1

I still think Perry will be a disaster and Obama would beat him.

I think Romney can raise the money needed to maybe come close to competing with the ultimate leftwing corruptocrat.

2 This country was built on compromise.  You know, like Lincoln compromising with the South about how many slaves they could have.  This was right after he formed the Republican party, so you wingnuts should appreciate it.

3 "Good evening, everyone. IÂ’m tmi3rd, and I finally have a night off from physics to toss my two cents into the pot. " Fellow physicist?

4 Mark Steyn linky no worky

5 And remember how the United States compromised with Japan about how much of our navy they could sink at Pearl harbor. They said all, we said none, we settled for half and shook hands. It was a different world in those days, filled with compromise and birpartisanship.

6

<sub>"Good evening, everyone. IÂ’m tmi3rd, and I finally have a night off from physics to toss my two cents into the pot. "

Fellow physicist?</sub>

I think he means that he likes dropping things off of highway overpasses.

7 My problem is that I donÂ’t believe heÂ’d deviate from current GOP thinkingÂ… that being that big government is perfectly fine as long as weÂ’re the ones running it.

It seems that the sad fact is a democratically-elected government will always expand.  It's built into the system.  As long as constituents keep demanding shit, politicians who want to keep their jobs will keep trying to figure out a way to deliver shit.  And most of it is shit, frankly.

Even Reagan couldn't beat the system.

8 Â… and I apologize in advance for the length of this.

Still, not as long as a movie review.

9 I'll always remember the way conservatives in the '50s were willing to compromise with the well-meaning Marxists that infested the State Department.  Good times, man.

10

Texas gal here - Perry's my guy; no qualms whatsoever about that decision.

That being said, I will pull the lever in November 2012 for whoever ISN'T Obama.

Don't want Mitt; at this point, it looks like the only other one who MIGHT be a challenger is Newt, but I can't bring myself to support someone who has left 2 wives and who is willing to roll over and appease the other side just so that he gets invited to all of the "right" parties.

I know the character of Aggies who were in the Corps of Cadets, and I know the character of kids who grew up in farming and ranching communities in Texas.

Governor Perry may not be the best debater - he never studied/practiced law; they're the ones who use that the most - but he IS a great speaker, and he connects with people; they genuinely like him.

11 Jordan, I'm doing the great career switch into medicine... which means I can't even claim technical physics I & II as what sucks up all my time. They didn't even ask us to derive anything today- but I did finally figure out how to describe friction mathematically as well as handle most elastic and inelastic collisions. Baby steps...

12 Whoa. That was so long I thought Ace posted it!

13 It was great when we could share our moon-landing technology with the Russians in a show of warm comradeship and good neighborliness.

14 Hey, Cain's corporate tax is really a goddamn VAT. He calls it a "Net Business Profits" tax, meaning he would tax corporate revenue less Cost of Goods sold. So, for example: Imagine a company with revenues of $1,000 and expenses of $400 for components and $400 for wages (with fringe benefits), half of which are manufacturing labor as opposed to the secretary, etc. Cost of goods sold equals the cost of components of a product plus the cost of putting them together into the final product, plus an allocated share of manufacturing labor fringe costs, such as health insurance. So in this case, Cost of Goods sold Could be $400 component costs plus $200 of manufacturing wages loaded with fringe costs. Cost of Goods sold would equal $600 ($400 components plus $200 fringe-loaded direct manufacturing labor). So Cain's tax would equal 9 percent of $1,000 revenue less $600 Cost of Goods Sold (=$400 components + $200 manufacturing wages plus fringe costs), or $36. $36 equals 18 % of the net profits of $200. That's WAY more than "9%." And this IS a Value Added Tax, because the companies that made the components ALSO were subjected to the same taxation. In fact: Cain's own scoring report of his scheme calls this a “subtraction method value-added tax.” http://tinyurl.com/3rpx5or And it's important to add... this company would pay this very same tax even if it was in a loss position that was not related directly to Cost of Goods Sold. Depreciation, bad investments, the price of administration, etc., could give the company negative income, and yet Cain's tax of Cost of Goods Sold would apply anyway! Nein, Nein, Nein, Herman!

15

Still, not as long as a movie review.

Not even as long as an introduction to a movie review.

16 Still, not as long as a movie review.

Posted by: YIKES! at October 19, 2011 08:12 PM (70TBD)

no but it was right up there tho...........ok, i did a Breitbart on that one..........

17 And this IS a Value Added Tax, because the companies that made the components ALSO were subjected to the same taxation.

Vertical integration.  The wave of the future.

18 Palin thought Newt won the debate.  There's that.

19 no snark, but I still don't understand your point. perhaps an abstract is in order?

20 Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

21 Passing Obamacare reduced rapes, ya' know.

22 Ive always looked for the person who can most eloquently make a case for conservatism. Right now on that stage it would be Gingrich.

23 Pep- More succinctly put, the conventional wisdom is that Romney is the anointed nominee. Polling seems to bear out that that isn't what conservatives and libertarians want, and the thing lacking at this point is people making themselves heard on the issue loud enough for the GOP to hear it. It could also be that none of these folks running for the presidency has really captured the imagination of enough of us to get momentum going, as well.

24

Mark Steyn linky no worky

Still.

25 It gives me no pleasure to say to Mitt Romney via this blog, “I don’t believe you.”

Ding ding ding ding ding we have a winner!  I can't even call Romney a RINO because I don't know what Romney actually, seriously, truly believes.  That is problematic, to put it mildly.  Still better than Obama and all that but still. 

26 23 Is that the longest before a SCOAMF ever??

27 Note to debate moderators:  Don't ask Mitt whether it's true that Perry's business cards are nicer.

28 WTF?

29 I'm not even going to consider choosing until we have the Feats of Strength and Airing of Grievances rounds. Though, technically, there's been alot of airing of grievances already, I guess.

30 22 Nein, Nein, Nein, Herman! Posted by: CoolCzech at October 19, 2011 08:17 PM (niZvt) Write your own thread, asshole. Posted by: Brilliant Physicist at October 19, 2011 08:20 PM (bZ8J6) Fiddlesticks!

31 at 25 that's ironic given that just a couple of months ago, gingrich was dead to everyone around here

32 Politics not as the art of compromise, but rather the art of *the possible." Bismarck is an authority. Or authoritarian. Whatever. Art of the possible was a song in Evita. About an authoritarian. For those for whom politics is about power, being able to do whatever people will go along with and give you kudos for is the way they work.

33 Nobody ever defended anything successfully, there is only attack and attack and attack some more. - Patton

34 Bad link at "Mark Davis"

35 29 Nah,I often do them the next day if I missed a thread.

36 Is there a Readers Digest version of this?  j/k... you make some great points. 

37 So I'm just trying to catch up here after having to leave AoSHQ for a few hours.

When I left, I believe Vic was ranting left and right that he is fully and completely behind Romney ... just loves him.

Is that about it?




PS = nice job tmi3rd

38 34 I don't really like him all that much. I do think he would take our beliefs further than Romney.

39 OK, I just fixed it.

40 All your links are belong to me .

41 Note to debate moderators:  Don't ask Mitt whether it's true that Perry's business cards are nicer.

Posted by: rdbrewer at October 19, 2011 08:23 PM (iWrpC)

Nice.  Is your real name Patrick?

42 Ive always looked for the person who can most eloquently make a case for conservatism. Right now on that stage it would be Gingrich.

Posted by: Big T Party at October 19, 2011 08:22 PM (JM2AX)

If we pick Gingrich there will be more rapes.

43 Thanks for reading!

So your point is..?
The establishment suks cause they like them some big gov.
Romney suks cause he's the establishment personified.
We really need to turn this bitch around and sell real conservative solutions to the public instead of constantly seeking a middle ground.
Choosing a nominee is our best chance to actually influence this whole thing.
Get out there and talk up your boy (girl) and your values?

What the hell are all the other words for?

44 My HTML-fu failed me. Just went and cleaned it up- see if that works.

45 I can't even call Romney a RINO because I don't know what Romney actually, seriously, truly believes.

I believe I should be President.

46 at 26 well given that we've gone through several cycles infatuation and heartbreak, is there a good reason to think we know ourselves what we want ?

47 3 people fixed the links ... what's the chance of them working?

48 Who said that compromise is when we win and they lose? Today more than ever!

49 Dunno, let's find out... and thanks for catching it, Andy.

50 I think Andrew Breitbart fixed the links - he knows some internet stuff.

51

OK, I just fixed it.

Thank you, Sir.

52 49 This!

53 Nice article. Romney will win if the election was held today and probably will win next year. It's how rick adverse you are. Perry will most likely lose. Cain might have a chance to break through, but it's unknown at this point. One thing I say about Cain, the reason why the GOP is not destroying the Dems every election cycle is because of minorities. If minorities voted at all a little more than they do for the GOP, the Dems will be gone unless they significantly move to the right. Cain/Rubio could be that ticket that changes the electoral dynamics for years to come. So would Romney/Rubio for that matter.

54 Is the GOP establishment really the problem? The choice of the GOP establishment was Mitch Daniels, someone who would have made entitlement reform THE issue. In fact, one could argue that the GOP establishment is more serious about entitlement reform than the Tea Party, based on Daniels' behind the scenes support. The Tea Party likes to talk, but when it comes to entitlements, they are rather silent.

55 If the entitlements crisis is the ONE big issue facing this country, as I'm sure most people here recognize, then the choice clearly comes down to Newt or Perry.

Newt has has baggage for sure, but he is definitely the smartest of the lineup by far and understands the problems we face better than anyone other an Paul Ryan.

Perry is good as well and I trust his resolve to make unpopular choices, but, like others, I just don't think he can beat Obama. Or at the very least, the GOP would be taking a hell of a risk by nominating him.

So yeah, put me down for Newt.

56 Thanks for sharing, please keep an update about this info. love to read it more. i like this site too much.

57 I'd like to announce that, thanks to the help of Andy and RD Brewer, in terms of links, we're more fixed than a spay and neuter clinic. (grin)

58 If Romney gets the nomination, heÂ’ll get daily messages from me urging him to tack right on key critical issues.
-------
He won't listen.  Many of us former Mitt supporters pleaded with him to throw over his support for Masscare and he just won't do it.  He's not going to do it if he is the nominee. 

Our best shot with a Mitt presidency (should it come down to that) would be making him run Right in the primary, but that isn't happening.

Vote for the guy you want in the primaries.  If he (or she) doesn't win, you have no guarantees he'll matter later.  Not as VP, not as anything. 

All these fantasies (some have) about a conservative Congress making Mitt govern as a conservative - or about some VP making up for his deficiencies - are silly and a little damaging because it makes people ease up on the guy.  And when was the last time the POTUS was not tagged with the "leader of his party" label?  Maybe late in a second term or when a POTUS is a lame duck, but not a first-termer.  And if we do not do something major to rollback government in the first two years, it ain't going to happen.  The POTUS is not going to follow Congress -- certainly not this Congress and I don't believe the new Congress will be that much better in the leadership positions. 

This is our only chance to influence what sort of POTUS we'll have in 2012.

59 62 is a RINO and probably a crossbow enthusiast.

60 Is that the Andy?

61

 Nobody ever defended anything successfully, there is only attack and attack and attack some more. - Patton

So Patton was a Democrat? And politics is war by other means, not the art of compromise. If that's the case the best we can do is Democrat lite.

62 MJH, you're absolutely right- the one thing I can't afford, as a doctor-wannabe, is four more years of Obama, and by extension, the implementation of ObamaCare. It's truly a rock-and-a-hard-place situation for (I think) most of us, simply because the stakes are too high to not win on this go-round. The biggest risk (IMHO) is that what we replace Obama with may not slow the march off the cliff.

63 Good post, tmi3rd. Turn in your RINO card. I negotiate settlements every day. The ideal result is a win-win, where both sides get something that they want (You got the number you wanted, I got the time frame I wanted). Sometimes it's win-lose where I've got 'em by the curlies and I'm dragging them towards the woodchipper. Or vice-versa. In a compromise, NOBODY gets ANYTHING that they wanted. You get some third option that satisfies no one - but it always seems to lean towards the shittiest of all possible outcomes. See: arbitration. Democrats don't want win-win. They don't even want compromise. They want win-lose, where they get all of what they want and chant "Neener-neener!" at us through the barbed-wire enclosure. Fuck these people. They're insane and it's nut-cuttin' time.

64 67 What a wingnut.

65 It's how rick adverse you are.

I see what you did there.

66 Mitt is the Shit!

67 Democrats don't want win-win. They don't even want compromise. They want win-lose, where they get all of what they want and chant "Neener-neener!" at us through the barbed-wire enclosure.

I propose the Ronaldus Magnus Plan: We Win, They Lose.

68 but, like others, I just don't think he can beat Obama. Posted by: Jason My labrador retriever that can't retrieve could beat the O. Vote for record.

69 72 I agree, a steamy constitutional.

70 More succinctly put, the conventional wisdom is that Romney is the anointed nominee.

it ain't just conventional wisdom. The RNC has said as much,

Georgette Mosbacher co-chair of the RNC finance committee on Romney.

"I think tomorrow, weÂ’ll be contacting one another and probably put something together with Romney."
"And we do believe Romney, in terms of independents, will be a strong candidate. We will coalesce behind him now."
"The time has come. With the primaries being moved up, the time has come to get behind him,"

71

This is just more excuse not to vote for Romney.

It is getting pretty ridiculous at this point.  No one else is even close to being able to do the job... Romney is absolutely as conservative and any of the others.... and yet every one turns themselves into pretzels not to vote for Romney.

I have yet to hear any valid, I stress valid, reason to be against Romney.

Every argument is fluff and nothing if you look at the exact same problems his competition has!

Especially, Newt or Perry or even Cain.  There is not one thing Romney has done that should label him as any less conservative as any of those... and yet... you have to think of some reason why Romney can't be trusted but those other guys can.

Hopefully the brain pretezels will end soon and you will realize you have been fed a load of crap about Romney by his enemies and you were only too willing to buy the load of crap, because you didn't have to stand up and say that you disagreed... 

But deep down I think everyone realizes that Romney is the only real choice and that he is much better than we have been told by his enemies.

72 I agree with your post tmi3rd. Fuck compromise. We are constantly told we have to compromise and go with the most electable candidate. Did the Dems do that in 2008? No, they went with an inexperienced cult of personality douche who was openly hostile to just about everything that made this country exceptional. And they won. Our Great Moderate Hope was vilified as a crazy old right winger and in the interest of wanting to be liked, he rolled over and took it, sometimes even helping. I see Romney as no different. I'm sick of Dem lite and the 'establishment'. At best Romney will be another Bush- good intentions (hopefully) but loves him some big government. People like BIG ideas and confidence. Even though he was full of shit, Obama projected both and that sealed the deal for a lot of the indies I know that went for him. This is why I respect Cain. Sure, 999 is never going to happen but we're having the conversation about taxation on a much larger scale and that is the first step to scrapping the old system. I'd love to see Newt/Cain or Cain/Newt happen. I'm sure we'll be stuck with the great cornholio instead.

73
Vertical integration.  The wave of the future.

Posted by: al-Cicero, Tea Party Jihadist at October 19, 2011 08:18 PM (QKKT0)

On the plus side it would mean more competition I suppose.

74 @77
Should I bother, guys? 

OK. 

Masscare, ethanol subsidies, AGW, and demonizing Social Security reform. 

75 So Ben Bernanke is the guy on the box of rice?

76 77 RomneyCare??? Global Warming??? Being more flexible on major issues than silly putty???

77

Posted by: petunia at October 19, 2011 08:42 PM (hgrmi)

Is that you, Mitt?

78 This is why I respect Cain. Sure, 999 is never going to happen but we're having the conversation about taxation on a much larger scale and that is the first step to scrapping the old system.

So an interesting point to consider. Obama never campaigned on Obamacare. But he did campaign on "healthcare reform"

Getting a candidate running on some sort of tax reform does open the door for any type of tax reform. I'm just highly concerned that 9-9-9 could leave us with the current tax structure PLUS another tax...

79 Loot for Newt!

80 Did we compromise when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

81 "My labrador retriever that can't retrieve could beat the O. Vote for record."

Being overly sanguine about victory is always a good strategy in politics as in war.

I, for one, don't want to risk another 4 years of this. Take a look at Romney's new add to see why Perry might end up a disaster in the general.

Say what you will about Obama, but he can hold his own in a debate (unlike Perry) and has message discipline (unlike Cain).

Newt is the only person on the GOP list now—besides Romney, but I don't even consider him a Republican—who can cream Obama in any debate.

Not only do I want to see that, but I think it will be crucial to victory.

82 Here's what bothers me about the entire slate of credible GOP candidates. None of them act like America is in a crisis mode. Here's a bit from the epilogue of Steyn's "After America". ... if a candidate is not publicly committed to fewer government programs from fewer government agencies enforcing fewer government regulations with fewer government bureaucrats on less lavish taxpayer-funded pay, he's not serious. He's not only killing your grandchildren's and children's future, he's killing yours - and you will live to see it. It will be hard enough to apply pressure on America's bureaucracy-for-life once he's elected, but if he's not prepared to argue for smaller government en route to office he's certainly not going to do so afterwards Which candidate that has a chance of getting elected is spelling out serious cuts? Which candidate isn't just saying we need entitlement reform but is NAMING whose ox is getting gored? Now I can imagine Romney getting in office and then getting forced to the limited govt. side... but it takes a BIG imagination.

83 Being more flexible on major issues than silly putty???

Should I pull up his letter to the Log Cabin Republicans on gays serving openly in the military back before he decided he was for DADT? 

Nah, too easy. 

84 68 MJH, you're absolutely right- the one thing I can't afford, as a doctor-wannabe, is four more years of Obama, and by extension, the implementation of ObamaCare. Posted by: tmi3rd Just curious... are you in med school now?

85 Fox News Alert:  Ltjg Michele Bachmann called to active duty and ordered to San Diego, CA for further assignment.

Posted by: Doctor Fish at October 19, 2011 08:43 PM (Lt/Za)

I'd let her kiss the Royal baby's belly.

86 I think this primary is not turning-out the way we thought it would because everyone expected a savior would easily rise to defeat Barack Obama and that just has not happened. Since the beginning of primary season, every candidate that performed best or was perfect on paper was elevated to be "the one" and each has fallen-apart under closer scrutiny.

As far as Establishment choosing Romney is concerned, it was interesting to see this time around that some of them waited for other candidates-- like Chris Christie-- but ultimately decided on Romney because it is "his turn". But something people tend to forget is that we do have a say and that is at the ballot box during the primaries. People should just vote for who they want.

I will say this about Romney though-- I am seeing more-and-more ordinary people on conservative blogs who are sold on him as the nominee, so I do not think it is just the Establishment shoving him on us. The notion of electability is always a huge factor in elections and people also have a tendency to like people who tell them what they want to hear in a compelling way.

87 As things stand now... I second the Newt nominations...

88 Did we compromise when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 19, 2011 08:46 PM (ieDPL)

No you xenophobic bastards!

89 No Cain No Gain!

90 Fox News Alert:  Ltjg Michele Bachmann called to active duty and ordered to San Diego, CA for further assignment.
----
Gee, can't she get a deferment for that or is this her way of bowing out and saving face? I thought I read that Congresscritters can turn down assignments of that type. 

91 I have yet to hear any valid, I stress valid, reason to be against Romney.

Defense of Romneycare.  This is getting easy.

92

tmi3rd,

I don't know where you are coming from here. I haven't heard anyone tell us we have to comprimise or anything else. You can vote for whoever you want in the primary. If you are for Newt you can start pimping Newt and see if you can get anyone to join you. I am between Romney and Perry right now. When I decide which one I will start working towards their election.

I must not be on the mailing list where someone tells me who I have to end up voting for.

93 We are constantly told we have to compromise and go with the most electable candidate. I watched my four-year-old nephew play Nintendo last weekend. He kept saying stuff like, "I knew that would happen." Hopefully he'll get an idea someday about how transparent that is. Otherwise, he'll grow up to be one of those dicks running his mouth about electability.

94 This is why I respect Cain. Sure, 999 is never going to happen but we're having the conversation about taxation on a much larger scale and that is the first step to scrapping the old system.

As a side note, Perry just went in on the Flat Tax. I don't know if he was going to do it anyway, or if it's a response to what's Cain's doing, but it looks like we're going to have our discussion on the tax system.

95 So the guy who dumped two (2) cancer-stricken wives, sat on that couch with Nancy Pelosi, and trashed Paul Ryan's budget as "right-wing social engineering" is now cleared to be the Great True Conservative Hope. But authoring Romneycare makes you persona non grata and the very physical manifestation of RINO-ism even though it wasn't such a big deal a few years ago that Rush and Levin both endorsed him. Thanks guys, glad I could get that cleared up.

96 Gee, can't she get a deferment for that or is this her way of bowing out and saving face?

I haven't been able to find a confirmation anywhere, even at Fox News. I also didn't remember her being a member of the Reserves, and checked wikipedia. No mention.

97 I prefer Cain or Perry.  However,  today I arrived at the conlusion that NEWT is the one to beat Romney.

98 Perry just went in on the Flat Tax. I don't know if he was going to do it anyway, or if it's a response to what's Cain's doing, but it looks like we're going to have our discussion on the tax system

I wish he'd take a page out of Ron Paul's book (yeah, I went there - and I do not like Herr Doktor) and start laying out some major cuts.  It's clear he'd roll back things like the EPA, but he needs to translate that into reducing the size of the federal govt.  Maybe he's nervous to propose cuts that would put people out of work, but he needs to do it to distinguish himself from the others. 

99 But deep down I think everyone realizes that Romney is the only real choice and ...

This is the "You'll eat the S* Sandwich and like it" attitude I spoke of earlier that makes the base turn the motivation dial from 11 to 1.

I'm not going to vote for him in the primary. Get used to that. Romney care is a straight up deal breaker. He is a ways from earning my vote in the general should he get nominated. Taking my ball and going home? No. If he wants my vote in the general he all needs to do is convince me he can actually turn this bitch around. He isn't even close to convincing me yet; but in fairness he is closer than he was. If he runs left after nom, should he be nomed, then that is pretty much a no-go.

100 However,  today I arrived at the conlusion that NEWT is the one to beat Romney.

And then you woke up.

101 As a side note, Perry just went in on the Flat Tax. I don't know if he was going to do it anyway, or if it's a response to what's Cain's doing, but it looks like we're going to have our discussion on the tax system. Posted by: Meiczyslaw Perry has not been a fan of the income tax. Has been meeting with Forbes to create his tax plan. A great discussion to have.

102 Maybe he's nervous to propose cuts that would put people out of work, but he needs to do it to distinguish himself from the others. 

Posted by: Y-not at October 19, 2011 08:54 PM (5H6zj)

What do you call it when your neighbor loses his job? A recession.

What do you call it when you lose your job? A depression.

What do you call it when everyone at HUD loses his job? A recovery!

103 Obama is ruining the World Series. 

I gather he's wearing a White Sox jacket.

104 Newt is like your first love that you never forget. Fond memories but then you remember the really shitty stuff they did to you.

105

I haven't been able to find a confirmation anywhere, even at Fox News. I also didn't remember her being a member of the Reserves, and checked wikipedia. No mention.

I think someone may be joking about the sailor suit she wore at the debate last night.

106 105 No one likes Newt. He's still more conservative than Romney. Rush and Levin endorsed Romney just before Super Tuesday because he was more conservative than McCain. Now Romney is the least conservative. Endorsements supporting anybody but Romney will come accordingly.

107 I wish he'd take a page out of Ron Paul's book (yeah, I went there - and I do not like Herr Doktor) and start laying out some major cuts.

Ron Paul is living proof that you can agree with someone you dislike. If the Executive was somehow split between domestic and foreign spheres, I'd actually think about Paul for domestic.

Perry, for whatever reason, is reminding me of the student who waits until the deadline to do stuff. His work -- when he does it -- is perfectly acceptable, but geez, he's behind.

108 115 Newt is like your first love that you never forget.

I was reading up on his wives and mistresses (I really didn't know teh stories) and how they're getting younger (well, that first one was his teacher, so she was older) and wondering what he does in bed.  I mean, he's gotta be a great lover is all I can think. 

109 Macintx- Taking the MCAT this summer, hoping to start a year from this fall. Had a couple of setbacks on the way through.

110 Newt would render Obama mute in a debate. Biden? He'd render him stupid. Well, more stupid. So, would Obama even agree to debate Newt? See? Easy out for President Present.

111 Permit me to clear up the misunderstanding. Michele's outfit in the debate was white with gold buttons and slightly resembled Navy dress. The call to active duty was a joke based upon her dress. Posted by: Doctor Fish at October 19, 2011 08:56 PM (Lt/Za) It's from the Michael Jackson collection, circa 1987.

112 What burns me up about Cain's 9/9/9 proposal is that if Obama proposed the same exact thing, conservatives would be up in arms over it. A freaking Value Added Tax (think about it: Revenue less Cost of Goods Sold... that IS "the value added" by the company that made the goods), AND a National Sales Tax. AND we keep the fucking Income Tax??? Are Cain Supporters OUT OF THEIR FUCKING MINDS??? THINK, will you, what Cain is SAYING!!!

113

I think someone may be joking about the sailor suit she wore at the debate last night.

Posted by: fluffy at October 19, 2011 08:56 PM (O6q63)

I thought it looked Sgt. Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Bandish. 

114 117 It's more funny if you don't explain it. I got it.

115

I'd rather die than compromise.  In fact, no compromise is my entire political motto.  Starving is better than 2/3 of a loaf of bread.  That's why I only vote in primary elections and I skip the other elections.  Weeding out the RINOs is how you demonstrate you're a true conservative.  Once you compromise that means you just lose slower. 

Hell, even an idiot knows you can't compromise in politics.  Did the founders of this country compromise?  Hell, no.  They rammed their agenda right down the opposition's throat.  If you didn't agree on the exact framework of our government that meant you were a RINO and needed to be purged.  That's why Jefferson, Madison, Buchanan and Teddy Roosevelt refused to compromise when the Bill of Particulars said hasta la vista to illegal immigration, pencil neck.  It's my way or the highway and always has been. 

So if it's a choice between Romney and Obama or Perry and Obama I'll choose Obama.  That way we prove our point, once and for all.

116 I'd take a flat tax over the current system but I'd prefer the Fair Tax. Anyone have any idea how big the underground economy is?

117 tmi3rd: "Taking the MCAT this summer..."

What a fun exam. Practice working as fast as possible. Time pressure is pretty high.

Most difficult test I'd ever taken.

118 Robtr- That was actually kind of deliberate. Right now, I'm in anyone-but-RomneyLand. I can buy the notion you don't feel like there's someone being forced on you; I just see it differently. The folks that I encounter seem to be resigned to Romney against their wishes, and the point that Steyn makes is that a bunch of motivated people in 2009-10 changed the course of political history in this country. Frankly, my opinion on who it should or shouldn't be is irrelevant to the discussion beyond my inability to get comfortable with Romney. I've changed my mind a few times on who I'm behind.

119 And good luck, tmi3rd.

120 I was reading up on his wives and mistresses (I really didn't know teh stories) and how they're getting younger (well, that first one was his teacher, so she was older) and wondering what he does in bed. I mean, he's gotta be a great lover is all I can think. Posted by: Y-not at October 19, 2011 08:58 PM (5H6zj) The "G" in "G-Spot" stands for Gingrich, hon!

121 Ixnay on the ookieway.

122 1

I still think Perry will be a disaster and Obama would beat him.

I think Romney can raise the money needed to maybe come close to competing with the ultimate leftwing corruptocrat.

Posted by: Lemon Kitten at October 19, 2011 08:07 PM (O7ksG)

Perry's fundraising numbers since entering the race have been just as good as Mitt's.  I actually think they were a bit higher.

123 Bachmann was very obviously dressed up for Halloween. She is being Adm. Mike Mullen this year.

124 Drivel- I'm MCAT-prepping for the next several months. Cleaning off the rust from stuff like Gen Chem is a pain in the ass, but the cool thing is that we're timed on everything we do as we work through it. Thanks for the heads-up, though... it's easier to walk the path with people reminding you what obstacles are on it.

125 137 You think?

126 135 Ixnay on the ookieway. Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 19, 2011 09:03 PM (ieDPL) You have to be more direct. Nice guy, but otnay ootay rightbay.

127 121 Taking the MCAT this summer, hoping to start a year from this fall. Posted by: tmi3rd Wishing you the best! We need good doctors! Have a daughter in nursing school and a son in pre-med. Not sure how that happened but I am well pleased.

128  She is being Adm. Mike Mullen this year.

Posted by: Big T Party at October 19, 2011 09:04 PM (JM2AX)

Adm. Mike Mullen with teh crazy eyes!

129 I still think Perry will be a disaster and Obama would beat him. So far, Perry has horribly embarrassed himself in every debate. Last night took the cake. His accusations were idiotic, and Mitt basically shouted him down. I have every ideological reason in the world to favor Perry over the others, but... I'm just shaking my head over this guy. "Disappointing" understates how I feel.

130 Perry's fundraising numbers since entering the race have been just as good as Mitt's.  I actually think they were a bit higher

He raised as much (more?) than Mitt did in half the time.

Perry continues to appt campaign teams in states.  He's not dropping out any time soon.  That's wish-casting by the Romney folks. 

131 I don't think campaign money is a problem once a nominee is chosen.

132

As soon as Mittens put his hand on Perry's shoulder, Perry should have dropped him.  Anderson Cooper would have pissed his panties.  It would have been great TV.

133 Was I the only one that noticed that Bachmann was sporting a Casey Anthony hairstyle last night? Kind of hawt, in a crazy scary way...

134 My main reason for being against Romney other than the obvious, is that I think he will ruin out chances at getting close to that 60 seat Senate majority we're going to need. There's a huge opportunity that we'll get there if it we can keep up the momentum from 2010.

It was the enthusiasm gap from the Tea Party and conservative base that turned 2010 into the bloodbath it was. The base is extremely unenthusiastic about Romney. Doesn't mean there won't be a large enthusiasm gap again with Romney, but it will close, hurting down ticket candidates as well. We lose a couple close Senate seats and you can say goodbye to any real chance at meaningful reform, even if Romney all of a sudden becomes a conservative following the inauguration.

Is it any wonder that Romney is the left's 'acceptable' candidate?

135 Hell, even an idiot knows you can't compromise in politics.  Did the founders of this country compromise?  Hell, no.  They rammed their agenda right down the opposition's throat.

Yes, those bastards!

136

Hey, Cain's corporate tax is really a goddamn VAT.

Posted by: CoolCzech at October 19, 2011 08:17 PM (niZvt)

You can't tell the Cainiacs that. 

 - They don't care if the 16th Amendment isn't repealed and the new 9-9-9 comes in. 

- They don't care that states like NH with NO sales tax are furious about the fact that they'll now be expected to come up with the mechanism to fork over to Uncle Sam. 

- They don't care that states with sky-high sales tax will just add on the VAT without blinking an eye and the taxpayer be damned. 

- They don't care that truly struggling seniors will now be paying nine percent on food and other goods even though they're on fixed incomes. 

- Then again, people are so desperate to get rid of SCOAMF that they want to latch on to anyone who gives them a sense of hope, so I try to be understanding.  Besides, there are 12 months to go and he's bound to flame out by then.

137 148 And I would have had an orgasm. Damn. No one ever wants to cooperate.

138 I don't particularly care for Romney, but I think Cain would be a disaster: his 9/9/9 tax scheme is a liberal's wet dream, and he is a total ignoramus on foreign policy. He says the stupidest shit, like electrocuting illegals and not hiring muslims merely for being muslim. Come on Caniacs... Let not the Mark of Cain be 9-9-9! (Sorry, just HAD to make a Mark of Cain crack, and the 9-9-9, 6-6-6 thing just worked SO well... )

139 138 Bachmann was very obviously dressed up for Halloween. She is being Adm. Mike Mullen this year.

Posted by: Big T Party at October 19, 2011 09:04 PM (JM2AX)

Huh. I heard it was Sargeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band

140

As soon as Mittens put his hand on Perry's shoulder, Perry should have dropped him.

I agree, I think Mitt wiped a booger on him.

141 WAIT!!! The Mark of Cain... The Mark of the Beast... The Inverted 6-6-6... OMG!!!

142 compromise is for fags

143 Well, of Cain IS the Antichrist, does that mean Perry will get to Rapture Michelle Bachmann? On TV??

144 Mitt's attempt to cast the finger of death failed.

145

Perry, for whatever reason, is reminding me of the student who waits until the deadline to do stuff. His work -- when he does it -- is perfectly acceptable, but geez, he's behind.

Posted by: Meiczyslaw at October 19, 2011 08:58 PM (bjRNS)

Perry's released his plans faster than Romney did his 59 point plan.  Romney announced in June.  His plan didn't come out until September.  Perry entered in August and had the first of his plans come out last week, and will have more by the end of this week.  Still ahead of Mitt's schedule. 

And its kind of even worse when you consider Mitt's "announcement" to be kind of a joke.  I mean who didn't know he was running well before June?

146 I was very happy to search out this web-site.I needed to thanks to your time for this excellent read!! I definitely enjoying each little little bit of it and I have you bookmarked to check out new stuff you weblog post.

147  You win again, Gravity!

Posted by: Brilliant Physicist at October 19, 2011 08:18 PM (bZ8J6)

Are you down with gravity?

 

148 We all claim to value substance over media fluff, so what's the argument against Newt? Seriously, anytime Newt lays the hammer down in the debates, we all say something like, "gee isn't it a shame that Newt did [insert non-policy, PR issue]". I mean, I don't want to discount the effect of negative PR, but isn't this kind of thing precisely what allows the media to effectively pick our candidate for us?

149 So this goon broke into my house (and I'm an anti-pro-anti-pro-anti gun guy, I left my varmint gun at the summer house) anyway he wanted to rape the wife. Since I'm a reach across the isle guy we compromised and he only raped her bung hole

150 >>>>>>>>> If minorities voted at all a little more than they do for the GOP, the Dems will be gone unless they significantly move to the right.<<<<<<<<<

Perry seems to be able to pull close to 40% of the Hispanic vote in Texas...have any of the other candidates shown a like ability?

151 Gravity, damn you to hell.

152 EoJ is comment #69    must be some kind of cosmic alignment in the Moronosphere

153  Hell, even an idiot knows you can't compromise in politics.  Did the founders of this country compromise?  Hell, no.  They rammed their agenda right down the opposition's throat.

Ugh.  Actually, they did, a little.  I watched part of David Barton's American Heritage Series last night.  They finally had to back down on anti-slavery language or the Southern States wouldn't sign on to the Constitution.

154

Perry seems to be able to pull close to 40% of the Hispanic vote in Texas...have any of the other candidates shown a like ability?

Posted by: Mr. Book at October 19, 2011 09:24 PM (qe1yY)

Mitt Romney seems to be able to draw about 25% of Republican support even though he's a Democrat.  So there's that.

155

Listen to Reagan's speech at the 1964 GOP convention. It's the same problems we're facing now.

Playing nice and civil with the Democrats gets you all the progress you'd expect from negotiating with a rabid dog.

Time to go Atticus Finch on them.

156 >>>>There is not one thing Romney has done that should label him as any less conservative as any of those<<<<

2nd Amendment squish.

157

Time to go Atticus Finch on them.

Posted by: Michael Rittenhouse at October 19, 2011 09:27 PM (2Oas0)

I don't care what you say.  There's no way I'm naming my daughter Scout.

158 174

Time to go Atticus Finch on them.

Posted by: Michael Rittenhouse at October 19, 2011 09:27 PM (2Oas0)

I don't care what you say. There's no way I'm naming my daughter Scout.

Posted by: RushBabe at October 19, 2011 09:30 PM (tQHzJ)

Good luck finding a neighbor named "Boo"

159 Mitt Romney seems to be able to draw about 25% of Republican support even though he's a Democrat.  So there's that.

I lol'd. 

160 144 So far, Perry has horribly embarrassed himself in every debate. Last night took the cake. His accusations were idiotic, and Mitt basically shouted him down. I have every ideological reason in the world to favor Perry over the others, but... I'm just shaking my head over this guy. "Disappointing" understates how I feel.

The primary thing I took-away from that exchange is that Romney starts giving under minor pressure. All he had to do was wait for Perry to finish, then continue speaking, but he instead went off with the "I'm speaking! I'm speaking! I'm speaking!", putting his hand on Perry's shoulder, appealing to Anderson Cooper, and making a lame joke about Perry. His “I’m running for office for Pete's sake, I can’t have illegals!” was revealing as well. So Perry did not do himself any favors there but Romney let the mask slip.

161 Naive claptrap..

rather than hunting for some mythical common ground –the idyllic compromise- you throw your ideas out there for the world to consume, and see what wins traction in the marketplace of ideas. You then go with it when you’ve got something that works.

That (stupidly) assumes all sides throwing out ideas are being honest.  It assumes honor and honesty.

Nothing could be further from reality in today's political climate.

We have a lying, evil president who employs (at least) dozens of wordsmiths to craft his messages to do nothing but deceive voters who are too busy or too dim to think for themselves.  The opposition party does that as a rule.  Obama did exactly that to win the presidency.

Yet, you and Mark Davis suggest we should just throw our ideas out for the world to consume?

We are NOT going to win the White House without convincing some independents to vote for our guy.  If you think otherwise, you are a fool.  Our "base" is a very small part of the electorate.

Let's be clear.. a Tea Party agenda would be my choice for governance.. but it won't win an election.  We will only win the White House by couching our rhetoric in terms more palatable to the general voting public.

Running a full-on Tea Party agenda dooms us to four more years of Obama.

162 Ah, I see. Newt dumped his wife; ergo, Romney has a better policy record and will govern more conservatively. Perfect logic, FTW! Look, I understand the general conservative argument about the relationship between private morality and public stewardship. But the fact remains that Newt did spearhead the Republican strongarming of Clinton in the 90's, and he has shown in the debates that he has the argumentative chops. So really the question is, To what degree are we going to let antipathy to private life influence our opinion of policy arguments?

163 142  We need good doctors!

No we don't. We need doctors who will take government orders and like it.

164 >>>Ugh.  Actually, they did, a little.  I watched part of David Barton's American Heritage Series last night.  They finally had to back down on anti-slavery language or the Southern States wouldn't sign on to the Constitution.

That was his entire point. (He was being ultra-sarcastic.)  Everything the Founders did at the Constitutional Convention was based on compromise, from the inclusion of the Bill of Rights to the creation of the federal judiciary to the 3/5ths clause.

165

Whoever we nominate, please please God, don't let this election be close enough for the GOP to compromise SCOAMF back into office by swallowing every car trunk full of crayoned ballots the Occupiers, Black Panthers, Dem hacks and Community Organizers discover.  And no more drawn-out fucking Greg Craig battleground state Frankendramas.  I am as tired of unpunished Dem poll-thuggery as any other failing of the GOP.  When they start shooting out campaign office windows, slashing tires and stealing computers this time, make them pay a heavy price BEFORE THE VOTES ARE COUNTED.  That is all.

166 When they start shooting out campaign office windows, slashing tires and stealing computers this time, make them pay a heavy price BEFORE THE VOTES ARE COUNTED. That is all.

Posted by: 666chevelle at October 19, 2011 09:46 PM (QjSgY)

They might think twice about shooting Rick P's windows out, good chance they will be return fire

167 >>>Ah, I see. Newt dumped his wife; ergo, Romney has a better policy record and will govern more conservatively. Perfect logic, FTW!

>>>Look, I understand the general conservative argument about the relationship between private morality and public stewardship. But the fact remains that Newt did spearhead the Republican strongarming of Clinton in the 90's, and he has shown in the debates that he has the argumentative chops. So really the question is, To what degree are we going to let antipathy to private life influence our opinion of policy arguments?

The answer is: a lot.  And moreover, even if YOU personally are enough of a committed hardcore conservative partisan to let it slide (honestly, I am too -- I am opposed to Gingrich for a number of OTHER reasons, but would let this slide if my vote was the only that counted), your analysis conspicuously omits the fact that massive numbers of voters, who do not share our unflinching partisan alignment, will not let it slide.

Moreover, the argument against Newt is so much more than just "oh he keeps cheating on his cancer-stricken wives and dumping them for younger blondes."  It's that he has proven himself a terrible leader of men, who squandered the majority gained in the Republican Revolution almost entirely (as I've pointed out over and over, the one major policy victory of his time, Welfare Reform, was due to Bill Clinton singlehandedly resurrecting the idea and pushing it through Congress in order to secure his reelection via triangulation, NOT Gingrich's strategizing).  Nobody who has ever worked with him or served with him has anything but criticism for his leadership. 

Also, he's inconstant and flaky -- he tosses out a ton of ideas, but never seriously thinks anything through or demonstrates a willingness to slog through and fight for policy victories.  Also, he's a weathervane: witness his early championing of the individual mandate for healthcare (Romney had him nailed on this last night), and his "oh, Global Warming is cool now, guess I should get on board!" endorsement of Cap & Trade while sitting on the couch with Pelosi.  For all the talk of how Romney is supposedly an untrustworthy RINO who'll knife us in the back in a heartbeat, Gingrich has given even MORE evidence of the same tendencies: a born-and-bred Washington insider, one of those classic "Beltway cocktail party" guys whose positions seem to be affected by the liberal company he keeps and whom the base affects to despise.

Sure he can say some pretty words in a debate.  We always knew that.  But it's absolutely COMICAL that some people are now announcing that Gingrich is an acceptably "true conservative" hope -- holy crap, how much amnesia does one have to suffer from in order to forget what he was doing even FIVE MONTHS AGO, when he denounced the Ryan Plan as "right wing social engineering?"

This is not the droid you're looking for.

168 This info is a terrific read. Thanks for the info.I am looking forward for more updates.

169 181 But the fact remains that Newt did spearhead the Republican strongarming of Clinton in the 90's, and he has shown in the debates that he has the argumentative chops. Newt is a Great debater. He is a great historian. This is where he shines. Leading a cause, especially our cause, not so much. And Yes, I would love to see him in some role in the next administration. Just not president.

170 @186: Ok, I understand what you're saying about Newt as a weathervane, but my point is that in the debates he has often been saying what needs to be said, and more pithily and forcefully than the other candidates. Maybe that is just pretty words, but then it seems to me like we had something like this argument last cycle in 2008 when even though Romney was the guy who looked good, it was that he looked "too good" and had all these other issues we didn't like, so instead we ended up with the "least objectionable" McCain because the media coalesced around him. And McCain rhetorically rolled over. Now, I don't think that a candidate Romney would roll over like McCain, but honestly, I'd like to see a little more fight in the dog for the conservative vote, esp. in terms of speaking openly about conservative solutions. That's part of the reason I like Cain's 9-9-9 in spite of its huge problems: At least he's not sitting back trying to weasel out a victory without saying anything.

171 In other words, I'd Romney to act a little more like a frontrunner. That would give me a lot more confidence in him, instead of just watching him follow the same old Republican party model of inheriting the nomination because it's "his turn".

172 #186 for the win. Newt does well in a think-tank. But as a leader? No.

173

"Good evening, everyone. IÂ’m tmi3rd, and I finally have a night off from physics to toss my two cents into the pot. "

Fellow physicist?

No he was appointed God.

174

>>>Ah, I see. Newt dumped his wife; ergo, Romney has a better policy record and will govern more conservatively. Perfect logic, FTW!

Christ, it's the one constant that drives me nuts in every thread.

They hate everyone. I think they really really really want fuckin' Romney.

175 I have been quite impressive with your posts, keep up the great work.

176 194 Thanks for noticing.

177

I voted for McCain in '08 because I knew, with very little internet research, that Obama had  been raised as a radical marxist, had chosen radical marxist professors and "friends" throughout college, and was absolutely incompetent at everything he had tried except "community organizing" (and Chicago pay-for-play politics), he the half-black affirmative action candidate. 

I was incensed at Bush for giving us ever more bigger government (socialist-lite; yes, you Republicans -- no Ace of Spades readers included, of course -- don't get it; Republicans are also on the socialist-anti-American bandwagon everytime you "compromise" with big-government programs.  But for conservatives to stay home when there was a known marxist on the ticket?  Unforgivable, and  to your eternal shame and the debt our children and grandchildren must repay.

Now that the socialism, marxism, destroy-America-first attitude is right out there for everyone to see, no more compromises.  It is time to stop the destruction of America.  We are a free market society that values freedom and justice for all.  I will never vote for Mitt (socialist-lite) and I will never vote for Obama and I will not vote for a third-party candidate.

This election is not about a "conservative" or "libertarian" candidate.  It is about a candidate who will not compromise with socialism, the direction we are heading.  (Read E.M. Smith at chiefio.com on that "socialism shiny-thing".) Mittens is not, was not, and has not ever been the candidate of freedom.

The only one I can see with any credentials who is a serious contender for the "no compromise" candidate is Gov Perry; Texas is the state that is a a better model at present than any other for "successful American".

Limited government, fiscal prudence (balanced budget amendment), (knowing how to) securing the border in the face of marxist-destroy-America-keep-it-wide-open-laws, voter ID, local control/ funding of education (I do like national testing in subject areas, however), strong military, limiting foreign funding/engagements to those in the national interest. 

Regarding the latter, I am surprised that no one I have read has picked up on Perry's comment that we need to question UN membership.  The UN is on a totalitarian bureaucracy-gone-wild path.  More on the UN -- be ever so grateful that there are (Canadian, I believe) citizens like Steve McIntyre (climateaudit.org) who pursued the false data, math, statistics, and computer models (e.g., hide the decline) along with demanding FOI inquiries that put paid to the biggest scientific-public policy scam ever-- AGW-Evil-CO2.  Also Anthony Watts at wuwt.com has been in the trenches for a long, long time.  No compromise ever with a Romney who supported the scam without a quam, selling our entire economy down the river to the one-world-bureaucrat tyrants for his political advantage.  Also check out brilliant debater Newt on this issue.  What he and Nancy Pelosie sit on that couch and chit-chat about?

 

178 "... and see what wins traction in the marketplace of ideas." Great idea, if, and only if, the consumers of the ideas are smart enought, thoughtful enough, energized enough to do their own research and thinking. Else, "the marketplace" is just dopes taking the easy way, or the way someone told them to take. Marketplace of ideas is a tiny little place, inhabited by a very few decision makers I fear. Yes, I mean, I fear them.

179 RushBabe, it's not that we Cainiacs don't care. It's that every other candidate we've got sucks porcupine ass, in one way or another, and folks like you expect us to light up the bonfires and celebrate like Mitt / Perry / Newt / Paul / Bachman is the resurrection of Santa Claus.

[When I try to post, I get an error, so I'm going to break this up.]

180 [Continued:]

Cain has a plan, and while it isn't perfect, it's been praised by Paul Ryan, Art Laffer, and Haley Barbour, so I'm happy if it's only idiots like us who support it. We all know it wouldn't pass in its current form, but it's a good starting point. AND, he's all for seriously cutting government spending, reducing unnecessary regulation, domestic oil and gas development, etc. Cain doesn't have Newt's silver-tongue, but he's both intelligent and a good, generally articulate speaker. In a debate, Obama would be toast. Cain doesn't have the political experience Romney and Perry have, but he does have solid business experience and executive experience.

Again, he's not perfect, but I know why I want to vote for Cain. The others I either don't trust or they appear to be idiots. I would like to be convinced otherwise, so please, have at it.

I'm actually holding out hope for Perry; maybe it's just that he's not used to the national stage and he just seems to be an idiot. I hope he can pull out of it, start making sense, and give me someone other than Cain to consider. But, unless he does, Cain seems the best of a pretty flawed lot.

181 Newt may not be the guy we want, but he is the guy we NEED.

182 I agree with what you say about compromise, but disagree with what you say about Romney.

We can't pull him to the right after the primary.  The primary is where he is the farthest right he will ever be.  He is saying a lot of the right things, but does anyone believe him?  He will move back to "the center" in the general election and as President.  As you said, the republican establishment is part of the problem - they are fine with big gov't and do not want to rock the boat.  That is exactly where Romney will be.

I also disagree with this:

Romney would be, without question, a cosmic improvement over SCOAMFOTUS. I believe heÂ’d have the good sense to try to get out of the way of the economy improving- meaning reducing regulation and making permanent the 2000-era tax rates. I believe him when he says heÂ’d repeal ObamaCare, after last nightÂ’s debate (as many of you know, thatÂ’s a critical issue for me). I believe heÂ’d take a more active role in foreign policy, and I believe heÂ’d work hard to reconstitute our military while trying to streamline the obstructions that have made advances in equipping our armed forces somewhat of a labyrinth.

A - he will not be likely to repeal Obamacare.  This is because repeal will be much more difficult and much more costly than most conservatives pretend right now.  The public is fickle, and after 3 years with Obamacare in place, people are going to be used to it and there won't be a solid majority supporting repeal by the time Romney is sworn in.  And, an even greater majority is not going to want to see the bloody battle that repeal will entail in congress.  So, the polls are not going to be favorable for repeal.  And we are unlikely to have a filibuster proof senate.  (and we can't repeal through reconciliation).  So, the president is going to have to exert a lot of effort and political capital in a battle for repeal - most likely against polls showing Americans just want to move on.  The republican establishment is not going to want to spend time and political capital on something like that.  Do we really believe Romney has the passion and backbone to force repeal through?  Particularly when it is the son of his Romneycare? 

No.  Instead he will try to come up with a compromise "fix" of Obamacare.  Which will basically leave us with what we have today and worse.  The libs will have won.

I think the same holds true for just about every other major issue.  Entitlement reform, spending, reforming the tax system.  Romney is not one to rock the boat and take on the republican establishment, which does not want to tackle tough and controversial things.  Romney has never been a passionate leader on any of these issues - why would he suddenly start as President? 

Thus, Romney will be what republicans always are - a tax collector for the liberal welfare state.  Obamacare will become established and private insurance carriers will start to go out of business.  And, once the gov't is fully in charge of health care insurance, almost every facet of life becomes reasonably subject to regulation to control health care costs.

This is why while I thought Romney was acceptable last time around (and wanted him over McCain), I don't think Romney is acceptable this time around. Last time, someone who did nothing big but governed mostly right of center would not have done any harm.  He would not have done any significant good in tackling major issues - SS Reform, entitlement reform, debt reduction, tax reform, etc., but he would not have made things any worse and may have done some small good.

Now, because of Obama, someone like that WILL make things worse.  He will simply solidify the gains Obama has made for European style socialism and giving those gains a bi-partisan stamp, making it the status quo and impossible to undo.  Which in turn will hurt America far more than 4 more years of Obama as for the mushy middle the distinction between liberalism and conservatism will again be blurred allowing far left liberals the ability to quickly get back in power - either through majorities in congress or the WH.

Which is the answer to the people who say "Romney was supported by conservatives last time, why are they against him now?"  Circumstances change making what is acceptable different now than it was then.

183

"It could also be that none of these folks running for the presidency has really captured the imagination of enough of us to get momentum going, as well."

I believe this is true. They all seem fatally flawed in one way or another and not really ready for prime time. If there was one candidate who really seemed like a true threat to Romney, one who did not have these flaws, the process of "pulling Mitt to the right" would be a lot easier. There really isn't a Howard Dean type out there to Mitt's Kerry, so to speak; someone who he has to fear a bit and who keeps him from trimming his sails too much.

Thanks, tmi3rd, for a well thought out post.

184

Look Newt rubbed cheeks with Pelosi when it was convenient (I hope he got his pic autographed by her). What he was a long time ago, he is not now. He is able to say what he wants in the debates because he has nothing to lose, ala "Bobby Magee".

The previous poster that noted that Mitt is as conservative now as he's going to get and that "his" team would start the slide left to get "consensus" just as soon as they have the lock on the nomination.

I find it rather telling that the day after he gets smacked in the face with immigration in a debate, he launches an extremely misleading ad against Perry on immigration. Projecting much there, Mitt?

I'm a Perry guy, from Texas and I think that if he continues to use other channels to get his message out, then shows us that he's not afraid to confront candidates that are out and out lying to the public to get their votes, will eventually turn the undecided  back in his direction.

I really don't care if he can debate his way out of a paper bag, I do want to know that he will be willing to call people on issues when they are blowing smoke up their kilts.

185

>> The previous poster that noted that Mitt is as conservative now as he's going to get and that "his" team would start the slide left to get "consensus" just as soon as they have the lock on the nomination.

Sorry, meant to add to the end, "is right on target".

186 >> many major players in conservatism and libertarianism check in here to take the pulse of the movement Currently: a little corny and a little nutty.

187

"pulling Mitt to the right"

Translation: We have our self-respect, you have to lie to us.

188

He is saying a lot of the right things, but does anyone believe him? 

I disagree with the first part.

This is a guy who is running, in the GOP primary as far to the right as he'll ever be, in favor of clean energy subsidies, in defense of global warming, etc. et. al.

For the last year he has flat out snubbed and rejected the Tea Party, not only not reaching out to it at all, several of the more moderate tea parties have reached out to him and before Perry got in, he basically said fuck off.

189

He is saying a lot of the right things, but does anyone believe him? 

I disagree with the first part.

This is a guy who is running, in the GOP primary as far to the right as he'll ever be, in favor of clean energy subsidies, in defense of global warming, etc. et. al.

For the last year he has flat out snubbed and rejected the Tea Party, not only not reaching out to it at all, several of the more moderate tea parties have reached out to him and before Perry got in, he basically said fuck off.

Posted by: Entropy at October 20, 2011 10:36 AM (XxXUI)

I agree - that's what I meant by "does anyone believe him".  He is saying a lot of the right things.  He makes mouth gestures to repealing Obamacare.  He makes mouth gestures to SS reform, he talks a big game on immigration.  But his past actions and statements belie these positions.

On paper, if you ONLY look at his current written policy positions, he sounds like the most conservative guy running - or at least pretty conservative.  But nobody buys that. 

I don't have any belief that he even intends, whatsoever, to repeal Obamacare.  He would sign a bill repealing Obamacare if it came to his desk without any effort by him and the polls all still strongly supported repeal.  But I doubt very, very much that it could ever happen that easily.  Meaning, no repeal. 

And, I have no belief that Mitt would do anything different on immigration than what is happening right now.  Nor that he will tackle entitlements.

He will do some work on spending and the deficit and will likely halt agencies from continuing with additional regulations.  I don't envision Mitt doing much to roll back regulations though.  He's the type to tweak stuff - not cut stuff out with an axe.

190 Nor that he will tackle entitlements.

He's actually running on leaving entitlements alone!