« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

What A Big Government Conservative Looks Like

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  January 6th, 2012 at 12:13 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

I’m rather tired of all the people who don’t like Romney trying to claim Rick Santorum is not a big government conservative, or not a pro-life statist.  I would support him before I would support Romney too, but I have no intention of giving up ideological and intellectual consistency in the name of beating Mitt Romney.

Rick Santorum is a pro-life statist.  He is.  You will have to deal with it.  He is a big government conservative.  Santorum is right on social issues, but has never let his love of social issues stand in the way of the creeping expansion of the welfare state.  In fact, he has been complicit in the expansion of the welfare state.

Suddenly we’re all forgetting what a big government conservatism is. The term was coined by Fred Barnes in defense of George W. Bush’s “compassionate conservative” agenda. Bush intended to use domestic social welfare policy for conservative ends. In the process, he expanded the welfare state to do so through No Child Left Behind, the prescription drug benefit, etc. Rick Santorum was a willing participant in this.

Santorum is a conservative. He is. But his conservative is largely defined by his social positions and the ends to which government would be deployed. But he has chosen as the means to those conservative ends bigger government. We see big government conservatives most clearly when they deviate from the tireless efforts of people like Mike Pence and Jim DeMint and the others who were willing to oppose George W. Bush’s expansion of the welfare state. Rick Santorum was not among them.

I and some friends, none of us Romney fans, have set about exploring Santorum’s record since Wednesday morning.  Here now is a non-exhaustive list of what we have found. It does not even include his support for No Child Left Behind, Medicare Part D, debt ceiling increases, funding the bridge to nowhere, refusing to redirect earmark allocations to disaster relief along the Gulf Coast post Katrina, etc.

This is not the record of a man committed to scaling back the welfare state or the nanny state. Had he been up for re-election in 2010 instead of 2006, this is the record of a man who the tea party movement would have primaried. The only real justification for supporting him now is he is not Mitt Romney, but I still believe we can do better.

See for yourself.



 

NEA
Voted for taxpayer funding of the National Endowment for the Arts.
Voted against a 10% cut in the budget for National Endowment for the Arts.

Bankruptcy
Voted for a Schumer amendment to make the debts of pro-life demonstrators not dischargeable in bankruptcy.


Defense and Foreign Policy

Voted for the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC).
Voted against requiring the President to certify that the CWC is effectively verifiable.

Voted against requiring the President to certify that that Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, North Korea, China, and all other countries determined to be state sponsors of terror have joined CWC prior to submitting the instrument of ratification.

Voted for the START II Treaty
Voted to allow the sale of supercomputers to China.
Voted to ban antipersonnel landmines
Voted against increasing defense spending offset by equivalent cuts in non-defense spending.
Voted to require that Federal bureaucrats get the same payraises as uniformed military.
Voted to allow food and medicine sales to state sponsors of terror and tyranical regimes such as Libya and Cuba.
Voted to limit the President’s authority to impose sanctions on nations for reasons of national security unless the sanctions were approved by a multilateral regime.
Voted against requiring Congressional authorization for military action in Bosnia.
Voted to give $25 million in foreign aid to North Korea
Voted to weaken alien terrorist deportation provisions.   If the Court determines that the evidence must be withheld for national security reasons, the Justice Department must still provide a summary of the evidence sufficient for the alien terrorist to mount a defense against deportation.
Voted against delaying the India Nuclear until the President certified that India had agreed to suspend military-to-military exchanges with Iran.
Voted against the Conventional Trident Missile Program

Nominations
Voted for Richard Paez to the 9th Curcuit (cloture)
Voted for Sonia Sotomayor, Circuit Judge
Voted for Richard Holbrooke to be Ambassador to the UN
Voted for Margaret Morrow to be District Judge
Voted twice for Marsha Berzon to the 9thg Circuit
Voted for Mary McLaughlin to be District Judge
Voted for Tim Dyk to be District Judge
Voted for James Brady to be District Judge

Labor
Voted against National Right to Work Act
Voted against Real of Davis-Bacon Prevailing union wages
Voted for Alexis Herman to be Secretary of Labor
Voted for mandatory Federal child care funding
Voted for Trade Adjustment Assistance.
Voted for Job Corps funding
Voted twice in support of Fedex Unionization
Voted against allowing a waiver of Davis-Bacon in emergency situations.
Voted for minimum wage increases six times here here here here here and here
Voted to require a union representative on an IRS oversight board.
Voted to exempt IRS union representative from criminal ethics laws.
Voted against creating independent Board of Governors to investigate IRS abuses.

Guns

Voted to require pawn shops to do background checks on people who pawn a gun.
Voted twice to make it illegal to sell a gun without a secure storage or safety device
Voted for a Federal ban on possession of “assault weapons” by those under 18.
Voted for Federal funding for anti-gun education programs in schools.
Voted for anti-gun juvenile justice bill.

Reform

Voted for funding for the legal services corporation.
Voted twice for a Congressional payraise.
Voted to impose a uniform Federal mandate on states to force them to allow convicted rapits, arsonists, drug kingpins, and all other ex-convicts to vote in Federal elections.
Voted for the Specter “backup plan” to allow campaign finance reform to survive if portions of the bill were found unconstitutional.
Voted to mandate discounted broadcast times for politicians.
Voted for a McCain amendment to require State and local campaign committees to report all campaign contributions to the FEC and to require all campaign contributions to be reported to the FEC within 24 hours within 90 days of an election.

Immigration
Voted against increasing the number of immigration investigators
Voted to allow illegal immigrants to receive the earned income credit before becoming citizens
Voted to give SSI benefits to legal aliens.
Voted to give welfare benefits to naturalized citizens without regard to to the earnings of their sponsors.
Voted against hiring an additional 1,000 border partrol agents, paid for by reductions in state grants.

Taxes
Voted against a flat tax.
Voted to increase tobacco taxes to pay for Medicare prescription drugs
Voted to increase tobacco taxes to fund health insurance subsidies for small businesses.
Voted to increase tobacco taxes to pay for an $8 billion increase in child healh insurance.
Voted to increase tobacco taxes to pay for an increase in NIH funding.
Voted twice for internet taxes.
Voted to allow gas tax revenues to be used to subsidize Amtrak.
Voted to strike marriage penalty tax relief and instead provide fines on tobacco companies.
Voted against repealing the Clinton 4.3 cent gas tax increase.
Voted to increase taxes by $2.3 billion to pay for an Amtrak trust fund.
Voted to allow welfare to a minor who had a child out of wedlock and who resided with an adult who was on welfare within the previous two years.
Voted to increase taxes by $9.4 billion to pay for a $9.4 billion increase in student loans.
Voted to say that AMT patch is more important than capital gains and dividend relief.

Welfare
Voted against food stamp reform
Voted against Medicaid reform
Voted against TANF reform
Voted to increase the Social Services Block Grant from $1 billion to $2 billion
Voted to increase the FHA loan from $170,000 to $197,000.  Also opposed increasing GNMA guaranty from 6 basis points to 12.
Voted for $2 billion for low income heating assistance.

Waste
Sponsored An amendment to increase Amtrak funds by $550 million
Voted to use HUD funds for the Joslyn Art Museum (NE), the Stand Up for Animals project (RI) and the Seattle Art Museum’s Olympic Sculpture Project (WA)
Voted to increase spending on social programs by $7 billion
Voted to increase NIH funding by $1.6 billion.
Voted to increase NIHnding by $700 million
Voted to for a $2 million earmark to renovate the Vulcan Monument (AL)
Voted for a $1 billion bailout for the steel industry
Voted against requiring that highway earmarks would come out of a state’s highway allocation
Voted to allow Market Access Program funds to go to foreign companies.
Voted to allow OPIC to increase its administrative costs by 50%
Voted against transferring $20 million from Americorps to veterans.
Voted for the $140 billion asbestos compensation bill.
Voted against requiring a uniform medical criteria to ensure asbestos claims were legitimate.
Voted to increase community development programs by $2 billion.

Spending and Entitlements
Voted to make Medicare part B premium subsidies an new entitlement.
Voted against paying off the debt ($5.6 trillion at the time) within 30 years.
Voted to give $18 billion to the IMF.
Voted to raid Social Security instead of using surpluses to pay down the debt.

Health Care
Voted to allow states to impose health care mandates that are stricter than proposed new Federal mandates, but not weaker.
Voted twice for Federal mental health parity mandates in health insurance.
Voted against a allow consumers the option to purchase a plan outside the parity mandate.

Education
Voted to increase Federal funding for teacher testing
Voted to increase spending for the Department of Education by $3.1 billion.
Voted against requiring courts to consider the impact of IDEA awards on a local school district.

Energy

Voted to allow the President to designate certain sites as interim nuclear waste storage sites in the event that he determines that Yucca Mountain is not a suitable site for a permanent waste repository. Those sites are as follows: the nuclear waste site in Hanford, Washington; the Savannah River Site in South Carolina; Barnwell County, South Carolina; and the Oak Ridge Reservation in Tennessee.

Voted to make fuel price gouging a Federal crime.

Tags:

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • gipper823

    Nobody wants to look that fact in the eye (least of all me), but that’s who it’s gonna be.

    Even though he only gets about 26% of people who actually want him to be the nominee, the conservative vote has been beat up and split and kicked around to the point that we couldn’t all rally around one person.

    Sucks.

  • dave2131

    Big Government = Big Fail

  • sunshinek67

    with an R next to his name, extreme social values warrior that will fail the GOP miserably in the general. From the research that I have gathered, he comes across to some as arrogant and flippant. And has no problem whining his view point to infinity, seen first hand in the debate, to get others to agree with him. Any argument, debate that he has ever engaged in and won, it was considered secession. To get him to STOP TALKING. Following the embed reporters on Twitter they are suffering war of attrition, desperate for resolution,’ is this guy front runner or not, we are not going to make it’…one ABC reporter, “I finally got up, and my foot was asleep”…RCP reporter”7:15pm and he announces ‘I got til 9:15pm’ any questions?” Following his stump speeches, in Iowa at one time in an audience of 3 he took an hour to answer one question.

    Come on America, please wake up. Big Government spender / Big waste of time.

  • quill67

    There are times when members of congress have to vote for or against something that on the face of it sounds good.

    This is why advocacy groups look at certain key votes. Maybe you should read the diary: Rick Santorum: Yes he is a True Conservative.

    I love Rick Perry but I am not going to tear down another conservative to help him win. Sorry. Romney yes—the rest (other than Ron Paul) are fine.

    http://www.redstate.com/wosg/2012/01/06/rick-santorum-yes-he-is-a-true-conservative/

  • quill67

    There are times when members of congress have to vote for or against something that on the face of it sounds good.

    This is why advocacy groups look at certain key votes. Maybe you should read the diary: Rick Santorum: Yes he is a True Conservative.

    I love Rick Perry but I am not going to tear down another conservative to help him win. Sorry. Romney yes—the rest (other than Ron Paul) are fine.

    http://www.redstate.com/wosg/2012/01/06/rick-santorum-yes-he-is-a-true-conservative/

  • mike90815

    This should be the definitive post about Santorum’s big-goverment record. Thanks, EE. Case closed.

    While I agree with Santorum on same-sex marriage and abortion, his anti-contraception stand just goes too far. No-one who takes a position against contraception is ever going to be elected President in this country.

    And remember, “sodomy” legally defined as all non-procreative sex, including oral sex and masturbation.

  • drivlikejehu

    Basically he’s Huckabee without the charisma or executive experience. Um, no thank you. I’ll take Willard over that.

  • quill67

    There are times when members of congress have to vote for or against something that on the face of it sounds good.

    This is why advocacy groups look at certain key votes. Maybe you should read the diary: Rick Santorum: Yes he is a True Conservative.

    I love Rick Perry but I am not going to tear down another conservative to help him win. Sorry. You can attack Romney because his record is clearly liberal and his words supported those liberal view. Perry Santorum and Gingrich are all acceptable.

    http://www.redstate.com/wosg/2012/01/06/rick-santorum-yes-he-is-a-true-conservative/

  • nicephorus1phokas

    Because that’s really how it is.

  • nicephorus1phokas

    Because that’s really how it is.

  • Change Jar Conservative

    I’m coming around to the idea of Huntsman.

    I think there is a good chance he finishes second in New Hampshire and that is enough to get him into the next stage.

  • gipper823

    We’ll all do what we’re supposed to do and vote for Romney. Obama won’t win again.

  • Waderic

    This is why nominating/electing anyone with congressional experience in Washington DC is problematic.
    Although I feel like some of these votes are somewhat trivial and do not bother me as much as they probably do some others, I can’t help but wonder how many of these votes were in order to get support on other pieces of legislation.
    We all hate the deal-making culture in Washington, but like it or not, its a big part of the political sausage-making process. Rick has admitted a few times that he voted for or against some legislation based on what he had to do to get other things passed.
    While I don’t excuse this, this doesn’t necessarily reflect how he would operate as a chief executive.
    The real problem for me is, I’m not sure how to know what he would do if he could set the agenda himself and not have to be as much of a team player.

  • red_oakster

    Here’s betting Huntsman joins Herman and Michelle come Wednesday.

  • red_oakster

    If I can’t have Perry, I’d settle for either Santorum or Newt. Btw I suspect Santorum will poll just fine in Pennsylvania against Obama. If he does that gives Democrats one gigantic electoral college headache.

  • http://libertarian-neocon.blogspot.com/ libertarianneocon

    Great post. Santorum is a big government conservative. Unfortunately there are no small government conservatives in the race (I dont count Paul as he is a fringe candidate and not a conservative). Is it too much to ask for someone who believes in free markets, individual liberty AND a strong defense?

    I will vote for Santorum if I have to but conservatives really need to focus on one candidate at some point in the next two weeks or we will be stuck with Willard, who I don’t think I can vote for with good conscience.

  • sunshinek67

    will be forced to focus on. We won’t be talking about jobs and the economy, we’ll be talking about porn.

    I have lassoed my 16 year old son into this political blogosphere via Twitter, blog sites and some news sites. He is watching and paying attention. Instinctively he knows that Rick Perry is the only guy that stands for honor and integrity, based on his record alone.

    Santorum is extremely misguided in equating time spent serving in the military, with time served in the Senate, which is honorable to a degree to be sure, depending on how you act once you get there though.

    This is an Perry campaign ad. I am incensed by the Senator’s remarks, an affront to all who have ever served, my dad, TAMU corp ’55 and Army and brother, a Gulf War Air Force vet ’91 included.

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

    I’m not sure how you can claim Santorum is not a Big Government Republican, but I cannot see how anyone would have said that in the first place.

  • rharrison

    two weeks ago. Santorum only wins Iowa because he hadn’t been vetted properly. Most of us here knew he was a big government conservative, but if the totality of it had been known, the ‘surge’ would have been blunted before he became a contender (in Iowa). Sigh

  • cheetah2

    If it’s gonna be Romney, we better be ready to fight for him tooth and nail, because he will be miles better as president than Obama.

    We can’t afford a novice in the White House again. Our poor country is all beat up and battered and it is partly because an unqualified person won the election in 2008. That’s why I am still for Perry and that’s why I don’t care if his continuing on helps Romney in the end.

    Another thing is, we need to work our tails off to get true conservatives in Congress. That is why I am already making plans to caucus in my state in March, even if Governor Perry doesn’t make it that far. We have a senate race to win here and I want to work to get the best conservative Republican possible.

  • kamiller42

    He has no desire to do anything with contraception at a federal level other than eliminate federal funding for contraception. And really, should your neighbor be paying for your contraception?

  • bonnman

    what makes you think they will rally around him in the general? While its true Romney could win not because people like Romney but because they dislike Obama, thats not much of a strategy or a reason to work hard for a candidate. Not to mention it does nothing to advance conservative principles.

  • izoneguy
  • texastaxpayer

    Keep dreaming. Obama will shred Romney and we will pay the Mccain price twice….

  • Tman8

    I’m not going to foolishly run around saying that Rick Santorum is not a conservative. To make such a claim is to fundamentally misunderstand what a conservative actually is.

    Even after that litany of votes (which requires further analysis then simply cuting and pasting a voting record) Erick still says he would vote for Santorum over Romney. Why? The answer will probably tell you why Santorum is a conservative.

    Erick is getting media attention by calling Santorum and others “pro-life statists” – well the stole that term statist from Mark Levin. Levin understands what conservatism is traditionally and he vouches for Santorum. He says Santorum is not a statist.

  • jakeofalltrades

    So… maybe re-think that?

    Romney is pretending to be Reagan. People are stupid and will fall for it.

  • sunshinek67

    like we are doing now. The msm will hammer him hard as a right wing bedroom nut before it’s all said and done.

  • red_oakster

    I’m a Perry supporter, but Santorum is a serious economic and foreign policy conservative. He has endorsed the Ryan plan. More important, he is closing in on Romney in South Carolina and is only five points behind Ron Paul in New Hampshire. If the polling continues as is, Newt may not make to South Carolina, and Perry may not make it out of there. If it’s a choice between Romney and Santorum, I’ll take the Rickster any day of the week.

  • jakeofalltrades

    IMO.

  • trevorb

    like Romney, but if he’s the nominee, I will support him, because he is still better than who we currently have. Just look at what Obama’s done.

  • rharrison

    He’s electable. Wait till the first poll comes out that shows Obama against Santorum.

  • YnotNOW

    Is a pretty compelling message. Fear and anger are strong motivators.
    (love would be stronger, but we’re talking politicians here, after all)

  • YnotNOW

    Is a pretty compelling message. Fear and anger are strong motivators.
    (love would be stronger, but we’re talking politicians here, after all)

  • Tman8

    I will admit that with Huntsman you do get a pretty conservative record as governor on fiscal and social issues – but with Perry you get the same thing plus someone that is much better on a strong national defense. Huntsman joins Paul as the only GOP candidates running on cutting defense.

    Plus you have the fact that Huntsman like to spend his time popping up on MSNBC and sticking his finger in the eye of the conservative base. Those crazy evolution deniers as he calls them. All Rick Perry likes to do is just talk about the greatness of America and the need to return to First Principles and uphold the Constitution.

  • rharrison

    Santorum.

  • mljones

    … of representational democracy. I arrived in DC as a small government conservative 6 months before Reagan did. Over the next 25 years I watched him and other Republicans be forced into serial hypocrisy again and again and again by the combination of voting and financial constituencies that sent them to DC. Wasteful spending is money that benefits somebody else somewhere else. Too many constituents demand to have their cake and to eat it too – loudly embraced conservative principles held by both the constituent and their representative be damned.

  • texastaxpayer

    He failed as governor of Massachusetts and I can prove it with two stats. 47th out of 50 in job creation and economic growth during a growth period. The US economy was booming between 2002 and 2006 and Romney’s policies fell flat. He can’t back up his rhetoric an the democrats know it. His private sector experience is going to do more harm than good in the general. Consider the American public attitudes toward wall street right now and then consider how well a vulture capitalist who used his inheritance to enrich himself further by outsourcing American jobs. Yeah its going to be peachy trying to support this man in the general to independents and right leaning dems. Can’t wait.
    Second 34% approval rating, that was where Romney stood at the end of his first and only term governing. After all his “compromises” and doing what he “had to do” in a liberal state. Romney couldn’t even credibly run for reelection.

    Romney is a ticket to Obamas’s second term. Period end of story. The man doesn’t have the resume, story or background to beat Obama. Even if we all grin out to support him and that is questionable will the independents? I think they will look at their choices, see they are in fact exactly the same and stay home. This also hurts us down ticket. Romney is a huge gift to Obama in that he hurts our chances to tale the senate and hold the house as well. Sorry to be the harbinger of bad tidings but that’s the reality as I see it.

  • federalfarmer1

    Did he expend political capital pushing any of these liberal positions? Did he break with a significant number of conservative senators to go in the liberal direction? Without context this is not helpful.

  • texastaxpayer

    :)

  • bonnman

    You’ll have to actually convince everyone else and I don’t mean just who to vote for but who people will actually go out and support. Do you think Ron Paul supporters will rally behind Romney and campaign for him or sit at home? The fear mongering strategy will only last as long as there is fear and that is drying up, then you’re left with just Romney and he hasn’t differentiated himself enough from Obama to get anyone to switch.

  • texastaxpayer

    But the press loves mittens much like Mccain and Romney hasn’t been hit yet. That coupled with the fact that he isn’t the nominee yet so they have no interest in tearing him down yet makes me suspicious of the “polls”. I seem to remember Mccain was favored in the “polls” right up untill he won the nomination as well, same polls as a matter of fact. So history suggests….

  • oldlady

    can’t help wondering what ever happened to the will of the Republican voters in the other 49 states????? Did the ignorant voters of Iowa crown Romney as the Republican candidate for all fifty states before the rest of us have even gone to the polls??? As Governor Perry stated. Iowa was only the first leg of the marathon.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    Thanks for sharing the diary I made. The argument that Santorum is a solid conservative is valid. It doesnt contradict the votes Erick dredged up, as it has been acknowledged that Santorum isnt 100% conservative in his record, in particular on spending, and has done some trimming of his sails to cater to his blue state electorate.

    So Erick compiled his list of those 15% deviations and calls him a ‘statist’ … using a PaulBot swearword. OK, if Santorum is a statist so is every GOP candidate running, including the earmark taking Ron Paul. Santorums is behind cut, cap and balance and has a more aggressive tax and $5 trillion spending cut agenda to match it, for less taxes, spending and regulation.

    Some, like “Voted for a McCain amendment to require State and local campaign committees to report all campaign contributions to the FEC and to require all campaign contributions to be reported to the FEC within 24 hours within 90 days of an election.” … miss the context, like for example, how Santorum voted AGAINST McCain-Feingold.

    But most disturbing is the political calculation behind this. Either Santorum is ‘in the way’ of Perry so lets destroy Santorum to give Perry a chance (never mind that its the least of Perry’s problems and Perry’s chances slipped to nil post Iowa) … OR … even worse, Erick has bought the lie that it would be better for conservatives to have Romney than Santorum as standard bearer.

    Either way, the hidden agenda and end result are the same – Romney will become the nominee while conservatives squabble.

    As it is, this is becoming 2008 redux:

    2012 Romney plays role of 2008 McCain
    2012 Newt plays role of 2008 Romney
    Santorum is this year’s Huckabee
    Perry is this year’s Fred Thompson
    Huntsman is the Rudy G of the race

  • texastaxpayer

    You don’t seem to apply that logic of yours when your discussing other candidates failures farmer? Little bias on display?

  • jeromefc

    In the span of about two weeks, Erick has done more “vetting” of Santorum’s record than he’s done of Perry’s over the course of the ENTIRE CAMPAIGN. (And before you say it, Perrybots, criticizing Perry’s campaign isn’t the same as criticizing his record.) Whatever your agenda here is, Erick, let’s not pretend it’s “ideological and intellectual consistency.

  • jakeofalltrades

    n/waivering

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    “Is it too much to ask for someone who believes in free markets, individual liberty AND a strong defense?”

    No it’s not… but you have THREE candidates who fit that bill – Gingrich, Perry and Santorum.

    It *IS* too much to ask that any candidate be 100% perfect plus electable etc.

    Erick is doing Yoeman’s work trying to ‘warn’ us about Santorum … as if these flyspecks will matter much at all (wow, voted for Start II, is that really so bad?) when we are faced in November with the choice of moderate Mitt vs leftist Barack.

  • A_Texan

    All but anarchists believe we should have a government or a state. All but totalitarians believe that government should have a limited purpose. Within that spectrum, how much state makes you a statist?

    If Santorum is a statist by his support for certain votes, can you identify any of them where Perry publicly went the other way? (NCLB, Medicare expansion, etc.). It is not enough to say, for instance, that he was not in Congress. He was a very prominent citizen, and a thoughtful man. His opposition as Bush’s successor most certainly would have a made a difference. If he said nothing, when his voice was so critical, he either supported them, or was indifferent, or was guilty of a grave sin of omission.

  • trevorb

    no kidding; he also has a thin skin. As the conservative field narrows, he’s going to have a harder time staying ahead.

    That being said, I’ll vote for him if I must, same as I held my nose and voted for McCain.

  • Dafyd

    (nt)

  • drothgery

    Obama led McCain by a smaller margin than the other prospective nominees in some polls, but if McCain led at all (which I don’t remember ever happening) it was only briefly between the convention and the knives coming out for Palin.

    In contrast, Mitt has been leading Obama head-to-head for months — and none of the other prospective nominees have been.

  • A_Texan

    If I understand your efforts, you reject Romney and believe we need a not-Romney other than Santorum.

    I recall four years ago, when we Fredheads were eager for Thompson to surge back in SC, where he put all his eggs and decided he needed to take out Huckabee and take his support. The results was a narrow Huckabee loss to McCain, which propelled McCain forward from glory to glory.

    At this point, right after Iowa, Huckabee was in a similar place as Santorum is today–low teens in NH, low 20s in SC, but Perry is far weaker than THompson at this point. THompson was around 5 % in NH, Perry’s at 0-1%. Thompson was around 13% in SC, Perry is around 5%.

    Absent Gingrich and Santorum utterly imploding and Perry having some unprecedented debate performances, he will not win SC. I bet he will not get 10%. But what he may do, is hand SC to Romney. And then he’ll endorse him.

  • nicephorus1phokas

    so conservatives are basically left with supporting conservatives for lower offices in 2012 and waiting for our chance in 2016. If you think conservatives will “do what their supposed to and vote for Romney” just go to the next meeting of your local Tea Party and ask them if this is their plan.

  • nicephorus1phokas

    so conservatives are basically left with supporting conservatives for lower offices in 2012 and waiting for our chance in 2016. If you think conservatives will “do what their supposed to and vote for Romney” just go to the next meeting of your local Tea Party and ask them if this is their plan.

  • nicephorus1phokas

    I think they’re blue in the face for lack of oxygen from holding their noses for so long! For many conservatives this year, it’s conservative or bust. No conservative = No vote for the GOP. Period.

  • nicephorus1phokas

    I think they’re blue in the face for lack of oxygen from holding their noses for so long! For many conservatives this year, it’s conservative or bust. No conservative = No vote for the GOP. Period.

  • http://libertarian-neocon.blogspot.com/ libertarianneocon

    Santorum isn’t a small government conservative he is more of a paternalistic conservative who believes in a central role for the state in managing people’s lives. Back when the fight was not between conservatives and socialists it was between conservatives and classical liberal and Santorum would not have been on the classical liberal side. Check out this quote:

    “This whole idea of personal autonomy, well I don?t think most conservatives hold that point of view. Some do. They have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down and keep our regulations low, that we shouldn?t get involved in the bedroom, we shouldn?t get involved in cultural issues. You know, people should do whatever they want. Well, that is not how traditional conservatives view the world and I think most conservatives understand that individuals can?t go it alone. That there is no such society that I am aware of, where we?ve had radical individualism and that it succeeds as a culture.”

    And then watch him rail against Tea Partiers and libertarians here

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLQnoVpkyqc&feature=player_embedded

    I think Perry and Newt, while not small government conservatives are at least smaller government conservatives than Santorum, who seems to want to legislate what people do in the privacy of their own homes.

  • redcal

    Remember, McCain had already run in 2000, and had a national presence as a self-styled ‘maverick’ senator with a bunch of bipartisan efforts. McCain also started out with very high net favorability ratings (the first half of 2007), in the +20′s and +30′s. See http://www.gallup.com/poll/28363/public-rates-giuliani-most-favorably-eight-presidential-hopefuls.aspx

    Romney was never seriously vetted (either by the right or mainstream media) during his 2008 run, and he’s been fortunate enough to avoid direct attacks for most of the 2012 primaries. When those attacks actually start to happen (both from his right in the next few months, and then from his left in the general), Romney’s national polling numbers will get absolutely crushed.

    If head-to-head polls this far out mattered, we’d be looking at President Giuliani right now.

  • jakeofalltrades

    A Texan like you has the luxury of staying home on election day. Most of us don’t. We don’t want death panels, we don’t want our military technology given to Russia and China, we don’t want four more years of this national embarassment! Primary Romney in 2016 if you have to, but OBAMA HAS TO GO!

  • acat

    After that, the press went after McCain with a vengeance, even bringing up some rumors from his Viet Nam days.

    Anyone who thinks the press isn’t playing the same game with Romney isn’t paying attention.

    Mew

  • jakeofalltrades

    Because I don’t want Romney either.

  • trevorb

    look at the alternative. If we stay home, Obama wins a second term, which will be an utter disaster for the country.

    Currently, I support Perry, but I could vote for Gingrich and Santorum; I’ll need a barf bag and a nose plug to vote for Romney.

  • nicephorus1phokas

    but conservatives realize there is no substantial difference between the philosophy of Obama and the philosophy of Romney, therefore, it is a waste of time to spend any time, money or effort trying to elect Romney, which given his weaknesses is basically impossible anyway.

  • bonnman

    And the fear strategy just won’t play for many people Bin Laden is dead, we’re out of Iraq, the economy is improving, slowly but improving and honestly I don’t believe one single man, President or otherwise can destroy the Country, that doesn’t give much credit to the American people.

  • redcal

    I’m not talking about just the press attacking, necessarily; Romney and McCain went at it all through late 2007. But the press definitely amplified some of McCain’s leftist positions during his summer 2007 dip before giving him some ‘underdog props’ in late 2007 and early 2008 (and then reversing after the GOP convention).

    And I completely agree with your last point — the press is DEFINITELY playing the same game with Romney. Go easy on him for the primary, vaporize him in the general. It’s so transparent.

  • acat

    i.e. “start it up, drive it slowly around the track, see if anything falls off”.

    Mew

  • A_Texan

    If I recall, a few months ago, there was a head-to-head poll in PA, and Santorum was competitive with Obama there.

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/08/poll-obama-tied-with-gopers-in-pennsylvania-2012-match-up/

  • http://wadingacross.wordpress.com logus

    As I recall, that’s often what Erick’s assessment of the polls and Mr. Santorum continued to be all through the summer and fall.

    Mr. Erickson’s rundowns always either said, “Who?” or “Not going to get the nomination.” when it came to Mr. Santorum.

    Who was it again that used to talk about being misunderestimated?

    The reality is, other than Mr. Paul (and I assure you, I wouldn’t vote for Mr. Paul with a 39 1/2 foot pole), the whole field of candidates are shades of gray when it comes to fiscal issues and government involvement.

    It’s going to be interesting watching people have to chose between Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich.

    March is a long way off for Georgia to get a turn to vote in the primaries.

  • jakeofalltrades

    give our nuclear missile technology to Russia and China, blatantly violate the Constitution dozens of times, bow to foreign potentates, shred the military, or promote the socialist agenda.

    Please upgrade to Firefox so I don’t have to see that kind of monstrously stupid false equation in double.

  • redcal

    If we don’t want a novice, we cannot elect Romney either. A guy whose approval ratings after 4 years in Taxachussetts were in the 30′s, lower than Obama’s. A guy who essentially flapped in the wind with whatever the local liberal legislature wanted.

    Being a success in private equity is impressive, but it doesn’t map to running the country any more than being a community organizer does. He couldn’t even shrink government in MA, under minimal pressure from junior varsity local politicians. What’s he going to do in the big leagues? Collapse.

  • nicephorus1phokas

    Given how depressed conservative turnout will be if Romney is the nominee, I think that is a dangerous assumption. We have 9-10 toss-up Democratic held Senate seats, but if Obama dominates most of these will stay Democratic. Also, an Obama win by the margin of 2008 would definitely put the House in play too.

  • nicephorus1phokas

    Given how depressed conservative turnout will be if Romney is the nominee, I think that is a dangerous assumption. We have 9-10 toss-up Democratic held Senate seats, but if Obama dominates most of these will stay Democratic. Also, an Obama win by the margin of 2008 would definitely put the House in play too.

  • trevorb

    supporting Romney; I’m just saying that I will support him if it comes down to it because Obama is worse, as the past few years have shown.

  • septembergurl

    rasmussen NH 1/6:

    Romney – 42

    Paul – 18

    Santorum – 13

    Huntsman – 12

    Gingrich – 8

    Perry – 1

    New hampshire is a terrible state for Santorum and he is turning people off in droves. Huntsman has the Globe endorsement which may not mean much outside New England but there are hordes of Massholes who live there and take direction from the Globe. If Huntsman picks up over the weekend he will be taking votes from romney, which will be a good thing, right?

  • trevorb

    seems to be planning a suicide attack against Romney. He doesn’t have much money or organization, but I’m hoping he’ll be able to do some real damage to him. Romney hasn’t been hit nearly as hard as the others, and he doesn’t respond well on the rare occasion he is hit that way.

  • bonnman

    Its a giveaway to the insurance industry, some of his top campaign contributors. Plus he’s the architect of the whole thing anyway. And if you actually believe him when he says he’ll act to repeal it just wait a month til he flips his position.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    Well said.

    I understand being committed to your favorite candidate.

    if anyone can beat Romney in SC at this point its Santorum.

  • acat

    will struggle to win the general as neither are terribly inspiring… and then there’s what lousy coattails do for the down-ticket races.

    Go ahead and pull for Santorum.

    Mew

  • Tarantulas

    The author has done a lot of good work for the Obama 2012 campaign with this article. Obama’s campaign staff can just sit back and gather all the negative information that some of us conservatives are throwing at each other, then use it against us.

    The opponent in this election is not Rick Santorum. The opponent is Barack Obama. Why is this so difficult for some Republicans to understand? Just remember Ronald Reagan’s Eleventh Commandment and then act accordingly and you will not go far wrong.

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

    I just finished compiling a summary of the Des Moines experience…
    http://www.scribd.com/doc/77378886/Perry
    …and will provide relevant citations regarding Santorum [compiled from ~1000 entries on RedState sites during the past three days.

    *

    This was composed from the Perry-perspective:

    He may lack the smoothness of Mitt, the rhetorical skills of The Newt, the slash-and-burn approach of Paul, and [surprisingly, of -late] the boyish-charm of Santorum [?The Other white meat Rick?]. This pun is employed to recall how Rick [Perry] noted his preference for Iowa pork over the other Rick?s having funded D.C. pork. And, the rationalization provided by Santorum over this past weekend [?everyone was doin? it, doin? it?] is overtly undermined by citing but a few names [Coburn, DeMint, McCain]. This, plus his support for unionization [amply documented by Guzzardi] and for Davis-Bacon [mandating payment of prevailing wages on public works projects] will prove to be of-interest to the S.C. voters who have experienced the Boeing/NLRB battle.

    Therefore, rather than projecting/predicting, it is simply noted that the strong possibility exists [to become manifest during the weekend debates] that: [1]?The Newt will attack Mitt aggressively, to the point whereby he won?t care if his numbers tank?just as long as he drags Mitt down with him; [2]?The effort of Huntsman to crack 10% may remain problematic [despite the endorsement by the Boston Globe] and potentially yield his departure by month?s end; [3]?Santorum?s lack of organization [plus some strategic truth-telling] will impede him in S.C./Florida/Beyond, despite having received $1M today on-line; and [4]?Paul will sink to his 10%-tithe thereafter.

    *

    ?snappy? lamented/documented: ?I don?t know if I?m more upset with Romney or the Republican TV media (including their panelists and guest analysts) shilling for him. Between Dec 1 and Dec 18, the NYT reported that Romney got 126 minutes of air time (guest appearance) on Fox News. This compared to 37 minutes for Santorum, 51 minutes for Paul and Perry, 52 minutes for Gingrich and 76 minutes for Bachmann during that same period. It wouldn?t be so glaring if at least ONE other Republican candidate came close and that doesn?t even include all of the blathering about Romney. I?m so fed up with Fox News shilling for Romney that I actually watched CNN caucus night coverage. [http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/24/us/politics/rick-santorum-fails-to-connect-in-iowa-but-he-keeps-the-faith.html?_r=2&pagewanted=2&ref=politics].

    *

    Illustrative of why it?s just fine that Santorum has done well [tentatively] is that he denied Mitt a big-win in Iowa; illustrative of why it?s just fine that Santorum is being scrutinized [hastily] is that he should be exposed for the fiscal-conservative that he is NOT.

    *

    Take-Home Messages

    My conclusion from what transpired in Iowa? It is always darkest before dawn, and Perry?s strengths should inevitably grab his natural constituencies: Constitutional [intent and meaning] Conservatives, TPM [young and old] Turks, and Evangelical [doctrinaire and revisionist] Ethicists. As another blogger noted: ?If he is made of what I think he is, he will look at what happened, and the finer details of what the results show. A thorough review will show cracks in Romney?s armor, Newt?s continued implosion, Paul?s being supported by cross-overs, and Santorum?s eggs as all being in one basket.?

    A meeting is to occur in Texas among Conservatives who wish to ponder the benefits of coalescing behind one candidate. This is reminiscent of Robert Vander Plaats?s Family Leader effort, which split but which led to his having supported Santorum. At the time, this was perceivable as an interim-move, subject to update if/when Santorum were gone; it was also a great help to his being catapulted above Perry. The same approach should be adopted this weekend; principles can be established and applied subsequently but, as much as there would be a benefit to Perry were they to endorse him, it is ultimately preferable for the TPM-model to be followed?for diffusion reflects grass-roots strength. They should be vocal, but they should not feel their voices are being suppressed to benefit the ?whole.? It must be recalled that this is what?s wrong with BHO?s collectivism, philosophically, and ?good intent? inevitably backfires if it is effected unjustly. The recognition that this is a marathon [not a sprint] must govern this level of decision-making. He can remain a candidate so as to espouse key-concepts during the campaign-season?and note the reaction thereto. His swagger is born of humility?not ego-centricity?reflecting an inner-confidence derived from a populism born of a deep moral-fiber.

    *

    Blogging – Santorum

    ?Rick Santorum practiced law and lobbied for professional wrestling before he was elected to Congress at the young age of 32. He served in Congress for 16 years until he was defeated in his US Senate reelection bid by an 18 percentage point margin. After his 2006 defeat, he stayed in Washington as a lobbyist and consultant. In 2010, he earned nearly $1 million from his political connections?. Santorum has received his paycheck over the years directly from the government or from firms that lobby government. He is the ultimate Washington Insider who is part of the problem?not the solution.? [http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/04/us-campaign-santorum-idUSTRE8032A020120104]

    ? ?He has been, essentially, a stealth lobbyist,? said Bill Allison, editorial director for the Sunlight Foundation, a watchdog group. ?He has been hired to try to influence policy on behalf of his clients without crossing the thresholds that would require him to report what he?s doing.? ? [http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/rick-santorum-stealth-lobbyist/story?id=15298204#.TwYXU_ncBnQ]

    *

    ?Freedoms Truth? spun a mean web-posting, which needs to be rebutted:

    ?Santorum was concerned enough about SCOTUS judges being conservative that he only endorsed Specter after he promised to help shepherd Bush?s appointees for SCOTUS through.? [Rationalization]

    Specter has his faults, but he kept that promise and we got Alito and Roberts out of that deal. That?s not bad for a courtesy endorsement of a fellow Senator. [He was known as an unreliable conservative.]

    I wanted Toomey to win in 2004, badly, but blaming Santorum for what he did is foolish. Santorum has been rock-solid on conservative appointments. [Had Santorum endorsed Toomey, he would have won.]

    Santorum has been a leader on a number of issues when in office. [Other than welfare reform and focus on Iran, what did he accomplish/advocate?]

    Santorum will have the same amount of executive experience as JFK, Obama, Johnson, and Lincoln. etc. Santorum served 12 years in Senate, while Obama served 2 before running for President. Since I am not thrilled with what Romney DID as Governor (aka Romneycare) and since Santorum served in office for far longer than Romney, I think Santorum long conservative record speaks better than Romney?s short non-conservative record. [The record is decidedly mixed, as has been documented on RedState.]

    *

    ?Freedoms Truth? advocated for Santorum over Perry and The Newt by citing his conservative voting record [American Conservative Union, National Right-to-Life Committee, Americans for Tax Reform, National Tax Limitation Committee, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, League of Private Property Voters, 2005 Republican Liberty Caucus ? Economic Liberties, 2004 Republican Liberty Caucus, 2003-2004 Campaign for Working Families, 2003-2004 Concerned Women for America, 2005 American Conservative Union, 2003 Concerned Women for America, 2003 Eagle Forum, and 2003 National Journal ? Conservative on Economic Policy] over concerns that he didn?t oppose myriad spending bills [http://votesmart.org/candidate/evaluations/27054/rick-santorum]. Policy positions were also noted [repeal Obamacare, cap spending at 18%, reform Social Security reform, oppose energy subsidies, privatize Freddie/Fannie Mae, and follow the Ryan roadmap and pass the BBA] and referenced [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/santorum-is-no-big-government-conservative/2012/01/04/gIQA5Q1zaP_blog.html].

    Regarding Huntsman, he succinctly concluded: ?Huntsman?s ultimate problem is that he is superfluous.? He added: ?Huntsman can?t run against Obama?after writing that fawning letter about how great Obama was.?

    He then, however, claimed: ?Santorum is to the right of Perry in some important ways. Santorum opposed the Troubled Assets Relief Program; Perry wrote a letter on the day of the Senate vote urging Congress to pass legislation to avert a meltdown. Santorum, as we saw in the debates, is likewise to the right of Perry (and Newt Gingrich, for that matter) on immigration. Santorum?s supposed deviations from conservative orthodoxy are similar those of his rivals. He voted for earmarks and highway funds. Gov. Perry took the money. Santorum voted for Medicare Part D; Gingrich lobbied for it, and Perry said in a debate that he wouldn?t repeal it. The guy is no liberal when it comes to spending taxpayer money. Is he to the right of Gingrich? Yes. To the left of Ron Paul? Yes. But so are most GOP voters.? Each of these assertions is problematic when details are probed. For example, why wouldn?t a governor attempt to recover IRS-monies sent to D.C.? And how is Perry assuredly to the ?left? of Santorum on Illegal Immigration? As an argument favoring Santorum, this is both selective and incomplete.

    He again lost credibility by ascribing deviating votes [earmarks, vote against NAFTA] to the need to accommodate his electorate, rather than recognizing they were essentially pro-union [citing http://www.clubforgrowth.org/whitepapers/?subsec=137&id=902]. That he had failed to cite the rest of this citation was noted by ?kamiller42? when this was promptly posted: ?But his record also contains several very weak spots, including his active support of wasteful spending earmarks, his penchant for trade protectionism, and his willingness to support large government expansions like the Medicare prescription drug bill and the 2005 Highway Bill. As president, Santorum would most likely lead the country in a pro-growth direction, but his record contains more than a few weak spots that make us question if he would resist political expediency when it comes to economic issues.? He concluded: ?The issue here is about federal jurisdiction. Santorum has been accused of willing to wield the federal government?s power when it suits him, forfeiting any notion of whether it?s the right thing to do.?

    And a follow-up note by ?JSobieski? observed: ?He voted with the other Rs—I am asking about leadership. Santorum did not lead the charge on the issues you mention?except maybe welfare reform. I remember Santorum on a lot of Sunday talk shows over the years?and I never remember him talking about cutting spending. He was good on fighting tax increases, but so was W.?

    *

    ?cimmarontrails? cited CREW?s ?most corrupt Congress list? and noted Santorum was number three. He then noted ?Santorum?s latest reply on Fox News?he still backs Earmarks?and Santorum likes to spend. He voted to raise the debt ceiling eight times?and he also voted for Bush?s Prescription Plan?more unfunded-debt to add to our deficit today?.Gov. Perry has done wonders for us. Our record does not lie?facts are stubborn things?and even the pundits need to find them.?

    *

    ?rharrison? cited Santorum?s voting record while in the Senate [http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/27054/rick-santorum], noting that they ?reflect how his detractors on the right (like me) have painted him: ? mainly a big government conservative in the mold of George W Bush. After 2010 is that what we want? Ask yourself, how does Santorum differ from GWB in any real way? He doesn?t.?

    *

    ?Nuclear139? advocates for Santorum based upon his personal narrative [which Perry obviously mirrors]: ?For all of Santorum?s problems, his story and life will be able to reach voters who were left behind by Obama; his example of hard work, sacrifice and family values can inspire a nation that has lost hope.?

    *

    ?nepanyrush? was almost making good points until he averred observations that were askew [?Santorum is a great candidate. He was very articulate in the debates, and actually is a great candidate, having three times defeated Democratic incumbents in a Democratic electorate. His talk after the Iowa results was very inspiring.?] and ended his mini-suggestion with a problematic confessional [??being from PA, I can tell you that he is very authentic. He will go to the mat for his principles.? The Bob knows otherwise, as has been documented by Guzzardi extensively.

    *

    Santorum?s book [?It Takes a Family,? which he signed for me ~ 6 years ago] is correctly noted by ?minorcanmaven? to be VERY problematic: ?He thinks the Feds need to set national standards for curriculum?[and] he thinks National Service is a great idea. He thinks government is the answer just like they do on the left, only where they are Socialist, he is more Fascist. He?s a good guy, well intentioned, but not a solution to the problems we face.?

    *

    ?Return to Revolution? wrote that ?Santorum is a FRAUD? because ?Santorum had a GOA rating of C while Specter was a C-, in the PA Gun Lobby group FOAC (Firearm owners against crime) he was rated at about 60, and Specter a 54 on their votes (NRA ratings are garbage; if they like you they give you an A). He endorsed Specter and then campaigned for Lincoln Chafee in RI. He also had to be dragged to our side on amnesty ? was not for border security until forced into it. Time after time, he went along with the big spending republicans and put party before principles?.Also consider the result of his endorsement of Specter over Toomey in 2004. The GOP was behind Specter too ? maybe it wouldn?t have mattered. But the Specter won that primary by something like 15,000 votes out of a million. If Toomey wins that primary and the general, he is the 60th vote the dems need and blocks Obamacare in 2009.?

    *

    [Other Santorum-refrences were raised in other contexts; this compilation amplifies the theme of this posting.]

    *

    http://news.yahoo.com/santorum-surge-brings-ethics-questions-152702229.html

    *

    ?kamiller42? responded thusly: ?All warts being equal…which candidate has the best philosophical vision and record to show he has the cure for what ails America??

    Problems We Have
    1. Economy in bad shape.
    2. Jobs deficient.
    3. Overreaching and ever growing federal government.

    So the candidate America needs, needs?
    1. To believe in removing the constraints on the market.
    2. Establish an environment which encourages business owners to create new jobs.
    3. Understands what limited government is and not believe government is a force for good that has just been mishandled by previous operators.

    Here?s the break-down of the 3 candidates:

    Newt:
    1. Yes? mostly. Still supports subsidies.
    2. Yes
    3. No. He believes what the government has been missing is his brain.

    Santorum:
    1. No. Santorum is not interested in a level playing field, e.g. tariffs, corporate tax breaks for some, subsidies, etc.
    2. Yes.
    3. No. I won?t say he believes in big government, but he does believe in an activist government. I get a Boromir vibe from him.

    Perry:
    1. Yes. He is a free market guy. Ex: Let the different energy sources play on a level playing field. No ethanol subsidies. Cost him Iowa. Oh well.
    2. Yes. Hello Texas. 1,000,000+ new jobs.
    3. Yes. He is governor, aka executive, of a state which loves limited government and lives by it. He knows the value of limited government for the governed.

    So yeah. I look at what the country needs and match it with the candidate with the best record and ideas. It?s Rick Perry.

    *

  • geoph

    In that order.
    God willing there’d be someone else, but you play the hand you are dealt.

    I have never, not voted Republican since 1984. I never vote straight party ticket, but mark each and every individual candidate. I joined the Young Republican’s Club in 1979. I can remember Nixon resigning and Ford
    assuming the Presidency. I campaigned for Reagan and attended the convention in Detroit. I was able to support H.W. over Perot. I was a precinct delegate from ’96 until ’06. I was even able to muster the will to pull the lever for McCaine. I’ve supported many a Republican candidate that was substandard, both with my time and money – but now they are trying to offer me Romney?

    Newt, Rick P. and Rick S.; by no means the best Republican’s could have offered, but a line really must be drawn and observed given the perils we face as a Nation.

  • Common_Cents

    he didn’t do better/win in Iowa? I’d be curious to know.

    What is going to change?

  • red_oakster

    nt

  • red_oakster

    If Santorum manages to win the non-Mitt playoff, he will pose serious problems for Obama. Santorum connects with Catholics and reagan Democrats and will cause havoc for the Democrats in PA OH and WI.

    The notion that losing an election even badly somehow eliminates that person as a serious political force forever is so historically ignorant as to be amusing.

  • Scope

    for all of us ABR voters. Yesterday he said that “President Obama will turn this country around.” He of course meant President Romney. Today he’s campaigning with Romney again, and he shouts about the corrupt practice of pork barrel spending, and pumps the air yelling that Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum don’t hold that view.” Of course he meant Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum. The cringe factor was written all over Romney’s face. Keep him on the campaign trail with you Mitt, as much as possible. He is making Perry’s oops moment look like a walk in the park.

    This is the guy we held our noses for and voted for in the 2008 presidential election. Who knew he was that close to dementia.

  • thirstyboots

    Talk-show hosts are useless. They also defended Bush from the charge of being a big government conservative even though he was. Just like Santorum was. I mean, Santorum campaigned on being big-government:

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/10-reasons-liberals-should-love-rick-santorum-as-t

    Those guys will always defend the candidate who brings more red meat to the table.

  • nicephorus1phokas

    because they knew what a disaster he would be. Unfortunately, instead of taking the prudent course and supporting Mike Huckabee, who would have made a great President, they pushed Romney. Don’t kid yourself that they think he’s anything close to being conservative. It was an indorsement for expedience, just as Santorum’s was, in order to stop McCain.

  • joshdunn

    When Rick Perry announced that he was running for president, he set off alarm bells in the White House, the media, and probably the 9th circle of hell.

    The media and the White House understand too well what can happen when the GOP coalesces around a plain-talking, accomplished governor of Texas: they lose.

    So their game was to stop the coalition before it hardened into a solid mass. They dusted off their old playbook and used Saturday Night Live to fire the first initial shots. Granted, Perry’s first debate performance was no worse than Romney’s or anyone else’s. But they created a caricature of a brainless Texas governor who somehow beat the odds and became governor of the second-largest state.

    Then Perry gave them the RPG that they were looking for. He tried to go to his talking points during the third debate and the moderator, under instructions from his producer, crucified Perry over it. It was the kind of mistake that Hillary or Obama could have gotten away with. But a conservative Republican from Texas who has the potential to beat the Anointed Liberal can’t get away with that type of mistake.

    From that point onward, Perry’s numbers sank. No amount of ads, door-knocking, phone calling, emailing, or pundit praise could save him. A caricature was created for him and he gave the enemy an excuse to justify their caricature.

    Conservatives ran like mice from a sinking ship to Cain, then Gingrich, then Santorum. (A few went to Romney.)

    So the Dems/libs can pat themselves on the back for sinking S.S. Perry before she had a full head of steam. But the joke will be on them if Obama loses to Romney. Remember that Jimmy Carter was happy when he found out that Reagan was the GOP nominee in 1980. Carter thought that Reagan was the weakest candidate in the GOP field. Carter saw Reagan as the next Goldwater and was shocked when 40 states, including California, New York, and Massachusetts, voted for Reagan.

  • federalfarmer1

    I’m always willing to change my mind with new information. I’ve defended and criticized santorum. But this is just unfair.

  • joshdunn

    Are you still for Perry?

  • JSobieski

    that is all they say on the topic. Neither seeks to really talk about the plan, or about entitlement reforms generally.

    “I like the Ryan plan” would carry more weight if they had said it back when it was controversial.

    Think about folks—its a R primary and candidates are scared to talk about medicare reform. Who will be brave enough to talk about the issue in the general election?

  • jakeofalltrades

    Certainly not to the Children of the Corn.

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

    the ship hasn’t sunk, for the hulls have been pumped-out

  • lineholder

    He’s said so himself. And the question all Americans should be asking is “transform it into WHAT?”

    Does Obama strike you as being someone who respects the Constitution and the basic principles on which this nation was founded? After all the times he and his colleagues have either bypassed the Constitution, twisted it and distorted it beyond all recognition, trampling it into the dirt, or ignored it altogether, can you believe he genuinely respects it?

    It is the Constitution of the United States that set us apart as being a land of free people, based on the rule of law, not on the rule of men. Would you say that Obama’s actions in bypasses the laws and ignoring the laws, implementing HIS own interpretation of what the law of our land should be instead indicates that he genuinely and sincerely has respect for the rule of law or the Constitution?

    He is amongst those in our nation who seek to control our society, economically and socially, not honor it, respect it, protect or preserve it.

    But the man is not completely and totally stupid. He knows that he can not completely and totally destroy this nation, especially in regards to economics, because the kinds of socialistic policies and the utopia the people like him dream about are very EXPENSIVE. So he needs our economy to survive.

    Do NOT underestimate the man. Even if he is only one man, he is a man who currently holds the greatest degree of power that exists in our nation.

  • pttx333

    many, many others. And I know that I speak for them when I say that we will stand by Rick Perry through thick and thin all the way to the finish line. No question about it.

    True supporters don’t waffle, waver, second guess themselves or hop around to the newest fool’s gold candidate. We hang in there, period. If I have filet mignon right in my hand, why would I reach for a chicken neck?

  • Finrod

    The Left wants to make this election about social issues, because the SCOAMF doesn’t have a leg to stand on when it comes to fiscal issues. Santorum will let them do that.

  • Finrod

    .

  • texastaxpayer

    Guess I will wait a couple weeks and Mittens Kittens cam explain how it works from their personal experience….
    http://youtu.be/AHVVvTJ27IM

  • Matthew Morris

    in particular the ones in the very rural area where the two caucuses I spoke to are:

    1) By far, almost all of them had made up their minds when they arrived to caucus.

    2) Bush Fatigue is REAL. I think people were on the look out for it, and then when the Perry flubs happened on stage, it was all the confirmation they needed. It was cemented in their mind at that point.

    This is what I learned first hand. Of course, I intend to do everything I can to make it to South Carolina for the PerryStrikeforce. And raise money beforehand.

    What is needed is a way to overcome Bush Fatigue…. unfortunately it takes time and exposure. I really believe that this is all that is holding Perry back from winning out among the non-Romneys.

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

    ..and fully-recognizing your disinclinations, I will reply.

    Please consult my comprehensive database for details.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/77378886/Perry

    He was upstaged via Vander Plaats [who wanted to make a difference, for future reference, despite opposition from his pals] and ethanol opposition [who wanted to stake a future political-lobbying claim].

    The MSM/LSM/ELM were continuing to ignore/ridicule, regardless of merit.

    He stood his ground, rather than compromising his principles.

    *

    During the next fortnight, double-debates, Santorum-vetting and NH-results will transpire; noting the inherent volatility of the race, let’s reassess thereafter, ok?

    As I had surmised in my 38-page memo, if The Newt savages Mitt [and both drop], even as Huntsman underperforms [noting Mitt's Iowa success] and Santorum recedes [after everyone learns he isn't a fiscal conservative], Perry could re-emerge from the morass…as Paul drops to his 10%-tithe.

    *

    Perhaps more important than any machinations is the sense of commitment his strike-force has developed towards his leadership.

    Perhaps more important than this sense of commitment is the faith that is harbored in American Exceptionalism and his potential to advocate uniquely for Constitutional Limited Government & Federalism.

    Perhaps most important [than political plots and/or faith in his oratorical skills and commitments] is his sense of duty to America, infused by his Judeo-Christian Ethic…enhanced by Anita…rejuvenated by a jog-in-the-woods.

    *

  • cheetah2

    :) One of the things I have despised about this primary is the flavor of the week garbage. It shows that people are not serious about what the different candidates have to offer. Why would you keep switching if your studied them all and picked the best one?

  • texastaxpayer

    I will be voting especially congress and senate…. Just telling it like I see it… Texas will stay red no doubt. But can’t speak for the rest…..

  • jakeofalltrades

    Remember Vander Plaats hitting the candidates up for money in return for his endorsement like an extremely-expensive *****?

  • Common_Cents

    Another poster who spoke for Perry at 2 caucuses just posted that he found Perry=Bush Fatigue is alive and real. Can you comment on your findings of that?

  • Matthew Morris

    this is the best concise explanation one could hope for. Awesome work joshdunn!

    From my experience on the ground in Iowa, in a rural area no less where the caucuses I spoke to were, it is Bush Fatigue. It is strong enough to prevent Iowans from realizing that Perry has the best credentials. Bush Fatigue, particularly as concerns electability in the general.

    We’ve got to overcome it!

  • Matthew Morris

    Very appreciative of all your hard work! (Matt from Dallas)

  • JSobieski

    Your underlying logic depends on how people rank their backup options.

    Although Santorum and Romney are very different, I don’t have a strong preference between them and am excited for neither. They are both backups to backups in my mind.

    Ergo, just as I did with Fred, I will support Perry in SC.

  • giatny

    I have had to refrain from watching both Fox and
    Msnbc since Santorum’s name gained unimaginable
    frequency earlier this week. I am not sure which
    was more painful: 1. hearing Fox view him as a
    viable candidate and continue to highlight Romney’s lack of conservative support; or 2. the commentators on Msnbc laughing their heads off at the abject stupidity of the Republican Party in pursuing everyone except the ONLY electable
    candidate – Romney. I foolishly had thought the
    worst was over when Cain “suspended” his campaign. All Obama has to do now is sit back
    and watch the tea people destroy any hope of
    saving freedom from Obama’s cold red hands.
    The undeniable message from the majority of the
    country is that both the extreme right and left are equally bad. What lunatic actually believes that
    abortion, Planned Parenthood, defunding NPR
    and reversing DADT are major issues at the moment? Obama has successfully put the entire
    economy in the hands of unelected bureaucrats
    and Republicans fight over who is the most pro-
    life. It doesn’t matter. Every freedom regarding
    health care, finance, energy, internet, rural America, sovereignty, autos, air, water, justice,
    immigration and private business has been usurped by this president. For heavens sake, WAKE UP.
    It would be difficult to select who is most
    unelectable among Santorum, Gingrich, and Perry,
    but trust me when I say ALL of them. Excuse
    the obvious anger, but having survived Bachman,
    Perry, Cain, Gingrich and now facing Santorum,
    my emotional health is in serious trouble.

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

    …was less stressful

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

    …and this is the continuing message received from my son, as well.

  • nicephorus1phokas

    nationalized health care, abortion rights, and a host of other issues you are criticizing. Maybe Republicans just want someone who remotely echoes their views on the issues to represent them in the election? What good is winning if your candidate is no better than Obama? Doesn’t it all come out the same anyway?

  • nicephorus1phokas

    nationalized health care, abortion rights, and a host of other issues you are criticizing. Maybe Republicans just want someone who remotely echoes their views on the issues to represent them in the election? What good is winning if your candidate is no better than Obama? Doesn’t it all come out the same anyway?

  • jakeofalltrades

    (Well, not a medical doctor.) But it seems to me if you put Obama fatigue up against irrationally-prejudiced Bush fatigue, Obama fatigue will be stronger. Obama fatigue hasn’t had time to fade yet, after all, and Perry isn’t Bush.

    It’s a valid point though. I have Bush fatigue myself.

    That doesn’t change the fact the Perry is the best I have to work with, If Paul Ryan or Jim DeMint were in the race I would not have chosen Perry, but they are not running and I need a small-government conservative who can defeat Obama.

    All candidates have a chance against Obama, but I believe Perry has the best one because of his record and because once he gets comfortable, he will be extremely charismatic in the media. I have seen some of his public performances when he was comfortable, and I was floored by the charisma. He’s perfect. He needs boat loads of prep and debates, and then he’ll get there.

    That is why he should draw it out to all 57 states. The longer this goes on, the more people will learn about Perry and see that he really is the best candidate to be our next President.

  • Matthew Morris

    So I hope you’ll be joining us in South Carolina ;-)

  • ghostship

    That worked so well for McCain didn’t it.

    Romney excites nobody but the handful of his supporters. He induces apathy at best in everybody else.

  • Matthew Morris

    I had limited time to go to Iowa. Had to turn around and head out as soon as I got home from holiday travels. Hopefully will have more time to work with for South Carolina. I would say it was tiring… 12 hour drive. Not too stressful ;-)

    It was very exciting, very insightful…I learned a lot. While I was impressed with the Perry campaign and staff, usually my mind wanders to thinking about ways things could be even better. Particularly as concerns technology.

    As we discussed, I think I will have to make a week or two in Iowa one of my “vacations” every 4 years- as long as we are still having elections and Iowa still has its disproportionately large role in the process.

  • nycmiddleman

    And for this very reason he is NOT a “Tea Party Candidate.”

    Sure, there may be some self-proclaimed TPers who are Evangelical enough to ignore his statist nature and support him, but since the proper definition of the Tea Party is FISCAL ISSUES ONLY, it simply does not compute to give him that moniker.

    I’m not saying that Romney IS, either. But Santorum is no how, no way. No. No. No.

    Just so we’re clear.

  • A_Texan

    Which is why I wanted Huckabee to win SC. Complicated.

    This time around, tho, the only one I see between Romney and the nomination is Santorum. But hey, things can change, Newt is far enough from the basement to turn it around, but I prefer Santorum (or Perry or Bachmann when they were in) to Gingrich.

  • rutleyh

    In all seriousness, you guys need to move on and not be held captive by Erik’s fetish for Perry.

    He will NOT win the nomination. Anyone with half a brain can determine this.

  • pttx333

    mm

  • Scope

    Actually I was all in for The Rent’s Too Damn High guy, but unfortunately he dropped out of his previous races. I’m hoping that Alvin Green will throw his hat in the ring, and declare himself as the one and only true conservative.

  • Scope

    Your emotional health really is in serious trouble. Now if you would back Rick Perry, your spinning head just might gain some sanity.

  • Bill S

    But the Idiot Finder is off the charts on that one…

  • pttx333

    n

  • texastaxpayer

    :P

  • Scope

    firing brain cells would know, without doubt, that EE is not pimping for Perry. You surely must be new, like today new, and have never read posts by EE where he actually harms Perry’s chances, with knocking his staff, campaign, and everything else with the Perry effort.

    So, it seems to me that some want Perry to be the next “he who shall not be named” candidate. The MSM, including Fox have taken the “He who shall never be named” meme to a new level. Hint, hint, it won’t work any more than the establishment, the uninformed voters, the liberals, and the naysayers couldn’t take RR down, and they won’t succeed in trying to take RP down.

    Have a nice life loser.

  • Vegas_Rick

    why would I rally around Romney yet? If he’s the eventual nominee, he’ll have my full support. Why is that such a difficult concept for so many people to grasp?

    I detest Romney,, but he’s golden compared to what we have now.

  • bzip

    Santorum supporters, you ought to be thinking about how Santorum can win the nomination when losing so many delegates (missing from so many ballots):

    After late surge, Rick Santorum could miss state ballot deadlines
    http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-after-late-surge-rick-santorum-could-miss-a-number-of-state-ballots-20120106,0,2400100.story?track=rss
    ?In all, Santorum could miss out on up to 200 delegates from four states (and D.C.) before the contests are held.?

  • conservativemusician

    Then why do they bother posting here at all? Seems like their time could be better spent blogging for the candidate they like.

    I do find it interesting, though, that Perry seems to be getting more positive comments overall lately over at Hot Gas. I hope it is not too late for Perry to come back.

    Perry 2012

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

    considering Santorum did not even try. What a world we live in when people put Republicans over small gov conservatism, then wonder why we are in such a huge debt. What could have gone wrong, guys.

  • pttx333

    is alive and well and in for the long haul – as are all those supporting him. My feet are firmly planted in concrete for him, because I know that he is the most conservative candidate with a PROVEN and ongoing record of stellar achievements. His patriotism, decency and honor go along with the achievements, too – you seldom, if ever, find that in a candidate.

    Don’t give up on him, ‘musician – we will prevail!

  • Tbone

    All the idiots who went from Bachmann to Perry, to Cain, to Newt to Santorum are just about due to come around to Perry again.

    Just as soon as the reality of Santorum filters through the sand to their primal brains.

  • sunshinek67

  • izoneguy

    Thanks for that link:
    Santorum was never really serious and has not done the work that Rick Perry has.

    After late surge, Rick Santorum could miss state ballot deadlines

    A senior member of the Rick Perry campaign team e-mailed late Friday that the Texas governor had qualified during the day for the ballot in D.C. Illinois, Indiana and Vermont.

  • conservativemusician

    But it will be an uphill battle for sure because we are facing a lot engrained and hardened opinions at this point and many of those are woefully uninformed. I’m also in it for Perry to the end, whatever happens, but right now I kind of feel like Arigorn in that scene from “Lord of the Rings” where Lord Elrod says “I give hope to men”, and then Arigorn says “I keep none for myself”.

    Hope Tbone is right down thread that it is Perry’s turn again for a second look. This post is great oppo research on Santorum, so I also hope that Perry’s team is taking detailed notes and paying close attention. There is a gold mine of information here that they can use from his staunchest supporters. May God bless Governor Perry in the days ahead.

    Perry 2012

  • conservativemusician

    Hope it will come sooner rather than later.

  • saulpaulson

    I have been busy for a few days but have been dying to see if Redstate would get behind the last conservative alternative to Romney.

    Instead it is the same old same old. Erickson lists every time Santorium did not for what is in vogue right now. The truth is many of these were conservative positions when he voted for them at the time.

    And as we see another good man (possibly the best man in the field) decried as not being a true “tea party conservative” the door is opened still further for “progressive” republican mitt romney.

    Even more to my amazement, the commentators on here all seem resigned to line up behind Romney, as if there was truly no different between him and the other choices.

    I am no purist and always support the R in every race, but I am just shocked that we are really going to allow this election to between a progressive Republican and democrat. Does winning the next election mean more than abondoning every principles conservatives espouse?

  • saulpaulson

    I have been busy for a few days but have been dying to see if Redstate would get behind the last conservative alternative to Romney.

    Instead it is the same old same old. Erickson lists every time Santorium did not for what is in vogue right now. The truth is many of these were conservative positions when he voted for them at the time.

    And as we see another good man (possibly the best man in the field) decried as not being a true “tea party conservative” the door is opened still further for “progressive” republican mitt romney.

    Even more to my amazement, the commentators on here all seem resigned to line up behind Romney, as if there was truly no different between him and the other choices.

    I am no purist and always support the R in every race, but I am just shocked that we are really going to allow this election to between a progressive Republican and democrat. Does winning the next election mean more than abondoning every principles conservatives espouse?

  • Spazzinout

    http://www.hapblog.com/2012/01/rush-i-wouldnt-have-one-ounce-of-doubt.html

  • Scope

    to get on the ballot in VA. Yet now he has the freakin nerve to “join in with the Perry lawsuit.” If anything he will harm the Perry lawsuit, as he never even made any attempt. That also includes the fact that Santorum didn’t even try to get on more than a few state ballots. I understand that everyone else got on the DC ballot, even if they just paid the $5,000 filing fee. Santorum didn’t even do that.

    Rick Santorum is a stalking horse for Mitt Romney. No question in my mind, no doubt in my mind, he is actually making it obvious at this point.

  • tadams1138

    5

  • acat

    .. and with the reduced field (Bachman and Cain gone) it could be really interesting.

    Mew

  • pttx333

    Thanks for the link!

  • superpatriot

    Hi folks.

    Anyone out there know how Newt is doing in South Carolina?

    I recently checked an RCP poll which showed him down some to Romney.

    If Romney wins New Hampshire and then S. Carolina, I’ll start getting a bit worried.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    -5- on your comments.

    Yes, there is clearly an attempt to destroy real conservatives for the crime of being not 100% purists, and the end result of the conservative circular firing squad will be the non-conservative Romney will prevail.

    So depressingly PREDICTABLE.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    __no-text__

  • lineholder

    but there would still be other ways to reach the total of delegates needed.

    I’d hate for SC to lose their predictive status, but in this particular case, it would be well worth the loss, don’t you think?

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

    I have yet to decide, but I suspect Romney would not fight to keep Obama care alive if the senate and congress tried to kill it.

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

    …when, in actuality, Santorum has policies that are closer to Bush-’43.

  • Common_Cents

    That is the problem. The better Romney does early the more people will give in and jump on the MittMobile. If an anti Romney conservative can’t win in SC and firewall romney momentum after IA and NH it will be extremely tough. You definitely need money to compete in FL.

    heck, Mrs tea party Gov Haley herself endorsed Romney early. People will cave soon if there isn’t consolidation among the antri romney candidates immediately.

  • Rapunzel46

    like everyone has given up because Romney won Iowa CAUCUS by one freaking vote! and the press is trying to turn Santorum into the next Huckabee (who he is amazingly like as Huck is a statist as well)…. and everyone, especially the media is trying to ignore the fact that the rest of us have not voted yet and this race is no longer winner take all and wrapped up in February, it is actually long slog race… and I still support Perry!

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    if he wins the first three states. He’ll also take Florida and nearly sweep Super Tuesday. You can try all the fun with math tricks you want, but none of them are going to work.

  • Tbone

    From now on we just let the hicks in Iowa, the faux Republicans in NH and the inbreds in SC decide the Republican nominee and save the money of running primaries in all the other states.

  • bonnman

    What I mean is that your support has to be more than just a vote. Will you campaign, donate money and try and convince people to vote for Romney even though you detest him? Maybe you will. But lots of conservatives won’t, sure they’ll hold their nose and vote for him but he’ll need more than that to stand a chance.

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

    as long both Romney and Santorum are standing in the middle.

  • lineholder

    what do you suggest? Really? What do you suggest at this point that will magically turn the tide for any of the anti-Romney’s in the race (other than Spantorum?)

    And let’s say that it does play out that Romney wins SC. Would you just have people automatically give up pursuing an anti-Romney? Or would you say “hold out to the last point”?

    When it’s all said and done, do you believe Romney can beat Obama? Or do you believe an anti-Romney has a better chance?

  • http://www.changeforrickperry.org louisianapatriette

    It was GOOD! Here’s some excerpts for those who didn’t read/hear it. I know it’s long, but it’s worth the read and some honest self-examination. Keep in mind these are excerpts, it’s not the whole thing; here’s the link if you want to read it all:

    http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/01/06/electability_and_qualifications_don_t_be_imprisoned_by_the_perceptions_of_others

    “Whether you know it or not, you are subject to what the media says about these people, whether you actively fight it or not. I just want you to be honest with yourselves. So, for example. If I’m describing you when I tell you of some friends of mine who didn’t like Rick Perry ’cause, “Rush, he sounds stupid. He can’t put three words together without pausing to think about it. He sounds just like Bush. He’s from Texas, and I’m sick and tired of people on our side looking and sounding stupid.” Okay. Who put that thought in your head? Is that actually your assessment of Rick Perry or is it the media’s?…

    “Now, me, see, I don’t care. I’m looking beyond this. Frankly, since I don’t care what people think… If there’s one thing I could do for people, the greatest gift I could give people is to have you not care a whit when anybody thinks of you. You do not know liberation until you are able to master that, but I’m gonna maintain that a lot of people are choosing or not choosing to align themselves with a Republican candidate for fear of what people are gonna think of them when they say, for example, ‘Oh, yeah, I like Perry.’ ‘You do? He’s an idiot!’ ‘Okay, you’re right. Yeah, I don’t want him.’

    “I don’t choose these people based on people are gonna think of ME because of my choice. I choose them ’cause: Do I think they’re good? Do I think they’d be good president? Do I think they’re gonna fight for this country, fight for the things I believe in when they get there every day? That’s my sole criteria. I don’t care what they could do well in a debate or not ’cause I don’t think the debates matter in a presidential race, and I don’t get depressed after our guys lose. Did George Bush ever win a debate, in your mind? One out of how many, six? He got elected twice. I rest my case.

    “I’ve met Rick Perry. I know he’s not stupid, and it ticks me off that that’s his image. It ticks me off that people on our side think he is, and I want to know who puts out that thought…Why don’t you look at what he’s done as governor of Texas? You’re not gonna do that?…

    “My only point here is that the media plays a far greater role in shaping your thought on who can win and who can’t than you may even be aware of. Not your fault. Even I, El Rushbo, it’s a daily effort to fight and beat these people back. Look at media mind control, go search on Google for Romney and electability, you’ll get 5,110,000 results. Romney and electability in the media. We have been beaten over the head with this, that only Romney can win, and a lot of it has come from Republicans, meaning the Republican establishment. You Google “Perry” and “too much like Bush” and you’ll get 1,500,000 results. Who puts the thought out there first? Did you first have the thought that Perry’s too much like Bush or did somebody else? Obviously it’s a media phrase ’cause it’s in the Google search database…Google “Obama” and “smart,” 390 million hits, nearly half a billion hits, “Obama” and “smart,” 390 million. It’s my only point here, folks, my only point. I know perception is reality in politics. It frustrates me, too. Really does.”

  • Scope

    a stalking horse for Romney. If he knows he is disqualified from many ballots, but still stays in the race, he is only there to help one candidate. His only role and goal is to take down the more viable and credible conservative candidate, Rick Perry. Remember his tirade against Perry where he just kept talking about amnesty, and wouldn’t even allow Perry to respond, until finally a leftist moderator stopped him?

  • Scope

    when anyone needs to go back to any Ron Paul videos to take another candidate down, it does nothing to help any single one of the R candidates. Ron Paul should never, ever, be credited with anything at all whatsoever, even if it is against or for who ever you support. Ron Paul is a kook, a conspiracy theorist, an anti-semite, a racist, and everything else you could call him. It has already been pointed out here at RS that using Ron Paul against any of the candidates is destructive. Why give him credit for anything? I despise Ron Paul, and everything he stands for.

  • onenationundergod

    If you want to help Santorum, better give him a donation to fight. Paul has a war chest.

  • http://www.changeforrickperry.org louisianapatriette

    Melody (AKA rightwingmom92) once posted this great analogy that I saved back in the summer. I loved it and laughed myself silly over it because it was so true, and still is. Here is it in full:

    Courtships are funny things.

    Paul is like the stalker you can’t get rid of.

    Gingrich is the old boyfriend you’re still fond of, but there’s just no chemistry left.

    Cain’s the guy you want to hang out with. A great guy.

    Bachmann’s the shoulder you cry on–a friend in time of need.

    Huntsman’s the slick talker telling you you’re the only one, but you don’t quite believe him.

    Romney’s slick like Huntsman, but a little more believable. Problem is he’s dating everybody who’ll go out with him.

    Rick Perry may not give you butterflies all the time, but you can build a dependable relationship with him. He’s not going to jerk you around and play games, and no doubt he’s the best kisser of the bunch (according to his wife).

  • Scope

    I just saw you say yet again on Anderson Cooper’s show that if Perry loses in SC, he is going to be responsible for a Romney win. Where in the hell are you coming from. You have been so all over the map on Perry, you are making my head spin. I promise your posts here, and your comments on CNN have all but made you into someone who doesn’t know what end is up today, yesterday, and tomorrow. Then tomorrow you will say something completely different. Do you have any principles? I’m beginning to doubt it seriously.

  • Common_Cents

  • onenationundergod

    I read is cost 250,000. He has a great ad maker. They are so good. I don’t support him, but I can critic an ad. Both the ones for him, and those against others are very well done. Santorum better get up some opposition research on Paul…..he needs money…..just saying.

    Paul has been shrewd you know. He votes no for everything to keep his fingerprints off everything. Like voting present. Why does he do it?

  • superpatriot

    I’ve always wanted the most conservative public figure to lead our nation.

    I started supporting Perry before he fell a bit.

    I’m now supporting Newt and hope he comes through.

    Reality, though, if Romney wins, I WILL support and vote for Romney.

    Remember, folks, compared to Obama, Romney is radical right-wing extremist.
    Obama is the most liberal, socialistic president and must go. Now.

  • http://www.changeforrickperry.org louisianapatriette

    Very bewildered. But since I’m still a relative newbie I’m going to withhold my judgment. Surely there’s a method to the seeming-madness. Maybe Erick and Perry together know something we don’t. Maybe Erick is trying to spur the campaign on. Maybe…I don’t know, I’m trying to give him the benefit of the doubt. Erick has said so many positive things about Perry. He even seemed to give the impression yesterday that Perry could win South Carolina if he did this, this, and this.

    Oh well. Signing off of RedState for today. I’ve got another sick goat and I’ve been fighting Iowa blues all day, so I think I’ll go start watching that Sam Houston DVD I got for Christmas and cheer myself up. Rick Perry’s on it and I’m going to enjoy it to the utmost. Goodnight!

  • sunshinek67

    everything you just said. Irrelevant who made the video, the content pertains to the diary. And in my opinion, it is relevant. Helpful to the discussion, RS posters quote sources from all ends of the spectrum, from the very bottom to the very top. I understand, and share, your sentiments towards a Ron Paul candidacy.

  • dajeeps

    As far as I’m concerned Gingrich is ideal the compromise candidate; plenty of free market conservatism and entitlement reform on his agenda. Repeal of Sarbanes-Oxley and fostering of competition for capital is a real big deal. I’d be willing to accept not quite as limited a role for government as I’d like to get functioning capital markets which translates to functioning employment markets. But it just doesn’t look like it’s going to happen this time around. It’s the same old story that’s been going on pretty much my entire life.

    I am exhausted in so many ways; I just don’t think I can stand all the work and dedication going for nothing. I just don’t understand how after everything we’ve been through, and all the talk about the constitution and the founding that noting at all has changed. Perhaps, being blinded by own misfortunes in this recession I misread the whole situation for something far more serious than it really is and I am starting to get the feeling that perhaps the Republican Party has just left me behind.

  • naraht

    I guarantee you that should Santorum become the Republican Nominee, that a *lot* more people are going to know what that case is about. The case is largely known for being the case that Roe v. Wade is built on, and I do truly think that if Griswold is overturned then overturning RvW is relatively easy from a Legal standpoint…

    Regardless of how those on this board feel, I just can’t see anywhere close to a majority of the American populace agreeing with the statement: “My state should be able to ban condoms from being sold”. (Though some on the extreme left might support the ban because they want the government to give them away)

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    In 2008, I feared Huckabee success because I (correctly) saw it as enabling McCain to win, who I (correctly) saw as our worst candidate. Romney would have been better in ’08.

    This time, Romney is the least conservative and least acceptable. Romney-care alone should be a disqualifier.

    It’s mind-boggling that we cannot come up with an alternative. Santorum, Perry or Gingrich would be better, but at this point I think only Gingrich and Santorum have the path/pull to stop Romney and if they split the vote in SC even that wont be enough.

    “I prefer Santorum (or Perry or Bachmann when they were in) to Gingrich” I agree there as well, but Newt would be great in a mano a mano debate with Obama.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    in Vermont, IL, OH, and he said on Hannity he’ll be on all 50 state ballots except Virginia, where he is joining the lawsuit over their ballot rules. So “could miss” is now “wont miss”.

  • jakeofalltrades

    That’s how joinder works.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    So who do you want? the n-th place finisher who was torn apart earlier in the process by one group of purists? its pretty clear the firing squad took other folks out FIRST, didnt it.

    So take out Santorum and Romney – you mean the 1 and 2 place finishers … that leaves #3 … Ron Paul.

    Last man standing!

    Is the Ron Paul ultimate goal the destruction of the GOP?
    If that is his plan, it is working to a T!

  • JSobieski

    Is that conclusion so unfathomable to you?

    There is a point in every primary campaign when it is time for the losers to unite behind the winner. The only dispute is when that time comes. Talking about anyting past SC is premature in my view, but reasonable minds can differ.

    I do recall Fred deciding that if he couldn’t win SC, it didn’t make sense to continue. Perry does need to show something. I would give him to Florida to make up some kind of ground. If he can’t show something by Florida, it will be time to make some really tough decisions or . . . eat the crap sandwhich that we don’t want to eat.

  • greyeagle

    is a big government Republican, look at his record. He served only in the Senate and has no executive experience. You need a Governor for that in this race. Santorum does not have the money or organization to beat Romney or do a national race. He simply is a weak candidate.

  • greyeagle

    Iowa is a little state just like NH. It is far too early to drop out with SC and then Florida coming up.

  • greyeagle

    I don’t think you can count Perry out yet. It is obvious you don’t like him. I also don’t think he would endorse Romney either.

  • greyeagle

    Interesting, and I understand what that means.

  • greyeagle

    I wondered why FOX was pushing Santorum so hard. Apparently Santorum had a high dollar contract with FOX news until he threw his hat in the ring for President.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    agianst the MSM onslaught.

    I am comforted that Santorum can articulate and think on his feet. Now, so can Romney and Gingrich, but I found Santorum’s single Iowa speech more inspiring than what I’ve heard from Romney-McCain-Dole as candidates … ever.

    And it’s a pity Perry flubbed it in debates (with ‘oops’ etc) because if he WAS articulate and able to defend his positions better, he’d be the frontrunner right now. He got downgraded because we KNOW the MSM will attempt to destroy our candidate and we need a candidate who stands up to it and doesnt do the RINO defensive crouch.

    Let’s no wuss out on trying to get a conservative because of phony ‘electability’ concerns. If we have a conservative who is articulate, non-crazy, geniune and a hard-working campaigner, they’re worth consideration.

  • acat

    Santorum’s no conservative, *except* on social issues.

    He’s going to get shredded in the general, just like he got his ass handed to him in Pennsylvania, once his social issue record was challenged by a “social conservative” Democrat.

    The social issues don’t move the independents. If they did, abortion would already be restricted, gays wouldn’t be getting all uppity, etc., right?

    Mew

  • ronlsb

    Erics comments will wind up causing exactly what happened in 2008–no coalescing around one of the conservative alternatives to McCain because none of them were pure enough. We know the results. Same thing happening this time–Romney is supposedly everyone’s last choice but all the bashing is pointed at those who are more conservative than he, despite their faults. Wake up, Eric. Romney, though better than Obama, is least likely to beat Obama and if he does will at best be a George Bush Sr. type of president. That’s not what this nation needs now and you very well know it.

  • Flagstaff

    “But lots of conservatives won?t, sure they?ll hold their nose and vote for him but he?ll need more than that to stand a chance.”

    If what you say is true, we (or the people who act as you predict) will deserve the disaster that will follow.

    The idea that Romney = Obama is ludicrous. So is “Romeny[sic] will fight to keep Obamacare in place.”

    Erick is making a serious point here. Think about it as you read it again. It has nothing to do with voting for either Romney or Santorum. It has everything to do with why you might want to vote for either of them.

  • Flagstaff

    he suspended his campaign and went back to DC to save the country from financial disaster. The press made it seem that Obama ran the meetings at the WH, with Bush saying “uh-huh” and McCain saying almost nothing (obviously because they were both too stupid to understand it as well as the brilliant Barack Obama).

    Obama jumped ahead in the polls, and that was that.

    I am thoroughly confused by all the current polls, each one of them seeming to show a different “truth.” Even the political polls called primaries and caucuses are contradictory. The one I haven’t seen is the one identifying the most popular second choice among those who don’t prefer Romney first.

    My own opinion is that each of them are a mixed bag, and how badly mixed the bag is depends on how you prioritize your values and issues. It seems to me that the higher the pluses are for a given man, the higher his minuses are as well, especially, perhaps, in the cases of Newt and RonPaul.

    I’ve admitted I’m confused. I just don’t see the rationalization that goes into demonizing Mitt Romney for certain things, while forgiving others for what I would consider worse transgressions.

  • Flagstaff

    “Romney excites nobody but the handful of his supporters. He induces apathy at best in everybody else.”

    He may not even “excite” his supporters. But he may also give the millions of disaffected former Obama supporters the best looking alternative to four more disastrous years with the Bamster. I don’t know, because for me they all look better than ‘Bammy.

  • http://www.voteforteri2010.com teridavisnewman

    PART ONE:
    Insider:? Got a bone?to pick with you son.

    UM:? Yeah?
    Insider:? Oh yeah.? Big time.? Told you?been saying to you for a while now?you keep the heat on Obama.? Don?t wander off takin? the bait on other sh-t.? Otherwise you?re wasting my time ? and time is somethin? we are in short supply of these days.
    UM:? All right, I?ll bite.? How about you explain that?
    Insider:? You know what I?m talking about.? Don?t play dumb now.
    Read more in News
    ??Yet Another Taxpayer-Funded Vacation for Michelle Obama?
    UM:? I?m not playing?dumb.? What?s up?
    Insider:? Why the Santorum article?? The dogs ain?t treein? nothin? there.? Why you fallin? for that sh-t?? You can be a damn fool ? a stubborn damn fool.
    UM:? Thanks.? Appreciate that.
    Insider:? Now don?t go gettin? all hurt up about it?but for God?s sake son?you can?t go running around hopping on to every little article that comes out spreading more chaos in the primary race.? It?s a put-on.? You?re being played and every other one of you who are doin? the same are being played too.? The focus is Obama.? Always.? Focus. Focus. Focus.? Stop takin? your damn eye of the ball.
    UM:? The RedState story?? On Santorum?s big government ? his less than conservative record?
    Insider:? Yeah ? that stupid sh-t your put up on the blog. Knock that sh-t off.? Like right now.? No more of it.? I don?t wanna see no more of it.? Obama is the target.? Go after Obama and stay the f-ck outta messin? with the other?the primary stories.? At least don?t go pittin? one candidate against the others ? media doin? enough of that.? Don?t need you and everyone else like you falling right in line and doin? the same like a bunch a braindead liberal bloggin? fool soldiers.? Focus everything ? and I mean everything, on messin? with Obama.? The other stuff?the Republican primary?they are running a classic pump and dump.?Been doin? it against them for months.? I warned you about it ? sh-t?how long ago now?? Were you not listening to me?
    UM:? Pump and dump?? I don?t recall hearing that term.
    Insider:? I told you about that?pretty sure I did.? Maybe it was someone else?? Don?t matter?so long as you don?t keep fallin? for it.? You and everyone else who pretends they are paying attention to this stuff.
    UM:? What is?what is a ?pump and dump??
    Insider:? It?s old school politics.? A political tactic.??Been around since Jesus was a?kid.??It?s ? now you remember the ?McCain the Campaign? thing, right?? How he was done then shot up in the polls outta nowhere.? Money started pouring in.? I know you gotta remember that.? A political pump and dump is a version of that?it?s the version.? The McCain thing was a bit of a variation but the principle is exactly the same.
    UM:? And what is the principle?? The purpose?
    Insider:? Chaos.? Uncertainty.? Infighting.? Repress the vote.? You notice the stories about low voter turnout?? You see that happening?? That?s gotta be makin? the Obama people very-very happy.? Godd?mn Republicans are losing this thing.? Idiots gonna lose this if they don?t get their sh-t together right quick now.
    UM:? What low turnout?
    Insider:? You ain?t seen those stories?
    UM:? No.
    Insider:? Well of course not.? See there ? that?s the kind of? thing I?m talkin? about here.? You?re too busy copying the other damn fools in helping with the pump and dump.? God?mit!
    UM:?? Explain the numbers ? the low turnout.? What are you talking about there?
    Insider:? The primary votes ? the turnout.? They started strong?been trailing off badly more recently.? People are getting?the motivation has been turned off.? That?s one of the benefits of the pump and dump.? Now you combine that with the bullsh-t stories on the economy and you lower the agitation in the country.? And when folks ain?t pissed?the tie goes to the incumbent.? That?s the end result.? That?s what the Obama team is playin? for now.? The tie goes to the incumbent.
    UM:? What?? Sorry but?I have no idea what you?re talking about right now.? The tie goes to the runner?
    Insider:? No ? the tie goes to the incumbent.? All things being equal?if sh-t ain?t so bad?voters will go with the incumbent.? If the other side looks all messed up?all the infighting, all the uncertainty, all the finger pointing?folks just step back across the line and vote with the incumbent.? THAT is what?s happening right now.? And you stupid little anti-Santorum story is playing right along with it.? That?s why I?m pissed.? At all of you.? All of you who say you want to defeat Barack Obama?you got?you seem clueless sometimes at how easy you are gettin? played.? I read that stuff and?you just go on making my job that much harder.? It?s tough enough son ? under the very best possibilities this thing is gonna be tough enough?but you just wanna go and make it that much tougher.
    UM:? Back up just a bit ? and thanks for the constant putdowns by the way.? Makes this all so much more enjoyable.
    Insider:? I ain?t here to play nice son.? You know that.? You best put on your man pants and get ready, ?cause you?re in the deep end now.? No backing off?you said you wanted this.? So here we are.? We about to rumble.? You?re gonna get a front row seat in how somebody gets elected President of the United States.? It ain?t pretty.? This ain?t no p-ssy ride.? This is the real deal here now.? Right now.? So if you?re worried about gettin? your feelings hurt?sh-t?me chewin? you out is gonna be the least of it.? Hand a God son?you think a person get?s a face like this from doin? it easy?? Hell no?this thing?this ?bout to get hard.? Everything up to this point?just the previews son.? You?re ?bout to get the sh-t kicked outta you.? Only question is?you got the spine to stand back up and hit the fu?ers back.? HARD.? Hit ?em so hard they done see tomorrow coming the day before.
    UM: (Laughs)
    Insider:? That?s right ? you laugh now.? You remember laughin? now.? You won?t have time for it later.? And that later is just about now.
    UM:? Back to the pump and dump?are you saying the Santorum surge ? let?s call it that?the surge was manipulated?
    Insider:? Yeah. That?s what I?m sayin?.
    UM:? Just like that?? None of his support is genuine?
    Insider:? No?not sayin? that.? He?s got support.? Real support.? They all do.? But to go from nothin? to something?it was the same thing with McCain, right?? I see their hands all over it?they done the same with all the others.? Gingrich.? Cain.? The only one they didn?t touch like that?didn?t try and help was Perry.? Perry scared ?em.? Perry was a threat.? That is, until he took himself out of it.? They didn?t need to do anything to Perry?that situation resolved itself.
    UM:? So the Santorum surge ? just to be clear?it?s a manipulation?? At least in part?
    Insider:? Exactly.? And not to take anything away from Rick Santorum ? as a candidate he?s done all right.? He?s hung in there.? He?s tried to line himself up for a VP spot.? That?s now turned into?you can see it in his eyes now ? he?s got that look that a candidate gets?starts thinkin? maybe he can actually pull this off.? Might just get himself the nomination.
    UM:? Ok ? you say it?s being done.? Explain how.? How are the Obama people manipulating Santorum?s support.? And why?? Why are they doing that?
    Insider:? It?s what was done with Gingrich.? Gingrich was elevated quickly, right?? Then the attacks came. The media repeated over and over again how the attacks came from Romney.? The negative advertising and all that.? Sure?some of that was right.? But what the media don?t say?and what idiots like you apparently don?t notice ? is all the negative MEDIA stories that are then bounced around 24/7 to push Gingrich back down.? So if you got a bunch of voters?conservative voters?they are not so keen on Romney?they?d vote for him against Obama if they had to, but they would rather have a different choice, right?? Well that?that lack of enthusiasm?that?s gold for the opposition.? That?s power.? You can manipulate that.
    This whole primary has been about that ? they have done that over and over again.? They have taken the voter?there?s a word for it.? A lack of?support.? Uncertainty?
    UM:? Antipathy.? Voter antipathy.? (Note:? meant to say ?apathy?)
    Insider:? Yeah ? that?s it.? Antipathy.? So the Obama boys?they are gonna use that antipathy as much as possible.? Play off it.? Reinforce it.? Use it to eventually limit voter agitation against Obama.? Make the Republican side look so damn chaotic people get turned off by it.? That?s their playbook?and they are doing it beautifully.? As much as it pains me to say?the Obama campaign is pulling it off beautifully.? ?Course, they are getting a nice bit of help when people like you go around helping to knock down Republican candidates like you just did with Santorum.? They play the music and you go out and start dancin? to it.
    UM:? That?s not?that?s not what I was doing.
    Insider:? Yeah it was.? You mighta been too dumb to notice, but yeah?that?s exactly what you were doin?.? No sense cryin? about it ? just don?t go doin? it again.
    UM:? So you?re sure about this ? that the Obama campaign is doing this ?pump and dump? as you put it?
    Insider:? No doubt whatsoever.? I know it because I?ve helped to do it myself.? Many times.? Many campaigns.? They slipped up a bit though ? they left a clear marker for folks to see if they were actually paying attention.? Which of course, most aren?t.? Even ones like yourself who think they are?who think they are following all of this?you?re missing it.
    UM:? What was the mark?
    Insider:? Marker.
    UM:? What was the marker?
    Insider:? There was a debate not so far back ? Republican debate.? And the moderator kept hammerin? away on the contraception issue.? And there was no contraception issue at that time, right?? Contraception?? Really?? Where the hell did that come from?? And why did that moderator keep at it like he did?? Repeatedly.? It came off like a joke.? People were sayin? how stupid it was.? How silly the media looked.? You remember that?

    UM:? I do.? Stephanopoulos, right?? He was the moderator who kept bringing up the issue?
    ?
    Insider:? That?s right, George was pushing it.? F-cking George.? He?is so transparent.? I saw it immediately.? Telegraphed it.??I knew the second I saw his face as he asked the question ? I KNEW they were setting something up.? Not then ? something for later.? And now we see that plan unfolding.? This false contraception boogie man issue.
    Now that debate was over two months ago.? And the issue of contraception, which seemed totally out of left field when it was raised during that debate ? totally out of place?what is going on now?? What is the media pounding on now?
    UM:? Contraception.
    Insider:??That?s right ? contraception.? ?It started out with a conflict between the Obama administration and the Catholic Church ? but sure as sh-t the Obama team and the media have turned it into an issue over contraception and are painting the Republicans as these out of touch Bible thumpin? radicals who want to take away women?s birth control.? That is how this thing is being framed? NOW ? and it?s exactly how Stephanopoulos framed the question THEN over two months ago.? This issue was being set up the whole time.? And did you notice who was involved in the debate question first?? What candidate?
    UM:? Santorum.? Damn?it was Santorum.
    Insider:? Ah ? there?s your light bulb moment for the day!? Now you?re seein? it!? Back then ? at that time two months ago, it seemed like they were going after Romney right?? But what candidate ? who it would seem is most vulnerable to the contraception issue?what candidate has seen a huge surge in support since that same debate where the seemingly silly and out of place topic of contraception was raised by a former Clinton operative mind you?what candidate is now posing perhaps the strongest challenge yet to Mitt Romney for the GOP nomination?
    UM:? Santorum.
    Insider:? And what candidate is most vulnerable to this bullsh-t contraception issue ? at least in how the Democrats and the media are now framing it?
    UM:? Santorum.
    Insider:? There you go.? Classic political pump and dump.
    And when you go and regurgitate that RedState story knocking Rick Santorum ? you?re making yourself an accomplice to the Obama cause.? You?re part of the dump.? So do me a favor?shut the f-ck up about Santorum or any of the other Republicans and keep your focus on Barack Obama.? I am sick and tired of seeing you Republicans bashing your own.? What is the deal with all of that?? For f-cks sake now?grow up and support the defeat of Barack Obama, right?? Go ahead and support your candidate ? yeah, I get that.? But stop with the destruction of everyone else in the process.? There?s gonna be enough of that during the General?why are you Republicans so willing to help out Barack Obama in that destruction now?? It?s godd-mn appalling is what it is.? And stupid.? Stupid-stupid-stupid.
    I?ve read the comments by people sayin? they are conservative.? If Romney gets the nomination?or if Gingrich gets the nomination?or if Santorum gets the nomination?whoever gets the f-cking nomination ? they are sayin? they won?t?voter for them because ?they?re just like Obama.?? Really?? Is that right???BULLSH-T.? There ain?t nobody ?just like Obama? people.? Believe me.? You ain?t got a f-cking clue if that?s what you really think.? This country ain?t seen anybody reach the White House like Obama.? Or more importantly ? the people around Obama.? The ones?supporting and pushing Obama.? Giving him the agenda, the words, the whole f-cking plan.? So shut the hell up about not voting for the Republican because they are ?just like Obama.?? That kind of talk is comin? from somebody who either is dumb as f-ck or is working for the campaign.? The Obama campaign.? And they are crawling all over your stupid Facebook thing.? And?leaving comments on your stories.? I?warned you about that.? There?s gonna be more of it.? A lot more.? You hear somebody saying they won?t support the Republican because they are??just like Obama? ? you?ignore that sh-t.? It? ain?t worth your time.
    Any of these Republicans ? ANY OF THEM, are a hell of an improvement over Barack Obama.? If it?s Santorum, or Romney, or Gingrich, or Paul?you?fall in line and you?support that candidate and you vote Obama the f-ck out.? That?s the goal.? That?s your motivation.? PERIOD.? Because if you don?t do that?if you give this administration four more years?I?ve already said enough on that, right?? It?s never going back?the country?this version of America is finished and I got no real idea as to?how?different it?s gonna be.? We won?t recognize it ? I know that.? I was talking to a fella last week about the?Senate?plans to take the Senate.??Republicans.? As a stop-gap, right?? You know what he told me?? Looked me straight in the eye and said ? ?It won?t matter.? He has pushed executive authority so far already?it won?t matter.? Give him a couple more Supreme Court nominees?it won?t matter.? If he gets the White House again?IT WON?T MATTER.?
    Gave me chills to hear?that.? This guy don?t talk like that.? He?s seen and done more than me with this stuff?and he sounded downright defeated.? And we?re not even in March yet.? So yeah -?you Republicans better fall in line when that nominee is chosen.? No more of this political purity I want?the perfect candidate nonsense. Grow the f-ck up and vote out Obama.
    UM:? I have some?questions ? a few of them.
    Insider:? Yeah ? shoot away.? Not that you?re much of a shot.
    UM:?? Fast and Furious.? Solyndra.? What happened to the primary challenge against Obama??Your California information?the Attorney General ? that all came together.? Is there anymore on that?? Have you heard from -name deleted- ?? They haven?t responded to my?
    Insider (interrupts)
    Hold up.? Let?s talk Fast and Furious.? Let?s talk Solyndra?that ties in with -name deleted-.? Might explain why they haven?t spoken to you recently.? There?s a big shove comin? on that.? The old man is finally puttin? some skin in the game.? And about damn time.? And as far as the California stuff?that make your chin hit the floor a bit, didn?t it?? Imagine that.? Take that money laundering?all those hundreds of millions in campaign dollars cycling through there?and now reward the players with a Supreme Court position and put them first in line to replace Eric Holder at Justice.? Four more years ? and none of it will get out. NONE of it.? Ever.? You noticed that then.? Good on you.? I?ll let you in on somethin? I haven?t admitted before.? -Name deleted- ain?t the only one following the comments to your stories.? I?ve been known to sneak a peak or two myself?you got some smart folks making some real connections.? Some of it closer to the real deal than they realize.? Do me a favor and pay attention to some of that.? Most of it?a lot of what?s left is bullsh-t?but you got some people?some of them got the right eyes for this stuff.? -Name deleted- told you to slow down and notice what?s sometimes right in front of your face.? You might wanna take them up on that advice son.? I ain?t gonna be available to hold your hand through this ? gonna be too busy now.? This thing is on its way.? You need to learn to do the work yourself and not wait for me to spoon feed it to you all the time.
    UM:? (long pause) So let?s start with Fast and Furious.
    Insider:? Sure ? let?s do that?