The Candidates

sunshinek67

Yes, Romney is the poster child for Wall Street run amok~

johntvalentine

For almost one hundred years this evil progressive movement HAS GOT TO BE STOPPED. Newt Gingrich is a progressive. Period. You do not need to be a rocket scientist to see that5 Newt is a progressive. RINO. A word to the wise is sufficient.

shorty

Obama MUST be beaten…As said, it’s likely that all GOP candidates could beat Obama in a debate. BUT they are not running or debating for a trophy. This is for the highest and most important office in the free world. This is for the person who can ‘take out ‘ Obama in the election and maybe, just maybe pull our country from the brink of disaster!

We need someone who can bring us out of the financial mess we’re in as well as protect us from the threat of terrorist and Shariah law.

I know no way of doing this except to go with my gut instinct and support in every way possible and hopefully vote for RICK PERRY..

I’ve never been scared about an election but I am now.

Jim

This is a well written analysis, but with all due respect, it is becoming a quite silly to not include Ron Paul in these write-ups. As a reader of Redstate going back many years, I have always enjoyed your take on things. You are principled and always have a very realistic take on things. You are prepared to challenge the GOP establishment when they, more often than not, give conservatives the middle finger.

I can understand that many around here fiercly disagree with Ron Paul. The venomous words written by many in the community in diary after diary have made that more than clear. But he is rising across many polls, not just the PPP in Iowa. As you mentioned on your radio show last week and as Neil wrote about yesterday, perhaps the Iowa situation is a big hoax and all the younger people won’t show up. But what if they do? Maybe he’ll roll in third in Iowa and NH and putter out after that. But what if he doesn’t?

I guess all I am saying, as someone who is very interested in Ron Paul’s platform due to my disappointment with the rest of the field, I am interested in your take. Even if it is your boilerplate “Ron Paul will not be the nominee”. Again, it is your site and you can report as you see fit. But, in my opinion, to not include him is just silly.

I just wanted to put that out there. Thanks again for all you do.

bzip

To me, Perry is the only candidate that I could support in the primary. As it has been stated ever so often and so nicely by many of why Perry is the best candidate. He has the best record and best contrast against Obama. A true proven leader with the record of accomplishments to show for it.

There are a couple new news articles out on Perry from Politico . One of the articles is pretty nice, Perry talks about a number of things other then politics and they have a nice video’s;

On the Line: Rick Perry on beer, guns and Iowa
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1211/70661.html
Rick Perry aims populist barbs
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1211/70673.html

Then there is a new Perry Ad out:
New Perry Ad Categorizes Gingrich as K Streeter, Romney as Wall Streeter
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/12/new-perry-ad-categorizes-gingrich-as-k-streeter-romney-as-wall-streeter/

Three Streets
http://youtu.be/ES2ml9CGvhY

teme

In business, private equity acquiring a company that is in bad shape, under-performing is pretty much equivalent of surgery in healthcare. Something needs to be done or the patient might die or live crippled rest of his life.

Huffington Compost tried to blame Bain for job losses of less than total 6k. Well, Staples alone employs 90k today. If you are generous in assigning the blame and credit, the net employment of Romney’s business career is somewhere closer to 300k. If he can’t defend that, America is lost.

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

…starting with the desire to fix a few typos:

Before:

While I realize Perry?s initial debate performances were weak and, should Perry make it out of Iowa he must absolutely and decisively remove Ray Sullivan from being in charge of communications, left people yearning for what might have been, the man is the three term government of the second largest state in the nation under whose administration close to 50% of all jobs in the nation were created in the past decade, and who has never lost an election.

After:

While I realize Perry?s initial debate performances were weak and, should Perry make it out of Iowa, he must absolutely and decisively remove Ray Sullivan from being in charge of communications. He has left people yearning for what might have been; the man is the three term governor of the second largest state in the nation under whose administration close to 50% of all jobs in the nation were created in the past decade, and who has never lost an election.

More to come [of greater substance]….

bk

It’s a good thing none of his investments led to layoffs or are in companies offshoring like crazy.

http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

You can be the greediest capitalist in the world but all you have to do is mouth some platitudes and call for more taxes and the left will lick your butt.

blark

Eric,

Whatever intekectual capital you have built up in the past by past insightful and accurate arguments and analysis of the political landscape, you have all but spent now in your perspective on this republican race. Rick Perry? Really?? I cannot think of any reasonable person who has been watching the debates, the interviews, advertising, etc… that does not realize that Obama would destroy Rick Perry. When you finally get around to endorsing, it will be irrelevant because you are so far off on this one. Not sure what Romney ever did to you, but you obviously have it in big for him –so much so that you cannot see what so many are now seeing that he is a much better leader than the rest of the field, and has by far the best chance against Obama! Whatever axe you have to grind against Romney, I suggest you get over it, and get on board, or continue to lose relevance as a credible political commentator.

bk

Is he conservative when it comes to ~~global warming~~ climate change and immigration?

hwgood

We are being told that the only possible Republican candidates are Mitt and Newt. Two candidates with massive liberal ties.
The conservative candidates are shown as not having left the starting gate.
This is the Left Stream Media in synchrony with the Beltway RINO’s.
They are playing us like a fiddle, and it ain’t a Stradivarius.

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

1. Where is the RedState Army?

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/01/01/redstate-in-2009-2/

2. How could The Newt excite a base that has to tolerate his self-imposed quotations [regardless of the negative-ads] regardless the judiciary [e.g., arresting judges]?

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/316386

3. How have Ray Sullivan and Joe Allbaugh injured Perry beyond what is publicly known?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/31/us/31ttperryweb.html?pagewanted=all

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/chatterbox/2005/09/joe_allbaugh_disaster_pimp.html

4. Are there other RS-bloggers [with Front Page statuses] who have also refrained from endorsing?

http://www.redstate.com/dan_mclaughlin/2011/12/19/dont-settle-rick-perry-for-president/

5. Noting that “Mitt Romney is hell bent on winning this thing without conservative support” and that he was allegedly panned when he tried to recruit TEA [Taxed Enough Already] Party Support support via ‘phone on Sunday…and that it is implausible to accept Coulter’s insipid rationalization for this rather-universal conclusion…so could it be reasonably anticipated that he fails sequentially in Iowa/NH [sandwiched respectively by The Newt and the Evangelicals, and The Newt and Huntsman]?

http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/19/romney-makes-pitch-to-tea-party-activists/

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/ann-coulter-tea-party-ignores-romney-because-theyre-looking-at-who-is-calling-obama-a-kenyan/

6. Why do people keep pushing the totally-irrational candidacy of Paul, particularly because any 3rd party run [which Politico keeps touting] would destroy the career of his son?

[see their reflex-supporters, already emerging herein]

*

williamjameson

as much as the stories from those people who will surely be tracked down plus the amount of money made will affect some voters. It doesn’t bother me but the Obamabots have sworn to play extra dirty since BO has little else to run on. BO’s campaign money won’t matter as much because people once again are tired of negative ads and I’m confident they are tired of being told success is a bad thing.

I don’t like Romney but tend to disagree that he will lose because people won’t Obama gone. Sacrifice is easy when you don’t give a damn for the incumbent nor the media. Hatred and mistrust of the media is one of the GOP’s hidden strengths because the corrupt liberal media pretend its not a factor…..they thought the same with the 2010 election. People would unite behind a moderate just to oust Obama.

williamjameson

and discussion by 5 major media outlets. Credibility is growing because ERSS has a perspective on the candidates that resonates with the majority who want anyone but Mitt. You’ll get over it. Romney isn’t a conservative by conservative standards, read up on what it means then you’ll understand why Mitt isn’t liked by many.

Perry doesn’t debate well but he doesn’t need a teleprompter yet he outperformed Obama and Romney on job growth, greater freedoms and fewer regulations.

Romney raised taxes and called them fees, sounds like something a democrat would do, because they have.

Crash71234

Giving Iran nuclear weapons is not an option.

daniel22

Even Fox has done its share of boot licking.

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

After having posed the six [supra] NON-rhetorical questions, it is tempting to “rest” [Biblical reference] but, instead, it may be helpful to synthesize the views of many RS-bloggers who support Perry by projecting what could transpire today…a major PIVOT-POINT.

As it may be recalled, the Family Leader [remember the pre-Thanksgiving Saturday-p.m. get-together with Frank Luntz...whose website inexplicably forced voters to choose only between Mitt and The Newt?] has not endorsed.

It was not going to do so, a month ago, but last week it was announced that it would do so; yesterday, it was noted that Plaats [its leader]] likes The Newt because of prior support of efforts to dislodge three Iowa Supreme Court justices.

Yet, despite meetings on Friday/Monday, nothing has yet emerged, perhaps due to the fact that some pastors have endorsed others and Plaats needs to be un-convinced of his fealty for The Newt [for obvious reasons, self-imposed].

Is it now possible that some hardball will emerge, just before the Holidays, as people confront the need to unify against The Newt and Mitt?

Noting the “public” nature of the caucus-voting, it is clear that people [with their neighbors watching/remembering] will be reticent to support an anti-Israel/Semitic Paul [with their pastors in-attendance] and two supporters of the Individual Mandate,

That Mitt is a Mormon and that The Newt has marital-issues, these could provide the backbone for rejecting their candidacies…among the 40% of Iowans who are Evangelicals.

The CRUNCH will, therefore, be played-out between those who don’t want to hurt Santorum/Bachmann and those who realistically recognize the urgency of banding-together ASAP behind the candidate with deliverables and a track-record [particularly focused on jobs]/jobs/jobs]…projected to “have legs” due to $$$-resources.

Let us hope that this group of Huckabee-supporters can draw upon sufficient gumption to “do the right thing”!

*

jjkoran

Erick’s preferred choice is about as mysterious as who will be the Democratic nominee for President.

Perry has absolutely no shot at beating Obama. He can barely make it through a 90 minute debate with 8 candidates on the stage where he only has to speak for about a total of ten minutes. In an one on one 90 minute debate with Obama he will look like a dear staring into headlights.

I would support Gingrich….but he does not have the money or the infrastructure to combat the onslaught of negative ads by your candidate Perry and Paul and Romney. He will succumb. People say they hate negative advertising….but it works.

Romney is who will be left standing…..and he can beat Obama…to say Perry has a better chance of beating than Romney really destroys your credibility Erick. You would be better served by just coming out and publicly endorsing Perry than trying this not so subtle onslaught against every other candidate on your radio show and this site. You pump up Perry at every opportunity you get…looking for every silver lining in every Perry debate performance. Whether he is or isn’t….he looks and sounds dumb and is not ready to compete against Obama. If you want to throw this country away…vote for Perry.

Beating Obama is the only thing that matters….and if we have to do it with Romney….all you conservatives better get on board and be enthusiastic about it. Don’t do it for because you love Romney?do it because you know this country cannot endure four more years of Obama.

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

Erick’s been told it’s obvious he’s backing Perry, Cain, Gingrich, Huntsman, and Romney at various times.

elayman

Whatever ties between Huntsman and the Tea Party have or have not been conclusively severed, is for political junkies to chew over and total inside baseball or ancient history to moderates, most of whom were not even around when it happened. Get over yourselves already.

Independents and disaffected Democrats are attracted more than anything I think to Huntsman for his civil, even keeled way of doing business ? a thoughtful, intelligent, no-nonsense, no drama candidate who seems like a genuinely good person that can (hopefully) work respectfully with the opposition to get practical legislation through Congress.

They are voters that for good reason prioritize consistency, intelligence, extremely strong with term limitations, political corruption and a deep knowledgeable regarding foreign affairs as realms of importance in a president over being a farmer or veteran (with much respect !).

swamphermit

Texas is loaded with them, and I’m not talking about gays. Perry was a Democrat not long ago, has been labeled a racist already, etc. He gets no more chances from me. I’m about to move to the left of Obama, since Republicans have run off Palin and Cain, and are now trying to run Newt off. If Republicans successfully run Newt off, I’ll probably vote Paul in primaries…if Paul loses, then I’m moving to the far left for another dose of Obama.

lizzie

The sole criteria of “under-performance” is profitability.
Not WHETHER the target is profitable, but whether the profits are HIGH ENOUGH.

No one should delude themselves into believing that Private Equity acquisitions since 1978 have had ANY other objective than HOW profitable.

I barely survived the first nine years of Kohlberg, Kravis, Roberts Leveraged Buyout of RJR Nabisco in “Barbarians at The Gate”.
The Del Monte Foods division was bled dry because 2% net profits were UNACCEPTABLE. Never mind that 2% net profit would be just fine for a family-owned company, or, some kind of co-operative by the farmers and canners, and that the canning of fruits and vegetables is one of the technological miracles that minimizes waste and spoilage, and is the foundation of America’s highly productive food supply and distribution.

I can provide a list of bad examples of where “Is it profitable enough?” was the SOLE criteria for the NOT ALWAYS “creative destruction” that destroyed MILLIONS of jobs and lives between 1978 and 2002, the era of the LBO.

Was Bain Capital less destructive than Kohlberg, Kravis, Roberts? Perhaps.

BUT, one also has to consider Bain CONSULTING, who peddled a BIG IDEA in the 1990′s that ALSO caused the destruction of millions of jobs at small manufacturers of intermediate goods used by bigger companies in the manufacture of finished goods. The BAIN BIG IDEA was to consolidate supply chains into sole source for intermediate goods. Not only were purchasing professionals “downsized”, replaced by algorithms or MBAs with zero product knowledge, but I am still haunted by the Connecticut paperboard mill shuttered when Milton Bradley went to sole sourcing for the paperboard used in board games, the ONLY segment of toy manufacture that always stayed in the USA.

Bain’s BIG IDEA to sole source was a theory that never proved itself.

There are millions of us destroyed by the rise of the MBAs in 1978, when American Can decided that manufacturing was not profitable enough and started the transformation into financial services with the very first industrial asset leveraged buyout. I was there in 1978, and I was on a technical consulting team at a forest products consultancy at the end in 2000.
So many profitable paper mills and converting factories shutdown solely because they could not also pay off the mountains of debt layered on by the MBA-whiz kid LBOs.

I have BA from an elite college and three master’s degrees, yet I was just as disposable in 2001 as my former papermill worker with a High School education neighbor next door. The only difference is that I understand what happened, in detail that still gives me nightmares.

Hopefully, this is the post and comment thread that survives Erick’s duplication

If Bain had solely been in the Venture Capital business (Staples), maybe I would not be so hostile about Romney, BUT I would rather still have that paper manufacturing base in the USA supplying Staples than buying my copier paper Made in Indonesia, from a low wage retailer.

Nah – I do NOT want another Harvard MBA nor another Harvard lawyer in the Oval Office. Have yet to meet anyone with those degrees who has ANY clue about the REAL ECONOMY. When the MBAs took over from the engineers who had built America’s industrial base, that is when the Great Decline started. 1978. When you got 10% interest on your savings in any bank.

THAT 10% became the new paradigm for measuring whether ANY company was PROFITABLE ENOUGH.

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

Those who adhere to the “only electable candidate” will, it is hoped, be forced to confront the realities of a 2-man race, for the criteria as to which people are invited can be tightened ["helping" those who remain in single-digits to hang-it-up]. Even if Paul is on-stage, it will be to enhance his sense of inclusion and, thereby, militate against his temptation to run as a Libertarian [where he would automatically be placed onto all 50 ballots]. And, certainly, any TPM-support for Paul would be undercut with Perry as the GOP-nominee.

RS has provided a community-service that appears both unique and unprecedented; a perusal of other right-leaning sites has not revealed BOTH the intense-debate [among adamant supporters of myriad candidates] and the strong-consensus [among adamant supporters of Perry] that has flourished [through thick/thin, including my overnight foray positing the "DeMint Gambit"].

What appears not to be obvious to some people who are Commenting [here and elsewhere] is that EE is focused on revealing essential-truths, gleaned from myriad sources and shared candidly with this fortunate audience. He invokes a disinterested posture–as does Rush–to employ rejection of Mitt as a foil that allows him to demonstrate his credibility and foresight. Thus, the focus here should not be to second-guess EE if it serves only to obscure the key-dialogue [among sincere thinkers/doers]; rather, it must remain a think-tank @ which the most potent candidate against BHO will emerge by consensus.

JamesLBurns

I’m not remotely close to politics like many here, but:

1) Huntsman seems like the most consistent, stable, qualified candidate. It baffles me why he can’t get off the floor. He should at least be in the top 3. And if it were 1 on 1 between Huntsman and Perry I don’t see how Huntsman doesn’t come out on top, especially in debates.

2) Gingrich, for all his faults, makes me smile. He reminds me of Giuliani in his days as mayor. He came up with ideas and sometimes did things that made you want to pull your hair out, but at the end of the day, he made the city an immensely better place. I think Gingrich has the potential to do the same.

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

Huntsman’s rejection of Enhanced Interrogation mirrors his having carried out a deeply-flawed Chinese policy; he is unctuous, and exhuming his prior conservatism doesn’t mitigate his having heaped scorn on the ["non-scientific"] set of competitors from whom he has consciously/consistently alienated himself.

texanlady

Buffett has invested in a lot of good Texas companies. He has increased employment. Got to give him his due.

jjkoran

Your comment is ludicrous and nonsensical. I suppose you just want to help Erick keep his illusion of impartiality. To say he could be accused of supporting Romney makes your comment laughable on its face.

I am only pushing one cadindate….whomever I think has the best chance of beating Obama. Right now in my estimation that leaves only Romney or Gingrich.

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

This guy should be banned:

“Perry was a Democrat not long ago”…prior to 1990.

“[Perry] has been labeled a racist already, etc.”…an attack from WaPo which has been discredited.

“He gets no more chances from me”…not we @ RS from you.

“I?m about to move to the left of Obama, since Republicans have run off Palin and Cain, and are now trying to run Newt off. If Republicans successfully run Newt off, I?ll probably vote Paul in primaries?if Paul loses, then I?m moving to the far left for another dose of Obama.”…which documents violation of RS-guidelines.

nunleigh

evah will be waged by the Obama machine in 2012. His hands will remain clean, as usual. If you honestly consider how each candidate can be slandered, and they will be, Rick Perry is the only one with a chance to win. Thank you Eric.

http://www.dhstation.com mayrfortuna

quoting: But Huntsman?s policy proposals are deeply conservative. He is more pro-life than Mitt Romney, more consistent than either Romney or Gingrich, and actually seems refreshingly unwilling to play in the kabuki theater we expect the candidates to go through…

Then, what is it that this man hasn?t got a chance to show his records and his willings?

Is it because like you?ve said Sir. Conservatives are more a bunck of radicals (implied)? Is it because conservatives are willing to see the circus go on fire?

I just can?t beleave in it.

I do beleave although, in that the so called “Conservative Media” doesn?t have a CLUE on who is Jon Huntsman (And that includes You Mr. Erickson).

from,

a conservative, fully surrounded by communists in a communist under disguised captalist country… (What a world!)

jiminga

with his “zany” judicial positions Mittens is surging as the only sane person in the top tier. Fascinating….we are not looking for the most qualified but the most sane. I can only hope Perry survives Iowa and his silly religion ads and refocuses on policy and programs.

Even former (and I stress former) Tea Party people are endorsing RINO Romney.

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

Huntsman has already been debunked [supra], so perhaps those brief reminders will serve to help you “see how Huntsman doesn?t come out on top, especially in debates.”

The Newt also makes the D’s smile, and many R’s view his ideas [no matter how much he tries to tie them to History] as dangerous [as also cited here/elsewhere regarding his unconstitutional war on the judiciary, particularly contrasted with the approach adopted by Perry] .

Comparing either to past/present POTUS-GOP candidates serves only to obscure fundamentals of which the RS-community is already quite aware.

acat

it has a couple fatal flaws. DeMint’s a Senator.

The last several times we’ve tried electing a Senator (Dole, McCain, Kerry, *Obama*) .. it’s not gone well.

Somebody – *Anybody* – needs to replace Mitch McConnell. He’s well past his sell-by, and is behaving increasingly as if he’s elected *by* D.C. *for* D.C. DeMint has one of the better sets of credentials to do so. Why remove him?

Mew

In The Hook

Erick has backed Perry since before Perry entered the race. Heck, Perry entered the race at a RedState function! If that’s not a tacit endorsement, I don’t know what is. And frankly I think that’s fine since Perry is the candidate with the combination of the best credentials and furthest to the right. It’s a shame he has proven to be an awful debater and a terrible campaigner on a national level.

I don’t think there’s any hurry to close ranks around anyone right now. Let the primary process do what it does. I simply think that will mean Romney will win and do so probably by the time Florida rolls around. And if Paul saps enough votes from the field to allow Romney to win Iowa, NH could be a coronation ceremony.

Or not. Something crazy ala Huckabee could happen and we’ll be in a fight for awhile. I think that’s good for our party. Certainly didn’t hurt the Dems in 2008.

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

…because it is correct to note the focus defaulting on “sanity” BUT it is also strategic to recognize Perry’s priority of trying to unite the Evangelicals ASAP.

Remember, regarding the former, it’s almost as if The Newt has self-destructed prematurely, prior to having KO’ed Mitt.

Remember, regarding the latter, it’s vital to recall that Perry has a multi-faceted approach that remains available over time [federalism,, jobs, military, etc.] that his competitors can only covet.

This is why I’m still curious about what EE knows of Perry’s advisors; although one of the supplied hyperlinks is to the NYTimes, it appears to provide a disinterested roster. [For example, when did Perry consciously portray himself as a potential "third Bush term"?] Thus, as Mitt gears-up for the long-haul and no other candidate has the $-reserves to match him except Huntsman [who will remain 0-ed out] and Perry, it seems a 2-man race [the same one envisioned in August] will emerge shortly after the New Year.

bwilliamson

he is not running for re-election after this term. It makes me very sad as he has done a wonderful job not only for South Carolina, but the country. He has fought the good fight and deserves a rest. It will leave a large vacuum when he is gone.

http://www.planettron.com NickDeringer

Newt’s “great debater” badge seemed to be missing in the last Iowa debate. After the debate his poll numbers…went down.

Gingrich less than 2 weeks ago had a double digit lead in the polls.

CNN: Gingrich 28, Romney 28, Paul 14, Bachmann 8

The “Anybody but Romney” hysteria is driving bewildered voters into the arms of Crazy Uncle Ron.

Insider Advantage: Paul 24, Romney 18, Perry 16, Gingrich 13

And of course there’s the evil Left wing shill Fox News:

DEAD HEAT POLL: Gingrich Lead over Romney Collapses

I agree with Eric that Perry is a solid candidate and can beat One-bama. I disagree that we should hand out participation trophies to all the other candidates and say they can ALL beat One-bama. That’s like saying any quarterback in America can beat Tim Tebow just because they’re all quarterbacks.

Perry/Rubio 2012 because the pre-game show is over, the clowns have entertained us and now it’s time for the main event.

acat

That’s going to leave quite a vacuum.

Mew

http://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com nathanalbright

To get DeMint some conservative reinforcements in the Senate in 2012 and then take the Senate Majority seat….that would be a pretty good scenario….

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

…but it was a brief foray [composed the overnight following "oops"], a potential flirtation if you will, which pitted me against a dozen RS-bloggers [some of you may recall] because I was perceived as sacrilegious.

Meanwhile, Perry is rebutting the liberality of Politico…
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1211/70661.html
…while depicting his Iowa-focus, assiduously.

This is why returning to Perry thereafter has increasingly been a breeze!

acat

And that’s not a bad way to enter retirement.

Mew

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

EE has been perceived [by bloggers, reacting to his Horserace-themed comments] as pro-Mitt [before he clarified matters] and EE has personal relationships with multiple candidates [such as Cain and The Newt].

So, let’s not misrepresent him, particularly when the spin-off is a plea for procrastination ["I don?t think there?s any hurry to close ranks around anyone right now"]; the suspicion arises that this is from someone who wishes to dissuade people from committing to Perry.

It is plausible that a protracted process will ensue [and that it is always healthy to vet everyone thoroughly], but the focus must be trained on assessing the efficacy of each candidates predictable ability to contrast favorably with BHO.

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

Just because some of you people aren’t capable of saying nice things about multiple candidates, and you obsess to unhealthy levels about the personalities in the race, it doesn’t mean Erick is down at your level.

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

Clearly you’ve been secretly inducted into the Vast Conspiracy to Cover for Erick.

acat

the time we were Pawlenty-State. (this was admittedly short .. but it was fun for those of us who were “on the bland wagon”, who thought that a polite and soft-spoken guy from a decidedly blue upper-midwest State might just be the answer.

Mew

lizzie

stereotypes that hurt him from day1.
Jon Stewart, and a host of Texans of every political stripe killed that n-rock story by mid-October. Stereotype #1: “all white Southerners are racist” NO LONGER APPLIES to Rick Perry. Never underestimate the influence of Jon Stewart’s “Daily Show” on the entire spectrum of punditry.

Stereotype #2: “male Sarah Palin” I sense that Rick Perry has thrown this one off as long as Sarah Palin does NOT endorse him until he is the official GOP nominee. There is NOTHING about Rick Perry and his family that screams”reality tv-show”, nor is Rick Perry a “quitter”. For any of the Palinistas reading this, I again disclose I am a disillusioned fiscal conservative registered democrat who liked and respected the Sarah Palin before her nomination as VP, and wonder what happened to her.

Stereotype #3: “another Texas governor dumber than W”
Perry’s great challenge. I do believe he has proven to many that he is the REAL Texas governor, and he needs to keep hammering that 1) Texas is the 13th biggest economy in the world by GDP (comparable to Russia’s GDP), and 2) Texas is the USA’s #1 exporting state for eight years in a row.
The New York Times has done some investigative articles that actually note how Rick Perry has successfully reformed several aspects of Texas government functions during his eleven-year tenure.

the “dumber than W” is the remaining hurdle. Bush43 is not dumb, just not very curious, but most Americans do not understand the difference.

Rick Perry is not “dumb”, but all the thoughtful interviews, and very creative outside-the-box thinking has been lost in the early debate gaffes.

I wish Perry had had the debate opportunity to discuss the F35 Joint Strike Fighter’s impact on both national security and the longterm Federal budget and deficit. The F35JSF is a Four Trillion$ over ten year program.

Why? Because when Rick Perry starts talking hardware, he blows everyone off the stage.

BTW, I am exactly the swing voter that Huntsman wants. I followed his campaign from before day 1. Yet, I really can not stand to listen to him – he sounds so angry and gloomy.

As for Ron Paul – his ‘base’ is growing from migarnts from Obama’s base, some Russ Feingold anti-Patriot Act dems (and I understand that), but also the most vile of the anti-war far left. personally, I wish that group of Code Pinkies would all emigrate to Norway, but the GOP, and real Libertarians, are going to have to decide if they really want the same anti-war left that destroyed the Dems in 1968, and agin in 2008.

Last night, I chose Fred Thompson filling in for Hannity versus Piers Morgan interview with Jon Huntsman (I just can not bear to listen even though I would vote for Huntsman over Obama in the general election, while I will NOT vote for Romney or Paul even as a protest vote).

Fred used the term “protectionist” when he meant “isolationist”. (Biggest gaffe ever!) Isolationism is a very durable American principle – avoiding foreign entanglements started with George Washington.

the dilemma in 2012 is that the USA can NOT undo history since WW2 – and the GOP needs to re-invent their foreign policy plank in order to find a different path for the 21st century between Obama’s naivete/appeasement, Ron Paul’s 18th century isolationism, and Bush43/Cheney’s neocon policeman of the world Freedom agenda (which Romney has embraced).

Perry, Huntsman, Bachmann, and Gingrich are the only candidates trying to redefine that plank.

http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

Of course his polling went down, that was the official “Get Newt” debate. Each front runner that gets close to Romney in the polls undergoes a get em debate. None of the others have survived after they were attacked.

Besides, these are not actual debates, they are beauty pageants that pay candidates in poll numbers for savagely attacking one another, but little payoff for stating your own positive positions.

In a real debate, and in making a speech Newt is terrific. I just fear that he has burned so many bridges, attacked so many other people, said so many squirrely things, and has so much personal and financial baggage that he is unelectable.

ombd

“I highlight Perry not to endorse him, but to point out that his qualifications and experience are a far better match against Barack Obama than Mitt Romney?s”. I sure don’t see any evidence of this.

To say that the Perry campaign has been underwhelming would be a vast understatement. And he?s not doing himself any favors with his series of unforced errors and now gratuitously alienating groups the GOP will need in November to build a winning coalition ? http://bit.ly/qVdDUt

Marcus_Traianus

And would their stories hold water under light scrutiny? Were they companies already headed for the trash heap which Bain saved by restructuring? Companies in industries that were under attack by foreign competition and needed to scale down to survive?

What about Staples or Dominos? Bain had a success rate in the high 90%’s. Think Obama can make that argument? With what- The Simulus? Oh no, I’ve got it “jobs saved”. Sure.

Funny, folks around here talk about cutting the “size of government” which eventually means you will be cutting jobs. But when someone in the private sector may have cut certain jobs to ensure a companies survival, all of a sudden they are Wall Street Raiders.

Right.

Conversely, I can find almost 16% of the working population who have been “laid-off” because of this current President. Methinks that is a pretty compelling counter argument.

But go ahead, assume we won’t fight back and Obama’s arguments somehow make a more compelling case to voters.

I am pretty sure Romney created more jobs than Obama ever did. That will be the argument.

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

…because I’d document any contradiction, were it to emerge.

Just like most people @ RS, I read this stuff critically; it’s just that I have noted effective undertones emerge when EE writes/speaks.

When someone makes you want to learn more [n.b., my "Queries" supra], the pundit has been effective.

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

And it is this precise posture that is reflected, also, in the commentary provided by Rush.

circlegranch

and while what you write here is in essence true, the Obama camp will do a marvelous job of twisting the facts. As EE adeptly puts it, the airwaves will be full of ‘victims’ of Bain along w/ that famous photo of a young Romney all smiles as money rolls out of his pockets. We’ll be treated to photos of his mansion in La Jolla being demolished simply because it was too small and footage of the new super-sized mansion being built. And that’s just ONE of the Romney homes. Remember the fluff made of the fact that the McCain’s owned several homes and of Mrs. McCain’s beer fortune? The poor, lowly Obama’s only owned one mansion in Chicago and when our side tried to reveal the truth of that real estate transaction involving Tony Rezco, he was whisked off to prison and the media excused Obama.

If we are naive enough to think that Team Obama has not been hard at work gathering photos, interviews, etc. on Romney for the past 3 years, we are beyond help. The Dem’s know how we roll–we always give the nomination to the guy that’s next in line; the guy that has waited patiently for his ‘turn’. They knew Romney would be next up at bat come 2012. What’s sad is that the RNC never even tries to pull off a surprise.

Perception is reality. That’s what killed Herman Cain’s campaign. He may well be innocent as a newborn kitten of the many accusations but as long as ‘victims’ with woeful expressions kept trotting forth, it didn’t matter if he was innocent, kinda innocent or just plain guilty. He could not survive the onslaught. Once the leak in the damn occurred, the Dem’s made quick work of it, didn’t they? Even the power of the Golden EIB microphone and the 24/7 opportunities Cain had on Fox and with Hannity and Levin and Boortz couldn’t save his campaign. This is the Big League.

Mitt Romney, contrary to the gushing endorsement of Nikki Haley, has not created a job in the midst of this recession. Yes, he’s hired security people for himself and his family, lots of campaign staffers, communications/media hacks, more pilots and drivers and chefs and hairdressers but these, like the shovel ready jobs of Obama, are not permanent nor long term. He cannot stand on a debate stage opposite Obama and claim any recent or current jobs creation. By contrast, Rick Perry can recite, chapter and verse, a number of counter attacks he presided over during Obama’s reign of fiscal destruction. Perry can draw a clear defining line between his state which has prospered and moved ahead in spite of the course of federal govt which has put policies in place which have inflicted great harm on our economy.

Mitt Romney ‘s only claim to being aware of middle class issues and having empathy for the plight of the young family struggling, the elder doing without healthcare services or the military family that can’t find gainful EMployment post DEployment is that his daddy grew up in the middle class. Most of us are not particularly touched to know our future president ‘gets it’ regarding where we are because as a little boy he sat in a luxurious living room hearing his dad talk about what its like to not be really rich, or something. We may also expect the dirty trick of bringing Romney’s dad’s record as gov of Michigan into the general election. His father, a Rockefeller Republican, pandered to the unions and helped set Michigan on a path of decline, from which they have yet to recover. If Team Obama can make the case that the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree, that won’t help Romney much either.

EE also brings up a very important point that many of here have tried to make and that is, since when does miliitary service not matter? During the Clinton and GW Bush years, it was always a topic of leverage as to whom was the better suited to be Commander in Chief. It got lost along the way in ’08, too. Perhaps when a nation becomes war weary, serving one’s country becomes less admirable?

I read a blurb in an Iowan newspaper a few days ago that said that Rick Perry should pay attention to 2nd Amendment voters because in states like Iowa, that still matters and thus far, none of the GOP candidates are touching upon it. Hopefully, somebody in his campaign caught that same blurb and put it on his radar. It’s Rick Perry that supports gun rights probably more than anybody else on the trail. He’s in favor of Constitutional Carry. Quite a contrast to Mitt, “I’ve hunted small varmits before” Romney.

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

…by over-doing the anti-SCOTUS rhetoric, for example.

Nevile

(I meant to post this here, rather than in the Huntsman thread. I was not able to find a way to delete the other post. No spam is intended by the re-post)

Any rational person who watched the last debate should have recoiled in horror at Ron Paul?s performance.

He seriously has no problem with Iran pursuing nuclear weapons. In fact, he thinks they?re justified to. He is indifferent to the existential threat this poses to Israel ? our only friend and ally in the region, and advocates a foreign policy of disengagement that any pollyanna Blame America Leftie is happy to subscribe to. He has no coherent economic policy, other than a return to the gold standard. He is, in fact, not coherent at all about anything!

Moreover, he tacitly threatens an Independent run should he not win. That alone should disqualify him from consideration. We owe him no loyalty.

A Ron Paul presidency would be a disaster for the country. A Ron Paul candidacy would be a disaster for the G.O.P. Picture him in debates against Obama. Is there any doubt in any sane voter amongst us that B.O. would rip him to shreds and make us the laughing stock of the nation?

He was well past his sell-by date in 2008. This year his babbling, sputtering, obsessiveHuntsma, debate performances betray the possible onset of senility. He?s long overdue for the Golden Handshake, and should be quietly but firmly put out to pasture with honors.

We have other serious candidates to consider. All are flawed, but all are viable nevertheless. I would willingly vote for Gingrich, Huntsman, Romney, Bachmann, or Santorum. I have some doubts about Perry, but would vote for him also.

Paul will never get my vote.

streiff

of Bain and its operations. It operates much more like an Turkish slave raid than a surgeon.

1. Bain was an initial investor in Staples. It wasn’t called in to rescue it.

2. The M.O. in the “rescue” cases is

–Pick a weak company, not a failing one.
–Buy it
–Install your management team
–Charge the company exorbitant rates for themanagement team which Bain can direct as it owns the company.
–Sell off the profitable parts.
–Cut staff, wages, benefits.
–Take all the cash you can out of the company.
–Take on massive debt so the company can buy back the Bain stock at a premium.
–Sell the company.
–Watch the company go into bankruptcy.

There is nothing illegal with this. There is a great deal of question about whether it actually helps the economy.

Whether it is moral or not depends on your morality.

http://www.planettron.com NickDeringer

His baggage is so huge that no amount of debating promise can save him. He may get off the occasional sound bite, but in terms of substance his debates don’t clarify his position. When he gets pinned down he throws up a cloud of dust and makes his escape. Contrary to many in the conservative media, Gingrich is not going to go in and call One-bama a socialist because Newt agrees with many things that One-bama is doing. Just look at his record over the past 5 years. Newt will not be the nominee. He’s done.

Perry/Rubio 2012 because GWB couldn’t debate to save his life and he won 2 elections.

lizzie

is one of Rick Perry’s greatest electability assets in a general election.
The Pelosi/Obama Democratic Party willingly gave up their majority by disowning the fiscal conservatives.
I imagine Bill Clinton probably has a secret dartboard for venting his secret rage, knowing how quickly (two years!) Pelosi/Obama destroyed what took the dems more than 20 years to regain.

MS congressman Gene Taylor lost in 2010 – and he was one of the best Blue Dogs ever!

Jim Webb, the archetype Reagan Democrat, is retiring from the Senate because he can not support a Pelosi/Obama party.

Ron Paul ran that ?Perry was a Democrat until 1989″ attack ad as soon as Perry announced. So funny – Hillary Clinton was a Goldwater Girl in 1964.
Ronald Reagan passionately campaigned for the liberalism of Harry Truman and Hubert Humphrey’s first Senate run in 1948.
I love that Youtube!

So many independents are former fiscal conservative dems, which is exactly why Perry was a dem until 1989. Well, that and the legacy of the Civil War. Harry Truman was a Dem because he heard the stories of the family farm being raided by the evil Radical Republicans during the Civil War.

Fiscal conservatives are the 60% of voters who will decide 2012.
The Pelosi/Obama Dem Party do not want us. That is 20%.
The other 20% are the GOP social conservatives.

Mitch Daniels is correct: it is the DEFICIT and DEBT.
Nothing else matters in 2012.

I swear that No Labels 3rd party ticket is going to be Evan Bayh and Mitch Daniels – and that ticket will win.

acat

don’t forget that Romney will be fighting uphill, against the Dem house organ news media, who buy ink in sufficient volume …

They can and will find everyone who was laid off by Romney, and – unlike those laid off “by Obama” – they will be in high rotation on the nightly news.

Mew

http://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com nathanalbright

…so that the struggle becomes one of “I know you are a job-killer, but what am I,” like taunting schoolkids, rather than the contrast that others would provide as having created almost as many jobs in the past decade as the entire rest of the country. Who would you rather have making a job contrast, someone who was part of a corporate chop shop or someone who presided over an immensely successful decade of job creation through shepherding friendly regulatory clients and a low-tax environment. It’s not a hard option.

And there are other candidates, and not just one, who could make a far better contrast concerning tax expertise. Why go with someone who has to hide or obfuscate their record when one has the opportunity to go with someone who can point to their record all the time in contrast to that of the current tenant in the White House?

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

…that EE is correct is to recall 1980.

Also, your hyperlink…
http://www.ombudizen.com/
…relates to DADT, which must be perceived as a strategic military decision [noting, for example, how combat-troops reside for extended periods @ close-quarters].

Patience, patience….

buddyp

Why isn’t Paul included?

As I’ve said before, because
this is Ron Paul speaking on foreign policy.

He would do intolerable damage to our national security, global order, and ultimately the world economy and U.S. economy.

We are the party of peace through strength, not the naive, idealistic, hippie notion that if we just “mind our own business” everything will be just fine.

http://www.planettron.com NickDeringer

The key here is the Ron Paul attack ad giving a laundry list of Newt’s greatest disasters. All One-bama has to do in a debate with Newt is run down the same list and he can start paying his reelection party.

acat

Other Peoples’ Money wasn’t so great, but .. it did show the ins and outs of the business model you highlight.

It is, rather obviously, a product of Hollywood, so should be taken with a large dose of salt (and maybe an antibiotic…) but does hit the points.

Mew

ihateliberals

My fear is that the Republican party is self destructing with RINO’s and progressives as our major candidates and are deliberately beating down any of the conservative candidates. The second part of the fear is tht the people are gong along with it. There is no way that at this point a RINO nor a Progressive (Romney/Gingrich) should even be close to the lead yet there they are.

How do we energize the conservatives in the Party. it seems as soon as anyone conservative starts to rise they are labeled Tea Party and beat back down. We have several candidates right now that are true conservative and they should be at the helm of the Party. I was a big Not Romney fan and now I have to add Not Newt fan. At this moment if the election were to be held with either of the Front runners as the nominee Obama would win easily. Are the Republican votes this easily mislead and misguided about what is going on? I haven’t seen the Party this disrupted in many many years and i have been watching election for 60 years.

After all of these years I think the Liberals found a way to beat the conservatives and that is to infiltrate the Party and destroy it form within. With the advent of Micheal Steele this dismantling of the party has taken off and is running at full steam even though they would not have taken the House without the Tea Party voters. They stil want to banish the Tea Party and not embrace the conservative faction of the party. I see four more years of the Obama regime and a further dismantling of the American way of life.

Eric, what happened? How did the conservatives lose everything after Reagan? The republican party acts as though Reagan never existed. Ronnie we miss you!

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

…which is increasingly apparent.

[Was it not "rich" when he said he looks forward to debating BHO and, indeed, "I'd even arrive early!"?]

http://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com nathanalbright

n/t

http://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com nathanalbright

….that was a great quote. I’m sure that Perry would have motivation to arrive at a debate early against BHO.

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

…Perry is increasingly channeling RR.

suzyq

that Rick Perry is the only guy out there I can support. He is conservative and knows how to run a government, which is important.

streiff

the man has been repudiated by voters the overwhelming majority of the times he’s stood for office. He has no party building skills whatsoever. We understand you’re a Rombot. That’s fine. Just don’t pretend otherwise.

gator_hoo

Bachmann’s actions in the primaries, particularly her suicide charges against conservatives while practically cheerleading Mitt, has deeply poisoned the well for me, and while I would vote for her should she be the nominee, I see her at this point as nothing more than a typical politician who has found that acting conservative is her best political move.

I think she is somewhat conservative as a person, but that she is first and foremost a politician, and would (and has) abandon conservatism where political expedience requires.

Do. Not. Want.

gator_hoo

Bachmann’s actions in the primaries, particularly her suicide charges against conservatives while practically cheerleading Mitt, has deeply poisoned the well for me, and while I would vote for her should she be the nominee, I see her at this point as nothing more than a typical politician who has found that acting conservative is her best political move.

I think she is somewhat conservative as a person, but that she is first and foremost a politician, and would (and has) abandon conservatism where political expedience requires.

Do. Not. Want.

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

note, he’s been in the Congress 20+ years and hasn’t been able to garner one Member to support his domestic dreams – what makes you think he could do it as President (only two possible answers: drugs or alcohol).

You, Jim, are an idiot of the first order.

APA Guy

He has deep flaws that actually matter to the voting electorate, unlike Perry and Gingrich. Aside from a few holier-than-thou on our side, Gingrich’s personal flaws don’t mean jack to people who see the value of their dollar in the toilet and no substantive increases in employment. Gingrich was the man in congress the last time that chain of events took a turn for the stars.

Perry is really the X-factor now. He has the money, organization and record of success to take us home. The real question will be how he handles the pressure of a national campain in front of a national audience against a skilled opponent. I am beginning to think more and more that he will be up to the task should he make it out of this ugly primary.

In the end, I think we may see a Perry/Gingrich ticket when the smoke clears…and what a ticket it would be! But I’m not betting money in any direction right now…

APA Guy

He has deep flaws that actually matter to the voting electorate, unlike Perry and Gingrich. Aside from a few holier-than-thou on our side, Gingrich’s personal flaws don’t mean jack to people who see the value of their dollar in the toilet and no substantive increases in employment. Gingrich was the man in congress the last time that chain of events took a turn for the stars.

Perry is really the X-factor now. He has the money, organization and record of success to take us home. The real question will be how he handles the pressure of a national campain in front of a national audience against a skilled opponent. I am beginning to think more and more that he will be up to the task should he make it out of this ugly primary.

In the end, I think we may see a Perry/Gingrich ticket when the smoke clears…and what a ticket it would be! But I’m not betting money in any direction right now…

streiff

you mean 25 years, then yes. Otherwise I have to assume stupidity led you to make that comment

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

…have proven effective.

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

…has been refreshing.

APA Guy

The bar is lowered enough by now…time for Rick Perry to step it up and be clear and coherent with his policy positions from this point forward. If he stumbles badly like he did with the 3 agencies answer, he’ll damage his chances for victory in a big way.

Jim

It is not my intention to argue the substance of anyone’s platform here. It is abundantly clear that most people on Redstate are fundamentally opposed to many of Ron Paul’s, as well as other candidate’s, positions on various issues.

My point is that I very much enjoy Erick’s raw political analysis of the “who’s up, who’s down” dynamics of the race. I know he has his opinions and leanings on each candidate, but he does know the GOP electorate. It is interesting to read about the dynamics of the race and to ignore someone who is polling in the top tier in the first states, even if you think he is the scum of the earth, is less than satisfying for me. That is all I am saying.

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

Or ignorant, or both.

http://www.RayJuniorShow.com/ rayjuniorshow

you piss and moan about all the candidates/choices we have (rightfully so, and I agree) then refuse to endorse?

It’s so obvious why you’re doing it… you don’t want to draw the ire of the eventual nominee.

Either shut up or endorse someone, but stop b***hing if you’re just going to hedge bets.

Jim

…despite your reducing the conversation down to “you’re an idiot.”

APA Guy

Both

APA Guy

Both

APA Guy

When it can be boiled down to someone’s idiocy, is there really more to say?

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

at least twice. If you can sleep well at night supporting Ron Paul, you’d have enjoyed a great career with the SS in Poland.

Oh, and I didn’t “reduce” the conversation, that’s the nicest appellation I can apply to Paul supporters on a family site. We used to have a ban on site rule for you jerks, I’m guessing it’ll be back in a couple of weeks.

Go hang out with the loons at Alex Jones site, you’re spreading filth here.

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

(And I’m not speaking for Erick)

Ron Paul not only is a hypocritical loon and an anti-Semite and a troofer, he’s not a Republican either. He should have been tossed from the caucus but Bohoener didn’t have the balls – or the core – to do it.

acat

Ron Paul draws lots of college support …

In part, this is because college students are out from under mom&dad and are engaging in some rebellion ..

In part, this is because college students often haven’t had their idealism burned out yet….

In part, this is for the same reason most freshman pack on 15lbs…

They’re learning how to self-govern… and Ron Paul’s dumbed-down permissive pablum *sounds* good… to anyone who hasn’t either been taught critical thinking, or who hasn’t had enough exposure to the real world to have learned it through osmosis.

I would find him funny if he were a Dem, but .. with Kucinich and LaRouche, that niche is pretty well filled. I find it infuriating because Ron Paul manages to both weaken the GOP while acting as a very nasty brush with which to paint libertarian-leaning conservatives.

Mew

zeprin

Perry cleans house in his campaign org. Offers top spot + Admin. Chief of Staff (if/when he wins) position to NEWT!
We get Best of Both Worlds!

Jim

…that I have always been cordial and reasonable in our exchanges.

But if you feel that equating me, a faithful Christian who is pro-life and has a great respect for the Constitution and liberty, with the most horrific evil of the 20th century then you will forgive me if I consider that bring the conversation into the gutter.

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

Yesterdays New York Times is on Paul for his newsletters, and you can also read about it in a conservative publication, The Weekly Standard.

Bottom line, the guy is a racist loon.

Scope

As has been repeated many times, people don’t really start paying attention until much closer to the first caucuses. In the last debate, and the final one before Jan. 3, Newt exposed some uncomfortable positions on some serious issues, for those actually listening to his words, rather than how passionately or bombastically he spoke those words.

When Newt was pressed on his Freddie Mac ties, he said that “he has always supported home-ownership” and that he believes we should all support home-ownership for “all” Americans, meaning even those that can least afford to own a home. It’s as though the housing crash never happened, let’s just move along and keep doing the same thing. Then of course there was the exposure of the 2007 Freddie Mac tapes, where Newt advised Freddie not to change their business model, as there was no (government) support for such a change. The news broke, very untimely for Newt, that the SEC is suing 6 of the Freddie and Fannie executives for their practices while Newt was very much so on the payroll of Freddie.

In that same debate, Newt made his proclamations that as president, he would haul the federal judges, by subpoena, to testify before Congress as to why they decided certain cases as they had. He may very well have meant that only those decisions that affected unconstitutional decisions would be threatened , but that is not what many heard, and it sure isn’t how it is being spun by the left, as well as many many on the right also. He doubled down on Face the Nation and said that if those judges ignored his subpoena’s, he would send the Federal Marshall’s to pick them up and arrest them. That should send shivers down the spines of those that believe in the 3 separate but equal branches of government. Newt has proposed that the Executive and Congressional branches of our government can usurp power, deny equality to the judicial branch, and set a horrific precedent that can one day be utilized by any future liberal presidency and Congressional majorities. To think of a president Obama with those powers gives me the creeps. To think of an undisciplined and unprincipled president Gingrich with those powers gives me the heebeejeebees.

For those reasons, plus the major ad buys against him in Iowa, with him having no funding to ward off those charges, is what has sent Gingrich spiraling down in the polls. I don’t believe for a second that he has reached the bottom yet, that we will soon see.

4suramcan

And tomorrow my morality will be that. Is this what you are saying?

Marcus_Traianus

I believe that will be an issue irrespective of the candidate. We will be fighting against a very partial media machine that helped get Obama elected in the first place.

What I politely disagree with is the notion that somehow our arguments or defenses are less compelling. Furthermore that we (again, irrespective of the candidate) can’t effectively make those arguments against a President with one of the lowest job performance ratings in history who has pursued an agenda foreign to the American people and in the process destroyed our economy.

It’s pretty easy to find lines of folks at the local unemployment office. Ditto folks working at the local Walmart where that job is usually one of several or a lifeline from total destitution. These people want a vision and plan for the future. Someone who can reassure them things will get better. That vision has zero to do with Obama and if we can’t provide that compelling case, we don’t deserve to be elected.

I may not be Romney’s biggest fan. In fact, he has a pretty big hill to climb for my vote. But the man would create jobs and know how to get this economy going again eminently better than Obama. To think otherwise, is fairly disingenuous and partisan.

znjs

I expect some posters would convince themselves”so and so can’t win because I personally don’t support him, and that’s all the evidence I need” but I expected more from you. I know a lot of posters here will agree with you because they also are on the “I don’t support them, so barely anyone else will” but it’s just not true. Poll after poll has actually shown Romney doing the best against Obama. Yes there are attack lines against him, but there will be on anyone. I like how Romney can’t win, but Newt can. Please. Personally I think both could win, though neither is guaranteed to, but Newt opens himself up to so many attacks it’s crazy. Don’t think we’ve heard all of the companies he’s acted as a “historian” for over the last number of years. And his court idea is sure to scare people away – imagine the attack ads Obama can run just based on conservative writers!

Also I notice you don’t say that Bachmann could win, you just hope it’s implied by including her. I’ll leave guessing the motive for that to other people, but Bachmann is a dream candidate for Obama – she reminds me of little more then Colbert’s caricature of a Republican.

The fact is that Obama is deeply unpopular. For many people it’s less about the issues and more about how people don’t want him to be re-elected. They’ll find a reason, even a nonsensical one, to support the other guy, unless we nominate someone who actively scares them off. Bachmann certainly does that. Newt has a real good chance of doing it. Romney won’t. He’s not my first choice, but he’d win despite you personally not like him.

Now whether or not a Romney presidency would be good for conservatives is another matter.

Paul_Zummo

When you start off a rant about someone’s mental capacity with:

Whatever intekectual [sic] capital you have

It pretty much signals that the rest of your comment can be safely ignored.

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

Then you’d understand the problem supporting a guy who’s a racist, a hypocrite, a troofer, somebody who’s not a Republican and who’s a lousy politician all rolled into one.

You brought up RonPaul, you’re the gutter snipe.

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

…notwithstanding your goal, for you try to be outrageous without recognizing the potential down-side of your attack-mode.

EE explained his rationale in the above-hyperlink; unless you can refute it, you should allow him the space to act individually that you would claim for yourself.

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

…because thematic in EE’s postings is the answer to your kicker-query.

“NO!”

And, BTW, Michele would not mirror a Colbert caricature; he has been tart regarding everyone.

Paul_Zummo

I think Bachmann could make an excellent Congresswoman for years to come and could move up the ranks to serious presidential consideration down the road. But she has really soiled herself in my eyes with this campaign. It’s unfortunate because she is a lot keener than I would have even given her credit for being before the campaign started.

arthurmanger17

Giuliani as mayor instituted the broken window policy. Which the main stream media at the time, not only categorized as nuts but racist. The idea that such a simple policy of arresting vandals for breaking windows of abandon buildings, would lower crime was insane. On top of that since most of the abandoned buildings were in poor neighborhoods, Black neighborhoods it was racist. This was the opinions of the intellectuals of the main stream media, (both information and entertainment) They could understand that empty buildings with windows made a neighborhood made it look much more attractive than one with a bunch of broken windows. They couldn?t understand that the people living there might think ?well if the police are going to be there to enforce such minor infractions they will be there for other more serious crimes?. What a turn around, from one of the murder capitals to one of the safest cities in the country.
The media, especially the news media and the government are so intertwined as to be one ruling class. The most insane pronouncements can be made by politicians and no one investigates if it?s true. Case in point Black parents don?t care about their children?s education. So if they are out there demonstrating for school choice everywhere, don?t report it. In fact don?t investigate, being part of the fourth estate, (the watch dog of government) can be difficult plus we have that party to go to once a year in Washington. So how do they fill up all that news time, reporting on the latest polling data. Polling data on everything. Polling data that was so wrong it didn?t even come close to predicting what happened in the midterm elections. The ruling class has given their propaganda wing, (the main stream media) it?s marching orders. Take back the political conversation. There is only one candidate running for the Republican nomination that the media knows is capable of drawing their blood. Just a couple of remarks during the debates, confronting the media?s moderators and you heard a loud cry of FOUL! If Gingrich gets the nomination it?s all over for the ruling class.

Ann_W

But we should try to be civil in these conversations. It’s a little more effort, and maybe not as satisfying as calling someone an idiot, however, if we can’t have a civil conversation this country is doomed.

And, like you said, the people on this site should especially be able to have a civil conversation. We have a lot in common. I actually would vote for Ron Paul IF he were the nominee. I would hope that wouldn’t happen, and it probably wouldn’t, but all the bad, crazy parts of Ron Paul could be said about Obama, plus Paul actually has a good side, too. Hopefully, Republican Congress could keep the crazy in check.

Paul_Zummo

The Kerry factor. How many people do you know that voted for Kerry (and I knew a lot) actually really were excited about voting for Kerry? Hardly any. Kerry voters were simply anti-Bush voters. When there is no excitement for a particular candidate and all of his support is grounded in opposition to the incumbent, then that person has a much more difficult hill to climb.

Romney supporters keep telling themselves that grassroots conservatives will just fall in line. They are making a grave political miscalculation in doing so.

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

…and the lies/deceit emanating from Paul regarding Iran would CERTAINLY qualify.

snappy101

What I don’t understand is why during the debates, moderators don’t ask and Rick Perry doesn’t offer up more detail about his executive experience, It’s what he has over all of the Representatives and former Representatives on the stage. He can turn to Bachmann, Santorum, Gingrich and Paul and say “It’s nice to talk about problem solving and big ideas but have you ever implemented any of your ideas or solved any problems or do you just talk about them? Consultants don’t do that and neither do Congressmen. As a Representative or Consultant, when was the last time you had to deal with a real emergency/problem involving large numbers of people? When was the last time you had to actually work with businesses to provide jobs for your constituents, provide services in an emergency, actually deal with an illegal immigration problem or a natural disaster?” He should then provide examples of big ticket things he’s done/big decisions he’s made. He should flat out tell voters on the campaign trail, that those debate moderators and media types never ask for executive experience examples that show the candidates have what it takes to do the job they are applying for and then remind people that Congress’ approval rating is lower than the President’s and the last time voters elected someone directly from the House of Representatives is when Garfield became President and there is a reason for that. And frankly, why should we elect a President, roll the dice, in these times, based on talk of what they would do and not what they have done? Talk is what a lawyer does. Talk is what a consultant does. Talk is what a Congressman does. We need a proven do-er in the White House.

red_oakster

I want Perry, but that is one dumb ad.

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

…and Perry has performed INCREASINGLY admirably!

circlegranch

I’m quite content to allow the Lord to judge the hearts of these candidates and believe in the edict of “judge not, so you will not be judged”. I don’t get caught up in waiting breathlessly for one Christian leader or another to play God and determine which candidate is the most holy. These folks can no better see into the hearts of our candidates than we can and we can look at how they live their lives and evaluate their words just as well.

As Christmas approaches, its time for a stark reminder that we are ultimately judged by God and what men say or think is irrelevant. If Christian voters in IA walk away from a candidate because of what a Christian ‘authority’ says against them, perhaps they need to reflect and examine their own values and return to The Word for advice and counsel. Would it not be far more useful if Mr. Vander Platts and/or others that claim leadership status in IA to say that any and all of the candidates in this race are loved and forgiven by God. If elected president all of them will be guided by faith and yet, each would fail to honor the glory of God simply because of their humanity. There is something very un-Christian-like about one man being able to possibly change history by either a nod of approval or a rejection. He cannot look into hearts. If Mr. Vander Platts wants to help change the course of American history and sit on his self-constructed judgment throne when it comes to who is “Christian enough” to be president, it would be interesting to hear his thoughts on our current president. Rather than espouse his superior knowledge of which candidate suits his ideas best, how about he use his influence to talk about the creeping of Sharia law into our courts and society? How about speaking up boldly in defense of Christmas and prayer in public places? How about proclaiming the Word of God into every far reach of this globe rather than narrow himself to simply passing judgment on one man or woman or another.

If Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, Michele Bachmann and Newt Gingrich haven’t talked enough yet about their faith journeys, their moments of being humbled before God enough yet for Vander Platts to see that all, including Paul, Romney, and Huntsman are people of deep and abiding faith, then enough will never be said. This is another example, similar to whom Sarah Palin is going to endorse, where people sometimes get a bit too caught up in their own importance, believing they hold the key to something far more intellectual than the rest of we idiots can fathom.

Whether its Ted Haggard, founder and betrayer of New Life Church in Colorado Springs (and significant contributor ot the defeat of the GOP in ’06 in my humble opinion) or Mr. Vander Platts in IA, we, as Christian Americans have the ability and duty to select a candidate that most lines up with our own values.

Select your dream candidate, Mr. Vander Platts, but please do so with humility and the knowledge that in your kingmaking endeavor you may be getting it wrong. That’s a big responsibility. Hopefully, you’ve secluded yourself in prayer for a very long time before making your announcement. Some will follow your beck and call and some will reject it knowing they are able to evalute the candidates on their own. It seems you’d better served the voting public if you’d ‘endorsed’ all of them and allowed God to be the judge.

APA Guy

…from Obama’s miserable record to hunting down communists in congress and other “winning” ideas.

We don’t need shrill and irrational right now. We need strong, principled AND electable. Bachmann becomes the issue if she is the candidate…and given that her record doesn’t extend beyond the House and includes some really dumb statements, I’m not willing to bank the future on her.

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

…so he focuses on direct answers to questions, during the debates.

Other times, he elaborates.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

no^text

acat

Romney is the posterboy for the 1%. (not bothering to find the picture of young Willard with a $100 in his mouth…)

Yes, it’s #OWS, and yes, it’s utterly wrong-headed, but .. as Ace of Spades reminds us all, while this election will likely decide jurisprudence and tax policy, while this election will decide how we devolve power from D.C. and wind down the Blue State model, this election will turn on jobs.

Willard has a harder time selling that. For that reason alone, I could be persuaded to dislike him as a candidate… but he provides so many others…. from hanging around with crooks (yes, I mean Kjellander) to not seeming to know how to fight, to not managing to improve the Massachusetts GOP standing *at all* in four years…

The guy will have a very hard time getting over the threshold and into 1600, and will likely cost us some Senate and House races along the way.

Mew

APA Guy

He is, in my estimation, the best overall candidate we have to choose from. If he stays focused and message-driven, he will pull it out. Here’s hoping he does!

red_oakster

and the shareholder-unfriendliness of the company management and the employees.

Criticize Romney for being the unprincipled, “flexible” politician he is, not for being a leader of a firm which has contributed a great deal to America’s market economy.

http://www.planettron.com NickDeringer

Amen!!

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

Desperate.

He’s really going all-in in Iowa.

znjs

I’ve seen his other posts saying that a Romney presidency would be bad for conservatives. Those posts I had no problem with. Don’t necessarily agree, but wasn’t disappointed with them. But this is going another step and is wrong. Unless you’re saying it’s ok for Erick to intentionally post false posts in order to bring down Romney – a ends justifies the means post. Which is certainly his right, but then it’s time to start taking his word with a large grain of salt.

As far as Bachmann, I’m saying she’s already like Colbert’s caricature. No need for actual book knowledge, she knows in her gut things like vaccines cause people to go retarded. Don’t bother trying to confuse the issue with your silly book knowledge.

http://www.planettron.com NickDeringer

It’s time for conservatives in the media to put their country above their advertising revenue. It’s time for the conservative bloggers to put America and Americanism ahead of web traffic. They need to stand up and endorse a candidate. If they leave it as “all our candidates can beat One-bama” then they guarantee that the Conservative vote will split among Perry, Santorum, and Bachmann thereby handing the nomination to Romney.

Kudos to the guys at RedState who took a stand for Perry. It’s time for all good patriots to come to the aide of their country.

red_oakster

If the social conservative leadership which narrowed the list to four now moves to support Perry, he would finish in the top three and might even have a chance of winning. They need to tell their fellow activists that a vote for Bachmann or Santorum is a wasted vote and that uniting behind Perry is the way forward.

acat

Remember, Romney’s guys also stood in line at the unemployment office…

Mew

renl57

Female Independent voters won’t vote for a serial adulterer. You can write off that vote right now.

As soon as copies of the documents from Freddie Mac about hiring Gingrich are leaked to The New York Times, the headline will read “Freddie Mac Hired Gingrich For Influence-Peddling”–and that will scare away yet more voters.

Gingrich’s flaws don’t matter to YOU. Because you’re dreaming of the Conservative Partisan taking Obama apart in debates. Well, that only works if there are no scandals hanging over the Republican’s head, otherwise it’s the Republican who will be on the defensive, even in the debates. Ask Herman Cain.

Once Gingrich’s scandals have been played before the votesr, those will be a major topic of discussion even at the subsequent debates with Obama. Half the questions will be about Gingrich’s own past.

quill67

Dole was a moderate who faired best in matchup against Clinton.
McCain was a moderate who was most popular with Democrats.
H.W. Bush moderated when he went against his no new taxes pledge. This made him popular with Democrats.

Where’s the fight in our Republican candidates?

Newt is only one brave enough to call Obama the “best food stamp president” Oh this creates gasps! How can Newt use such language? Whispers: don’t you realize the racial overtones of talking about foodstamps (never mind that something like 90% of recipients are white..)

Newt’s attack on courts is right. Consider this: NJ spends the second highest amount on education and yet a panel of judges determined that this was not enough and forced the state to spend more. Who elected them? Is there some requirement thNJ must spend more than any other state?

Perry has shown a willingness to attack but not the effectiveness–but I still hope.

pdawk

I don’t think there is more of a way to sell out on your conservative principals that to demagogue a guy that made his job running a business in the free market and operating it in a way that maximized its profits to its shareholders. There are plenty of reasons to dislike Romney, but his business background is not one of them. I think having a President who was a super successful and cutthroat businessman that understands what it takes not only to be successful but to be elite would do this country a world of good.

I know how badly EE and the contributors wants RIck Perry to be the nominee. I mean Rick even announced his campaign for President at the RedState gathering. It just isn’t going to happen. He doesn’t come close to having the gravitas or requisite intelligence that most people look for in a president. I would take Romney, Huntsman or Gingrich over Perry.

renl57

In 2000, Bush managed to eke out an Electoral College victory despite *losing* the popular vote. He wouldn’t even have won the Electoral College except for a few hundred votes in Florida.

Bush came into office with no mandate, and half the country upset over the razor-thin margin. Had a few hundred popular votes gone the other way, Bush would have lost.

If that’s the kind of election victory you think Perry can pull off, that’s not saying much for him.

As for 2004, Bush won only because the public had made up its mind to back him in the War on Terror.

gator_hoo

But he doesn’t have a vote in the primaries.

http://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com nathanalbright

…is that like the world’s shortest books: Great Bolivian Victories, or Great Bulgarian Victories, or the ever popular: Great Italian Victories?

http://www.planettron.com NickDeringer

Nevertheless BUSH WON!!

renl57

Because in debates, while Obama can delve into all the details of Federal Reserve policy and money supply issues and all other aspects of macroeconomics, Romney is the only one who knows more about that stuff than Obama does. There isn’t a single aspect of economic policy on which Obama can best Romney. Romney doesn’t have to resort to slogans or simple statements. If Obama wants to go into details, Romney can go into even more details.

If Obama wants to bring up the hundred people who got laid off by Romney during his time with Bain, Romney can respond with the *millions* who got laid off under Obama. Romney can explain that Bain’s job was turning around companies, and that’s always a painful process. Where’s the national turnaround that Obama promised?

My own dad, a retired blue-collar worker and former union shop steward, isn’t even bothered about the Bain thing. He’s impressed with Romney’s command of economic issues.

Romney has a good shot at winning female Independent voters, which Gingrich does not owing to his serial adultery.

I care most about getting Obama out of the White House. And Romney can do it. Everything else we can worry about after Romney is inaugurated.

APA Guy

…to people who have no jobs and can’t afford to buy groceries. If you don’t believe that, you are running in a pretty small circle because I speak to hundreds of these types of voters every single week in a state that voted Obama last time around.

And please don’t presume to speak for female Indie voters. Most of the time, Indie candidates as a whole tend to vote with the perceived front-runners, not based on someone’s personal life that has nothing to do with his policymaking abilities.

APA Guy

…to people who have no jobs and can’t afford to buy groceries. If you don’t believe that, you are running in a pretty small circle because I speak to hundreds of these types of voters every single week in a state that voted Obama last time around.

And please don’t presume to speak for female Indie voters. Most of the time, Indie candidates as a whole tend to vote with the perceived front-runners, not based on someone’s personal life that has nothing to do with his policymaking abilities.

lepelerin

I think I understands why Erick does not endorse. It’s hard to be excited about any of these candidates, although it does take some courage to run and get all your pass xrayed.

I will vote for any of these candidates except Obama.

At this point I prefer Newt. He is a social conservative and has a history of balancing budgets.

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

and Alex Jones various conspiracy theories, which he’s repeatedly agreed with.

acat

See the Ace of Spades post.

I do not see how, given the current candidates, Romney can be the “best one to make that case”.

Yes, Obama is weak, but .. so were Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, and we won only one of those….

Mew

mizzoumark

….he is one of the LAST people I want representing the GOP as a presidential candidate. I do not want a Bush redux (I’m speaking in terms of style, not policy here). I do not want the template for the media to be “the smooth, slick, ‘smart’ Obama against the hayseed backwater Texan who made jokes about getting bad grades’.

Common response: “WHO CARES! Rick Perry is NOT dumb, and Obama is not NEARLY as smart as the media ass-kissers say he is. What matters is substance and character. The media will hate the Republican no matter who they pick – we might as well go with Perry”.

Every word of that statement is true. But who cares…..because it doesn’t matter. STYLE DOES MATTER. I do not want to win another base election (if we win at all) where it’s strong on culture wars and red-state identity politics. I do not want another Bush candidate (style wise). And I say this as someone who happily voted for Bush twice, and also in the primary in 2000 against McCain.

Common response: “You’re just one of those guys Rush talks about who has caved into the left-wing media and is tired of defending a southerner, someone who talks about faith, abortion, and gay marriage!! You have a linguine spine!”

Not really. Well, ok, I admit I am tired of defending against candidates that play up their “red-state identity” politics heavily, but it’s not because of media brow-beating……it’s because it is NOT a winning proposition for Republicans or conservatives. Granted, you might be able to win an election here or there, but they are gonna be divisive battles that end with 51-51% majorities. A “win” like that does not deliver a mandate, and it likely isn’t gonna produce a wave in congressional elections either.

The fact of the matter is that style, persona, charisma matters……and it’s important not to just have that appeal to the base. Rick Perry, like Bush, plays the red-state identiy politics up as good as anyone, but Republicans and conservatives need to think bigger. I will virtually always agree that policy and substance is better and more important than style, but why not shoot for both?

Like it or not, it DOES matter when the leader of the GOP is being mocked on comedy central, late night comedy shows, and in other areas of pop culture.

Common response: “It does NOT matter! Those actors, comedians, and people that watch that stuff are all LIBS anyway! We shouldn’t give in to those losers!”

I’ll give this one “three pinocios”. While true we shouldn’t cater to the whims of our pop culture, should we really be giving them material every day at the same time? I think no.

Common response: “You’re a loser, Mark, and you’re missing the point. Pop culture will mock ANY GOP CANDIDATE NO MATTER WHAT THEY DO OR SAY!”

I disagree. While there’s no doubt that much of the media/entertainment complex in this country is hostile to Republicans/conservatives, I do NOT believe that all Republican candidates would be savaged equally – I do not, and think it’s silly to think otherwise. Instead of looking at the Bush/Rove model, why not look at the Reagan/Buckley model? Why not look for a candidate who is conservative as they come on substance and policy, has a good record to tout, who appeals to conservatives, but also independents and moderates, who is also media savvy, and who commands respect among those in the media?? The left-wing media may have despised Reagan and Buckley, but you better believe they respected them. They were not men that could be taken lightly and mocked. If you don’t believe Rick Perry would be mercilessly mocked and ridiculed throughout the campaign, you’re deluding yourself. And YES, IT DOES MATTER….especially when you are seeking votes from not politically “in-tune” voters, or those voters in the middle. Perry’s message will have a VERY hard time breaking through in that environment.

Common_Cents

What a pathetic weasel ad. It’s a race to the bottom of who can come up w/ the worst ad.

Neil is right, smacks of desperation.

clowngirl

Ron Paul is not a Republican. He’s a libertarian who uses the Republican party to get elected to Congress, draw a healthy salary, and hypocritically race to the trough, quadrupling the spending for his own district while screaming about how we need to cut spending, and accomplish nothing aside from developing his own following and phony – purist image.

But I agree with Jim – in a sense — in that I think it’s time we started dealing with Ron Paul. Treating him as irrelevant is allowing him to present himself just as he would like to appear. He can come off as principled, idealistic, and (apparently) baggage free. I’ve met any number of people (usually leftists but sometimes independents or even Republicans) who say ” I don’t agree with Ron Paul on everything – but he stands by his convictions. I respect that.”

He is probably the most pragmatic, hypocritical, even dishonest politician in the race. Yet, unlike any other non-Romney who has risen in the polls – he gets virtually no scrutiny.

No other candidate could poll as well as Ron Paul and be getting the pass that he is. I would hope he would never be given the nomination under any circumstances but his potential as a potential problem should be taken seriously.

If he were to win Iowa, it’s not hard to imagine scenarios where Democrats with nothing better to do crossover and vote for Ron Paul just to jack with our primary.

As to his Iowa numbers, I would assume that they are inflated by Democrats with no intention of caucusing getting polled and asked which Republican they would prefer. But it’s not that much of a stretch to think some of them might decide “Hey, wouldn’t it be fun to go and pretend to be Republicans!”

Libertarians are probably 1-2% of the population but if they almost all turn out that could impact a caucus which is likely to draw a much smaller percentage among Republicans.

The other problem is that most of the debates have focused on Domestic policy and Ron Paul has been able to talk about the need to cut spending and come off as a lot closer to a Republican than he really is – and so carry a certain amount of actual GOP support.

So, I do think think there is some threat of him winning Iowa which would be, IMO, a disaster.

consecrata

Those fired by romney will be interviewed if he becomes the nominee…perhaps. But you can be sure that gingrich’s ex-wives and mistresses will be interviewed over and over again, as well as his current wife/former mistress…his deeply dysfunctional, self-absorbed personality will be deeply examined…his non-conservative activities will also be examinied..his outright lies and manipulations will also be examined as well as the notes he wrote to himself about how he will save the world, about how great and monumental a figure he is, etc, ad nauseum…the man is deeply disturbed and would become more disturbed and dangerous if he were the president of the most powerful country in the world…beware of the mulitple-personalities of gingrich…

Dave_A

He wouldn’t keep insisting that it says things found nowhere in the document….

And wouldn’t keep ignoring Art 6.

Tavern Keeper

I think enough doubts have been raised about Gingrich bona fides to cause flight, if not from the first round in Iowa then in rounds following. The way the caucus system works I think works in favor of Perry. Ron Paul supports will be the most unwilling to yield, and I think the prospect of either Paul or Romney scares the Bachman/Gingrich/Santorum crowd enough that their votes will flow to the logical candidate – Perry.

And if Perry wins in Iowa, I think SC is a lock. That means huge momentum going into Florida.

In The Hook

Pawlenty was competent, conservative and could definitely be appealing to moderates. Not easy to be a conservative governor of Minnesota and he was pretty battle-tested as well on the state level.

Too bad he was an atrocious campaigner at the national level.

rcastonjr

was totally uncalled for. Jim has been very polite and respectful and personally attack him? Leave the personal attacks at home. There is no place here for them.

rcastonjr

what exactly?

acat

from the short memory of the electorate and long memory of the commentariat. (bloggeratti?)

In short, because the dirt that came out on both is still easily findable (google or, if you’re Neil, bing…) can dig up articles and blog posts on either from the 2007 time frame … so bloggers hesitate to “write the same thing again”, but voters have forgotten the details….

Mew

p.s. this is why cat keeps whispering Kjellander…

rcastonjr

stating the obvious which escapes many here. Romney made his living “fixing” companies in trouble and many times that meant cutting the fat and getting back to the companies core business. This resulted in less employees of course but the surviving entity was leaner and meaner and could actually compete in the marketplace. Can any of you think of a corporation that is in dire need of restructuring? How about the United States Government. I’m not actually a Romney supporter but the BS that flies around here needs to be challenged sometimes. Romney’s job was to SAVE the corporation, not kill it. Geez.

Marcus_Traianus

Did you know that Hank Greenberg from AIG or JP Morgan Chase are top Perry donors (past and present)? Think that won’t come up?

Gingrich and his work for Fannie Freddie?

Rick Santorum and contributions from Federated Investors?

Michele Bachmann and TCF Financial. Or in another direction Fagen- who is involved in renewable energy like ethanol, wind, etc.

I don’t buy it. Romney was very ggod at what he did in the private sector. Now all of a sudden in Obama’s New World everyone allegedly accepts the meme that success in the financial world equal some type of corruption.

Truth is it’s the converse that we are missing in our society and economy. People who have experience creating jobs, wealth and livelihood for others. That is what this country was built on and vs. Obama Romney or our side in general have the better part of that argument.

We simply need to stick with our vision and stop adopting meme’s put out that solely for divisive consumption.

Ace’s piece is another back door endorsement in search of an argument. He has it backwards.

thirstyboots

Is he going to be endorsed by OWS soon?

Common_Cents

in that pile on debate setup and all the negative ads by perry, paul, romney. Bachmann and Paul piled on in the debate along w/ moderators trying. romney and perry were pansies for not taking on Gingrich face to face like real men. They hide behind their pacs, interviews, commercials etc…and we expect them to take it to obama?

thirstyboots

Redirecting capital. The essential economic function of connecting investment resources with opportunities.

Those who wonder if such a thing helps the economy – the maligned Bain raids – are economic illiterate buying the socialist crap.

And yeah, lots of people end up without jobs. That’s the way it should be.

clowngirl

How many people paid attention to Ron Paul prior to 2008?

Common_Cents

That is ‘pure’ baloney! Our last candidate was ‘pure’, John McCain. Didn’t he have a clean record that obama couldn’t attack? Enough said.

Obama and the media machine will attack anyone, whether they have the past old baggage or if they have to “dan rather” someone. You mean the left wing media won’t make up stuff? They’ll do it 24/7, repeat it so often, the headline readers will believe it.

Our success is nominating someone who can Alinsky the media and the left to fight back and marginalize them.

acat

Romney has a huge bullseye on his back.

Perry has a much better narrative – and can make the “growing up in the working class” case better than Obama. (I salivate thinking of Perry asking Obama about his private school days in Hawaii…)

Bachmann has a somewhat better narrative and tax law expertise. Too bad she’s gone off the rails.

Newt has almost as hard a narrative to sell as Romney. Almost.

You’re right – the media will portray all of our guys as anti-jobs .. and that is what the election turns on. The problem I see is .. for Romney, it’s really simple – both because of BAIN and because of his silver spoon – to make the mud stick. Worse, Wafflin’ Willard doesn’t seem to know how to fight back effectively.

Mew

retire05

creating an entire website to smearing Governor Perry.

Oh, wait, he already did. And now he has a new website that slams Newt Gingrich.

So………………….

is it now not fair game to slam Mitt on his Wall Street connections when Mitt is running on his business acumen and NOT his time as a governor of a major state?

Here’s a plan: why don’t we compare how much Mitt’s wealth increased while he was governor of Massachusetts and how much Newt’s wealth increased while he was speaker compared to how much Perry’s wealth has increased in the same amount of years?

acat

if looked at purely from an economic standpoint, an appealing function. If looked at through a wider lens, not so much.

Do bear in mind that while the investors in “corporate raider” outfits gain, it’s in part because they can shift the cost for those who end up unemployed onto the backs of the taxpayer.

Mew

tailfins1959

So what? This ad doesn’t impress me either way. It’s not bothersome, but it doesn’t say much either. It has no effect on me either way.

acat

McCain, who spent most of the 2000 campaign taking shots at the religious right, who was “the guy” behind the “gang of 14″, who was for another round of amnesty .. was pure?

Mew

hahaiwin

I understand not liking Romney for some policy positions he has had in the past, but to disqualify him because he was an investor that had to lay off people? Isn’t that capitalism? If when he were a Governor and laid off government workers, would we also disqualify him? Romney became wealthy because he created profitable companies that in turn created FAR more jobs than a few bad investments that didn’t pan out.

Also, the type of finance Romney was involved in is not what has people angry. People are mad at large banks and their involvement with the financial meltdown and real estate collapse. What made them even madder was when the taxpayer bailed them out. If Romney were involved in subprime mortgages or CDS type investments, or at Lehman Brothers, Goldman Sachs, Countrywide, Citi, Bank of America, etc. or if his firm took TARP money, then yes, that would be an albatross.

I’m amazed and saddened how quickly people will abandon core principles and attack other candidates using Leftist talking points if it helps out their primary candidate.

trueredfromtexas

Perry, like most of the top candiates, has serious flaws.Perry, the Texas Governor, who should set an example and be a leader? is nothing but a lowly follower? following and doing what the rest of the government officials can do? rake taxpayers over the coals. Is this the kind of leadership people want in the White House? The kind that will rake taxpayers over the coals. Perry and elected officials have given them selves a loophole in Texas… and like others… he’s taking advantage of it. If this were the private sector and Texas taxpayers were not funding this huge pension for Perry while receiving his $150,000.00 a year salary (totalling now more than $242,000.00 a year), I would not have a problem with it. Remember Perrycare where he wrote a letter praising Hillery Clinton for her work on HilleryCare. Some may not be aware of this and other flaws at the moment… but believe me… if Perry is the nominee… these flaws will be made public by the Dems… and then we will be stuck with Obama yet again.
If the liberal media would just give Santorum the time of day… perhaps he would be the conservative candidadte of choice. If Santorum make it to the Texas primary, he will have my vote.

tailfins1959

I wouldn’t be surprised if some Romney people were pushing Paul. Paul is an excellent “bowling pin” candidate: Set him up and knock him down.

Common_Cents

The SAS, the British special forces, have a motto: ?Who dares wins.? Unlike Mitt, Newt dares ? and he may yet win. As the old Dem bumper stickers used to say, ?Newt Happens.? -mark steyn

geotan

Why are you afraid of debating me on the merits? I find Erick’s article disingenuous because his main criticism of Romney is that he is unprincipled. And yet, the first point Erickson makes is that Romney is evil capitalist who gleefully laid off workers while enjoying millions of dollars. Right out of the Democratic talking points play book. Oh he says, “we on the right will say this is okay” with apparent acceptance of such practices. But we’re not buying your interpretation Erick. Bain Capital should be celebrated as a Conservative example of job creation. My friends on the mushy middle Right, you need to listen more to Krauthammer and less to Erickson. How are we going to win with friends like this as Paul Ryan would say? You people need to really tone down the negative attacks on Romney because you are effectively creating a path for Obama to retake the White House and to finalize the American decline which will certainly come if Obama is re-elected. Then America will be much worse than Greece could ever be because of the scale and scope of the US Economy.

Common_Cents

We need a fighter that will marginalize the media and destroy obama in debates and challenge obama to several debates to make him look foolish and chicken if he doesnt show.

Why? because debates (hopefully some lincoln douglas) are the only media that our candidate won’t be edited to look as dumb as possible. Millions will be watching. We cannont afford not to cream Obama at every single debate. We need those huge victories to offset the billion dollar media smear campaign.

tailfins1959

He said anybody but Paul can beat Obama. Does considering Romney one of three plausible candidates make me a Rombot?

acat

It’s “He works at Mister Cacciatore’s down on Sullivan Street across from the medical center”.

While I’m not happy with the attacks on capitalism that we’re seeing, I’m taking the #OWS views into account as they will be out there at election time.

Mew

exitsfunnel

Let me preface this by saying that I am not a Romney guy; in fact I can’t particularly stand him. I really don’t have a dog in this fight. I am with Ron Paul (though I have no delusions that he will be the nominee and I would have cast a pragmatic vote for Pawlenty / Daniels / Christie).

But this whole Red State group hypnosis experiment where almost the whole site has adopted, against all reason, the talking point that Romney is the weakest general election candidate when clearly he’s the strongest just cracks me up. There’s a reason that he polls consistently between 7 and 15 points better than all of the other candidates against Obama. You can all stick your head in the sand until the cows come home and it’s not going to make either Newt Gingrich or Rick Perry or Michelle Bachman any less disastrous as national candidates.

-exits

tailfins1959

This recession has made people less conservative in some ways. There’s less stigma connected to food stamps, having a bout of poverty reveals that cops treat the poor differently (read worse), more consideration for the homeless, Poverty doesn’t generally effect ones view of foreign policy, war and most social issues.

Rush Limbaugh’s discussion of the liberal versus his view of the homeless is excellent: The liberal offers the homeless a free shopping cart and sends them on their homeless way. Limbaugh says “You can do better than that. I want you to learn how to access opportunity”. Notice Limbaugh’s doesn’t judge the person’s past.

Common_Cents

This is hardly a general commentary horse race blog. This is a grass roots conservative activist blog.

About Redstate:
“Today, RedState is the most widely read right of center blog on Capitol Hill, is the most often cited right of center blog in the media, and is widely considered one of the most influential voices of the grassroots on the right.

RedState was the first national political site to tout and endorse Marco Rubio for his Senate bid in Florida. We put Doug Hoffman on the national conservative radar in New York. Across the country we find grassroots candidates and work hard to get them elected.

At RedState, we are conservatives in primaries and Republican in general elections and we aim to win.”

I am surprised Erick has not endorsed Perry by now this ‘late’ in the primary for a grass roots blog. He must be waiting to see if Perry can actually pull off a top 3 finish in IA. I think it’s time Erick stepped up and lead the grass roots early effort RS is known for, and not take a role of play by play color commentator. This is the essence of RS, getting behind the next Rubio early etc….

texabama

And people do have short memories and attention spans. The electorate has forgotten that Perry has had to deal with a slew of natural disasters, including the infamous Hurricane Katrina. A huge amount of those leaving New Orleans came to Texas and Texas took on the task of feeding, housing and educating thousands.

I was living in central Texas at the time and teaching. We had several students from New Orleans and their educational challenges were pretty daunting.

acat

He was frequently touted – after McCain clinched – as “the one we should have gone with” in 2008. (even Erick said so .. for a while..)

If we were to poll just political junkies who infest (erm, frequent) Red State and Hot Air and Ace of Spades and Powerline and Daily Caller etc. etc. (and, what the heck, the remnant at Little Green Footballs…) we’d likely get a very different set of numbers, eh?

Joe Sixpack in Iowa has heard of Romney since some time after 2004… and wasn’t particularly impressed with McCain’s performance….

Mew

thirstyboots

What the heck does that even mean? Wider lens?

And blaming them for the unemployment benefits, too? I mean, they’d gain the same with or without unemployment benefits. In fact, they’d gain even more because they tend to pay the taxes that support unemployment benefits.

lizzie

I just finished listening to Politico’s Mike Allen discussing the books that Rick Perry has been reading on his bus tour of Iowa, in detail about “Currency Wars”

Jon Stewart LIKES Rick Perry since Perry’s visit on Nov 10, 2011.
Jon Stewart stopped that WaPo n-rock story cold in Oct, 2011.
When Jon Stewart satirized the Romney hand on Perry’s shoulder debate moment, Perry was Clint Eastwood as tough cowboy, and Romney was secret human hidden in a robot’s skull.

Perry even charmed Christiane Amanpour in an online short interview when he answered her question “favorite music” with Beethoven.

No need to worry about the liberal media. Bush43 was proud he did NOT read books.
Rick Perry mostly DOES read books, so far, has not admitted he watches television although I am sure he is a secret NCIS fan.

Bush43 was faking being dumb (he was mostly NOT-curious) and pretending to be a Texan.

Rick Perry is the Gary Cooper of governors. The real deal. who is intensely curious and likes to read books. My, my.

exitsfunnel

Maybe you could make that argument for Perry, but Gingrich? C’mon now. Who doesn’t know who Newt Gingrich is? And to be clear, the point isn’t that Romney is a particularly strong candidate, because he’s not. Only that he’s clearly better (in terms of electability) than the alternatives, such that they are.

-exits

thosjefferson

So now Erick thinks Romney will lose because capitalism is indefensible? Is he channeling Gingrich or Obama?

And instead we should nominate a candidate who, as a professional politician, is the antithesis of a capitalist?

Erick opposes the only two business people left in the race, Romney and Huntsman. According to Erick, the only electable “conservatives” are career politicians who say the right things (although not in debates) and govern only Republican states. Let’s hope he’s wrong.

goldwaterguy

Dear renl57… what on earth are you talking about? Women twice put Bill Clinton in office and this is the “dude” who [to the very great pleasure of a few men] normalized the objectification of women. Further whining est verboten. To win the Rep nominee MUST crush Obama IN DEBATE. No woman can win [sadly IMO]. See Hilary and Michelle. If the economy improves [likely], but enough [unknown] Obama will win. In the end, it will come down to money [1 billion arrayed against my goals - ouch], the Media [not a pretty picture] and TALKING in presidential debates. Nothing more and nothing less. Prepare now for the coming fury.

tailfins1959

NT

goodgovernance

is why the candidates are busy beating up Newt Gingrich leaving Romney alone. The Establishment Republicans are already beating up Newt as it is. But I fear all this infighting amongst the conservative candidates will leave the path free and clear for Romney, a candidate very few people love and who is decidedly not a true conservative.

Those who say Romney is the strongest candidate do so without anything substantial to back that up. Romney isn’t loved by the base, so it’s not like he will have an energized foundation in the general should he be the nominee, aside from anti-Obama sentiment. McCain wasn’t loved by the base, either, but at least he had the pro-military side of the GOP in his camp, and was well-respected by independents.

Romney is NOT respected by independents, and I don’t see how he ever will be. No one likes a phoney! And Obama, the Dems, and the MSM are going to punch him and punch him and punch him on this point.

If Romney was a stronger, more charismatic individual he could fight back effectively. But the Baird interview shows he’s way too brittle on this topic — it’s so clear he just doesn’t want to think about it and he hopes it will just go away, or maybe he can go back into Mittness Protection for a while or something.

paladin1

that so many people are seeing through Romney as a big government, personal mandate, re-writer of his own personal history, so that instead of flocking to him they are turning to other candidates. Tell me, with all the rise and fall of the others in the race, has Romney ever gotten more than his ceiling of 25-27% support? I thought not.

So, maybe it is you who have an issue with relevance as a political commentator and not EE.

jakeofalltrades

Romney is not a paragon of capitalism; he represents the unfortunate side effects of capitalism rather than its primary benefits.

Also, what part of capitalism involves the entire population being forced at gunpoint to buy specific services?

rcastonjr

out of the fellows post is that the “Republican Establishment” has done a great job skewering every candidate that is “not Romney”. One would have to be blind not to see that Romney IS their pick. All you have to do is watch McConnell in action right now to see the establishment has no desire to see a conservative elected President. Republicans were elected tin 2010 o change the direction of things and they have done nothing but cave. I’m sick of it. Personally, I want to see the establishment get their butts kicked then sent home. The old guard Republicans are no different than the darned demoncrats we loath. Nothing changed after the elections in 2010 and that really sucks for most of us who were hoping that conservatism was on the rise. Just look at the Republican clowns in DC today. They are every bit as bad as Reid and Pelosi. What difference has occurred since 2010? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. They do not want a true conservative elected to the Presidency or anywhere else. That is why Romney is their man. Pure and simple.

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

People show up and flack for a racist hypocrite troofer have earned more scorn than can be heaped upon them.

tricianc

Guess who advocated and fought to implement Mandates, National Health
Records and Comparative Effectiveness Rearch in the Stimulus and Obamacare?

Newt Gingrich!

Here?s his own Op-ed in 2008 written with a Democrat that worked with him to get these. Newt was making millions off it too, all the while, we were fighting against them.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/28/next-president-must-put-health-in-health-care/?page=all

The last 4 paragraphs of this article are particularly enlightening and can be corraborated: http://nyti.ms/t29THI

Read the whole article but here?s the last 4 paragraphs:

?When The Wall Street Journal editorial board, in January 2009, criticized
the bill for creating a Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research, Newt?s Center was there to defend it. The Journal
argued that eventually ?the comparative effectiveness outfit will start to
ration care to control costs.? In a statement for the center, Mr. Merritt
had said that while those fears were understandable, ?that argument is not
currently justifiable in the specific language of the bill.?

The following August, however, the coordinating council came in for added
scrutiny as conservative health care opponents rallied against its creation
in angry town-hall-style meetings and online, playing into fears of ?death
panels.?

Around the same time, Mr. Gingrich reversed his call for a ?comparative
effectiveness institute.?

?In our country, the road to dehumanizing, bureaucratic health care rationing,? Mr. Gingrich wrote in Human Events, a conservative publication,
that August, ?begins with something called comparative effectiveness
research.?

So Newt is LYING on his Flip Flop. You don?t work for years for something, making millions off it at our expense, especially when we fought it so hard, enduring the ridule and sacrifices we made, and then when there?s outrage, and you?re going to run for President, change. NO NEWT, NO WAY!

tailfins1959

Mr Romney works on Wall St.
Mr Gingrich works on K Street.
Mr Perry works on Main Street.
Sergeant O’Leary works on Sullivan Street.

So what?

neukm

Who knew?

acat

And, you’ll note, nobody expected Newt’s rise …

Mew

Ausonius

How and when were Consrvatives ever in charge of – or had a major influence over – the Republican Party? They lost what little influence they had when Reagan left in 1988, and George Bush – to be sure a logical choice, but not a Conservative (Remember “voodoo economics” ?) immediately ran things into the ground by “compromising” with Democrats.

His son, also not a Conservative, did Conservatism no honor by placing the word “compassionate” in front of it and thereby implying that Conservatism is not compassionate by definition.

And remember those nominees in ’96 and ’08? How were they Conservatives? I don’t see establishment Republicans as anything other than slow-motion Democrats who promise to ruin the country with increased spending and to take away liberty by allowing the government to become a Leviathan with an unelcted bureaucracy micromanaging our lives to ever greater degrees,

See for example the “Federal Offenses” series in the Wall Street Journal: yesterday’s issue had an update saying that the number of Federal regulations is now 29 feet long!

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204903804577082770135339442.html?KEYWORDS=federal+crimes

blarman

We are all very aware of your anti-Romney position. But since you refuse to actually support anyone, why not instead focus on what each candidate needs to do instead of just dismissing them out of hand. Here’s my take:

Newt Gingrich – Newt’s biggest strength is his mouth. He is very intelligent and debates very well. Newt’s biggest weaknesses: his infidelity and his real record. He didn’t balance the budget – despite his claims – and many in the conservative leadership view him as an egotistical blowhard. That being said, he has obviously resonated with enough people to become a major challenger. The big question is does he have the money and stamina to continue?

Mitt Romney – Mitt’s biggest strength is his campaign. It is well-funded and better run than any other candidate’s. The perception people have is that Mitt is a flip-flopper, however, and he has done little to combat that image. He is a strong family man (contrast to Gingrich). Romney has the name-recognition to win in every state, and the credentials and background to challenge in even very liberal states like Massachusetts, so labeling him as a “can’t win” candidate is ignoring the fact that he actually puts more states into play than any other candidate. Instead of the races being cut and dried, each one would be a close fight.

Michelle Bachman – Bachman’s biggest strength is her conservative bona fides. Her family is a real trophy and demonstrates her commitment to conservative ideals. Bachman’s problems are a lack of experience and funding. She could make a great VP candidate, however.

Rick Perry – What Newt Gingrich is now, Rick Perry was a few months ago. Perry’s skeletons have been aired, however, and his campaign has been less-than-flawless, causing him to fall in the polls. While Perry is neither the most conservative nor most liberal, his biggest problem is being unable to differentiate himself from the crowd. Perry’s problem is his campaign, and until that changes, he’s going to continue to be marginalized.

Ron Paul – Ron Paul’s greatest strength is his consistent record and message. His main problem is in foreign policy and it really drags him down. The other thing that hurts him is his age.

Jon Huntsman – Huntsman’s greatest strength is only now beginning to show itself – he has the background, the bona fides, and the foreign policy experience. His problem is “too little, too late” and being the governor of a state most people don’t care about.

acat

Mr. Perry works on Main Street.
Mr. Gingrich works on K Street.
Mr. Romney works on Wall Street…. and laid off the staff at Mr. Caccitore’s.

Sergeant O’Leary’s out of a part-time job.

Mew

http://www.changeforrickperry.org louisianapatriette

What a shame. Santorum is doing very poorly in Iowa and doesn’t stand a chance of beating Romney/Gingrich, let alone Obama. Vander Plaats just wasted his endorsement. The Family Leader itself will remain neutral. I don’t understand this ignorant Christians. The AFA leader, Don Wildmon, endorsed Gingrich this morning–Wildmon, who rails against the high divorce rate and lack of family values in every one of his newsletters, endorses, Gingrich, a serial adulterer. And then Vander Plaats endorses Santorum, whose campaign is basically on its last leg. I do NOT understand it AT ALL. Even Bachmann stands a better chance than Santorum.

But then again, I’d rather Vander Plaats endorse Santorum than Gingrich. At least he’s endorsed a man of character and family values. Wildmon just betrayed everything he stands for.

Sorry for that little rant, my mom and I are completely disillusioned with Christian organizations this morning. Again, a big thanks to RedState, Mike Flynn, and AceofSpades for standing up for Perry yesterday.

bzip

Rick Santorum gets endorsement from Bob Vander Plaats and Chuck Hurley
http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/12/20/rick-santorum-gets-endorsement-from-bob-vander-plaats-and-chuck-hurley/

“wo Iowa conservative Christian leaders this morning endorsed Rick Santorum for president.

After agonizing for about four weeks over what to do, the Family Leader, an Iowa-based Christian conservative organization, decided to stay neutral.

But Family Leader CEO Bob Vander Plaats and fellow activist Chuck Hurley told a pack of reporters in Urbandale this morning made personal endorsements: for Santorum”….

acat

Those who benefit from corporate raiding pay only a tiny fraction of the unemployment benefits for those displaced.

It’s just another example of an artificiality created by our tax code.

It’s not illegal, but .. again, as streiff brought up .. it’s of dubious morality.

Mew

tailfins1959

L’Oro Di Napoli at 206 Sullivan Street in SOHO is still in business, it’s the Medical Center that was closed down.

heraklios

No way the Republican Party is conservative today. Conservatives, who make up 35-40% of the people have no voice in this country.

clowngirl

…”Otherwise, the newsletters, and Paul?s continued failure to name their author, would be mentioned in every story about him, and he would be relegated to the fringe where he belongs. But Paul has escaped the sort of media scrutiny that would bury other political figures.”

This is what is becoming so frustrating. The liberal media, almost certainly regarding Ron Paul as a useful idiot, is propping up his candidacy by taking no interesting in his ample and utterly disgusting baggage.

According to this article points out, Ron Paul made millions of dollars by peddling racist, anti semitic garbage, filled with insane conspiracy theories and which – from the sound of things came very close to advocating violence.

I don’t buy, for a second, that he had no idea as to the content of his own newsletter – which was published in his name for decades. It doesn’t sound these were really isolated incidences.

There was an article on hot air the other day that said he changed his story – defending some of the racist remarks and speaking as though he wrote them and then later saying he didn’t (Will try and find a link to that)

Can you even imagine if Rick Perry had published such a thing? In his own name? Look at the comparison between the amount press given to the bogus N*****Rock controversy compared to the almost non-existent coverage of these genuinely racist and recurring articles.

clowngirl

1. It’s not nice to call people idiots.

2. It’s a needless distraction. You notice that Jim now is only responding to your treatment of him and not dealing with any of the very valid points you raised about Ron Paul.

acat

Santorum’s going nowhere. Fast.

Mew

1spark

Are you trying to imply that when Bill Clinton ran for presidency (twice), the majority of Americans had sure-fire knowledge of his extra marital affairs and STILL voted for him?

Because as I saw it… Slick Willie’s affair came into light near the end of his second term… we the people had no idea of what kind of man he really was behind the oval office.

http://www.changeforrickperry.org louisianapatriette

Vander Plaats couldn’t even get the rest of his organization to fall in line behind him.

http://www.changeforrickperry.org louisianapatriette

(and I’m beginning to think he might just WIN Iowa) I believe he’d still win South Carolina. He has a lot going for him there, including his military service and his good ol’ Southern charm. (I say that as a proud Southerner who appreciates strong gentlemanly men!)

clowngirl

hotair.com/archives/2011/12/15/can-ron-paul-win/

It’s actually quoting Matt Welch who stated that Ron Paul “defended” and “took full ownership” of the statements at first.

conservativemusician

They should have endorsed for Perry if they really want their pro-Christian conservative views to really be heard in DC. Santorum is a very honorable guy, but no matter what he says or does, he is not gaining any traction anywhere. Yes, Perry is behind, but he is moving up in the polls now…and he is very pro-life. Hope they reconsider before 1/3/12 and help with the current momentum to push Perry over the top in IA.

elayman

Or don’t deny him the right not to pander, just don’t draw outside the conservative lines or I’m voting based on your jokes, tweets and campaign manager ?

I agree It’s actually worse when an editorialist does not admit to endorsing a candidate but writes with a strong bias.

Muddying the issue with false equivalencies or propped up opposition to established evidence and fact runs directly counter to the purpose behind having a free press in the first place.

red_oakster

Businesses really need to be run for the benefit of shareholders. Corporate raiding tends to happen where they aren’t. But the whole point at the end of Other People’s Money was that the old management and the employees and the locality which had raised taxes and the cost of doing business had all contributed to a situation where only an outside raid would restore the right corporate goal, namely, the betterment of the owners (shareholders) of the company. To the extent that managers and employees work to maximize shareholder value, they deserve and ought to be compensated. To the extent they don’t, there should be hell to pay.

The difference between Warren Buffett and Bain is that Buffett focuses on companies where managers already are good allocators of capital but the market doesn’t recognize that fact for the moment, while Bain focuses on improving the allocation of capital in firms where management has done less than a stellar job, or where it lacks the skills to take things to the next level. But it’s all about the successful allocation of capital.
And attacking Romney for this is wrong. Attacking Romney for this when he presents such a target-rich opportunity seems silly.

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

endorsing Cynthia McKinney.

Paul, who unsuccessfully sought the [2008] Republican presidential nomination, will tell supporters he is not endorsing GOP nominee John McCain or Democratic nominee Barack Obama, and will instead give his seal of approval to four candidates: Green Party nominee Cynthia McKinney, Libertarian Party nominee Bob Barr, independent candidate Ralph Nader, and Constitution Party candidate Chuck Baldwin, according to a senior Paul aide.

trickamsterdam

thing is that I’m starting to think that the Base has always secretly wanted him….possibly subconsciously.

Basically, they think like you (I’m broadly generalizing) that he’s the most electable. But being big, bad movement conservatives they can’t admit that.

Perry and Cain self-destructed, but what did Bachmann or Newt do? And now people in Iowa are going to go w/ Paul? Really? I wonder how many of the people that caucus for him would do it if they thought he had a chance to actually win the nomination? Maybe half?

Conservatives will say the “establishment” forced Romney on them, but actually they’ve always wanted him.. But they won’t admit that…they won’t admit it because now they can spend four years whining about him if he wins, and how they really, really wanted Bachmann or Paul or Santorum..

And if he loses they can say “moderates can’t win”. But when they have actual conservatives in first place (e.g. Bachmann, Newt), they find reasons to abandon them..

This dislike of Romney is just Base-Kabuki theater, I’m really starting to believe.

onemovoter

All of the topics you just posted have been gone through with a fine tooth comb here at Redstate. You obviously haven’t been paying attention or are brand new here. However being that you claim to be from Texas, I’d have to go with the cluelessness end of things.

Having gone through Gov. Perry’s record with a fine tooth comb, I have found that Perry has consistently worked to reduce spending and improve the functions of government that are in place. Even when he was still a democrat, he was part of a group of legislators that were known as anti-spending bulldogs.

His pension is something he has been paying into for nearly 35 years. He could have started taking his pension 5 years ago but didn’t. He also continues to pay into the pension system that they take out of his salary. I have worked in county government with these pension systems and they are well funded and managed. They also force you to start taking the pension once you reach a certain number of working years and age.

Your mention of the Hillarycare letter has already been debunked here. The letter came out way before any proposal came to light. The letter also says to keep in mind local farmers and ranchers when working on reforms for healthcare. Once Hillarycare came out, Perry turned on the proposal saying it was terrible.

Much of the other things in his history has already been put out there for the past 10 years. I only have a few qualms here and there about how he did something, but overall Perry has a stellar record. I honestly don’t think Santorum will get to Texas. He just hasn’t budged at all in the polls from his 3%.

texashistorian

Is partially taxpayer funded- it is a matching retirement plan. What Perry accessed is what other public employees in Texas (including myself) can do once you reach “retirement” age but still continue to work. It really isn’t that big of a taxpayer rake, unless you would say that teachers, firefighters, professors, DPS, etc, are also raking the raking the taxpayer. The taxpayers voted in the legislature, who set up the system, and no one has really wanted to change it. Now, when Perry, because of his profile, does what thousands of other public employees have done, it is suddenly a major issue?

acat

the reason for attacking Romney on this – as Ace of Spades made *very* clear, is because this election will turn on the issue of jobs.

The next President may get to pick as many as 5 supreme court justices, and may get to set the direction on the de-evolution of D.C. (the dismantling of the Blue State model) but .. what’s moving the electorate is .. Jobs.

Romney, for all his other faults (and .. I really don’t think you can honestly say that I’ve been at all quiet about his faults…) makes the *weakest* anti-Obama candidate on this front. Even Ron Paul is better, if only because moving to private currencies would increase employment at Currency Exchanges tenfold.

Mew

red_oakster

They could have delivered Iowa to Perry. Now they will fade into insignificance.

znjs

She really wanted that endorsement, and I’m sure in her mind she deserved it (she seems like she feels very entitled to certain things). With it maybe she takes enough support away from Santorum and Perry to come in a surprise 4th in Iowa. Now that hope is probably gone.

acat

the free-market system, that’s been under assault pretty much since capitalism arose. It’s certainly been one of the biggest points of criticism by everyone who wants to “manage” it .. from the communists all the way over to some subsets of the religious right. (google around for Father Pfleger and what he wants to do to firearm manufacturers.. or, of course, if you’re Neil, use bing…)

I see it as rather pointless to argue the amorality (for, indeed, a market has no morals) of the markets, and rather to argue about what abridgements to free markets we, as a society, should have. Welfare and unemployment insurance are but two examples, eh?

Mew

acat

that I’d included a rather left-leaning religious example.

There are, however, other voices on the right calling for limits on free markets…consider anyone on the right who has supported a NIMBY attitude on nuclear power or who has pushed through a waiver that supports a particular industry…

Mew

acat

after the primary anyway.. all this does is move them offstage faster.

Mew

texashistorian

neukm

.

texashistorian

Perry has as much of it as any of our candidates- more than some, even. More than Obama certainly. Why repeat that same old tired liberal media lines? I think it’s fine if you don’t prefer the man as our candidate- I don’t care for Mitt Romney, but let’s make it about the issues. If you’ve lived in Texas for the past ten years and seen Perry deal with natural disasters first hand, the gravitas comment would not have passed your keyboard. Requisite intelligence? What is the requisite intelligence for the job, and how are you measuring it?

red_oakster

If Gingrich and Romney (Huntsman?) are the only other folks who realistically could win the race within the current field, and Perry would be with them every day of the week were he to win, this strikes me as the definition of stupid.

gwbramhall

Geotan, you are right on. Free enterprise, if it is to work, must
allow for these dispuptions. The companies that were worked
on by Bain Capital were going down the toilet. Romney should
be celebrated for the jobs he saved rather than the ones that
might have been peeled away so the enteerprise could live on
and eventually grow. It would be interesting to know how the
employment numbers of the companies Bain worked with compare
now to their employment levels prior to Bain’s efforts. There is
such a thing as educating the electorate and not just rolling over
and playing dead because an ill informed criticizm is levelled at
you. This is how we got into this fix, by McCain not taking it to
Obama in the first place. Let us not make that mistake again!

acat

Worse, they denied themselves the ability to leverage “their crucial endorsement” to get some additional favors .. if Perry wins he doesn’t owe them jack or squat.

To me, this actually works better for Perry if he captures the nomination…. one less albatross that the Dems can hang on him.

Mew

jrfromdallas

and fast. Between Ron Paul leading to the fact that the Des Moines Register endorsed Romney (who has spent the least amount of time there and the fact that they based their endorsment on his sticking to his guns on Romneycare is just embarrassing. I would like Iowa to lose their place as the first in the nation Caucus. How many electoral votes do they have? Seven? Give me a break. The state went for Obama last election. ENOUGH WiTH IOWA!!!! Santorum’s whole candidacy is based on being the moral police and calling gays disgusting people. This was a bad endorsement and just punctuates how pathetic Iowa has been this year…

retire05

You said:

“You people need to really tone down the negative attacks on Romney because you are effectively creating a path for Obama to retake the White House………….”

For that to be applicable, one has to first assume that Romney, unlike anyone else, can actually defeat Obama. That is folly, for it is Romney who will have little counterpoint to a debate with Obama. From Romney’s appointment of his climated guru that now works for the Obama administration, to the very people who advised Romney on Romneycare being part of the discussion with Democrats when Obamacare was being designed to Romney’s record of governing from center-left, like nominating more Democrats to the Massachusetts bench than Republicans, including two gay lawyers who supported same-sex marriage. The problem is that you refuse to acknowledge Romney’s warts while apparently quite aware of the warts of other candidates.

Romney, in the recent past, has provided the Obama campaign with enough material to run ads against Romney 24/7. I understand you think Romney had a stellar tenure as governor, but that is not so. There is a reason that Romney cannot seem to get his poll numbers out of the low/mid 20′s. He was rejected last time by conservatives who chose the RINO John McCain over Romney. What has Romney done in the last four years that makes him any more acceptable or conservative than he was then? Remember, talk is cheap.

Romney and Obama have one thing in common; they are both opportunists. But don’t sell Obama short. His campaign team, headed by David Alexrod, is one of the most brilliant in recent campaign history. It was no small feat defeating Hillary who is married to the most respected modern-day Democrat in liberal circles, yet defeat her he did.

By the time Alexrod is done with Romney, Romney will not be looking forward to building another tony mansion but looking for a cave to crawl in since his reputation will be totally destroyed.

gekster

In Romneys own words:
from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitt_romney

Romney ran as a fresh face, as a successful entrepreneur who stated he had created ten thousand jobs,

So Romney only created 10.000 jobs.
Not the “tens of thousands” that Romney supporters,
and now Romney himself, says.

SFDennis

While on a completely visceral level, Erick, I want to believe that any candidate who runs against Obama should be able to beat him handily–and should be a better President–I have to say that, after the 2008 Presidential election, I’ve lost faith in our country’s electorate.

During the 2008 Presidential election, I was, for the first time in my life, forced to “write-in” the name of my candidate for President–even knowing that doing so was futile. I have a great deal of personal admiration and respect for John McCain, but I could not in good conscience vote for him for President.

I am, right now, very afraid that I will be faced with the same “choice” next year–despite the futility of the effort (I should say that, in my mind, simply NOT VOTING AT ALL is not an acceptable choice).

Although simply defeating Obama in 2012 is without question completely necessary, doing so with a candidate without principle and an acceptable core set of values is no victory for the United States–although I’m certain that many think it is.

Electing Mitt Romney would be a prime example of such a pyrrhic victory. Romney’s “principles” and “core set of values” are always a matter of expediency–never a matter of firmly held values and beliefs. This is, of course, well proven by his positions on the opposite sides of so many of the more important issues of our times.

As for your evaluation of the other candidates in the “horse race,” I agree wholeheartedly with your assessments of all but one. Personally, Michelle Bachman makes me very nervous. Please do not get me wrong. I give her credit for having both principles and core values that are consistent. However, her penchant for hyperbole in describing her “roles” and “leadership” in the fight against the liberal/progressive agendas in Congress are, in many, many cases, blown completely out of proportion. Self-aggrandizement is not a characteristic I am looking for in our next President. We have far too much of that in the current President.

I have chosen “my” candidate from our current field already, and I am doing everything I can afford to do–both in terms of my time and my money–to advance his cause. Should he not be the nominee, I will assess the candidate chosen and make the decision then on whether or not I can, in good conscience, give that candidate my support on election day. I sincerely hope that I am not, once again, faced with the futility of having to “write-in” the name of the best person for the job.

God bless the United States of America. Now, perhaps more than ever before, we need his blessings.

sethellis

If Perry had taken the slow and steady route he could still be in this. Instead he has desperately thrown every pander he can think of to see if any stick.

This ad is ill advised. The turning point for Gingrich was when he attacked Romey on Bain. Republicans will not tolerate even the appearance of attacking capitalism. It would undermine the entire platform.

You guys had really convinced me that Perry would comback, and still be relevant. I no longer believe this. His only hope is that nobody notices the ad.

jrfromdallas

When asked if she would consider jumping in or supporting a candidate she said it’s not too late. Give it a rest already and either endorse someone that holds your values i.e Rick Perry or Michelle Bachmann or say that you won’t consider getting in or it’s too late for someone else to get in and we have a good crop of candidates.

jrfromdallas

When asked if she would consider jumping in or supporting a candidate she said it’s not too late. Give it a rest already and either endorse someone that holds your values i.e Rick Perry or Michelle Bachmann or say that you won’t consider getting in or it’s too late for someone else to get in and we have a good crop of candidates.

thirstyboots

That doesn’t even make sense.

Are you arguing that shareholders are now somewhat responsible for the people they fire? Wow, just wow. What is this, DailyKos? I mean, would you want job-creators to support the unemployment benefits of the people they fire? I mean, that’s basically making firing impossible, with the result of destroying wealth and much more jobs than those being “saved”.

That’s the problem with these candidates like Perry. They completely poison and undermine the platform with their anti-capitalist demagoguery and their fanatical supporters will not condemn their stances, making things eve worse.

Another example of an artificially created by our tax code? What does that mean? This isn’t even related to the tax code. People should go after tax expenditures and government subsidies – two issues Perry knows very well. Not private companies acting in the free-market.

jb13

Eric, I’m curious: You have spent several weeks now dishing out slightly-more-than-faint praise to Jon Huntsman. How do you reconcile this to your crusade to torpedo Huntsman’s campaign from the moment he announced his candidacy? I don’t understand how someone can say “Jon Huntsman is terrible! Don’t dare vote for him, Republicans, because he worked for Obama!” and then a few months later, wonder why, despite his conservative credentials and solid policy positions, he can’t gain ground with the very conservatives who look to people like you for guidance and insight.

Incidentally, I agree with you regarding Perry. I think he does represent our best chance. Now, we need Santorum, Bachmann, etc., to GET OUT and allow conservatives to coalesce around a conservative before we end up with Romney vs. Paul vs. Gingrich for the nomination. Just typing that made me throw up in my mouth.

thirstyboots

instead of explaining people why their arguments are brutally flawed?

Venture capitalism creates jobs. It’s a shame there aren’t more Bains and Mitt Romneys. He’s clearly the strongest candidate in this front – those who state the opposite, that capitalism destroy jobs, should be fought, not appeased. Apparently, that includes Rick Perry.

bshughes1

Its about time that conservatives start explaining and defending CAPTALISM instead of attacking our capitalist cadidates.

Bain Capital invested in Staples when it was a tiny Massachuessets retailer. Now its a 2000 store monster of success employing over 50,000 people.

Romney–what a shrewd and successful CAPITALIST!

federalfarmer1

Though palin is a little more attractive. Her supporters aren’t that shallow, are they?

flguy

Your column was deeply appreciated. I was glad to see that you were not one of the signers of the recent endorsement posted here on RedState by a number of important contributors. I don’t mind their endorsement of Rick Perry, and I think he’s got some great qualifications.

However, I prefer to get the information I need to make my own decision from people who have not endorsed. Everyone has a bias, I know, and I can sort through that. But once you’ve endorsed, you are by definition in-the-tank for one person, and I continue to want all options on the table as far as where I get my info from.

You and Rush Limbaugh I respect greatly for not having made any endorsements, instead showing the positives and negatives of each of the viable candidates (I know, I know, “Ron Paul will not be the nominee.”)Yes, you will probably make an endorsement eventually, but hopefully I will have made my mind up by then as well and will be at peace with my own choice. I honestly do not like official endorsements by anyone, whether in the media or in politics or hollywood. People have the right to endorse, it just doesn’t mean anything to me as far as making up my own mind.

I’m still looking all of the candidates over, and I appreciate your continued research and informative columns that are helping me and so many others to make an informed decision.

Again, I have nothing against those who have endorsed on RedState, and I may end up being for Perry myself, but I appreciate your staying out of the endorsements for now, and I will continue to be a fan of RedState.

znjs

Doubt she’ll start anytime soon.

acat

4 fresh salmon fillets
1/4 c. balsamic vinegar
2 tbsp. grapeseed oil
1/2 tsp freshly ground black pepper
1 tsp. dried coarsely ground salt
1 tsp lime juice
Lime wedges for garnish

Heat broiler.
Place salmon skin-side down on broiler pan.
Combine vinegar and oil and brush on fish.
Sprinkle evenly with freshly ground black pepper.
Broil about 6 inches from source of heat for 7 minutes or until fish just flakes when tested with a fork.
Sprinkle immediately with salt and lime juice
Garnish with lime wedges.

jrfromdallas

in the way that she can’t do any wrong. I liked her when she burst on the scene but I am not a fan anymore with all of the games she was playing on whether or not she was going to run. She is an inch away from being the Kim Kardashian of politics in the way that she has the most name recognition BUT how she acts coy when asked about her future plans.

hls87

Nor does it attack Romney’s private sector career or attempt to make political hay out of the creative destruction of a free economy as Gingrich did. The ad is very shrewd. It neatly bundles Gingrich and Romney together and accurately identifies each as the personification of a different aspect of the failed establishment. Romney personifies the rent-seeking financial elite of Wall Street. Gingrich personifies the corrupt influence peddlers of K Street. The two groups, working in tandem, have messed up our economy, perhaps beyond repair and to pick a representative of either group to be the next President would be suicidal insanity. There is no rational counterargument. This ad, and the campaign theme it embodies, will be devastating. It’s always the truth that does the most damage.

federalfarmer1

Id like to see him do that with the federal government. I dont know why he isn’t touting this. We need to can a bunch of federal employees, stop stupidity in benefits like the double dipping pensions Perry is now taking, shutter a bunch of agencies, and refocus the government on fewer core purposes. Newt and Perry are foolish to attack romney on this.

I should say regarding Perrys pension, I don’t blame him, id take free government money too. Same as Newt taking fannie money. Why would they not take the money? The fact its legal is the problem.

acat

Seriously, the best you can do is to try to make the argument about how I’m pointing out that Romney has a huge problem making the jobs argument?

Derp

Mew

acat

I’d love to see him strip down government, but .. his resume in the public sector is far less favorable.

(hint – he did NOT reduce the size of government as Governor…)

Mew

jrfromdallas

Romney has gotten more donations from Wall Street than even Obama. Who do you think Iowans are more like Perry the cotton farmer or Mitt (if you want to vote for someone who grew up poor vote for someone else) I can’t have illegals here I’m running for office for crying out loud? This is a plain spoken ad and there is nothing wrong with it.

jrfromdallas

Romney has gotten more donations from Wall Street than even Obama. Who do you think Iowans are more like Perry the cotton farmer or Mitt (if you want to vote for someone who grew up poor vote for someone else) I can’t have illegals here I’m running for office for crying out loud? This is a plain spoken ad and there is nothing wrong with it.

nepanyrush

In light of Redstate’s attack of anyone and any institutions not deemed pro-Perry, with savage attacks on Cain, Gingrich, Perry, Paul, Bachmann, Santorum, Fox News, National Review, Hannity, etc.,, including attacks on any of the supporters of a non-Perry candidate (Romneyzombies, etc.,), and even some blatant anti-Mormon bigotry, let me join the fray: Rick Perry is the dumbest person to hold political office that I have ever seen. He makes Sarah Palin look like a Phi Beta Kappa, Summa cum laude graduate of Harvard.

To get an idea of how dumb he is, just google “is Rick Perry dumb” and read essay after essay indicating how dumb he is. It is page after page on the internet.

Perry will be torn apart in the general election. But most GOP voters are not so dumb. Perry has only 7% of the vote because, well, he is probably smarter than those 7% of the public that support him.

Look, when there is an article published titled ?Is Perry Dumb? and they quote a former Republican governor as saying ?Perry is George W. Bush without the brains,? you might not be the brightest bulb.
.
When you go to a New Hampshire College and tell the college students, to audible gasps, that if you are over 21 to vote for him, but if you are under 21 you cannot vote but can still work on the campaign, then you reinforce that dumb image.

When you use phrases like: ?This ain?t a day for quitting nothing,? then you make Sarah Palin seem like a gifted orator who must have captained her Harvard debate team. (A fifth grader speaks better than that!)

When you get the deer in the lights look at every debate and embarrass yourself so badly, time after time again, that you immedately go from 30% of the vote to 7%, well.

When you claim that Romney is a flip-flopper in a debate and try to roll off examples, but draw a blank, and then in a later debate, blank out when listing three departments you would cut, then you created indelible images in the public?s mind.

When you spend one debate on the economy where it seems you answer ?energy? for everything, saying the same thing over and over again, then it appears you do not have a clue about other components of the economy.

When you do not answer the questions posed at a debate, but begin to answer questions posed to someone else several questions ago, it creates an impression that you are little slow minded and don?t know the answer to the question posed. Then when you expose your strategy with ?you get to ask the questions. I get to answer how I want to,? it doubly reinforces that impression.

When you give a campaign talk that becomes an Internet sensation because viewers think you might be drunk, it adds to the image problem.

When you quote the blog “Hot Gas,” it really helps people to understand how out of touch you are.

If people really think that Perry will not be made into a dunce in the general election, they are sorely mistaken. He will never shed that image because he actually is a dunce.

There, I feel much better. I have listened to RedState defend Perry by savaging any competitor to him. Now let me spread the reality the public’s perception of Perry. He will never, ever, ever win a general election against Obama. He is by far the dumbest of any of the candidates on stage and well below all but about the 7% of the GOP voters that support him.

izoneguy

Then maybe a “dumb” President is what we need?

Rick “Dumbo” Perry – 2011 – I mean 2012….

windwaker24

Perry pays 6.5% of his check into the pension fund. He still paying into it. He’s collecting his own money.

jakeofalltrades

How disappointing. If America is as superficial as you, they deserve Obama 2.

“Perry will be torn apart in the general election. But most GOP voters are not so dumb. Perry has only 7% of the vote because, well, he is probably smarter than those 7% of the public that support him.”

My IQ is higher than most members of MENSA, and I’m a Perry supporter. Frankly, I wonder how supporters of the other candidates managed to make it to voting age without choking to death on their food.

I’ve concluded they must have started with vast numbers, and the ones around today are only alive by random chance.

federalfarmer1

I look at Perrys and romneys record as pretty similar, in that government grew substantially in size under both and neither pushed for any serious tax reduction. I don’t excuse romney for having dem legislatures, he could veto as many good republican governors like pawlenty and Johnson did repeatedly. Romneys problem with me is that I don’t trust him on abortion and think he’s a wall street tool. Bain would be a good talking point for him but he’s too moderate to see that.

gekster

Obviously you havn’t bothered to read all the posts supporting all of the other candidates.

You also take the words of the MSM and leftist sites to heart.

Questions.
If Perry is so dumb, as you say, how did he manage to get elected three times as governor of Texas.
Unless you also think all Texans are dumb also.
If Perry is so dumb, how has Texas managed to avoid the brunt of the recession under Perrys leadership, when so many other states havn’t under the brilliant leadership of thier governors.

sunshinek67

as you have conveniently ignored earlier threads. Specifically, Romney’s pro-choice, pro civil unions, pro amnesty and anti-gun.

http://www.issues2000.org/2012/Mitt_Romney_Gun_Control.htm

2008: “Lifelong” devotion to hunting meant “small varmints”

Romney’s efforts to get right with the right landed him in trouble. Running against Ted Kennedy for the Senate in 1994, he declared, “I don’t line up with the NRA” on gun control. By 2008, Romney had reversed himself on his [and other issues], which quickly gave rise to charges of hypocrisy and opportunism. A YouTube video began making the rounds that captured him firmly stating his liberalish social views, comically juxtaposing them with his newly adopted arch-conservative stances. From then on, th flip-flopper label was firmly affixed to Mitt’s forehead.
Oh, and also the one about this “lifelong” devotion to hunting, which turned out to mean he’d done it twice. “I’m not a big-game hunter,” Romney said, then explained that his preferred prey were rodents, rabbits, and such–”small varmints, if you will.”
He couldn’t fathom why the caricature of him was sticking. When Romney’s staff showed him the devastating YouTube video, his first reaction was ,”Boy, look how young I was back then.”

Until you answer my threads on each point consider our “debate” over. This spin on your part serves as a distraction to the other more credible serious posters here at RedState, many whom I have the utmost respect for, that want an honest open dialogue during this primary season. You, like your chosen candidate like to dodge and avoid with hyper-spin to keep folks dizzy. Your guy comes across as having no core. That’s gotta suck for you.

Perry is my first choice for conservative consistent proven executive leadership. I can find attributes in all of the other candidates, save for Romney and Paul, that is admirable with enough conservative credentials of some type of leadership experience that would propel me to vote for them should things not turn out the way I hope they will.

nancysabet

for picking a President? When did the RNC decide to team up with the legacy media and turn the nomination contest into an almost unwatchable reality TV spectacle? Is this really a sane way to pick a nominee? in the end, one of these candidates is very likely to end up as President and will have to govern. With the exception of Jon Huntsman, Rick Perry is the only candidate with a successful record of governing. That and, more importantly, what he has accomplished in governing make him the clear choice for President.”

izoneguy

Any Republican candidate could beat Obama like a drum…..

Aaron Gardner

Thanks for setting me straight. I am totally on board for Romney now.

texasroots

counting days until she endorse, ha! ha! I read that Sarah’s CPAC spent over $650,000 urging her to reconsider running for president. Wow, that is a ton of money!

federalfarmer1

But like I said, I dont blame Perry for taking the money. But if you defend that system, you are either a government worker or a fool.

jakeofalltrades

n/repeats

thirstyboots

Very well said,

WA_Cowboy

I for one am tired of so called “smart” people running this country. What has it gotten us? 15 trillion in debt and using the constitution as a doormat.

I will take someone with COMMON SENSE over a Harvard degree any day.

thanks for giving me a laugh izone

windwaker24

But I’ll keep my insults to myself. Ordinary people do what Perry did everyday with SS. People can collect SS while working full time. My senior old co-coworker did it. She liked to stay busy, so she worked and used SS to supplement her income. She paid into SS since 16, so she deserves her money if she wants it, just like Perry can have his earned money if he wants it. I have no problem with it.

acat

We’re looking at nominating Romney, who is an establishment insider, and who won’t be able to make a fiscal conservative case and prevent a strong third-party challenger despite running against a relatively weak opponent…

The only difference is whether Romney is playing the part of Bush 1.0 or Bob Dole, with Johnson as Perot and Obama as Clinton.

Mew

gabs

but it does matter. Not just because of the Reality Show mentality of people watching, but because it does show something about how a person would do if they were in their office with the leader of another country arguing a position. The ability to summon facts quickly and to communicate them in pursuit of a goal is a skill a President does need.

Menlo

Like when he supported the 1992 Energy Policy Act and Ted Kennedy’s HIPAA legislation?

I think not.

septembergurl

anyone yet. However, he does say who it won’t be — Paul or Perry.

Now, I get the Paul part. Herb is no libertarian. A libertine, maybe.

But what does he have against Perry?

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/286297/cain-mulls-endorsement-rules-out-perry-and-paul-robert-costa

He says he is thinking of two people and it’s obvious one of them is Newt. He’s not very enthused about Mitt — but then who is? And he’s hard on bachmann.

Santorum??

federalfarmer1

I’m saying the system is broken and corrupt and its absurd for it to be legal to take a huge pension and then keep working taking home a paycheck. Im not criticizing people who benefit from the system. I’m criticizing the systems existence.

Do you support our current pension system for government workers?

retire05

how you can compare Perry’s tenure as governor to Romney’s tenure as governor. You say their records are pretty simliar. How so?

The only way to really compare them is to compare the years between January, 2003 and January, 2007, when Romney started his run for the Oval Office. So, between those years, how do the two compare on budget increases, unemployment, promoting legislation that adheres to social conservative values? Did Romney expand the size of the Republican Party in Massachusetts? Did Perry in Texas? Was MA more, or less, Republican when Romney left as compared to Texas becoming more Republican under Perry?

You are right to not trust Mittens on abortion. For him, it is a polical issue, not a moral one, allowing him to fall on the side that most benefits him at the time. As to being a Wall Street tool, yes, Romney is garnering most of the donation money from Wall Street who found out that supporting Obama is costing them more than they planned on. But a tool? I don’t think so. Just an insider.

As I have said repeatedly, there is a reason Romney is running not as a governor, but as a businessman.

swami7774

Do you really think that’s what venture capitalists do?
Good God. Why not just read straight out of Axelrod’s playbook–or is that what you were doing?

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

I will admit though that I’m surprised you’re now in the tank for Romney. The supermajority of dumb bigots are all for RonPaul. You should rething this endorsement.

Dave_A

1) Requires US currency to be gold or silver

2) Requires that all military actions be preceded by a declaration of war

Both are nowhere to be found in the Constitution.

The document is silent on what substances the federal government may make legal tender nationwide – the only mention of gold/silver is as an exception to an otherwise absolute prohibition on states having their own alternate (to whatever the feds are doing) monetary systems.

As for the declaration of war issue… The Constitution grants Congress the power to declare war (in the same clause that it grants the power to engage in another equally obsolete action: the issuance of ‘Letters of Marque and Reprisal’), however NOWHERE in the document does it require that Congress declare war for us to fight one.

To assume that the Founders ‘really, really meant to put these things in there, but forgot’ is absurd, given the specificity that they engaged in on other issues.

Further, Paul completely ignores Article 6 – the Supremacy Clause – in his vision of a post-Federal America….

Aaron Gardner

.

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

.

windwaker24

It’s a state matter in Perry’s case. As for federal workers, they stopped the pension system back in the ’90s, I believe. They no longer give pensions to the little peons. My mother is a federal worker and she doesn’t have a pension, but some of her co-workers who started in the ’80s and ’90s do. Now, the only people who get pensions are higher-ups like Congresspeople and their staff. If they paid into it and leave in good standing, I have no problem with them collecting. If not, that’s where I have a problem. That’s not right.

heraklios

Seems like we have a lot of that type prejudice on this site.

conservativemusician

And just like the most recent Palin “should I stay or should I go” tease, I will not be influenced by anything Cain has to say on any subject because he is not someone I view as credible.

This article is more of the typical Cain-speak. He tries to triangulate every position he takes and never really comes right out and says what he thinks. Then when you try and pin him down on what his position actually is, he obfuscates and says that we have totally misunderstood his position or that he never really said what he actually said. He parses to the point where he is unintelligible. I’m surprised he didn’t say that he would leave it up to some trusted advisors to help him make this all important decision on who he will endorse…just like he did when he was confronted about every other substantive issue while he was campaigning.

I don’t believe that Cain’s endorsement is going to mean much and the fact that he is already disqualifying Perry from consideration speaks volumes…especially since Perry is continuing to rise in the IA polls. What is he going to do if Perry comes in 1st or 2nd there and eventually wins the nomination? Is he then going to sit it out or vote Democrat like his wife has in past elections?

Cain always was a cult of personality and I am glad that he is gone because I think he would have been a disaster for the GOP and for the conservative cause in general. Ron Paul is in the same category and his views especially on foreign policy are truly scary. For this and many other reasons, I really hope that saner heads will prevail in the next 2 weeks and that IA voters will vote for the best, most electable, and most consistent conservative candidate we have left – Rick Perry.

Perry 2012.

acat

Would these suffice?

Mew

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

troofers and bigots.

Aaron Gardner

..

federalfarmer1

He must have, as Texas spending increased substantially during tenure. Did he enact significant tax cuts? No, in fact he increased a number of state fees. He can talk about cutting federal agencies, but did he do that in Texas? I don’t see why more couldn’t have been done in Texas, a very conservative state. I expect southern governors to do more than hold the status quo. Let’s see some real transformation. Privatize public schools, privatize agencies, quit wasting money in green energy boondoggles like wind, solar. Or ethanol. I hold republicans with republican legislatures to a higher standard. Otherwise we get another bush administration.

I can vote for Perry, I just wouldn’t't expect much in the way of advancing a conservative agenda. Newt has a record of agitating for real reforms and getting them enacted. Remember, everything he accomplished he did with Clinton holding a veto pen and far more squishy republicans than there are now

heraklios

Don’t you belong on Politico, HP, or TPM?

gekster

If you don’t see what Aaron means by now, you never will.

hint, read the whole thread

jakeofalltrades

n/t

federalfarmer1

When states state going bankrupt because of absurd promises to government workers, that were never funded, the gop president better say, go pound sand when they come looking for a bailout.

There’s no reason old federal workers couldn’t have their pension benefits taxed or cut. These plans are the result of a corrupt bargaining process between workers and the politicians they supported. There is no good defense for honoring these corrupt bargains.

notpropagandized

I’m guessing that if Perry recovers to get nomination that Perry/Gingrich would be a very good combination, but that he would be more inclined to pick Gov Deborah Martinez – NM.

saulpaulson

Thank you for stating the truth. Romney cannot win. He is so much like John Kerry it is unreal.

Romney just this AM said that SuperPACs should not play a role in the campaign, while having his SuperPAC attack Newt. Plus since when did anti-SuperPAC become a Republican belief?

If the nominee, Romney will get close, but he will lose.

cbartlett

when the media (and that includes Fox now) decided that it did. Of course the media decided that because of the American Idol audience that demands it. I’ve said it before *** the most dangerous thing in America right now is the uninformed voter and – wow – do we have a majority of those!! If the Perry campaign would just do a better job of getting out the facts on the issues and leave the petty stuff alone, this country would realize that he IS the best option for the White House. If I wasn’t on RS often and/or doing my own research, I wouldn’t know (or at least remember) that he is a veteran, grew up with farming values, has been married to the same woman for more than 30 years, believes in small, limited government, NRA supporter and hasn’t flip-flopped on any of the important values like abortion and cap-n-trade. I’ve lived in Texas all my life and actually voted for the guy every time he has run for statewide office!! I know I’m not the only one that has missed these good points and taken them for granted. The uninformed voter needs to be educated on the stark contrast between Perry and those other two “front-runners”. The media is NOT going to help – they are spending lots of time and effort to completely ignore him. Perry’s people need to spend his campaign money wisely and get the word out! Sure hope Iowa shocks some people….

bzip

In case nobody knew – Jindal will be joining Rick Perry in Iowa:

Bobby Jindal Joins Rick Perry on Iowa Bus Tour
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/12/bobby-jindal-joins-rick-perry-on-iowa-bus-tour/

retire05

Did Perry enact substantial tax cuts? Well, no, because in Texas our tax codes and rates are done by the legislature. But yes, Perry promoted tax cuts. One such cut was the elimination of ad valorum taxes for veterans with 100% service related disabilities. Did Romney push that in HIS state? Nope. Perry also pushed for reduced ad valorum taxes for everyone and an increase in the over 65 exemption. He got the lower taxes by not the increased over 65 exemption. You also say that Perry increased spending as governor. Give me your figures because I am sure you are not factoring in a 20% increase in population or inflation.

You claim Perry increased fees. Be specific. What fees. Taking your talking points from a Paul website doesn’t work here. You have to give specifics when you make claims.

How about getting tort refore in Texas which has increased our physician population by 58,000? Or “loser pays” laws? Or trying to end sanctuary cities and take on the TSA, both of which were defeated with the help of the RINO, David Dewhurst. How much money did Romney spend, using Massachusetts taxpayer funds, to guard his border (yes, MA has an open border) against illegal invasion? Seems I remember something about Obama’s aunt living in MA on the public dole while being illegal.

As to cutting federal agencies, are you really under the belief that any governor can cut federal agencies? If so, you are delusional.

Specifics, federalfarmer1, specifics. Without them, you are giving me nothing but talking points that are unproven.

notpropagandized

No question that Newt is skilled in focusing on a problem and driving it to a workable conclusion. The flaw that gnaws at Newt is his lack of ability to build and maintain a long term team to refocus and attack problems ongoing. Historically, the final problem Newt must address is the mutiny that inevitably develops. Why? Don’t have that answer, but concerned that his brain trust will eventually be undercut by his brain.

carolynr

Guys…I am going to the big D for Christmas….to see the daughter and grandkids….plus the son in law…oh well, you now know where he comes in…but he’s a good guy. So…have a Merry Christmas…Happy Holidays.

Erick….I could not agree with you more concerning Perry. He has what it takes. Tea Party Patriots…get this…three choices…Bachmann (and you know she is out for me…the shill for Romney), Romney and Newtie. Of the three…I would vote for Newtie.

Get on the more Conservative paper in Iowa…Souix City…and blog. Perry also has to get his BIG GUNS out in SC. Boy…Nikki Haley is taking a beating on The State, their big paper…along with Romney. Big opening for Perry. Perry also has to get some ads out in FL…because WILLARD has told those people that Perry is taking their SS away from them. WILLARD AND OBAMA are the same…I’m sorry….but he is a liar..he’s for big government, and he doesn’t care about the everyday person. Des Moines Register is liberal…and there are soooo many Paulbots on there it is horrible. I will be back on the 28th…to say HAPPY NEW YEAR.

Carolyn

Change Jar Conservative

so he could only endorse a democrat.

HERMAN Cain might have ruled out these two you mention.

goodgovernance

Lot of Romney supporters here keep talking up the value of free market capitalism (and rightly so). The hypocrisy comes when they seem to be blind to the value of the free market of ideas.

When they argue, “Don’t criticize Mitt!” or command, “Don’t talk about Mitt being a phoney!” or “Don’t bring up Romneycare!” it betrays a sense they don’t realize that in the free market of ideas, the arguments most substantiated with facts and logical thinking, will ultimately be the ones to win out, in the course of vigorous debate.

By criticizing conservatives for attacking Romney’s record at job creation, the pro-Romney camp is claiming that we’re “attacking Romney from the Left.” Note this claim does nothing to negate the actual argument that Romney is not a job creator.

So let’s say we all decide to give up criticizing Romney in any way, shape or form. What will Romney do in the general when Obama criticizes Romney’s record? Romneyists can’t criticize Obama for making “an attack from the Left” then — Obama and the independents won’t care!

Some Romneyists here have said, “Romney will just say, ‘Oh yeah, Obama? Well you laid off a lot more people than me!”

Lame. Once again, note this response still doesn’t put Romney out ahead. It still doesn’t substantiate the idea Romney is a job creator. It’s weak, weak sauce. Independents will not be won over by this man.

And not only are Romney’s arguments weak, they’re disingenuous. When Romney claims Obamacare applies to everyone in the country, but Romneycare only applies to a small portion of people in Massachusetts, how stupid does Romney think people are? I’m insulted by the way Romney thinks he can pull an accounting frameshift and not have anyone realize what he did!

If he can tell us that kind of lie with a straight face, Romney would lie to us about anything.

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

…and that is why he maintains his credibility.

Michele perhaps learned a lesson about Gardisil and has ensured her attacks are well-referenced; book-knowledge isn’t “silly”…and when it is mischaracterized as such, the individual committing this act is self-impugning his argument.

http://www.changeforrickperry.org louisianapatriette

I think her name is Susanna Martinez. That would be a good ticket. My mom likes Rick Perry/Allen West herself

texashistorian

I meant to reply to TrueRed and not to you- your sarcasm was well taken and appreciated

lineholder

then it displays that the Perry campaign maybe getting it’s act together. A lot of people, including myself, genuinely respect Jindal…much more so than we respect Sheriff Whats-his-name.

http://www.changeforrickperry.org louisianapatriette

I’m one of those dumb Suth’un hicks myself.

znjs

First off I agree that Erick shouldn’t post anything that isn’t true. That’s why I have a problem with this post. Polls consistently show the exact opposite of what Erick is stating.

But as far as bachmann learning her lesson, in the last debate while attacking Newt she made a claim that politicofact had verified what she had said. Politcofact responded by giving that claim a pants on fire rating. Which, of course, was due to the fact they had given her a pants on fire rating for something she had said in the last debate!

And my comment about book knowledge was meant to display what she thinks, not what I think. She’s the one that seemingly thinks book knowledge is silly and that her gut is the way to determine what is true or not with no regard to facts. Which is exactly Colbert’s caricature of a Republican.

Aaron Gardner

nt

carolynr

Here’s my thought on this jkoran…We have to have a candidate with a polar opposite of Obama TO WIN. We have high unemployment, we do not have solutions (Except Perry) , we have a top heavy government, Obama is taking away rights a day at a time. We are hurting. I don’t give a hoot what the MSM says. There was an article in either Politico or Drudge that talked about the amount of money that goes out of EVERYONE’s pocket for energy…gas, heating oil, etc. Pumping gas does not create jobs. Having more money to spend eating out or going on vacation does…excuse the trickle down theory…however, it does work. Sir Isaac Newton…with his theory on gravity should be a clue. But not for Obama..he thinks money is going to rise up. Excuse me…dumb POTUS…the rising up of money is our TAXES. We are stimulating ourselves!

Perry is the polar opposite of Obama. Texas accent and all…the man is sincere…he has the answer to our problems and he’s no dummy on foreign affairs either. He…rather than the others nailed the problems concerning our problems abroad. Perry can claim he created an environment for jobs…and the record will bear him out…Romney will incur the hatred of OWS and people out of work, and Gingrich appears as though he might change the Constitution via fiat.

No, what I want is proof…it is there for anyone to look at and your remark about beating Obama is the only thing that matters…well…yes…IF THERE IS IMPROVEMENT. OBAMA AND ROMNEY are alike.

Another little thing…Mr. Romney gets upset too easily. If Perry can rattle him…can you imagine what Obama will do…questioning his pristine credentials? That’s HIS BUTTON.

federalfarmer1

They aren’t perfect, but I can check their analysis. they say pauls claims are lies, but that Perry has increased spending and not cut taxes, in fact raising fees on cigarettes, diesel equipment, Business taxes, and other things.

Also says spending on general revenue increased 22 % from 2000 to 2010 adjusting for population and inflation. There are lots of ways to work the numbers, however.

I can’t link well, I’m typing on phone at work. You can search poliifact pretty easily to find those.

beric

Proving this outlandish claim is true. I don’t even feel I need to pull out points proving otherwise. But check out his website (including his counters to every outlandish “Newt is a RINO” claim”), and see if you can still say this.

tailfins1959

Remember the adage: “Don’t argue with an idiot; people watching may not be able to tell the difference.”

The corporate version is: Fight with an ***hole and those watching just see two ***holes.

Aaron Gardner

ahahahhahahahahha!!!

streiff

is an insult to anyone’s intelligence. Don’t do it again

znjs

But I’m not sure if that’s a point for or against.

federalfarmer1

Cato, fort worth star, and other sources are generally in agreement that spending increased under Perry.

Cato-at-liberty.org/rick-perrys-spending-record

Aaron Gardner

Granted, it doesn’t really say much of anything negative and actually defends the Governor’s record on taxes and spending.

What does Cato say about Romney’s record?

What do you say about this?

milehighcon

He’s an out of touch, blueblooded, elitist, flip-flopper. If he were a democrat we would be salivating over the chance to run against him. He’ll do anything to put the Potus trophy on his mantel, and he’ll pander to anyone, and say anything to get there.

What kind of excitement can we whip up among the base to vote for good ol’ Willard? It would be like McCain all over again. I don’t think there’s any genuine appeal to Romney outside the Washington elites and media. He’s been tagged with the “inevitable” label by the media, and we’re supposed to just fall in line and vote for him. I think Gingrich is our best bet, because he led Congress to a balanced budget and surplus, and a booming economy. Back when Congress wasn’t reviled by 90% of the country.

Yes, Gingrich has a tricky personal history. But he will hold his own, and by running a positive campaign he’ll force Obama to stay away from the whole affair thing. McCain had his past indiscretions too, and no one cared about them. Gingrich can talk about regret, redemption, and forgiveness. His story is one that people will relate to. That he was foolish in the past, and that he was redeemed. And those who don’t buy it still only have to look at the numbers. Like Slick Willy said, it’s the economy, stupid. He has a true record of being a job creator in government, and it will contrast nicely with Obama fiddling while our economy burns.

Perry would get chewed up and spit out in a debate with Obama. Romney will get killed in ads showing him flip-flopping and out of touch, with pockets of Bain Capital money. Gingrich is a true conservative, and a real fighter, and the best chance we have.

1rationalmind

Mr. Erickson, If you are truly concern about the Obama team airing interviews and commercials with every person ever fired or laid off by Bain Capital. Take heart, the Romney team could air interviews and commercials with every person that had a job saved and every person that had a job created because of Bain Capital and Mitt Romney. It would be no contest to tens of thousands jobs CREATED to the left’s argument of jobs lost. Mr Erickson, you are asking people to fear the left’s argument that capitalism and free enterprise are evil. I don’t believe that many Demarcate’s believe that, since many own businesses.
If we conservatives can’t win the Risk/Venture Capital, Free Enterprise and Capitalism argument here in the United States of America, we will no longer be a prosperous nation and domed to second world status.
Mr, Erickson, with all do respect, It is clear to anyone who can be objective and follows your blog, that your problem with Mitt Romney isn’t his Governing record, when examined fairly is a conservative record in a very very liberal state. It is my opinion that your problem with Mitt Romney is one of a more personal nature, that of who he is, or to be more direct, his faith. I know, Jon Huntsman is also a Mormon, but you most likely feel very confident that Jon Huntsman doesn’t stand much of a chance of becoming the GOP nominee. If I’m wrong, you have my apologies, but only you know for sure (well only anyone who’s mortal).

federalfarmer1

i think their ratings are biased but they give extended analysis of numerous claims in one spot, making it a decent quick stop. Just like any other website, the sourcing and authority cited should determine how much weight to give it.

tomatin

People who attack Gingrich can never attack his record in office, especially since he passed the best conservative agenda since Reagan. Sure he was not liked by some of the Republicans he led because he was a tough tough leader.

Face it Gingrich is the only conservative who could get this group of fractured congressional Republicans in line. I mean does anyone really see Romney having the ability to handle this. He can’t just break up congress and capitalize on it which is the only thing he’s ever been good at.

notpropagandized

Liberalism is heavily correlated to absence of responsibility to others. Lacking any of the following promotes liberalism, ceteris paribus:

No job.
No spouse/partner to whom one is committed beyond lust.
No children.
No extended family to whom one feels some commitment.
No pet that is responsibly owned and cared for.
No community to which one is committed.
No circle of long-term friends to whom one is committed.
No creative hobbies that are outsided self-indulgence.
No interest in proven systems of personal success.
No concern for one’s appearance or reputation to others.
Etc, etc….

Just a beginning list that happens to line up pretty well with being younger. Maturity and more conservative outlook with age is an observable reality, all other things being equal, of course…

Paulistas (or Paul-bots) and Obama-philes are thus easily targeted. Communists and Race-baiters commonly target the poor with empty and unsupportable promises of better fortunes under their failed systems designed to benefit a small cadre of plugged-in cronies. The promises never manifest except for the most exceptional, committed ideologists which are very few. Their riches are essentially legislated theft from the wealthy and formerly huge and victimezed middle-class.

gekster

Ridiculed, yes.
Censored. No.

(just an obsevation)

tomatin

A few flip flops based on principle are fine.

But Romney is the typical pol who will say anything to get elected.

Everyone can see Romney is a complete phony. The only reason the GOP establishment likes him so much is that he can be easily controlled.

federalfarmer1

a million things affect economic growth and decline. Governors directly control spending and taxation by what bills they promote and sign or oppose and veto. Those things affect the economy greatly, but its not as easy to determine.

Besides, is vote for Perry before romney so I dont know what you are trying to convince me of.

bzip

Cain has always had a very serious dislike for Perry and I have never heard why or been given any reason. Perry has been extremely nice to Cain. Now talk about trying to win over voters, sorry Cain all you do is continue to bring “hate” to this election.

It would be hard for me to believe Cain’s endorsement would mean anything by this time. All his supporters have moved on and set most of their hearts into another candidate by now. If Cain really wanted to influence by his endorsement it should have come withing a few days of his suspending his campaign.

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

she has helped, and she should be granted “space” rather than pressured

she’ll do the right thing….

Rhampton

Smaller government means massive layoffs, does it not?

streiff

because the analysis you quote ignores population growth in TX as well as growth in wages. But since you like Politifact so much I’m sure you agree that the GOP voted to shut down Medicare.

I’ll just be honest with you. I’m not sure whether you are an idiot or just doing an extended bit of trolling. Not that it matters a lot because they are both going to inevitably lead you to the same place.

http://www.timothy-bladel.com/ center77

while I am not sure who Romney will blame, he may try to say what he says in the debates that you win some and lose some, but I fail to see how that is a good argument in the minds of indepedents.

I think this election will be about jobs, and because of that I’ve always felt Perry had a leg up on the rest of the candidates.

If Newt is the nominee, we will see Obama and Bill Clinton on the campaign trail claiming that Newt did not have a huge impact on the balanced budget. Now the other day I posted some quotes from a writer who claims that Newt tried to pass budgets that were not balanced, and when 11 conservatives voted against him he called them out and told them they were going to have to explain themselves, he said something a long the lines of “those conservatives” like they were lesser beings.

I get some flak from people when I call Newt a fraud, Ive been saying it for some time now, but now that more and more people are starting to pay attention and learn that he indeed is not the conservative champion everyone thought he was, they are going to other candidates,

This should come as no surprise to anyone. Newt is not so much a small government conservative as he is a less government than Obama conservative. He comes from the way of thinking that Rove, Bush, and some of those other east coast Republicans come from. I believe it is all about power with them, if they can not get someone in there that they do not have to worry about rocking the boat too much, then they will be happy, or else they will just be happy losing and putting Christie or Jen in the race in 2016.

I was shocked that Bill O’Rielly took Mitt to task last night, but even that may have some little trick to it, the media did go after Mitt for only going to easy interviews.

Perry is the right choice, I have no doubts about that at all. His outsider message will really contrast with OIbama’s message of class warfare. People are not happy about the way Washington works, and if the right got behind a guy like Perry we would have one strong nomonee, one that really kills the whole “hey they are more of Bush” argument. Bush never talked about sending congress home and cutting their pay. He never taked about really balancing the budget. We can beat Obama with a movement based on the tenth amendment.

This is why I am a Perry supporter, and why in about 40 minutes I am going to meat him and Bobby Jindal in Iowa.

Rick Perry 2012

bzip

As Aaron pointed out, Jindal endorsed Perry back in I think it was Sept. So it isn’t too surprising but I think it is really helpful and good for Perry to have Jindal by his side.

Aaron Gardner

Then lets talk about his support, and urging conservatives to pass, Medicare Part D.

Go ahead, explain to me how supporting an expansion of the entitlement culture is a grand conservative achievement. I’ll wait.

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

…we’ve been around this block on many occasions [re-summarized supra @ 7:16 a.m.. with title "Puhleeze [I]“].

“Huntsman?s rejection of Enhanced Interrogation mirrors his having carried out a deeply-flawed Chinese policy; he is unctuous, and exhuming his prior conservatism doesn?t mitigate his having heaped scorn on the ["non-scientific"] set of competitors from whom he has consciously/consistently alienated himself.”

streiff

unfortunately there is not a single thing in the man’s history that suggests he’s capable of running a winning campaign. You’re established yourself as a Rombot long before today. Why don’t you just wallow in the pleasure of being attached to some part of Mitt’s anatomy? That is if you can fight the NRO staff away long enough to enjoy yourself.

notpropagandized

I wonder if now that Newt is a grandfather if he’s also acquired an improved group temperment that promotes long-term organizational cooperation or if he’s still so committed to his and his alone ideas that the team will migrate away from him as in the 90′s.?

bzip

I hope it is driving Bachmann nuts, that would really make my day .

It is this sort of thing that peeves me, to know end. These groups and people endorsing candidates that have NO chance of winning and even going much beyond Iowa like Bachmann and Santorum, – all this does is end up splitting the votes up among all these conservatives so that the conservative who actually has a chance of winning gets a lousy blow and a harder hand to work with.

Think about it – if Bachmann and Santorum pull just enough votes away from Perry to pull Perry down to 4th and both Bachmann and Santorum place 5 and 6 then Perry has that much harder of a hill to climb and he is the only one out of the 3 that have the money to go the distance.

lineholder

rather than Sheriff Whats-his-name, Aaron. And I’m not being sardonic in making that comment.

Jindal’s credibility with voters is greater. That’s all.

Aaron Gardner

but I think having him come out for Perry helped put to rest the false accusations that Perry was soft on illegal immigration.

Maybe if a bunch of conservatives, who should have known better, hadn’t propagated that lie about Perry, Arpaio would have never been heard from.

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

…and it would be desirable were the individual who posted it to update it accordingly.

notpropagandized

Yes. Deserved layoffs caused by Big Government overspending politicos. And who gets hurt? It’s always the one given to believe he/she is entitled to the job/transfer payment, etc.

Privatization… yes, to an extent. Some will keep job transferred to contracting company or maybe get re-hired at lower more reasonable compensation.

Amazing how government, years ago, started adopting Big Corp employment policies instead of Small Biz policies that are more responsible and realistic. Entitlement mindedness always has a dead and unhappy ending.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

no^^text

romansdaughter

I just got back from doing some Christmas shopping. Tell your Mom that I agree with her that is who i would like Perry to pick for VP.

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

mizzoumark (Diary) Tuesday, December 20th at 10:06AM EST (link)

federalfarmer1

Everytime I get in a Perry discussion, I learn new rules for posting here or get personally attacked by a moderator. That’s fine, I can handle being called names. But I dont know what I’ve said that’s trolling or douchey in this conversation, or anything else today, except to a Ron Paul kook.

Is it so hard to believe that a conservative can look at Perrys Texas rrcord and be not impressed?

I’ll try harder to avoid Perry, because its not worth it to me, but its very hard when everybody wants to pick a fight with every non Perry supporter.

Still, my point was simply that Perry increased spending in his term. There are accounting determinations that go into judging that claim, so its not a straightforward determination, but most if what I can find supports my claim. I’ll withdraw it if I’m convinced otherwise.

Texasbudgetsource.com is another one thatsupports me. Is the one kegit?

znjs

But this is why I wish we had a different voting system such as IRV. It doesn’t make sense to me that having similar candidates should split the vote and cause a lesser overall popular candidate to benefit. Even if we just did it for the nominating process and not the general election (although I’d be in favor of it there too) I think it would help a lot.

tyman

Bzip, your post is depressing to think about.

That’s what is so frustrating about this whole process. That was really stupid to endorse a candidate that can’t win.

I cannot (CANNOT!) understand why Rush keeps putting Bachmann and Santorum’s name out…or Levin for that matter.

Erick filled in for Boortz and he had a caller that wanted to talk up Santorum and Erick rightly said that Santorum is NOT a fiscal conservative. Erick used the example that people would tell Santorum to be more fiscally conservative and he said that he would when he got more power in committees (I believe I’m paraphrasing that correctly).

Bachmann and Santorum will be done shortly after Iowa. Personally, I’m not so sure that they’re NOT trying to damage Perry. I think Bachmann still feels scorned that Perry took a lot of her thunder after the Iowa Straw Poll.

I, too, hope Bachmann is going nuts over this. That thought is one of the few bright spots.

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

I have a solid dislike for Arpaio, but if you live outside of Arizona the likelihood is that all you know about him is that he’s “tough on illegals”. Given that assumption, he could very well help Perry in Iowa. The problem with Joe will be if Perry gives him too much face time or talk time.

federalfarmer1

I have no problem criticizing Newt from the right for his mistakes. Perry was my number two for a long time, and I also have no problem criticizing him from the right. I don’t understand the way thinking that says we should support our favorite candidates every boneheade move.

http://www.changeforrickperry.org louisianapatriette

I told my mom and she gave me one sharp, quick nod of approval. She and I have been pretty upset today about the AFA/Family Leader endorsements, but I think we’ve all been doing better after seeing our governor out there with Perry.

So you’ve been shopping? I’ve been upstairs all day (hiding out ) working on Christmas presents. My little sister is getting Prince William and Princess Kate paper dolls and I’ve been cutting them out so she can play with them right away. Taking a break right now!

tailfins1959

Some posts that may seem like idiocy or trolling is just people “thinking out loud”. In which case, the reaction is “oh yeah” or “never mind” once you point out the flaw in the logic without insulting them.

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

Your problem is that you picked one that has significant history of being stupid. Just because it’s written on the internet doesn’t make it true.

http://www.changeforrickperry.org louisianapatriette

Santorum can’t beat Romney, let alone Obama. Talk about a wasted endorsement, and WEAK! Vander Plaats couldn’t even get the rest of his organization to fall in line behind him. He ended up looking like a fool endorsing a man who is bringing in only 2% in the Iowa polls.

I hope Santorum and Bachmann are below Perry when voting actually starts, because then there won’t be any motivation to go on. They definitely won’t be winning New Hampshire and I think Perry will be strong in South Carolina.

http://www.changeforrickperry.org louisianapatriette

It’s so funny to have people tell me on the Internet, “Oh my gosh, I love your governor, he’s wonderful!” I type back, smiling, “Yes, I think so too!” Sounds like people think Jindal is wonderful, so hopefully his presence will do wonders for Perry. (And I see why he would make a good VP…don’t want to give him up but I’m reconsidering my complete opposition to the idea…)

tailfins1959

If you are analyzing it for Perry versus Romney, well OK. However, the population growth is a reason NOT to recommend Texas as an escape from the recession. That has increased the unemployment rate and perhaps generated a resentment to outsiders. I wonder if Texas police are hostile to the destitute.

If you don’t have a degree and are single: North Dakota is the place to be. If you have a family and/or degree, Metro Boston is recovery central for the time being.

tyman

I think you said it earlier about why Perry will do well there, and I agree with you.

If Herbcain got nothing else right, he said that Willard couldn’t win the nomination because of the south.

Of course, Newt is polling very well in Georgia right now. So I guess we’ll just have to see. I’m still not trustworthy of the polls. I think they have an agenda to help sway our decision.

I still believe Perry will do a lot better than people think. Endorsement or not.

mizzoumark

…..John Kerry lost a close election to a relatively popular incumbent with a strong economy, and during the Iraq war when it still was largely popular. 2012 is NOT 2004, and Bush/Kerry is NOT the same as Obama/Romney. If 2004 featured the deficits we’re facing now, a highly unpopular signature piece of legislation signed by Bush (ObamaCare), and unemployment the way it is now, not to mention the right track/wrong numbers……Kerry likely would have won in a walk.

I’m not a Romney guy myself, but saying he’s allegedly the “weakest general election candidate” is comical. He may not be the best, but he’s definitely not the worst.

Who’s the most electable? I’d say Jon Huntsman. Huntsman is also the most conservative……

jrfromdallas

http://biggovernment.com/mikeflynn/2011/12/19/393640/

Let’s keep it going people!!

jrfromdallas

http://biggovernment.com/mikeflynn/2011/12/19/393640/

Let’s keep it going people!!

hithere64

Picking up on the thread, I do not assume that Romney will beat Obama, but I think he has a much better chance with independents than any of the other candidates. Like it or not, the independent vote will decide who will be President. It’s going to be 47% versus 47%, with 6% swing vote. The swing voters are independents who are themselves flip-floppers–Romney appeals to them! Think about flip-flopper Justice Kennedy. He is infuriating some times, but don’t you prefer a 5-4 decision with him in the majority along with Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and the Chief Justice? Or would you rather “stick to your principles” and honestly–but consistently–lose 5-4? The bottom line is that we can accomplish more with even a RINO in the WH, presiding over a *conservative* Congress that is driving the agenda, than we would with BO.

hithere64

Picking up on the thread, I do not assume that Romney will beat Obama, but I think he has a much better chance with independents than any of the other candidates. Like it or not, the independent vote will decide who will be President. It’s going to be 47% versus 47%, with 6% swing vote. The swing voters are independents who are themselves flip-floppers–Romney appeals to them! Think about flip-flopper Justice Kennedy. He is infuriating some times, but don’t you prefer a 5-4 decision with him in the majority along with Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and the Chief Justice? Or would you rather “stick to your principles” and honestly–but consistently–lose 5-4? The bottom line is that we can accomplish more with even a RINO in the WH, presiding over a *conservative* Congress that is driving the agenda, than we would with BO.

Scope

Hope your Christmas with your family is wonderful. Looking forward to seeing you back soon.

earlgrey

and more often than not, I find I would be a lot more relaxed, and attentive to my family if I did just that. For whatever reason, I just can’t give up.

FWIW, I am an anyone but Gingrich (or Bachmann, Santorum, Paul).

lineholder

As someone who tends to be a hardliner on numerous rule of law issues, I do think this type of decision-making is “soft”. Does that make me a liar? Or is it just a reflection of my viewpoint?

Truthfully, I think people are just AFRAID that Perry might be soft on illegal-related-immigration issues at a federal level, not so much that he is soft on the issue. There is a subtle difference. It is possible that having Sheriff A at campaign sites might alleviate some of those fears, so in that context, I can see it as being positive.

But after three years of Obama, I can’t blame people for being fearful or questioning things, Aaron. I truly can’t.

circlegranch

We’ll be waiting to hear!

Rhampton

I agree, and that’s what bothered me about this comment;

“I am, however, continually surprised that anyone in the GOP thinks Mitt Romney is a really viable candidate. Should he be the nominee, the American public will be treated to interviews and commercials with every person ever fired or laid off because of Bain Capital, an organization from which MItt Romney still draws money.”

The eventual GOP nominee will be EXPECTED to lay off tens of thousands of government workers, so I don’t see how this would hurt Romney more than any other candidate.

jimmyg

Gov. Perry, at a campaign stop, forgot part of his flat tax plan, fortunately Gov. Jindal was present and told Gov. Perry what Gov. Perry’s flat tax plan contains.

The hits just keep on coming.

http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/12/20/jindal-corrects-perry-candidates-own-tax-plan

Common_Cents

The media will run w/ the whole dumb Perry gaffe package 24/7.

He is just too risky. We don’t need a white knuckle campaign hoping and praying he doesnt blunder and hand obama a gift.

Tbone

Nothing Burgers.

Good.

giatny

Clearly, the Republican Party intends to do everything possible to reelect Obama. I realize the difference between opinions and facts and that certitude is dangerous. However, the evidence is in on both Gingrich and Perry. Neither stand a chance of winning a national election. Gingrich’s flaws are
both overwhelming and demonstrable whether the
far right wing admits it or not. The perception of
Perry is that he’s a bit too dim and he has done
nothing to temper than opinion. Even worse,
listening to Repubs criticize Romney for his work
at Bain is a disgrace. It’s called capitalism to
reorganize a company to be more successful. With
both Dems and Repubs trying to dig up dirt on
Romney, it’s impressive that no accusations or even hints of corruption have surfaced. For me, that
alone sets him miles above the other candidates.
Republicans have to decide whether or not they
are trying to reelect Obama. The Dems have been
laughing their heads off at the stupidity being
exhibited daily by the Repubs as their support
drifts from Bachman, to Paul, to Perry, to Cain, to
Gingrich. Obama has ended the Iraq war and
Sebelius has ceded control over Obamacare insurance perimeters to the states – both major
winners with the American people. WAKE UP
or Obama will be guaranteed 4 more and America
will be lost forever.

http://www.timothy-bladel.com/ center77

and I can tell you this I’m a big fan of these two governors. Some lady tried to catch Perry with a gotcha about uninsured children in Texas and he handled it superbly. He is really good on the stump and all 15 people I brought walked away supporters.. Jindal and Perry work well together and it was a diverse audience. I think people should hold judwhether On not supporting Perry until you meet him. He is a very good stump speaker and has no doubt won many people on the stump.

lineholder

It isn’t realistic for Perry to meet every citizen face-to-face or on the stump. He’s going to have to find another way to connect with voters besides just that.

http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

Jindal will probably be his running mate. And I like Jindal a lot.

gekster

Playing moby are we.

What gave you away?

“Obama has ended the Iraq war and
Sebelius has ceded control over Obamacare insurance perimeters to the states ? both major
winners with the American people.”

Not all Americans are happy with Obamas handling of the war, and his claims to have ended it, which was GWs plan, which was in place before he got elected.
Americans by a large majority reject Obamacare even more than when it first passed.

bzip

Thanks for the update. Oddly enough I was on Perry’s web site and I noted they were broadcasting the event. I couldn’t watch it all but noted it was on YouTube. What I saw was really good, both Perry and Jindal do work very nicely together and Perry was right on top of it doing a wonderful job.

Lets hope folks are paying attention and are networking the good information out. Thanks again for the update. The YouTube is;
Jindal comes on about 29:00 and Perry comes on about 43:00
Town Hall
http://youtu.be/a4QCnOfBdQo

sunshinek67

that I personally do not have a problem with Governor Rick Perry’s speaking abilities. He sounds fine to me. Human and realistic, sincere. Is he perfect? Absolutely not. Has he made mistakes. No doubt. However, his record can stand on its own, all by its self. A record of consistent conservative principles that has boomed the Texas economy. If Texas had a Governor Obama, or even a Governor Romney, our State would not be where it is today. Disciplined leadership. That is what is going to get the economy turned around, help unemployment numbers subside, inspire a morally depraved nation to want to hope again, to invest and make the way for future generations. Actions speak a whole lot louder than words as the old saying goes. I believe this wholeheartedly.

I respect your free speech rights. I disagree with folks that post in these chat room with such vitriol unsubstantiated attacks without empirical evidence, reduces the messenger to the level of irrelevance in my mind. Talk about a man’s record, pick it apart, fair game.

I respect your right to adhere to the American Political Idol crowd amid screaming teeny bops too that measures a man’s success based not on what he has accomplished, but rather what comes from his speech patterns because it serves as a point of reference in analysis of discerning what is right and what is wrong. While I find your postings against Perry necessary for this analysis, the gist of your continuing rants against Perry’s level of intelligence are without merit. All of your anti-Perry rants on his intelligence level just begs the question in my own mind, What is YOUR own IQ score and where is YOUR resume? Have you ever served in the military and flown a C-130 tactical airlift? Have you ever Governed *successfully* the world’s 13th largest economy, or 2nd most populous US state? What about Commander In Chief over 20,000 Texas National Guard?

If smart equates to corporate greed, one professional and personal scandal after another, undisciplined lack of conservative principles, then I will take the “dumb” candidate with a strong record of executive leadership for President this time around. We got the “smart” guy last time.

Dumb is standing on a stage in front of millions and revealing your true political self, “for Pete’s sake”. Dumb is standing on a stage in front of millions and placing a $10,000 bet amid middle America Iowa of all places. There are different levels of intelligence, social intelligence being one of them. This is just as important in getting a message out with sincerity and credibility. Lack of social intelligence can repel folks, kill a campaign, no matter how many millions of dollars are being laid down for “endorsements” and “headlines”.

Based on your premise of speech inarticulation nullifying a candidacy for President, Thomas Jefferson, a Founding Father, author of Declaration of Independence should never have been President. He sounded “dumb”. I was a bit challenged this afternoon to get to a library, but I was curious and had a little bit of interest in research.

One of the Founding Fathers, author of The Declaration of Independence

“Although Jefferson became famous for his eloquent writings, he was a poor orator and was reported to have had a lisp. (He gave only two public speeches as president of the United States)”

“established his reputation as a writer on political issues, but not as an orator.”

“had attended his Duty in the House but a very small part of the time and when there had never spoken in public: and during the whole Time I satt [sic] with him in Congress, I never heard him utter three Sentences together.”

“His voice was not strong, and he was never a good speaker.”

“Freckled and sandy-haired, rather tall and awkward, Jefferson was eloquent as a correspondent, but he was no public speaker. In the Virginia House of Burgesses and the Continental Congress, he contributed his pen rather than his voice to the patriot cause. As the “silent member” of the Congress, Jefferson, at 33, drafted the Declaration of Independence. In years following he labored to make its words a reality in Virginia. Most notably, he wrote a bill establishing religious freedom, enacted in 1786.”

“Thomas Jefferson Was A Bad Public Speaker
Did you think George W. Bush was a terrible speaker?? You should have put him up against Jefferson to see who couldn’t pronounce “Nuclear”.? Jefferson’s lucky that they didn’t have television and YouTube around when he was in office, because he never would have been elected once, let alone twice.? If anybody was in need of Toastmasters (an international public speaking group), it was this guy.? When he had to speak publicly, he frequently mumbled and spoke in an inaudible voice that made it very difficult for people to hear him.? That?s not to say that his speeches were not well written and meaningful.? He just wasn?t able to give them in front of crowds.? John Adams once said, ?During the whole time I sat with him in Congress, I never heard him utter three sentences together.?? His fear of public speaking made him an incredibly private president who tried to avoid the spotlight.? For this reason, he started the tradition of sending theState of the Union message to Congress in writing so he would not have to present it.? This tradition was followed until 1913 when it was broken by Woodrow Wilson.”

“Despite his skills at writing and conversation, Jefferson was never a very competent public speaker.? When he had to speak publicly, he frequently mumbled and spoke in an inaudible voice that made it very difficult for people to hear him.? That?s not to say that his speeches were not well written and meaningful.? He just wasn?t able to give them in front of crowds.? John Adams once said, ?During the whole time I sat with him in Congress, I never heard him utter three sentences together.?? His fear of public speaking made him an incredibly private president who tried to avoid the spotlight.? For this reason, he started the tradition of sending the State of the Union message to Congress in writing so he would not have to present it.? This tradition was followed until 1913 when it was broken by Woodrow Wilson.”

1. http://images.gocomics.com/images/uu_com/samples/world-of-wonder/wow110626_sm_x1a.pdf

2. http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h664.html

3. http://www.monticello.org/site/research-and-collections/public-speaking

4. Reese.org

5. whitehouse.gov

6. My5Best.com

7. http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-facts-about-thomas-jefferson.php#ixzz1h7x9cobC

Don’t quote the Founding Fathers, how important they were to our society and forming the basis for our government and not be aware that one of the brightest bulbs in the bunch just happened to trip over his own words from time to time. Did it really matter? No. At the end of the day, it is always character that matters, not a 30-60 second soundbite in a media-hyped rapid fire debate stage, or even on the campaign trail after 5 back to back events in one day. I am not voting for a well rehearsed robot, and you shouldn’t be either. I am voting for results, and that candidate is Governor Rick Perry~

gekster

gunsrus

what more can one say

heraklios

to win over voters hurt by Obama’s policies who might be sympathetic to our message.

gunsrus

are you someone who would take painkillers away from cancer patients? Rob them?
What next, candy from babies?

aesthete

It would seem that you have missed the compelling practical and moral reasons for why government forcibly taking from some to give to others may not be a good idea, regardless of the intentions behind the idea. It would seem to me that conservatism is about nothing if it eschews this motivating idea.

gunsrus

she was all but forgotten by the mainstream media until she attacked Newt. Now she’s the heroine we can’t see enough of.

Bill S

I have been waiting fruitlessly for a GOP candidate to propose the repeal of Part D. I was hoping that was something that Paul Ryan would throw on the table. But like each and every entitlement program that has been passed – once it’s there, it’s there to stay. The American Entitlement Culture and the spineless politicians won’t stand for anything to be taken away.

greyeagle

This sounds like talking points for Ron Paul. I am from TX and disagree strongly with you. Perry has been vetted over and over. He has been re-elected Governor 3 times, so if there were too many flaws they would have been found before now. There is noting wrong with taking a salary and pension. Go back and look at the law. You obviously don’t like Perry but trashing him with lies and innuendo is pretty low. By all means support and vote for Santorum, but it doubtful that he would be electable. He has only served in the Senate years ago and could not win re-election in his own state. He is a good man, but that does not translate to electability.

heraklios

by a “compassionate” conservative who was selected by our party because he was “electable” Although GWB wasn’t as bad as many of our other nominees, how did this work out for us, really?

windwaker24

It’s a states’ issue. The federal government shouldn’t be bailing out any state for its foolishness. However, I don’t know if you can simply cut off people’s promised benefits without running into legal trouble. Whether the contract was done wisely or foolishly, the person did what was required of them, which was work X amount of years. The judge would have no other choice but to rule in their favor. In order to legally recoup something from the old federal workers with pension plans, they would have to be ASKED to enter a new contract, in which they have a right to accept or decline.

Bill S

There were absolutely some things he did wrong, as did Reagan and every other GOP president from the very beginning. Now, just as then, we must remember that no candidate (or President) is perfect and no conservative is perfect. The goal is to choose the best one possible, not the perfect one.

Of course we have to select someone who’s actually sane (:cough: anyone but Paul :cough:)

greyeagle

You are welcome to your opinion. The large influx of people also translates to a lot of companies moving there and bringing a lot of jobs.. No, the Texas Police are not hostile to the destitute either. Probably a lower number there than other areas.

heraklios

He also appointed excellent SCOTUS Justices (with a little prompting on the 2nd one) and cut taxes. The fact remains, however, that we got two big new government programs (Part D and NCLB) that will be hard to ever cut out.

greyeagle

Every state is different. Tx is required to have their pension system funded correctly. The pension systems mostly going bankrupt are in Union Blue states like California, New York and other north eastern states. There is not much problem in right to work states. Suggest your explore your information a little more.

aesthete

and some of his foreign policy was very good (esp the early strategery in the GWoT), but otherwise he ranged from flat-out sucking to being an active impediment for conservatives. I don’t think you have to be one of those TrueConservative harpies to say that and try to aim a little higher next time.

goodgovernance

Even putting Romney’s phoniness to one side, the way he runs his campaign tells you how he would govern: weakly.

The pattern’s clear. Romney is cautious to the point of timidity. Mittness Protection, hiding from the media (even Fox). Never making a bold, conservative move – too much risk to the self that way.

If he were ever to lead, we would get no bold conservative agenda, during a time when the country needs some serious change. Romney would basically kick the can down the road on all the tough decisions, favoring the status quo whenever possible. “Don’t rock the boat, don’t rock the boat,” he’ll tell everyone around him.

And as for Supreme Court nominees? Romney would pick nothing but Souters, in order to minimize political risk during the confirmation hearings.

greyeagle

Tell the truth, you are NOT a Perry Supporter. You have another dog in this fight.

katem

To paraphrase Reagan, someone who is with you 80% of the time is a friend and ally. Huntsman’s record is largely conservative. Gingrich and Romney have held similar views on climate change (albeit not without flipflopping). The big issues for this election are the economy and, to a lesser extent, foreign policy. Huntsman is conservative on both.

tricianc

“With Texas facing a massive budget deficit heading into the 2012-2013 biennium, Perry worked to pass a budget that cut spending by 8% from the previous budget and did not raise taxes.

State spending grew from $30 billion in FY2002 (his very first budget) , the first half of the biennium budget passed under Perry, to $39.4 billion in FY2010, a 31% increase in nominal terms over the nine years. However,when looking at Texas?s spending on an annualized basis, spending increased an average of 3.9% per year, which is excellent compared to the state?s average annual population plus inflation growth rate of 4.2% over the same time period.

One reason for the slow growth of state spending was because Governor Perry made frequent use of his veto power. Another is the existence of a conservative Texas legislature. During his tenure as Governor, Perry vetoed hundreds of millions of dollars worth of spending, perhaps even a lot more. It is important to note that it is difficult to give Perry credit for a specific dollar amount of vetoes due to the complexities of the Texas budget process. Some of the Governor?s vetoes were on spending bills contingent on bills previously struck down by Perry. Other vetoes killed legislative language from budget bills which authorized spending from separate bills that never passed. Regardless, a review suggests that Perry did aggressively look to cut spending with his veto pen”.

retire05

“perhaps generated a resentment to others”

Are you judging others by your own standards? Have you ever read, ANYWHERE, where Texas resented those from other states that come here to find work and be productive residents of Texas?

Why do I sense some animosity toward Texas on your part?

Now, let’s compare apples to apples, shall we?

Mittens saw his workforce increase by 16,742 (which would pretty well mean that only took in those who had reached the age by which they sought work. The unemployment rate dropped from 5.6 to 4.6, just 1%, under Mitt while Massachusetts saw jobs increase by 51,362.

Now compare that to Texas:

Workforce in January, 2007 compared to January, 2003:
Increase of 512,709

Employed: Jan. 2003 of 10,173,909 compared to January, 2007 of 10,901,614 for an increase of 727,705 jobs.

Unemployment went from 6.6 in Jan. 2003 to 4.5 in Jan.2007.

Bottom line? There were more jobs created in Texas the four years Mitt was governor than there were increases in the workforce. For Mitt to have kept up, on a population scale, he would have had to create at least approximately 182,000 jobs during his tenure. While MA had roughly 25% of the population of Texas, Mitt only created 7% of the jobs created in Texas.

Want more?

greyeagle

What groups would that be?

greyeagle

Iowa simply has blown their chances. The people there are supposed to be conservative. They sure don’t reflect that.

greyeagle

After the very ugly comments you just made, it would be interesting to see just who your horse is in this race. Comment though, if Rick Perry was dumb, he would not have been elected Governor of the second largest state in the US, three times. TX also is the biggest job creator as well. So dumb? You are big on insults, but lacking on facts. This more of a hit piece than anything else.

tailfins1959

I’m concerned that those who are near-homeless reading less than the best information. My information comes from looking at unemployment rates as well as reading experiences from homelessforums,org and Prisontalk. A good place to come back to life is a mix of job availability, level of law enforcement interference, and availability of help whether it be public or private. It’s hard to put it into words when experience contradicts beliefs. Tennessee was hell on Earth. Massachusetts was shockingly easy. You can’t just pretend experiences didn’t happen. Lots of people post about getting rough treatment by law enforcement/justice system in the South.

Being a conservative is easy in the comfort of a University conference room with the College Republicans. It’s harder to balance once the cold hard world smacks you around a bit.

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

Yeah if I want that kind of propaganda I’ll turn to Daily Kos or something.

katem

I disagree that Gingrich has a chance to beat Obama. Gingrich is probably the least electable candidate in the field. His hypocrisy, enormous ego and serial flipflops already turn off Independents, who will decide the election. A Gingrich nomination will turn the focus of the election away from the incumbent and onto the challenger — not a good thing. Gingrich could not govern effectively as Speaker; his own party pushed him out of office. Look at what a couple of weeks of negative ads has done to Gingrich’s candidacy in Iowa and then imagine the toll that a sustained campaign by Team Obama against Gingrich will have. Plenty of Republicans won’t vote for him because a Gingrich presidency would be disastrous. If he’s the nominee, Gingrich could take too many GOP congressmen/senators down with him in 2012.

Perry is likely unelectable too. Not only because of his weak debate performances but because, fairly or unfairly, he reminds voters of George W. Bush. Four years on, Bush is still deeply unpopular among many Independents.

Santorum and Bachmann have no appeal to moderates. Paul has limited appeal outside his core following.

The only two candidates who can plausibly make the argument that they can win the general election are Romney and Huntsman. Of the two, Huntsman is the most electable; just ask any Independent. He is also the consistent conservative (albeit with a few moderate positions). Romney’s transformation from Bill Weld liberal Republican to social conservative presents a challenge for him. And Erick is right that the perception that Romney is of Wall Street will hurt in 2012. Romney might be able to pull off a win, esp. if the economy worsens. But Huntsman is the strongest candidate for the general election. Most moderates I know will vote for Huntsman over Obama. A smaller number will vote for Romney over Obama but none will vote for any other candidate over Obama. They know that Huntsman is mainly right of center but are attracted by his temperament, nuanced views and willingness to work with the other side to get things done. At the end of the day, it’s all about who can win the general election.

tomatin

He’ll pick the candidate that will get through the nomination process the easiest which means indeed he’ll pick Souters.

Your point about his campaign too is correct. He has all his Super Pacs and surrogates do his dirty work. While he tries to pretend he’s above the fray. But when he get’s challenged directly he can’t take it.

His whole legacy in government is doing the easiest thing politically.

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

“Sebelius has ceded control over Obamacare insurance perimeters to the states”

[parameters]

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

…recalculation is in-order, because the Constitutional Conservatives in the TEA Party Movement won’t accept Huntsman’s pacifism.

http://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com nathanalbright

If independents (many of whom are conservatives, let us remember) aren’t willing to go with people who are serious about solving the problems of this country, including long-term ones such as the growth of Washington and the corrupt cronyism that has exploded in the last few years because they come from the wrong state (like Texas), then this nation cannot be saved. Let us also remember, as has been pointed out ad nauseum, that putting squishy moderates to appeal to moderates hasn’t worked out very well. What makes you think it would work better this time?

bzip

Well I guess I was partially right. Iowa faith leader wants Bachmann to drop and endorse Santorum. To me this is bachwards though, Santorum is the least electable (in the sense he has been typically polling the least al the time).

In my opinion both Bachmann and Santorum should drop out, neither one of them have a chance at winning or going beyond Iowa.

TRENDING: Iowa faith leader asked Bachmann to consider dropping out, campaign says
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/20/iowa-faith-leader-asked-bachmann-to-consider-dropping-out-campaign-says/

http://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com nathanalbright

Bachman and Santorum should both drop out and endorse Perry. Problem solved.

romansdaughter

is an all day excursion as you have to take a boat to town and back. But it was quite satisfying, Sounds like you were busy too. When I was a kid I loved paper dolls of course I had a big imagination and would dream up all kinds of wonderful scenarios. Smile. About the AFA/Family Leader endorsements I was pretty bummed also but keep reminding myself that a lot of these endorsements that are going on right now doesn’t seem to help at all instead seems to back fire. I believe God is in control and He will put whomever He desires and maybe it won’t be whom we desire but His will will be done. Of course, I am praying it is Gov. Perry.

http://www.changeforrickperry.org louisianapatriette

I recently watched a documentary called “Into the Amazon.” This particular Christian ministry that made the documentary actually went into the jungle, exploring, studying the different plants, visiting Machu Picchu (spelling???), etc. But I know from following their blog as they were making this documentary that they had to leave the jungle in order to get internet access. So, my question: how are you accessing RedState? Are you in a town where you can get internet? (I think it’s wonderful that you’re ministering there!)

Loved paper dolls as a kid myself. My brother would have his little action figures and I’d have my Grace Kelly/Princess Diana/Jacqueline Kennedy paper dolls–and my, what adventures we had!

Agree wholeheartedly with your last sentences. God’s Will is always done; I’m certainly praying that Governor Perry will be our next President.

romansdaughter

This Christian business man gave the Mission school 14,000 dollars internet “thing” and even came down on his break time and set it all up for us. We don’t live real far from civilization…maybe 25 miles away along the river.
Of course at times due to storms and lightning we have to unplug and at night out here the generator is turned off at 9:30 PM and doesn’t come on again till 6:00 AM. So a different way of life.
I am certainly glad to hear that much prayer is going on in Rick Perry’s behalf. In my mind he is the best candidate on record, values and principles so I am definitely supporting him.

thosjefferson

Romney succeeds in raising millions of dollars, funding over a hundred companies, and this is the unfortunate side of capitalism?

jackofalltrades writes like an Obama speechwriter.

Not to mention, I’m not aware of anyone being forced to buy anything at gunpoint. Bizarre rhetoric there.

jakeofalltrades

What happens if you refuse to pay for healthcare and the fine imposed for your refusal?

Are you such a flaming statist that you can’t see the consequences of Mitt’s policies? Stop treating him like a paragon of capitalism – he’s the exact opposite.

http://www.changeforrickperry.org louisianapatriette

God ALWAYS provides, doesn’t he? Wow! I can’t wait to share that with my folks. I’m always telling them what’s going on at RedState, so they know all about romansdaughter, Scope, pttx333, etc. ! (Speaking of which, haven’t seen pttx333 in some time, hope she’s recovered from her illness.)

Don’t worry. People are praying for Governor Perry. One of the families at our church definitely supports him, I know that for a fact; there are people I’ve “met” on RedState, Twitter, and HotAir who are also lifting him up in prayer. My little siblings even pray every morning that “Mr. Rick Perry would be our next president . . .” And we know prayer has had amazing effects in our nation’s history!

jakeofalltrades

How else to reconcile your incredible spinning of the big-government socialist Romney into a paragon of laissez faire economics?

romansdaughter

My brothers via email tease me all the time about me spending so much time with all my friends on RedState. I am mentioning you guys all the time and of course they hear all the time my enthusiasm for Rick Perry. Yes, the effectual fervent prayers of a righteous man or woman availeth much.
Scope told me that she got an email from Pttx333 as she is with her son or daughter right now and she was doing better but can’t do as much RedState…probably as grandkids that she has to love up on. But we sure do miss her, right?

kegan05

What I wouldn’t give to see these two in the White House. They are both reformers who have the experience needed to get this country going again. Jindal has worked miracles in Louisiana and Perry has done a stellar job in Texas. They could take Obama to the wood shed.

Rick Perry for President – 2012!

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

COMMENTS

ALL

COMMENTS

POPULAR

#RSRH

PICK YOUR STATE & GET LOCAL