • http://UnitedConservativesofVirginia Cargosquid

    by realizing that they ALL suck.

    They’re politicians, for God’s sake! They ALL think that government has solutions, even Ron Paul. Otherwise he wouldn’t have put all that pork into the budgets.

    Sooo…what to do? Vote for the candidate of your choice. Mine is down and out. Cain was my guy.

    Newt? Besides all the OTHER stuff…do we really want President NEWT? Really? ;)

    Romney? Just another Demo..I mean Republican.

    Santorum? He’s conservative. But where’s the traction, where’s the big ideas?

    Paul? Ok. We’ve destroyed all the agencies we want to, dismantled the Fed, and brought all the troops home, and sacked the CIA. Now what?

    Bachmann? Conservative. Thoughtful, Shrill. Reminds me of Glenn Beck in heels. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

    Perry? Um…..um……..(blank stare)

    They ALL SUCK. They have some good ideas. But none are perfect.
    But that’s nothing new. They’ve sucked since 1793.

    Tell me why I should vote for any of your candidates, not why I shouldn’t vote for the other one.

    That said….even the worst one is better than another Obama term.

  • jackspectre

    Folks on the right have been forced to choose from a pretty lame field of candidates, all of whom have major flaws. Personally, I’ve accepted that I’ll have to choose between voting for another crappy RINO or staying home.

    Perhaps people are just venting because they’ve chosen who they think is the lesser of the evils and are in no mood to be reminded that their guy is a piece of [redacted].

  • http://kevinholtsberry.com Kevin Holtsberry

    nicely done, Ben, nicely done …

  • trickamsterdam

    the other candidates is kind of important. Otherwise they can actually drive people away from their candidate. Ron Paul people are the prime examples (and I actually like Ron Paul).

    But now Romney people are doing it.Instead of just saying he’s more electable than Newt (arguable, but certainly logical), they are trying to say he is MORE CONSERVATIVE than Newt. How you say the guy who said “in the 80s I was an independent, not part of that whole Reagan/Bush thing” is more conservative than the guy who led the second conservative revolution?

    They sound insane, and it just makes me dislike Romney (who I am actually OK w/ as a back up candidate).

  • lesueur8

    It comes with the territory. Deal with it. If the tweets and comments and emails are getting to you, do something else. You seem like a sharp guy and I am sure you can do other things.

    Your comments today remind me of people like Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank. Maybe you are just having a bad day. You chose your profession and with that comes the understanding that people won’t agree with you.

    We are looking for leaders, not someone that treats people like we are your 3 year old child.

  • Common_Cents

    There is much dishonest twisting of words blown up to make candidates nearly evil LOL. It’s pathetic. Even among intelligent Republicans.

    The media has gone off the wall in blowing up stupid stuff.

    Case in point: The back and forth zinger between romney and Gingrich. They are just stupid back and forth stuff, not some major policy statement. Yet the media are blowing it up into something it isn’t.

    Let’s stick to actual track records of what has been actually accomplished, ability to win, etc…

    The approach to candidates should be like stock picking. It’s less of where they’ve been and more on where they are going in the current and anticipated future environment.

  • norris

    Obama trips on single syllable words like corps.

  • http://UnitedConservativesofVirginia Cargosquid

    if it doesn’t apply to you.

    If you’re not acting like a 3 year old, then he’s not talking about you.

    If you are…..

  • http://UnitedConservativesofVirginia Cargosquid

    But he’s the smartest man in the world, tasked to lead the nation in a time of crisis, fated to stop the seas from rising, the ice caps from melting, the unions from failing…..

    He’s not an idiot. He’s…….ok. He’s an idiot.

  • http://www.erickerickson.org Erick Erickson

    That’s a winner right there.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    …but this shtick you’ve developed of whining at Erick is starting to get boring.

  • dpmapper

    Intelligent, informed, dispassionate criticism is great. Emotionalism and name-calling is not.

  • lightspeed

    …Ron Paul attracts a lot of young, rabid conservatives, libertarians, and independents. No candidate wants to alienate them as long as Paul doesn’t have a real shot at the nomination. If he starts to threaten, then we will see the charges start flying (911 truther, anti-Semite, etc.).

  • Bill S

    This is a PG site. Do not use that language here.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    NT

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    [nt]

  • suzy000

    Paul just recently said that Israel was to blame for all the problems in the Middle East…is that considered vetting? Oh…sshh…don’t tell Glenn Beck…he just may endorse him..lol.

  • ccoolidge

    EE needs to say what he really thinks.

    Seriously, though, good for him. Whining/crying belongs in the NBA, not politics.

  • zollistar

    And when the shoe pinches, well, it pinches.

  • http://UnitedConservativesofVirginia Cargosquid

    Anarchangel nails it.

    http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/2011/12/misundertanding-problem.html#disqus_thread

  • carolynr

    I’m done with these people and their supposed Conservatism.
    So here is the letter. I listened to both of them on my way down to Buford, GA

    Hi there readers. I am a Conservative and quite frankly, I am more than a little disturbed with our “so-called bastions of Conservatism, i.e., Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. I have all but stopped watching Fox News because they have an agenda and while I do not agree with it, it goes against their supposed “core” beliefs that they don’t have one. Yesterday, I had the chance to listen to both Mr. Limbaugh and Mr. Hannity and this is how I feel about it.

    Dear Mr. Hannity and Mr. Limbaugh:

    Are you aware of the fact that you both hold yourselves out to be Conservatives and have strayed from the reservation…CONSIDERABLY? Sean Hannity claims that he changed his voting classification to “Conservative” rather than Republican and Rush Limbaugh touts his program as the “Institute for Conservative Studies”.

    Gentlemen…why do you back two candidates that are anything but Conservative? First we have Willard, who has forgotten his first name (oops) followed by Newt who has had ethical violations, justified relationships as a “historian” for Freddie Mac and has “matured”. Mr. Hannity has bailed out Gingrich by using his Christian beliefs to justify Newt’s “coming to Jesus” moment. He has praised his ability to debate. He has said that we all make mistakes…but was he…or his network willing to forgive Perry’s? Forgiveness is forgiveness…Sean.

    Then we have Mr. Limbaugh who has become all but a moderate, trying to bolster BOTH WILLARD and Newt. Is there anything about these people that is Conservative? Oh…I know, Newt’s endorsement of the sanctity of marriage…well, I hope the third time is a charm! Both people, WILLARD and Newt have been for Cap and Trade, global warming, and a form of government healthcare. Newt is an “idea” man. Well…great, but where has that led us? Have they openly supported our troops? Do they believe in down-sizing the present scope of government? No. But, according to a recent survey, 60% of the American people want smaller government. These two people, Gingrich and Romney have demonstrated policies that are anti-Conservative. Romney, with Obamacare, Cap and Trade, global warming ideology, flips on abortion. Newt has a more radical idea for immigration than Romney does, which will not be implemented either. Gingrich has a very poor reputation for lots of ideas without any results.

    I would suggest that we look to a true Conservative candidate that has shown proven results. Oh…did you forget the name? Did your network forget the name. Do you blacklist his accomplishments on your show? Oh…that’s right…you want to be seen with a “media” perceived winner type like Newt and WILLARD. But with the people wanting JOBS and less government and a candidate with solutions to ALL of our problems, why Mr. Hannity and Mr. Limbaugh have your forgotten the name of Governor Rick Perry? Do you vote your conscience…or go with the flow? You say you are Conservative…I think not.

    Carolyn

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    don’t vote if he’s not on the ballot. And, they’re a small number, they’re just noisy, like feril cats.

  • Paul_Zummo

    Then we have Mr. Limbaugh who has become all but a moderate, trying to bolster BOTH WILLARD and Newt.

    Have you actually listened to Rush’s program or are you just venting? Rush has been doing nothing of the kind. In fact, I hear people complaining about Rush because of how much he has criticized Romney. He’s been a little more supportive of Newt, but killed him for his comments about Romney and Bain. The only thing he’s done that could be considered “moderate” is insist that all of the candidates are better than Obama. I can’t speak for Hannity because, well, he’s intolerable. But if you want to go after squishy talk show guys look no further than Medved. To include Rush in this rant is absurd.

  • Paul_Zummo

    That was meant to be another comment.

  • nancysabet

    It has been a real frustrating and to a point excruciating primary process, so far, for some of us who are passionate about our candidat, . and we have a long way to go before it is over.

  • izoneguy

    He needs to change his voters card to “Moderate”.
    Hannity does not back conservatives in this primary race.
    If he did he would back Perry or Santorium.

    Hannity is friends with Cain and gave Herb a platform, even though
    Herb was a disaster.

    I diifer on your view of Rush. He does not support Romney.
    He leans to Newt but says he backs no one. He was a Cain
    apologist and I stopped listening for awhile until the Cain Train derailed.

    Guys like Rush and Hannity just don’t understand Perry or Texans in general.
    Most of the country thinks Texas is just “lucky”…..

    Well wouldn’t it make sense to let Perry have 4 years of trying a Texas size
    solution for the US? Obama’s Marxist Vision has failed. Only a true conservative non-politically correct President can get America working again.

    An Obama “light” candidate won’t cut it.

  • Paul_Zummo

    My main issue with conservative critiques of the candidates is that few are indicating who they are actually supporting. It’s one thing to suggest that all of the candidates are flawed or to even single out Newt’s problems. But if you fail to announce affirmative support for a candidate, it just makes you look like a person who wouldn’t vote for any of the candidates (and by you I mean not you specifically, Erick). Malkin, Steyn and others – writers I generally respect – continue to trash whoever the current front-runner is. Again, it’s fine to point out there faults, but it seems like the end result will only be to help nominate Romney.

  • lightspeed

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/the_ron_paul_campaign_and_its.html

  • earlgrey

    I get really annoyed at the commnets made here. I have made one whiny post about it, and was refuted by your moderaters. If we are up to the fight than we have to get tougher. All of us.

    Getting throttled in the comments sections has been one of the most rewarding aspects of participating in online forums. It make me better.

  • jackspectre

    Sorry! :(

    I meant to write:

    “Perhaps people are just venting because they?ve chosen who they think is the lesser of the evils and are in no mood to be reminded that their guy is not an ideal conservative champion.”

  • DaveWT4

    I have a few Paulbot friends who are rabidly anti-GOP. One of them said he will not vote in the Primary because he doesn’t want to associate with the GOP. I pointed out that Texas is an open-primary state, you don’t have to register, he still refuses. He says he will write-in Ron Paul in the general (again) rather than vote for anyone else.

    So yeah, no candidate should worry about alienating the Paulbots.

  • 1bunny

    and pretty quickly at that.

    http://www.unitedliberty.org/articles/9188-how-speaker-newt-gingrich-betrayed-the-republican-revolution

  • acat

    totally baked and forget election day.

    Mew

  • Marcus_Traianus

    Look what that eventually did for him…

  • trickamsterdam

    It sounds a lot like sanatorium ) more conservative than Newt or “Herb”? Why are they less of a disaster than “Herb”?

    Santorum backed Spector over Toomey and now is running as a social conservative’s social conservative. How does that make sense?

    He is found to be an unacceptable nominee by 62% of Republicans (tied w/ Ron Paul). He also is a terrible debater and terrible political strategist who couldn’t even be counted on to carry his home state in the general (where he lost his last election by 18%).

    Perry thinks there are eight Supreme Court “Judges” and can’t remember the name of the one appointed only two years ago. And he has other problems. Many, many of them..

    “Guys like Rush and Hannity don’t understand Perry or Texans in general”.

    OK, and Texans apparently don’t understand that the other 49 states want someone who doesn’t think there are only eight Supreme Court “Judges” and can’t name them..

    Solution: you can’t keep him.. We’ll take Newt.

  • trickamsterdam

    Solution: you CAN keep him.. We’ll take Newt.

  • floydius

    Believe it or not, there are plenty of us who welcome the vetting process for Ron Paul.

    I’m socially and fiscally conservative, and up until I came across Paul four years ago, I hadn’t found a candidate I could support on either front. I became convinced he was right for this country by doing my own homework, and I think that’s how other people may be persuaded, too.

    Re: the charge of Paul being anti-semitic or believing that 9/11 was an inside job, I have found no compelling case nor evidence that he is either. There may be some vocal supporters who are, but that’s not most of us by a long shot. The beauty of the freedom movement is that it brings together people of many persuasions together on issues that we can agree on.

    So bring on the vetting of Dr. Paul. He isn’t perfect and I don’t agree with every vote he’s made, but the questioning process is healthy and essential for determining what exactly you believe and who you can support in good conscience.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    We know it happens, sometimes.

  • Paul_Zummo

    But I’m listening to Rush right now and he’s all but saying “Please vote for anyone but Newt and Mitt.”

  • naraht

    Well eventually he left the cave, but he might have been better off staying there…

  • themobhasspoken

    I’m waiting for people here to wake up to the disaster that awaits them if they choose Newton as their nominee.

    The guy can’t win. Even if he could, we wouldn’t want him to be president. He is a sell-out.

  • naraht

    I work on the following scale for Arguments in the Primary. Is it closer to the “Voodoo Economics” charge which was within what I consider to be acceptable as an argument in the primary and “McCain’s Black Baby (2000)” which isn’t. I just look to see whether the attack is closer to the former or the latter.

  • themobhasspoken

    That is what must stop before people stop the impassioned argument for their candidate of choice.

    If someone can convince me that Newton has been a consistent conservative throughout his 40-year career as a Rockefeller Republican, professional politician, and lobbyist, I’m ready to listen.

  • themobhasspoken

    nt

  • buster93

    Ok you elect someone that can debate on the stage and has every encylopedia memorized and you still can’t make them a PROVEN LEADER.SOMEONE IN THE WHITE HOUSE AT PRESENT.
    SECURE THE BORDERS , JOB CREATION, ENERGY INDEPENDENCE. Rick Perry has the governor of the state I live in . You know what when that 3am call comes in RICK PERRY will have already had a plan in place .No problem he has answered that call in TEXAS. ENERGY INDEPENDENCE!!!!. Oh yeah Texas is the one state that could play in the sandbox with other global economies .What are Rick Perry’s problems? Ok let me pull out my black sharpie and draw a line thru each one.?
    I
    am not whining Erik I promise!!!! Gosh I hope I spelled that right !!

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …because he mirrors precisely what the Islamists claim, namely, that an “explanation” for 9-11 is rooted in America’s prior policies.

  • themobhasspoken

    The media has been whining about the crop of Republican candidates ever since the founding of the Republican Party.

    They laugh and poke fun at Republicans. Yet, in 2007, there were a bunch of wacko running for president and none of them were Republicans. You had an untested newbie who couldn’t remember how many states there were and whose “autobiography” was ghost-written by Bill Ayers, a domestic terrorist who had spent time on the FBI’s most wanted list. You had a first-time presidential candidate who cried when she lost the Iowa caucus. You had a guy who made a sex-tape with his pregnant mistress WHILE ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL. And you have a various assortment of other wackos all of whom had one thing in common: none of them were fit to be president.

    But the media never stopped heaping praise on how intelligent, fun, cool, and creative they were.

    I would ask people to please stop paying attention to TV and the LSM. Please fact-check everything you read in the Times, Time magazine, and Newsweek, and then bias-check it to make sure that they give Democrats the same ration of crap that they are giving the Republicans.

  • carolynr

    Do you know how many people went to the polls for McCain and held their noses. The American public voted for an unknown..Obama…a Marxist.

    I still believe in the American people and American people want JOBS. We have a disaster going on in this country and the two front runners BOTH have too much baggage. I’m not backing down on this. It is a question like this….God either is or he isn’t. This calls for a yes or no answer. If one believes that Conservatism is the answer to the problems facing this country…THEN we do not back a person that has a background taking $$ from Freddie Mac as a “historian” or fined on ethics charges. Isn’t OUR PRESIDENT unethical enough for us to say…Nope…we don’t go that way.

    Romney will do and say anything…anything to get elected. He has changed so many times, we feel like we are on a roller coaster.

    Sorry…but that is how I feel. Concerning the remarks made about Rush … I have to agree that he does favor Newt over Romney…however, what he wants, as does earlgrey, for the fighting to stop. We are fighting for a cause…Conservatism…a solution…that is why I got fed up. I’m not going to sit back down and take this…I did in 2008…because it was McCain’s turn. This time…we need someone with PROOF…someone with a record..and Perry has it.

    You know…I am a person that has been hoodwinked enough over my lifetime to become very suspicious…very suspicious. My only solution is to look at the proof. Do I buy a car because everyone is driving one…No…I look up data to see what car best suits my needs and will get the job done. I don’t need Lexus in my garage to prove how smart and great I am…I need a car that will get the job done, for the least amount of money with the best ride. People…that is how we need to be looking at this race. This is the end of the line…we’re done..it’s over unless we change and we need someone that will not “WAFFLE” with the polls. We need leadership.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …because the type/profundity of alleged-imperfection must be weighed.

    Compare/contrast Perry’s [presumed] blank-stare with the other stated-faults.

  • themobhasspoken

    He turned the Marine Corps into the “Marine Corpse”.

    But the media’s got his back so it doesn’t matter.

  • themobhasspoken

    EE has biases. You can see them when he posts.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …and, thus, the theme of nix’ing Romney as a priority, this is what must emerge ASAP after the first of the year.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    ….because it would be instructive to know details as to what prompted both events.

  • Aaron Gardner

    Don’t confuse being unbiased with being objective.

  • themobhasspoken

    Huh. I always try to think about the general election because, in the long run, that’s the ONLY thing that matters.

    Newton has some major problems with the way he is perceived by about 50% of the voters.

    NBC and the Wall Street Journal ran a poll that was released today on just how unelectable Newton is.

    Here it is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/12/13/9423771-nbcwsj-poll-romney-struggles-with-primary-voters-gingrich-with-general-electorate

    Gingrich might actually win the primaries (shudder). But he is far too unpopular to ever be president. His unfavorables are higher than any other living Republican right now.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    http://popwatch.ew.com/2011/12/13/gary-busey-newt-gingrich-politics/

    http://thehill.com/capital-living/in-the-know/199375-gary-busey-withdraws-gingrich-endorsement

    [neither digs into rationale, perhaps, because evidence that any had existed was sparse]

  • Change Jar Conservative

    I’m keeping my stress down by making homemade signs for Mitch Daniels based on the hope of a brokered convention.

  • themobhasspoken

    I wish that Rush would tell us who he is voting for rather than just trash the leading nominees.

    It seems that Rush is taking the easy way out by staying negative.

    But negative does not win elections. The winning candidate must have a positive message in addition to his negative message.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    If the candidates remained issues-oriented [recognizing the Jeffersonian reference], there would be no grist for tangential articles. Regardless of whether the focus is overt [Romney] or covert [The Newt], the carping is notable. Perhaps I don’t mind it ["a pox on both your houses"] because I’d love to see Perry benefit [rising like a phoenix from the morass].

  • izoneguy

    Perry was referencing a 1963 case known as Abington School District v. Schempp, when the court ruled that school-sponsored Bible reading is unconstitutional. The vote was 8-1.

    Perry in the meeting with the Register did not specifically mention the name of the case but did ? about five minutes before making the ?eight? comment ? note a 1962 case while discussing school prayer. (The actual case was argued and decided in 1963.)


    Newt Gingrich Praised SEIU Head Andy Stern?s Forward-Looking Vision

  • http://UnitedConservativesofVirginia Cargosquid

    Hi, I Rick Perry.

    You know my opponents, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich?

    Yeeeaahhh…..I’m not either of those guys.

    Vote for me.

    I approve this message.

  • Tanggor

    I’m surprised the Paulistinians have not yet demanded a two state solution…after all, they’re a separate and distinct “race”, right?

  • floydius

    Can you please expand on why this is a dangerous notion?

    It seems to me that it’s only dangerous if it’s false.

  • izoneguy

    Perry is on the offensive.

    Romney will always play defense.

    Newt’s time has passed.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …as per Tom Hanks.

    Seriously, the overarching message that must constantly be kept in-mind, particularly when forcing one’s self to listen to PMSNBC, is to maintain a distinction between objectivity and “cheering” when assessing the evolution of this [or any other] competition.

    So, EE is well-equipped to handle the presumed onslaught for, if nothing else, discussing how he reacted has served to amplify prior observations.

  • themobhasspoken

    I liked Rush in 2000 when he was backing Bush aggressively and warning conservatives about John McCain.

    This year, Rush seems to be out to placate the far right of the party by bashing the Republican front-runners. Rush doesn’t seem to understand that one of these front-runners will eventually be our nominee and then he will have to either say, “I was wrong about _________, please vote for him.” Or he will say, “I was right about __________, please sit this election out.”

    Rush puts his credibility in jeopardy when he asks people to forget comments that he made during the primary. But he has no value to conservatives if he tells them not to vote.

  • avagreen

    Did WaPo publish it?

  • renl57

    Six months ago, I thought he was the best choice to fix our economy, and I still do.

    Six months ago, I thought he was the best choice to reassure Independent and swing voters that he is solid and stable enough to be trusted with the Executive Branch, and I still do.

    Some folks want to nominate someone who can make an ideological case against liberalism. My view is that if Romney can fix the economy after Obama failed, that will show that the economy is best not left in the hands of liberals. And that is the best case we could make against liberalism.

    Nothing succeeds like success.

  • theone3434

    This is, by FAR, the best post/diary entry so far!! Everybody has a right to defend their candidate using actual facts. Each candidate DESERVES to be vetted by having their record and/or weaknesses brought out into the open. Each one of the examples cited (Romney, Gingrich, and Perry) have absolute validity to them and MUST be questioned.

    Thank you, Erick, for allowing those of us with an honest and open dialogue regarding each candidate some backing to do so!!!

  • themobhasspoken

    I’m from the “Anyone-but-Newton” camp and I’ll vote for Romney with pride if it keeps a Freddie Mac lobbyist from becoming president.

  • Tanggor

    that Erick even had to write this diary.

    Folks should know better. All candidates are flawed.

    The Primary is how the Republican family decides which of our eccentric uncles or aunts gets to challenge the inevitable nightmare that the LibTards will put up.

    Erick is dead on.

    Too many cry babies.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …so here is the relevant hyperlink.

    http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/2011/12/misundertanding-problem.html

    *

    This, surprisingly, is in the text:

    “…Perry is somehow still operating under the delusion that he is a candidate.”

    *

    This is the $-quote:

    “What the American people want now, is a man of principle, and guts, who WILL reverse the current collision course with the dumpster we’re on, and roll back the idiotic excesses of the current congress and administration…

    “…but not someone so radical that they’re going to try to end social security (or for that matter change it in any meaningful way) or put in a flat tax or… well, anything radical or transformative at all really.”

    *

    This is the rather cryptic conclusion:

    “They want the guy who will put things back to the way they were around 1992 or so; just, you know, winning this time.

    “Unfortunately for the RNC… that guy isn’t running.”

  • avagreen

    ^^

  • tomatin

    But let’s face it RS definitely has a slant toward Rick Perry.

    I just warn folks that the same hero worship I see for Rick Perry now is similar to the way most conservatives felt about another Texas governor who besides his tax cuts ended up being big government. I too was smitten with GWB and he probably was the best choice at the time if only for national security.

    However I’ll take Gingrich’s record in office, especially his domestic record, against GWB’s any day of the week.

  • floydius

    sorry, this was intended for another thread. feel free to delete, mods.

  • floydius

    sorry, this was intended for another thread. feel free to delete, mods.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    I just knew that the Gary Busey endorsement would really put him over the top.

  • theone3434

    that what a typical conservative would deem as a weakness, true libertarians regard as being consistent with the mantra. Are you going to say he is an isolationist?? Libertarians ARE isolationists. They believe that we shouldn’t meddle in other countries matters and just take care of ourselves. Are you going to say he all but called U.S. at fault for 9/11. Libertarians believe that by going into Iraq (Bush I) and continuing to intervene in the middle east, the U.S. indirectly is at fault.

    Right or wrong (I lean toward wrong) there isn’t a whole lot that you can bring up to them that would steer them AWAY from Paul. He is as consistent inside the Libertarian mantra as you can possibly get…and his supporters love him for it. The only reason they align with the GOP is because both believe in a limited government. Other than that, the glaring differences would have driven them into a third party a LONG time ago.

  • westcoastpatriette

    is because we be so smart.

    All joking aside, though, the support for Perry is not contrived by conniving moderators or front page writers. It is a natural conclusion to draw if you have intelligently vetted all of ‘em.

  • izoneguy

    Anybody but Romney (or Newt) – Please no more big government progressives

  • acat

    They want a Libertarian State, ideologically right next door to the GOP State….

    Mew

  • avagreen

    let’s just thro ‘um under the bus.

    Support?!? BwaaaaHahahaaaaa! Heck, no! Just find someone less qualified and support him/her.

    Suuuuure.

    Makes sense to me. NOT!

  • Paul_Zummo

    (Also like the other Rick.) But I certainly do not blindly hero worship the guy. He’s the best of a mediocre lot, but I think he understands better than any of the others the fundamental issues facing this country.

    And the comparison to GWB is a little weak. Other than being Texas governors, they are not the same. I had qualms about Bush as far back as 1998. I went so far as to support McCain because I actually thought he was the more conservative candidate. Whoops But even if I was wrong about Bush vis a vis McCain, I was right to worry about his conservative credentials. I don’t have anywhere near the same concerns with Perry.

  • streiff

    nt

  • romansdaughter

    for everyone but Perry. We get it !

  • trickamsterdam

    record, and say that. Or they would let it go because he was more personally likable (Reagan was sort of FDR to Newt’s Harry Truman).

    But, OK, it would be fine if Bachmann or Paul (NOT Santorum or Perry) used that line of attack…

    But, especially not…Romney???

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …for each of your stated-reasons?

  • retire05

    There is no hero worship. The admiration that some of hold for Rick Perry is based on his record. When GWB burst on the scene, no one was talking about how he had managed to increase the number of jobs in Texas, reduce the Texas budget to WWII levels, and get certain conservative issues legislated on a state level.

    I can give you article after article where those who watch finances and the nations economic indicators, and most economists talk about how well Texas is doing in a down economy. There is a reason for that; leadership that knows when to lead and when to get out of the way of the free market.

    I will not dismiss Newt Gingrich’s leadership (although he did have times where he seemed to wander off the farm) but his day has come and passed. We are now in an era where a Marxist has been elected to the highest office of the land, and the damage done will have to have a strong hand to slam on the breaks from the progressive march.

    Here is a question for you: if Newt Gingrich wanted to be POTUS, why did he wait until now to run? Why didn’t he run in 2000, or 2004? Why didn’t he run when he was Speaker? Can you say, with certainty, that Newt will not have another Pelosi/couch moment if elected? I CAN say that about Rick Perry who was more conservative as a Democrat than Mitt Romney is now after changing his mind about issues in 2007 for political expendiency.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …to equate Perry with “W”!

    Did Bush-’43 ever write a tome [before/after his double-term] comparable to “Fed Up!”???

  • bfelger

    During the 2000 primary, I was very “meh” on GWB. Just like this father, I said, he will kow-tow to democrats in congress. And while we had a good solid 6 years of wet-noodle conservativism,, his last two years proved me right.

    Now Perry is altogether different. This is no big-government neo-con. This is a guy who thinks people can figure out things for themselves, and that government does best when it leaves people alone. This is no technocratic statist (despite the histrionics of bobble-headed anti-vaxer’s).

    When the primary comes to my state, I will be voting for Newt if Perry has no viable path to the presidency. I am relying on all you guys in the early states to give me a meaningful and efficacious Perry option.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …by noting a concept and its inverse.

    There is a tendency for pundits to “explain” polling data by fixating on this snapshot, rather than to assess a longitudinal set of forces-at-play.

    That is why Perry is receiving short-shrift in the MSM/LSM/ELM.

    Contrariwise, adherents [such as myself] to Rick are wont to complain about his phenomenon, preferring that someone NOTICE what we see occurring.

    That is why I have articulated [numbered, usually stopping @ "10"] comments, so that any break my logic can be easily critiqued; that is also why I have focused on what may be occurring in-between-the-lines.

    So, when I repeatedly emphasize how appreciative I am that The Newt has KO’ed Mitt from his perch, this is overtly asserted to illustrate the perceived prelude to the emergence of another “king of the hill” [who will then displace The Newt].

    Therefore, fellow supporters of Perry, don’t fret when the “egalitarians” attempt to group our-guy with the has-beens/also-rans/yesterday’s-news candidacies [Huntsman/Johnson] and/or those who are clearly functioning in Rick’s shadow [Santorum/Bachmann]. Feel relieved that the Cain-yolk was lifted in sufficient time for his supporters to be released into the general population. And recognize that Perry’s innate magnetism and polished message will continue to resonate with a frustrated GOP-population.

    Relax…everything will work-out just fine!

    [But, don't relax the efforts to achieve this end....]

  • miconservative

    Paulistinians. But they might well be a made up people.

  • ericksontales

    I’ve been busy today reading all the news about Newts support beginning to sink that I forgot to check in with my favorite opinion website only to find this little gem.

    I’m going to save this little tantrum and frame it on my wall so I can be reminded of the day that Erick broke down. This is classic. So Erick is ok spouting his bias opinion off about people but the moment that he gets attacked for his opinion we get this article.

    It reminds me of the chorus “I see your true colors shinning through…”

    I’ve already downloaded and saved my copy of this post. I’m sure at some point down the road Erick is going to regret this public lash out. On the other hand, as long as he doesn’t decide to run for office he’s probably safe with this post.

  • zachv

    Makes obvious sense in the hindsight. Duh.

  • gekster

    And again you show you have no clue as to politics, or opinion writing.
    Keep telling yourself you do. I’m sure you can convince yourself someday.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …which I have also articulated on RS; indeed, if memory serves, I was going to dedicate my diary [once the opportunity were to emerge] to vetting the conservative-media, to dig into what might be motivating them.

    Essentially, Rush is constantly supportive generically of all Republicans; he has opined that he is reticent to endorse because then he would feel the compulsion to support/defend anything/everything the chosen candidate might say/do.

    Hannity dummys-down for the masses, repeating messages dependably; he’s not truly the “next step in the process.” [Remember, however, how vigorously he supported Perry last year.]

    Medved is a problem, recalling his support for amnesty; I cross-examined him on this topic [along with other visiting Radio-hosts from Salem Communications] in the fall of 2010 and, to-a-man, they “candidly” claimed this was the sole salvation of the GOP. [Go figure.]

    In any case, do not fear. As long as people such as EE help the electorate pare-away the problems [here, Mitt], the PROCESS will be healthy!

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …your observation, today, befits the general model that I’ve promoted.

    Once The Newt eliminates Mitt, then he can become targeted.

    Again, it’s not unreasonable to hope that the Family-Coalition endorsement can go to Perry after tomorrow’s debate [recalling that they had been reticent to support any one person, as recently as a fortnight ago].

    Add the latest polling [Rick 13, Bachmann 10, Santorum 7...if memory serves] and it is possible that Rick wins over The Newt and Paul…in Iowa.

    Then conjure the sandwich-job on Mitt in NH [with The Newt and Huntsman assisting].

    Next, conjure a SC event with Perry as the lone true-Conservative dominating The Newt…and Mitt not making it past Florida [after a brief Nevada foray].

    We could have our nominee by Ground Hog’s Day!

    [And we will have the ongoing input of EE to thank [dominant, particularly when compared with others of comparable repute], for having facilitated the serial recognitions that have been needed, during the past half-year].

  • ericksontales

    When it comes to politics for right or wrong I have the backbone to take a stand. You won’t even take a stand on who your favorite candidate is. Come on tell us… stop hiding…

    As far as the opinion writing is concerned we get it. All the redstate minions are quick to point out that EE is not a journalist and that this is opinion writing. Apparently EE can sling mud but doesn’t like to have it thrown back. I guess the heat got a little too much for him..

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …after having been challenged.

    He claimed his motivator was respect for the Constitution.

    FYI.

  • ericksontales

    I agree with you on Newts ultimate demise. I have been saying for quite some time now that this has always been a race between Perry and Romney. I think its VERY likely to get an upset Victory in Iowa with Perry getting the nod. I also think its possible (albeit less likely) that Romney could pull of a close win with the anti-Romney votes getting muddled among the other candidates.

    Romney will not lose his foothold in New Hampshire. The only person that even gives Romney a contest in NH is Newt. After Newt loses Iowa he loses all of his momentum. Perry wins S.C. Romney wins Nevada. Romney wins Mich. The big question is who wins in Florida. By the time we get there Newt will no longer be a contender.

    Will Perry or Romney pull off Florida? The answer to the question will be the likely nominee.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …use “competitors” rather than “opponents.”

    BHO is the true opposition.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    remember that, in ’68, Johnson actually beat McCarthy in NH…but not by the anticipated margin?

    I would think that Mitt not winning by at least double-digits could help sink him.

  • jl9999

    All nasty barbs have had an affect to be sure but we have to get serious now about issues not percieved personal misdeeds and charachter flaws, which are most irrelavant anyway.

    When Bush Sr made his famous “no more new taxes” and then went back on it, the conservatives wet their pants and voted third party thus bringing about Slick Willie and 8 years of Democrat controlled WH. Boy did we teach GHW Bush a lesson.

    It is this low rent reasoning that will bring about ANOTHER well reasoned and thought out GHW BUsh lesson unless we get serious, which too many are not. We have to decide if there is anyting that Romney has done that will keep him from beating Obama. The same for Newt. THAT is the question and nothing else.

    ALl this other crap is just that – crap and meaningless.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    mitt just called The Newt “zany” during his Editorial Board interview with the NY-Times.

    Decompensation…Debilitation…Decomposing….

  • jl9999

    Most people don’t know jack about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and what they believe or what their values are. It is about time some of you knot heads do just a little homework so you don’t sound quite as stupid in the future. www.lds.org and www.mormon.org.

    And let’s not turn this into a meaningless, nonsense debate about theology and who is right and who is wrong.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    And may I note in passing that nobody ever seems to ask Erick – or any of the rest of us, really – if he/we want to take up residence inside their heads? It’s very rude, being forced to be the absolute center of someone else’s wretched, meaningless life.

    Sheesh. And shoo.

  • trickamsterdam

    1. The spelling thing wasn’t an attack on the typo. It was a dig on Santorum,, cuz I grew up in PA, and he’s nuts. Trust me, he is no more conservative than Newt, and is infinitely less electable. Would I vote for him over Obama? Yes, but obviously that’s not the point. Santorum would be the last on my list, including Huntsman (Huntsman would have a chance at winning).

    2. Let’s not pretend this “8 Judges” thing was an isolated incident. You’re the one who said “Herb” was a joke. “Herb” was a joke for saying things like that.

    3. I was very excited when Gov Perry entered the race, but he just can’t cut it. Job interviews (i.e., Pres debates) aren’t just unique to the political world. If you come unprepared, you’re in trouble. Perry’s wife admitted after the third debate that he hadn’t practiced for any of them..

    4. You’re really not bothered that after everything else, he called them “judges”? You’re really not bothered that after everything else he couldn’t remember her (the Justice’s) name?

    5. He is not electable, because he’ll keep making those mistakes and Pres Obama’s billion $ and the 75% or the MSM that openly root for Obama would destroy him.. Not fair? So what else is new since the Garden of Eden.

    It comes down to Newt or Romney. Maybe if people would have given Bachmann more of a chance, she could have had a chance…but the thought of Perry w/ his errors against the Obama machine and MSM…it’s just nightmarish.

    Newt. Or. Romney. Sorry.

  • izoneguy

    To nominate either one of these dorks is the end of the Republican party.

    If you are easily swayed by what the MSM tells you then that is sad.

    Perry would tear up Obama.

    Romney & Newt would be no different than McLame…..

    John McLame – “Mr. Obama would make a great President”

  • pj2012

    opinion on any candidate. I’m a strong Perry supporter, I see him clearly and I respect yours and other peoples rights to their opinions regarding mine, theirs, or your candidate/s. This is a primary and candidates get vetted etc., we’re going to have a stronger candidate for it…. hopefully ;-)

    One thing I do know for sure, is the coming 2012 race to win back the White House will make this primary look like a walk in the park on a beautiful spring day.

    Interesting picture… is it just me or does Perry look the most presidential of the four… darn… and Newts eyes off to the side, what’s he checking out? Cain’s looks drunk.. or something. Romney seems to be saying “please dear god let me be the winner this time”. Okay… Sorry… I just couldn’t resist having some fun…

  • westcoastpatriette

    ,,,

  • jenndee

    Rick Perry yesterday and it was great. Perry had all but lost me due to his stum
    bling and mumbling and the canned answers I have heard him give. If I hear the term ” boots on the ground” one more time from him I will scream, Hannity really let him shine though, it definetly turned my head.
    I also heard Rush give a very powerful speech against Romney and his need to campaign more to the right. He has attacked Krauthammer and Rove, I think he has really stood up to the establishment Republicans.
    Now Ann Coulter…that is an entirely different story. She is killing me, I feel like I have been dooped for years by this woman.

  • pj2012

    hope it show here…

    Photobucket

  • clowngirl

    1. Do you honestly think Ron Paul is ready to be President?
    Has he ever even once successfully sponsored a piece of legislation? ( meaning him primarily leading the effort to get it passed)

    2. One of the front pagers at RedState recently posted that Ron Paul routinely loads up bills with pork for his district, then meaninglessly votes against their passage. If this is true ( and seeing as it was published on the front page at RedState, I assume it is) then Paul is a bigger phony than Romney. This, in my view, undermines the whole rationale for his candidacy. Unlike most of the others he doesn’t have significant legislative achievements (if he has any) and he hasn’t risen to any official leadership position.

    His whole image is supposed to be that he’s got integrity and consistency – but… he doesn’t.

    I have mixed feelings about him being in the race in that I think he’s basically a libertarian and many of the people who support him are also libertarian, dishonestly crossing over to vote their candidate onto the GOP ticket.

    But then, I once thought about supporting him myself. Didn’t take long at all to determine he wasn’t what I wanted in a Commander in Chief. But his presence got me to watch the debates and start developing preferences among the other candidates.

    So I think it’s potentially good to have him in there to (possibly) bring some of the disenfranchised into the GOP.

  • clowngirl

    I’d heard some libertarian friends praising Paul and was curious. Wound up supporting McCain.

  • blackmarketops

    i still don’t see how people duck away from this absolute fact. Al-Qaeda hit the trade center twice, hit the cole, hit the barracks, etc., because we’ve got bases too close to Mecca.

    please don’t think i believe if we pulled out they’d wash their hands of us – these fascists now have too much invested in a perpetual war against the neo-Crusaders to ever stop.

    but to try and pretend these attacks lacked any [perceived] provocation (or even worse, arose “because they hate our freedom”) ensures the cycle will continue.

  • carolynr

    because neither one of these people are Conservatives. Now has the Republican Party decided that it wants to be more purple…still continue to rob the people through their bills…well then, I guess the TPM was all in vain and I’m not a Republican.

    Bachmann..what has the woman accomplished…TPM Caucus?

    What this boils down to is this. Washington DC and the Republican Party (the old guard) DO NOT WANT PERRY IN WASHINGTON. Perry cares about the people…not the party. No more goodies for the insiders in DC if Perry is there. Gaffes….how many did Obama make? Really…if you are running for a country…you are supposedly a constitutional scholar (?) then one ought to know how many states are in union..shouldn’t one. Does Perry take a teleprompter to a 5th grade class…I don’t think so but Obama did. I can get you a list of gaffes that would run out this website from Obama…but I don’t think that is the point. The point is…this is what we all b*tched about…wanting smaller government, less spending, more power back to the states…and now we are considering two people who do not share that idea.

    Texas has the 13th largest economy in the world. So..my question to you…and I can help you out with GA. Would you rather have the jobs creation of TX or MA under Romney? Would you rather have the taxes under MA or TX? Would you rather have the regulation as a business owner in MA or TX.? Those are for you to answer…for someone ill prepared … his state has done pretty well for itself. MA…do you remember, when Romney was Governor…the mess with the Big Dig….imagine if it were the federal deficit? WOW…and you think we have problem with Obama.

    Now…about Newt. Newt has never been a governor…he was a congressman, a historian, a writer, and Speaker of the House. His home state, GA has a state income tax, a state food tax and a state sales tax. Has he given any “conservative ideas” to his home state. They have a lot of taxes. This is why I could never understand why people bought into Cain’s 999 plan…people can’t pay anymore taxes and Gingrich certainly has not had any influence on GA. Secondly, GA is making another monumental mistake…they are building a high speed rail (Obama’s idea) from Atlanta to Charlotte. We don’t need that…we really don’t need that. Yes, Atlanta is the SE hub of the USA…but Charlotte…please.

  • themobhasspoken

    Review the findings of this Pew poll and then tell me that Romney’s religion is irrelevant in the GOP primary:

    http://www.wrvo.org/post/romneys-religion-could-play-role-primaries-poll-finds

  • carolynr

    Thanks…ava. I watched a video…I believe on this site…where you can see the frustration of Limbaugh’s face on the ditto cam…when he is questioning Newt. All this unnecessary information. Befuddled doesn’t even begin to describe how the listener must feel when listening to Newt. No crisp answer…except when he decides to be sarcastic.

    When I listened the other day, I believe he was trying to say…stop the in-fighting…you are playing into Obama’s hand. The problem is…there is another candidate…and nobody mentions him…and his record is the PROOF we need to know IT WORKS.

    This is what a very well respected business woman said to me. You know…this man appears to be very hard to work with and I don’t think women like him all that much. Bet if we had a poll…that would be the exact sentiments of most women. I’m not some flaming affirmative action babe…but women vote…his likeability is not that great.

  • themobhasspoken

    I don’t like some of the decisions that Perry made as governor. I found his executive order which virtually forced teenage girls to get an injection intended to prevent them from getting genital warts to be an egregious abuse of authority.

    But, given who Newt Gingrich is and what he would do to the Republican party if nominated, I’d take Perry over Gingrich, sure.

    At least Perry doesn’t have Bill Clinton’s problem.

  • clowngirl

    Do you have the name of the article?

  • themobhasspoken

    But there’s a diff btwn whining and complaining.

    Whining is complaining when it makes no difference.

    Saying that someone like Gingrich is unelectable is not whining. It is just pointing out a fact that is borne out by several polls.

    It’s like saying Ron Paul will never be president. That’s not whining. It’s just a fact.

  • Bill S

    “Who the heck uses the word ‘zany’ any more? What, is this guy Chuck Barris or something?”

  • themobhasspoken

    But the way I use the term “objective” it means the same thing as “unbiased”. If I have a bias, then I am not being objective.

  • carolynr

    I will try to get through to my contact at Perry’s campaign…however, we have been hearing for years…and years…and years about the border…AND NOBODY has done anything. His promise to have it secured in 12 months is reassuring and I believe he will do what he says..come heck or high water. He’s military…and that is probably why you hear that phrase…I doubt it would come out of WILLARD’S mouth except to copy Perry.

  • themobhasspoken

    I don’t blame him for that. Only 8 sitting members of the House will let Newt use their names and most of them are from Georgia.

    I don’t blame the entire GOP senate caucus for keeping Newton at double-arm’s length. He is trying desperately to recruit some more support but the two Georgia senators, Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss, have let Newt know that no endorsement would be coming from them.

    That should raise a red flag.

    The fact that Newt has less than $400,000 in cash on hand should raise a red flag. For those of you old enough to remember 2008, Mike Huckabee looked like a champ after he won the Iowa caucuses. Then he ran out of money and moved to being a sideshow performer. Newt fans: thy name is Huckabite.

  • acat

    Muppets are zany, especially Fozzie or Gonzo.

    Gingrich … not so much.

    Mew

  • carolynr

    This is not going to be a sexual discussion but rather a political and medical one.
    Fast 1. Perry wanted the Gardasil vaccination passed in Texas because it stops vaginal cancer that leads to death. The EO he put forth had an opt-out. Mandates and opt-outs cannot co-exist. The Texas Legislature (unlike our current Congress) over-rode the EO and it was never implemented. Bachmann, who voted for the vaccine in her own state, played on the emotions of the people with her over the top rhetoric that Perry was forcing this on poor innocent little girls. Fact. 2. Nobody forced anything on anybody…it was a non-starter. Perry admitted that his approach to the problem was incorrect.
    Fact 3. Vaginal Cancer is a killer and it is an epidemic in the USA. Genital warts are not killers.
    Fact 4. The reason that the vaccine is required of sixth graders is because those children cannot be sexually active for the vaccine to work. Hence…this is why the young age. Looking at today’s programming on TV…I doubt many sixth graders are innocent of facts in this day and age.

    I hope that this thread explains this. If you are still unconvinced about Gardasil…please use your search engine to find out more. You might try WebMD so that you do not get political bias.

    Carolyn

  • themobhasspoken

    That good?

  • themobhasspoken

    I was thinking, “Really? We’re excited about a Gary Busey endorsement?”

    Then Gary Busey decided that it was not such a good idea to endorse Newt and withdrew his endorsement. I don’t blame him.

    People are painting their own political views onto Newton and they are pretending that Newton is just a political extension of themselves.

    They are blocking from their minds the images of Newt staring into Nancy Pelosi’s eyes while telling a TV audience that Nancy is absolutely right about global warming being something that smart people everywhere know is dangerous and worth our time and money to fight against.

  • carolynr

    Earlier thread…I made the same point. However, Romney will capitulate to the Liberals on everything to stay in office. Go look up his record on the Big Dig. The man needs a spine…and right now…he’s just waffling around without one,.

  • themobhasspoken

    People keep calling Newton a “conservative”. They refuse to take him at his word.

    By his own description, he’s a “realpolitick Wilsonian” and a “Teddy Roosevelt progressive”. But in the looking-glass world of RedState, he has magically been transformed into a conservative.

  • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

    won’t endorse Newt in light of their own straying from the conservative reservation.

  • Common_Cents

    I think Ron Paul was the inspiration for Shaggy, indulging a little bit too much herb.

  • themobhasspoken
    Perry on his TV ad which mentioned gays in the military: Oops.

    Perry on how many Supreme Court justices there are: Oops.

    Perry on the three federal departments he’d just down: I don’t remember the third one. Oops.

    Perry’s game plan is always defense.

    Except when he’s trying to rally evangelical pastors against Mr. Romney. Then he’s on offense.

    Oops.

  • carolynr

    EE does not have a slant on Rick Perry…some of the bloggers on this site do. That is fact. EE has not endorse anyone.

    Don’t even go there concerning Perry and Bush. The only thing they have in common is GWB did have some of his upbringing in the same part of Texas…THAT’S IT. GWB…was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, went to Harvard and Yale, owned a baseball team, was in the oil business. He was and is rich. GWB also finished what Daddy Bush did not…Sadaam Hussein. Today, I don’t know what the truth is about Iraq…I do know he was right concerning Afghanistan.
    GWB used the phrase Compassionate Conservative…but it was code for “let’s spend money”. He did not use his veto pen and that was another problem. He never cautioned Congress to “stop spending…and the Republican Congress spent like drunken sailors.

    Perry on the other hand, grew up poor…dirt poor. We all know his story concerning tenant farmer’s child and not having store bought clothes. Rick Perry volunteered for the Air Force and served his country for five years. Rick Perry did not go to an expensive college in the NE US…he went to Texas A&M. Rick Perry believes in “thrift”. If you don’t have the money…you can’t have it.

    He is not a rich man by a politician’s standards and he does have humility. I have yet to see his Texas swagger…but I have seen it with Bush.

    See, Tomatin…Perry can feel and see what every tier of society feels…because he has been there, excepting the very rich. He knows what it is to be poor. His wife worked to help support his family. He is middle class America. GWB…Not So Much.

  • trickamsterdam

    I know it sounds like I’m either making a joke or complementing Romney, but no…

    I’m saying Romney is gonna get whipped, money or not…

    Perry Ad:

    “No matter how much money a man has, he can’t by back his past”.

    You could add:

    “And no matter how much lobbying Newt did, he couldn’t sell his past out”.

    Newt’s leading by nearly 50 points in GA, btw. And I think also leading in Michigan. I wonder how many points Romney is leading in MA? And can he take it in the general?

    LOL

  • themobhasspoken

    and I have no reason to doubt them, then Governor Perry could have sponsored an awareness campaign whereby children were encouraged to get the vaccine but were not ordered to do so.

    I have a real problem when government steps in and tells parents that their children must be vaccinated to protect them against an STD. I never got vaccinated against HPV or genital warts and I never caught them.

    Perry seems to have forgotten that the best way to prevent AIDS, HPV and other STD’s is to wait until marriage before you have sex and then to remain faithful to your spouse after marriage.

    I know that is a tough sell with today’s kids but it is good advice that smart people have taught their kids for thousands of years.

  • themobhasspoken

    And I mean anyone.

    Since Newt’s support seems to have hit a 33% ceiling, by the logic of the moderators here, that means that 67% of the party wants someone other than Newt.

    Let’s make it happen.

  • Bill S

    If supporting the right candidate is “bias”, then call me biased.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    It was snark.

    As for Newt, I’m OK with him.

  • retire05

    to read the Perry EO on Gardasil? Or have you just relied on the statement of others that claim there was no “opt-out” for parents?

    Are you of the opinion that it is a bad thing to make available to all young girls a vaccine that would virtually wipe-out future cases of cervical cancer caused by HPV? How about genital warts? Do you know how painful they are, or how they are a threat to the unborn child of an infected woman? Or that the CDC claims that at least 50% of all college students suffer from genital warts?

    And what about the Hepititus B vaccine that is mandatory in most states for entrance into a public school with NO opt-out, except under religious objection? Hep B is also a disease that is basically transmitted sexually. Do you have an objection to that rule even though the CDC claims that adverse side affects are more frequent with the Hep B vaccination than the HPV vaccination?

    America has basically wiped out polio. Yet, the Salk vaccine killed many. Now it is mandatory for entrance into a public school. Was the virtual elimination of polio in the U.S. worth the deaths caused by the vaccine against it?

    No informed voter should ever bring up the Gardasil issue again. It is dead and buried; along with Michele Bachmann’s campaign.

  • izoneguy

    Romney is far more wishy-washy than McLame…..

    I have no doubt if Obama won in 2012 – Romney would ask him if he could be the democratic VP.

  • avagreen

    Perhaps you could go on the defense since all this has already been covered and proven wrong, yet you continue to post garbage.

    MOB (noun)
    1.a disorderly or riotous crowd of people.

    2.a crowd bent on or engaged in lawless violence.

    3.any group or collection of persons or things.

    4. common people (common is right); the masses; populace or multitude.

    5.a criminal gang, especially one involved in drug trafficking, extortion, etc.

    EXPAND
    adjective
    9.of, pertaining to, or characteristic of a lawless, irrational, disorderly, or riotous crowd: mob rule; mob instincts.

    10.directed at or reflecting the lowest intellectual level of the common people: mob appeal; the mob mentality.

    a chattering or flighty, light-headed person.
    a gadget; dingus; thingumbob.

    mob
    1680s, “disorderly part of the population, rabble,” slang shortening of mobile, mobility “common people, populace, rabble” (1670s), from L. mobile vulgus “fickle common people” (c.1600 in English), from mobile, neut. of mobilis “fickle, movable, mobile. (

    So, you are a common, fickle, flightly person, bent upon illegal and disorderly, activities as part of sub-intelligent, riotous crowd.

    ‘k. Got it.
    Ignore.

  • romansdaughter

    I am a visual person too and am glad someone else is like me. LOL I kept going back to that picture and thinking the same thing kind of: I thought Mitt looks like he wasn’t sure if he should be doing this{ like will I get more votes if I do or not?); Herman looks like he is falling asleep and Newt was busy checking out something else. And Rick Perry looked the most Presidential.

  • thosjefferson

    I agree with you that it’s important to point out what candidates have said and done, and what they advocate now. My problem with you is you oppose Romney because of Romneycare and you refuse to accept the distinction between a state-based mandate (which is constitutional) and a federal mandate (which is not).

    Romney has always opposed the federal mandate, while Gingrich has supported it (and advocated for it, pursuant to the millions of dollars he raked in from his “clients” who also supported the federal mandate).

    All I ask for is consistency and realism on your part.

  • carolynr

    I don’t this so….it took him 14 years to ask the wife for a date.

    Could Have…Would Have. The man said that the process of trying to get the vaccine initiated was wrong. It was overturned…it was never a law.

    However, I don’t know if you are old enough…but I do remember the polio vaccine…and it was an opt-out kind of thing with a NYS distribution of the drug. Good thing we had that…now isn’t it.

    Concerning STD’s…you need to be a little more aware of today’s society. Know that little sign “I Did It”…that kids put on their car bumpers…what…themobhasspoken do you think they were talking about…passing high school? No…that was about having sex…and that was back in the 1980′s.

    Today…STD’s have run rampant in teenagers and young adults. Hepatitis C is an epidemic.

    Again…we are not talking genital warts…we are talking about CANCER and this type of virus that eventually turns into cancer does not just affect the female…it also affects the male…and there is no way to stop it…except abstinence, a condom, or a vaccine. Do you remember when you were 17?

  • avagreen

    http://www.redstate.com/dan_mclaughlin/2011/12/14/taking-newt-gingrichs-ideas-seriously/#comment-9195

  • carolynr

    nt

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    being more perceptive than gekster, I notice that you’re gone again. And not likely to return this time.

  • avagreen

    -nt-

  • Bill S

    .

  • buster93

    You should check into the AMA or American Association of Pediatrics. Discuss this matter with your Pediatrician. Gardisal is given before sexual activity. That is why it is recommended around the age of 12 for both boys and girls to be vaccinated at that time. It is nice to think that kids will wait until ma
    rriage but this is not the 1950′s. That is why Americans should do their homework and realize this is an option for their preteens along with their parents and Pediatricians.

  • carolynr

    Romney believes that Romneycare was a great example of how the federal healthcare could work. There is a thread somewhere on RedState showing remarks between Romney and Fred Thompson, where Romney calls for a mandate for Federal healthcare. Thompson’s reply…you’re for mandates…as long as they are your mandates.

    I’ll try to find the video…but Romney is for Federal mandates also…or at least was in 2008…maybe he waffled .. or maybe the facts have just begun to surface.

  • JSobieski

    If you want a perfect candidate, you might as well stop paying attention.

  • JSobieski

    There is a legal distinction between state mandate and federal mandate.

    Romneycare is still a bad idea. It is a move away from free markets.

    The “it’s not illegal” defense isn’t relevant when the questions are:

    What about Romneycare is good?

    What did Romney do to make Romneycare better? (or did he just sign a D bill)

    Everybody understands the difference between state level vs. federal level, but guess what—increased bureaucracy and regulation is bad at both the state level and the federal level

  • themobhasspoken

    If you don’t believe me, go here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gardasil

    The purpose of gardasil is to put a weakened genital wart virus into the subject and help that subject’s body to create immunities to the virus.

    Now, coincidentally, if you can stop kids from getting genital warts, you can also reduce their chances of getting HPV. But that is a side benefit of gardasil.

    Gardasil’s main purpose is to vaccinate people against genital warts.

    I do remember when I was 17. I remember wanting to have sex but choosing not to do it. This put me in a somewhat awkward situation socially. It is not that I didn’t have any takers. I did.

    But I knew that the best way to avoid STD’s, premature pregnancies, and the wrath of God (I believed this at the time. I don’t believe it anymore.) is to wait to have sex.

    It is a difficult thing to do. Kids would rather drink, smoke pot, and have sex than listen to their parents, pastors, etc.

    But when the government steps in and says, “All kids are going to get vaccinated for STD’s” it is just like the government handing out condoms to kids and saying, “You don’t have to use these, but if you do use them, we’ll give you some more free ones later.”

    There is a wink and a nod going on when the government gives kids shots and/or condoms which are designed to prevent STD’s. The subtext is: It is now OK for you to have sex. If this were not so, then they would be giving out condoms to kindergarteners as well.

  • themobhasspoken

    Gardasil shots won’t prevent pregnancy. They won’t prevent AIDS.

    They only protect against genital warts and HPV.

    If the kids use condoms, they will be protected against all STD’s and pregnancy. Gardasil sends the wrong message to kids.

  • themobhasspoken

    But this is Perry’s executive style: Don’t go to the legislature, just sign an executive order.

    That is not the kind of president I want. Congress is in Article I of the Constitution for a reason. Our founding fathers did not want to set up an elected King George III.

  • themobhasspoken

    It should have been an awareness campaign or an “opt in” law.

    Parents should not have been made to feel that their child would be stigmatized if they chose to teach their kids the same values that they were taught.

    Other parents may have preferred that their kids simply used condoms rather than have unprotected sex.

    Gardasil sends the wrong message.

    It is clear that Rick Perry was simply doing a favor for Merck. His professional judgment was compromised by Merck’s donation to the Republican Governor’s Association and to Rick’s belief that Merck would help him out later if he gave Merck a multi-million dollar boondoggle.

    Read Robert Caro’s biography of LBJ. You’ll figure out quickly what Rick Perry was trying to do with Merck.

  • themobhasspoken
    He stood up to the liberals.

    They wanted single-payer health care. They didn’t get it.

    They wanted Romney to raise taxes. They didn’t get it.

    They wanted stem cell funding. They didn’t get it.

    They wanted gay marriage. They got it over Romney’s veto.

    Romney cut liberals off in a way that his predecessors, Jane Swift and William Weld (and Paul Celucci) did not.

    This is why liberals hate Romney and why conservatives should love him.

    But conservatives have some very private, personal reasons for hating Romney that I’m not going to go into.

  • themobhasspoken
    RS became “PerryState” when Perry had a shot at the presidency.

    When Perry imploded, it became “CainState” briefly.

    Now, it is starting to look like a reluctant “GingrichState”.

    What is the common denominator that all of these candidates have?

    They’re all Republicans. True.

    But so is Mitt Romney. So is Jon Huntsman.

    So there must be a reason why RS never became RomneyState or HuntsmanState.

    And the reason is not so hard to figure out.

  • themobhasspoken

    I wouldn’t miss you, however. Give your keyboard a rest for a few hours.

  • themobhasspoken

    You are talking like you have authority that you clearly don’t have.

  • http://www.changeforrickperry.org louisianapatriette

    This was the ONLY instance of Perry doing such a thing and he has since repented in dust and ashes. What more do you want?

  • retire05

    Gardasil was designed to reduce the chances of contracting HPV. Genital warts and cervical cancer are effects of the HPV.

    Now, if your kid is having sex at the age of 12, you have more problems than a governor who wants to elimate one of the major causes of cervical cancer. And if you choosing not to have sex at the age of 17 put you in an awkward social position, you should have chosen better friends. There is (or rather should be) no “wink and nod” by choosing to get your kid vaccinated against heartbreaking diseases. Like I said, if you kid is fully aware of sex at the age of 12, you have major problems. Why do we want kids to stop being kids?

    You’re right; this is not the 1950′s. Shame. In the ’50′s, our kids were still kids at 12, not fully aware mini-adults. Got to admit the progressives have done a bang-up job of shorting childhood in true Gramsci fashion.

  • themobhasspoken

    Chill out.

    The guy has a right to vent. Let him vent.

  • http://www.changeforrickperry.org louisianapatriette

    “Oh my goodness, Perry is the only one who looks serious about the hand-over-the-heart thing!” (See the limpness of other hands???)

    My response: “He was a Boy Scout. Of course he’s serious about it.”

  • themobhasspoken
    Email me if you need me to decipher Romney for you.

    He has to use code words for people like Newt because of Newt’s hot temper. But if you call Newt “zany”, Newt’s not smart enough to figure out that you’re calling him crazy.

    Apparently, some of Newt’s supporters aren’t, either.

    (Ed note: Don’t come back, dipwad.)

  • themobhasspoken
    we need to stop “whining” about how Newt Gingrich will not be elected.

    Nice framing on Erick’s part, but this is not whining.

    It is simply stating a fact. A fact that must be repeated frequently because there are true believers out there who think that America is crazy enough to allow Newt to become president.

    Ain’t gonna happen. Sorry.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    Which is why he is no longer.

    In the future, please use the Contact link below for all complaints, concerns and/or questions about site moderators* and site moderation policy.

    Moe Lane

    *Site moderators at RedState have red-colored usernames (front page Contributors have green-colored ones).

  • trickamsterdam

    I wasted time w/ a well-reasoned reply to you, Texan.

    No, he wouldn’t. For all the reasons I pointed out, he’d be humiliated by Obama, and the MSM. And much, much worse than that…Obama would be re-elected.

    Fair enough, though. I’ll ignore you from now on. If I can remember you call-sign.

  • chieftain

    Good government stands a better chance if more people would adhere to your rules.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    Now shoo.

  • http://www.changeforrickperry.org louisianapatriette

    I see that you’ve been here for only the day, so given your extreme newbie-ness, I suspect you had no idea Moe was a moderator. I’d be the one chilling out if I were you.

  • gekster

    say it.

  • gekster

    He probably wouldn’t like my response to him anyway.

  • trickamsterdam

    He’s sort of “old school”, almost Calvin Coolidge.

    But he can’t get elected, because he makes too many mistakes. I don’t know what people don’t see about this?

    Yes, he’s running a medium–sized country. But when you see his numbers plummet, after his mistakes (mistakes in the debates and out), w/ R voters, what do you think is going to happen in the general?

    He couldn’t even answer if SS is unconstitutional or not. That’s how Romney got him.. In that first debate. It wasn’t that he said: “no, Social Security’s not constitutional!”.

    It’s that he DIDN’T KNOW.

  • Bill S

    But someone with an antisocial personality is bound to come back for more and more and more. So he came, he retreaded, and he got gaked. It must be a lonely life for him, down in his mom’s basement.

  • greyeagle

    The reason that a vaccine is stated to be mandated is so that insurance companies will cover the vaccine. However in this case, TX has opt outs for all vaccines.

  • greyeagle

    Reply is to themobhasspoken: I am from TX and your comments are incorrect. We get that you don’t like Perry. Vote for whom you want, but I would appreciate it if you would stop trashing Governor Perry, because I will vote for him.

  • retire05

    admit you were wrong and be done with it. Perhaps you should check with the Guttmacher Institution to learn how many women claim to have gotten pregnant even with the use of condoms.

    There is only ONE failsafe way to avoid pregnancy or STDs.

    Are you still reeling from social rejection at 17 because you chose friends unwisely?

  • jenndee

    I am very interested in Perry’s Flat Tax solution, and I understand what he is trying to say about needing more troops on the border and I agree. I just think he got into this rut, in the debates and on the national shows that made his answers sound rehearsed and not genuine. This automatically sent up a red flag…due to the teleprompter and chief we deal with now.
    I have watched some of his speeches on youtube and love what he has to say. I also trust him more than Romney or Gingrich. It is just very troubling to listen to him get flustered. Our society is so visual and Obama is going to have a billion dollar marketing campaign that will demolish anyone the Conservatives send his way, it just doesn’t look like Perry has the fight or the quick on his feet thinking to fight it off.

  • Bill S

    when I went in to do the edit, it was already fixed. I thought Neil had programmed in some magical profanity correction code!

  • lesueur8

    Clarify? I am not “whining” at Erick. Just saying that maybe the “thin-skin” act makes him just like all of the many politicians who want to take their ball and go home if they feel challenged? I have maybe posted 5 times in my life on this site. Not sure “this shtick” I’ve developed really applies here???

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    I read Moes “blam” note. Kinda like the one you got just moments later.

  • izoneguy

    Rick and I cannot waste time with tricka’s

  • izoneguy


    Is Social Security Constitutional?

    Given all that, the issue of Social Security?s constitutionality, far from being settled, remains wide open. Somehow I doubt that the Framers, who after all meant the Constitution as a fetter on expansive government and not a blank check for it, intended the Constitution to authorize a tax-devouring engine of dependence on the State like Social Security. The purported constitutionality of Social Security rests on sloppy argument, willful evasions of reality, and, ultimately, frightened submission to one of the worst acts of tyrannical bullying in the federal government?s history. Here again the reality of Social Security is radically at variance with the myths. The case for holding this program inviolate collapses accordingly.

  • heraklios

    the Democrats re-interpreted this part of the constitution a long time ago and 80 years of precedent is hard to overturn, especially when social security is so popular with seniors.

  • avagreen

    That’s the best that can be said of your surmisings based upon your initutive feelings rather than fact or substnace..
    Personally, I failed Mindreading 101. I guess you didn’t?

    “There are still some who are convinced that Merck contributed more than a paltry $6,000 to Perry. They are simply wrong. Merck gave two checks, one for $1,000 and another for $5,000 to Perry in the 2006 election timeframe (in 2008, they contributed a whopping $2,500). Here is a source to view all of Perry?s contributions: ProPublica. In fact, Merck has only contributed $23,500 to Perry over a 1998-2010 span, not exactly George Soros money. For comparison, from 2000-2006 Merck gave $2,460,000 to state politicians across 40 states.
    Some additional insight can be gained by an analysis of 700 pages of e-mails regarding the HPV decision (Politico got from Perry?s office via a FOIA request). Ben Smith and Byron Tau concluded that there was not a record of Merck meddling and that Perry was ?largely absent from the internal discussions.?

    When Perry made the decision to issue the EO, it is likely that he was relying (at least partially) on his own in-house consultant more than being influenced by a $6,000 contribution by Merck. “
    http://peskytruth.wordpress.com/2011/07/19/rick-perrys-negatives/

    Both his parents died of cancer, and he states he hated the disease and wanted to make it available for the people in Texas who could not afford it, which the mandate would provide……..insurance coverage.

    LBJ and Perry have nothing in common except they both lived in Texas.

    Do I think this will change your mind? No. I’m writing this for those that might like to have the facts.

    Your rock is calling you. It misses you.

  • JSobieski

    An executive such as a President or Governor have executive authority for a lot of stuff. Perry was an exec for 10 years, and made ONE MISTAKE.

    Do you think every decision made in the executive branch requires Congressional approval? Even Ron Paul doesn’t believe that.

  • Bill S

    He was a pathetic retread and now sleeps with the fishes.

  • californiagold

    Let’s hope Romney and Gingrich continue to trash each other. As they do, their poll numbers will continue to drop while Perry and others rise.

    In a new Iowa poll, Perry has moved into third place ahead of Romney…and is closing in on Newt and Ron Paul. As long as Perry stays positive while Newt and Mitt argue about who is a bigger flip flopper, Perry has a fighting chance to win.

  • lightspeed

    The Ron Paul Campaign and its Neo-Nazi Supporters

  • bs61

    An American delegation went to meet with them and ask why they were kidnapping and robbing American ships and what was it that America did to them. They said it’s in the Quran to make war with all who did not believe.

    That was long before any bases were too close to Mecca!

  • gekster

    I did not know that.
    What would be interesting is to get the whole story of this angle on the Muslim side.
    Throw in a comparason of that to todays Muslims and thier goals and reasons,
    And it would be a diary I would read.
    I am suggesting you turn this bit of info into a diary.
    It is just a suggestion, but I would read it.

  • onemovoter

    tend to repeat certain comments and statements.

    First is that it keeps them on message. It may seemed canned but it’s done for a purpose. Most people aren’t watching and listening to every single time you are of Perry and the other candidates. If a candidate is consistent in their message then as more and more start paying attention, they will catch that message and hear it a few times again. People actually like consistency.

    I have actually watched Perry go off script during Q&A and found him extremely passionate and genuine, along with forceful knowledge in response. I think once Perry gets into the General, he’ll do that more often like Reagan did.

    Erick is right on many points. Perry’s weakness is actually never really being outside of Texas when running for office. Reagan’s “the Great Communicator” title was given to him because he worked at it. He went around the entire country working for G.E. making speeches and then talking to people afterward. From this he learned what so many across the country really thought, and was able to tailor his speeches. It was also where he went from the Democrat party to the Republicans.

    Reagan also learned how to run government by being Governor of CA twice. Perry has the experience and conservative beliefs. He will just have to learn quick how to speak for those outside of Texas in order to win. Will he do so? Only time will tell. I think so.

  • onemovoter

    on HPV. They have found that people are contracting HPV in the throat… due to…. oral sex. There are cases of cancer of the throat now from the HPV. Ever since Clinton, oral sex has been very pervasive.

    So to say that this is hard to get is very wrong. Also the reason for a government to mandate a vaccine other than to help stop the spread of easily contracted disease, but to also have it picked up by insurance for those who wanted but couldn’t afford. The system doesn’t work with an “opt in” for insurance. It does work with an opt out though.

  • gekster

    His username has me believing he was ows origin..
    Came here as a moby.
    Lefties playing conservative.
    Been a rash of them lately.
    Got a big can of raid I can borrow. ;)

  • dcacklam

    How is this vaccine any different than the ones for, say, Polio, MMR, Hep, Smallpox, or any of the others that are now or have been mandatory?

    Polio paralyzes kids, so we made laws requiring kids to be vaccinated against it…

    Human Palpaloma Virus (HPV) – in its various forms – is responsible for regular warts, genital warts, and has been shown to cause cervical cancer.

    Now, granted, Guardasil doesn’t ‘help’ with the regular (foot/hand) type warts… But it DOES immunize against the strains most likely to cause cervical cancer.

    Sounds like a good thing to me.

    As for the claim that ‘Kids will be more likely to have sex because they got vaccinated’ – BS.

    Teenagers who are going to have sex, aren’t going to reconsider because of a disease that doesn’t even register in most folks thoughts… If the possibility of pregnancy, AIDS, gonorrhea, syphilis, and herpes don’t convince a kid that unprotected sex, the possibility of getting HPV won’t either…

    At most, being concerned about STDs will cause a teenager considering sexual activity to use condoms – after all, widespread education campaigns have made pretty much everyone aware that ‘Condoms protect against STDs’.

    So, preventing a Guardasil requirement MIGHT in rare cases convince a few kids who know about HPV to use condoms.

    It will convince absolutely NO ONE who has not already decided not to have sex, that abstinence is the way to go.

    If you want your kids to wait, then your only hope is to convince them to follow in your religious footsteps, and hope their faith is strong enough to stand up to peer pressure.

    There is nothing the government can do to help with that task.

  • williamjameson

    Toughen up or take a break, don’t take it out on the messenger.

    Denial is your coping mechanism. Learn about the candidates and then push the red button to elect your best choice.

    Trust me, liberals go through more hell over what we say about their messiah than what we think of our candidates.

  • http://UnitedConservativesofVirginia Cargosquid

    HI! Ah’m Rick Perry.

    You know my two competitors? Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich?

    Yeeaaahhhh ……(smiles and drawls)

    Ah’m not either of those two guys.

    Vote for the real conservative.

    Bless their hearts.

    Have a nice day.

    Ah’m Rick Perry and Ah approve this message.

  • thisisme7

    people that feel it necessary to point out Perry is inarticulate, when in actuality he is not, they are merely saying that because they know NOTHING about him. As if the first debates he participated in should (when it shouldn’t) define who he is. He has won the last five debates… and so we are supposed to believe the first few debates are who he is? Hell no! My suggestion is to not let the media define what you will believe when it comes to Rick Perry.
    But, go ahead, underestimate at YOUR OWN peril. He isn’t undefeated in ALL his elections by being a dunce.

  • thosjefferson

    As the Heritage foundation used to point out, the mandate has a conservative origin. When applied in a state such as Mass, where less than 10% of the population was uninsured, and combined with an opt-out for those who have the means to pay their medical bills, it makes a lot of sense.

    But Romneycare is far more than the mandate. It includes the exchanges which allow sole proprietors to purchase insurance at group rates, thereby encouraging entrepreneurship and innovation. There are other elements of Romneycare that promote capitalism as well if you cared to look at it more objectively and realistically.

    And don’t forget that Romney vetoed elements of the bill, only to have the Mass. legislature override the veto.

  • JSobieski

    is not an argument for Y being a good thing. Even the best X can be wrong about things.

    I agree that both Romneycare and Obamacare are about far more than mandates

    What elements did Romney veto?

    Romneycare has caused insurance premiums to skyrocket, just like Obamacare will.

    Enterpreneurship and innovation is caused by deregulation and lessening the impact of tax law on the insurance market. The tax issues are largely federal, so I don’t blame Romney for that, but what about deregulation?

    Did Romneycare do anything to encourage high deductible low premium insurance coverage?

  • JSobieski

    To me the “individual mandate” is not the number 1 or number two policy problem with Obamacare. That issue is the focus of the legal cases but not the policy ramnifications.

    My concerns about Romneycare focus more on removing the range of insurance coverage that is available to the public. As recent HHS rules make clear, low premium high deductible policies coupled with HSA accounts are in the Obamacare bullseye.

    In the pre-Obamacare world, the states with the lowest health care inflation have relatively minimal baseline insurance requirements.

    I really want to know:
    (1) What aspects Romney vetoed?
    (2) What aspects Romney is most proud of?
    (3) What elements “promote capitalism”?

    Romney’s defense of Romneycare to date (as far as I have heard), is basically “state level, not federal level”. If that is the best he can do, I can see why he can’t get above 25%. He should actually give a detailed answer . . . or admit what he did was simply enact a bad plan to prevent the implementation of an even worse plan. I would accept that admission as well, but that has not been is tact . … to date.

  • cheetah2

    I too was struck with the expression on Perry’s face in this photo. This man loves his country.

  • retire05

    do you agree with the individual mandate, on either a state or federal level?

    how many people did Romneycare actually put into the “insured” column?

    what was the cost?

    how much did it increase the debt per capital in Massachusetts?

    what was the budget increase due to Romneycare in Massachusetts that has to be absorbed by the citizens?

    why did Romney tell Bill O’Reilly that Romney care had always been a state/federal cooperative (putting the citizens of every state on the hook to pay for Romneycare) if it was simply a state issue?

    are illegal immigrants covered by Romneycare (don’t bother, the answer is “yes”)?

    did competition among insurance companies (which drives down the cost) increase after the implementation of Romneycare?

    When you answer those questions, your stomach will churn because you know that Romney is actually a Nanny-state Republican, as proven in his governance.

  • JSobieski

    I do not support Romney.

    I do not support Romneycare.

    I was trying to engage a Romney supporter in a logical reasonable manner without an emotional tone.

    You kind of ruined it. although your questions are good ones.

    Asking questions without the editorials spilling out is in my view the best way to (1) get people to answer and (2) preserve the ability for unity after the primaries.

  • pj2012

    the window to the soul, as some say.

  • avagreen

    THIS, this is the man we need for President!

    Truth shines through. Can’t be hidden.

    A pox on the noses of those that fight so hard to keep a man like this from leading us.

    PERRY 2012!!!

  • bs61

    I’m kinda scared to be a diary. i learned this from a Navy person who said this is why we have in the song ‘To the shores of Tripoli’

    I’ll try!

  • bs61

    I hope that I don’t get kicked out of RS for you! Here is a link that tells the tale.

    http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2010/09/why-did-president-jefferson-read-quran.html

  • bs61

    I will never listen to him agan! And believe me that hurts, especially since I pre-paid for a year of GBTV. Only to be an insulted for the 3rd time Tea Partier!

  • bs61

    If I were running, you would never vote for me!

    In 1on1 clips, i see the man that I want for Prez and that would be Rick Perry.

  • gekster

    Providing links will not do that.
    In fact I think it is encoraged.

    I would still like to see that diary, if you have it in you. ;)