1 Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

2 I wish my blog could get some air-time with the chief ewok...

3 Looking forward to having Drew on board, too.

4 War: You're pro-Romney, correct?

5 Correct.

6

I’m pretty much in complete agreement with everyone here, except for two minor points –

a)       I donÂ’t think the republican nominee will be anyone currently running.

b)      I donÂ’t think the democrat nominee will be Obama.

Other than that, weÂ’re all on the same page.

7 War: And you're also against Obamacare, right?

8 Send an email with hookers in it. That always works.

9 I can think of plenty of conservative things Mitt has said recently but actually done? I have nothing. Rick Perry, Rick Santorum and even Jon Huntsman have far more conservative records of actually doing things to advance conservative principles. Romney has no concrete example to point to. This is as true as the fact Obama is a stuttering clusterfuck of miserable failure.

10 Correct.  So is he.

11

jwest

 

do tell................

12 Is VLC a good media player for torrents?

13 Not cool attacking Tina Korb at the end of the post.  I'm pretty sure she is, like, a 15 year old intern or something.  Cut her a little slack.

14 War: Fair enough, that is what he says. I'm trying to find differences between Massachusetts health care and Obamacare. So far, I have found none. Besides the States Rights argument, do you feel there is much difference between the two?

15 I can't vote for anyone that uses the word 'zany' as a pejorative. It's just weird. Howie Mandell is zany. Jim Carey is zany. Newt Gingrich? Not so much.

16 Is VLC a good media player for torrents? Why are you asking these questions?

17
I don't know why people are still wasting their time making the case for/against any of these candidates. Who is their target audience?

We all hang out at political blogs every day. We know what's what.

I know all about Mitt, Newt, and Rick, and the rest. Nothing anybody says can change my mind about any of the candidates.

18 I keep saying it, Newt and Romney on conservative stuff are just about the same. Newt does beat him out, but only slightly.

19 "Keep smiling, Reed Richards" LOL! That's fucking funny right there. Look at Mitt giving a thumbs up - it's like he's trying to get used to operating a human body, like Jeff Bridges in Starman.

20 Maybe not, but I don't really care.  As long as ObamaCare is repealed, that's all that matters.

21 Why are you asking these questions?

Posted by: Joffen at December 16, 2011 04:17 PM (zLeKL)

I had to backup my computer and want better download programs. Its not for internet porn... trust me.

22
We're way past the biographical/resume stage.

It's now all about strategy and a little luck. It all depends now on the strength of the candidates and who screws up the least.

23 So I guess we're back to hanging ourselves again. [Grabs rope, gives it a tug] Check.

24 Newt said he supported the individual mandate "as a tactic against Hillarycare." Did he submit a bill that included the mandate? What would have happened if the tactic worked?

25

I’m pretty much in complete agreement with everyone here, except for two minor points –

a)       I donÂ’t think the republican nominee will be anyone currently running.

b)      I donÂ’t think the democrat nominee will be Obama.

I'll bet you could get 1,000 to one odds on  that in Vegas.

26

Since I'm sure we can all agree that Romney is more electable, we should give the nomination to him.  I'm sure Romney is well aware that if he pulls some "governing from the center" crap, he'll be a one-termer just like Bush the elder.  That should keep in check his desire to be liked by liberals.

27 Romney Didn't Really Call Gingrich "Zany"

28 Its not for internet porn... trust me. Nothing wrong with that, bud.

29 I was wavering on Newt, but I think that tumblr sold me. 

30

do tell................

Posted by: phoenixgirl at work at December 16, 2011 04:15 PM (s+J9D)

On the republican side, neither Mitt or the Anti-Mitt forces are going to back down.  The Ron Paul people will stay true to their guy.  No path to nomination.  No compromise on anyone currently in the race.  The only answer is someone new that everyone can agree on (like a Rubio).

 

On the democrat side, the media is going to start coming to the realization from polls like Ace just cited that Obama is going to lose big time.  Once they begin turning on him, Obama will be looking for an exit so that he isnÂ’t the one people point to as the guy who sunk the entire party – like Carter.  HeÂ’ll take a half billion in campaign funds and drop out, planning to return in 4 or 8 years.

31 Maybe not, but I don't really care. As long as ObamaCare is repealed, that's all that matters. --- It doesn't matter to you that Mitt enacted Obamacare in his state? If Obamacare is wrong, it's wrong no matter what. If we're all against Obamacare, why would we elect someone that signed the same thing into law in his own state? That's why I don't trust Romney. He looked at a bill that was like Obamacare and signed it into law. How is that different from if he'd signed a gay marriage bill into law, or a cap and trade-type bill into law?

32

It all depends now on the strength of the candidates and who screws up the least.

So we're depending on the GOP not to screw up?

Get your razors here! Nice sharp razors!  Remember, up the tracks not across the road!

33 it's like he's trying to get used to operating a human body, like Jeff Bridges in Starman.

Candid shots of Mitt trying to look human.

34

>HeÂ’ll take a half billion in campaign funds and drop out, planning to return in 4 or 8 years.

 

unconstitutional

35 And you're also known for your skills of diplomacy?

36 Romney didn't really call Gingrich 'zany'.

Very true - but he should have done so.

37 My kingdom for a horse in this race!

Neither Gingrich nor Romney can gain real support, and meanwhile, Axelrod, Plouffe, and The JEF are laughing.  They are planting claymores along every road, and the MFM is building them 24/7 in their munitions plants newsrooms.

Both men are just flawed, flawed, flawed.  Flawed.  Either will disappoint horribly if elected.

We are doomed.

38 unconstitutional


Because all these years, Obama hasn't done anything unConstitutional and gotten away with it, right?

39 And he really didn't shit in the bucket-des rigueur.

40

>It doesn't matter to you that Mitt enacted Obamacare in his state? If Obamacare is wrong, it's wrong no matter what. If we're all against Obamacare, why would we elect someone that signed the same thing into law in his own state?

 

to send Obama back to Chicago, instead of giving him 4 more years to finish ruining our country

41 Oh sheesh.  So Drew can't find *one* conservative thing that Romney accomplished?  How about: balanced the Massachusetts state budget and turned a $3 billion deficit into a $700 million surplus?

42 I wish my blog could get some air-time with the chief ewok

Be careful what you wish for.... Starting a blog sounds like a great idea but then suddenly your notice that your most recent post is 12 months old.

43 Go read the front page of WaPo. If it's the same as last night-you get to revisit Newt and wife #2 if you follow all the links.

44

I've been pushing Newt for president longer than most here. Pining for him in 2008. Pining actually for a GOP candidate who can speak like a conservative and chew gum at the same time, and he was the only option. Incredibly, he still is.

Here's the deal: Newt will crush Obama in debates and speeches, but has left himself open with enough quotes to be killed in paid ads and MSM. That's it.

Romney has a better chance of winning the General. But you will get a man clearly desperate to be president. His style is that of George HW Bush in the waning days of his failed re-election bid: frantic, voice filled with fake, hyper-energy desperately trying to add heft to shallow rhetoric. Romney is Bush Sr. without the shot-down-in-WW II part.

He can stop the bleeding that 4 more years of Obama would bring. But you might have this warm glass of GOP milk for 8 years.

Newt has been selling conservatism to a nation of skeptical buyers longer than anyone here. He might lose, but he might advance conservatism more in losing than Romney would in winning. Whether we can afford that right now I don't know.

45 I wish my blog could get some air-time with the chief ewok Be careful what you wish for.... Starting a blog sounds like a great idea but then suddenly your notice that your most recent post is 12 months old. ------- Tru dat!

46 How about: balanced the Massachusetts state budget and turned a $3 billion deficit into a $700 million surplus?

Without tax increases and accounting gimmicks?  Because, is so, that would be 1.  So he'd only be down be 4 or so in Drew's count.

47 Be careful what you wish for.... Starting a blog sounds like a great idea but then suddenly your notice that your most recent post is 12 months old.

Whew! My most recent is two months old!

48 to send Obama back to Chicago, instead of giving him 4 more years to finish ruining our country We can do that with any candidate. Hell, if that's all we're going for why not vote for Ron Paul?

49

unconstitutional

Posted by: Jones at December 16, 2011 04:26 PM (8sCoq)

Not only constitutional, but easily and legally done.

Any candidate can drop out of their race and retain the campaign contributions in an interest-bearing account for use in a later race.  The person can spend from that account on anything campaign related, even if the actual election they are campaigning for is years away. 

Obama could purchase and staff a Boeing 757, maintain offices, pay consultants and even take a salary.

50 If Obamacare is wrong, it's wrong no matter what. If we're all against Obamacare, why would we elect someone that signed the same thing into law in his own state?

I'm not against Obamacare for Massachusetts.  If they want to mandate themselves into oblivion, let them.  I'm against Obamacare for me in my state.

51 Starting a blog sounds like a great idea but then suddenly your notice that your most recent post is 12 months old.

It didn't sound like a great idea.  In fact, I resisted it for months.  But, as far as I can tell, there aren't any others actually looking at the philosophical underpinnings of the Conservative ideology.  I think we need that.  Thus, the new blog.

52 26

Since I'm sure we can all agree that Romney is more electable, we should give the nomination to him.  I'm sure Romney is well aware that if he pulls some "governing from the center" crap, he'll be a one-termer just like Bush the elder.  That should keep in check his desire to be liked by liberals.

Posted by: Cygnus at December 16, 2011 04:21 PM (DFkgL)

Umm, No I don't agree.  As I stated in the last thread, we need someone that will do anything to win.  Romney's just not that guy.  I don't see him allowing some PAC to make robo-calls in critical districts 24 hours before the election spreading rumors that Obama is teh Ghey (even though we know it's true). 

Newt, on the other hand, strikes me as someone that would approve of these kind of tactics.  He's dirty, underhanded and fearless - my kind of guy. 

I also like Newt's idea of following Barky around the campaign trail showing up 4 hours after Barky's speech and giving his own view while challenging him to a debate.  This tactic would absolutely unnerve the Barky campaign and would energize the base.  

We've had dumb (Bush), we tried nice (McCain), it's time to try smart (Newt).

53 >He can stop the bleeding that 4 more years of Obama would bring. But you might have this warm glass of GOP milk for 8 years.

 

Fine. Pour me some. This Obama Sandwich tastes like shit.

54 Since 'romneycare' is 80 pages long and Obamacare is 1000 pages long I'm sure you can find a few differences. As for the conservative things Romney accomplished I guess you can count his veto of in state tuition for illegals, taking his state from a 2 billion dollar deficit to a 300 million surplus without raising taxes and opting out of the Regional cap and trade initiative. There's more if you want.

55

Romney or Newt is all the same to me, though I am still slightly favoring Newt of the two. The bigger problem to me is that the argument with Romney is built so much on electability.

He has won a single election in Massachusetts with less than 50% of the vote. The general public knows little of his weaknesses (and his religion, which sadly will be an issue with a small group of voters), and his favorability is lowest in states where people follow most closely.

I think Obama has about the same chance of losing to Mitt or Newt, but I'm afraid that a Romney loss could break apart Republicans in a way that a Newt loss wouldn't. A Romney loss would be the ultimate example of nominating a moderate that no one liked. I don't think the 'establishment' and 'conservative' wings of the party would ever align again if he lost the general.

56 If they want to mandate themselves into oblivion, let them.

The Federalist in me agrees.  The guy who looks at how boned California is, and knows he's going to have to pay for it, disagrees.

57 Be careful what you wish for.... Starting a blog sounds like a great idea but then suddenly your notice that your most recent post is 12 months old. Some of us are pacing ourselves. But when we hit that "publish" button... Solid. Fucking. GOLD.

58 So someone thinks if they don't address something-no one else will notice or point it out.

59 War: Fair enough, that is what he says. I'm trying to find differences between Massachusetts health care and Obamacare. So far, I have found none.

Besides the States Rights argument, do you feel there is much difference between the two?

Posted by: Joffen at December 16, 2011 04:17 PM (zLeKL)

Here are just a few off the top of my head.

1. 75% of MA citizens wanted it and are still happy with it.

2. It didn't raise taxes at all, much less like Obamacares $500 Billion tax increase. The funding for the 8% unensured was paid for by not having to have free emeregency room care.

3. It didn't mandate a level of coverage like Obamacare does. 92% of MA residents policies did not change.

4. It's constitutionally legal for states to mandate something as where I beleive it is unconstitutional for the federal government to do so.

5. It only affected 8% of MA residents where Obamacare affects 100% of US residents. In other words Obamacare changes all of our insurance policies and premiums. Romney care did not.

60 Neither Gingrich nor Romney can gain real support, and meanwhile, Axelrod, Plouffe, and The JEF are laughing.  They are planting claymores along every road, and the MFM is building them 24/7 in their munitions plants newsrooms.

Both men are just flawed, flawed, flawed.  Flawed.  Either will disappoint horribly if elected.

We are doomed.

Posted by: Buck Ofama at December 16, 2011 04:27 PM (4sQwu)

 

Then why don't you just cut your wrists, hang yourself, or take the pills (sorry, preference cascade) now.  The leftists are going to do this no matter who we nominate.  Perhaps you need to grow a pair if death isn't an option.

61 What do Drew et al. think that Romney did for 4 years as governor of Massachusetts?  Sit around all day and sign mandate bills all the time?

62 I'm not against Obamacare for Massachusetts. If they want to mandate themselves into oblivion, let them. I'm against Obamacare for me in my state. --- Hm. Fair enough. But...if Romneycare doesn't matter, then why does anything a candidate does matter? If Romney signed a law that would force Massachusetts taxpayers to fund abortion, would that be ok? Would it be ok if Mitt said he thought taxpayer-funded abortion is bad for the country?

63 We can do that with any candidate. Hell, if that's all we're going for why not vote for Ron Paul?

Because we couldn't in a million years fool the mushy middle independent voters to vote for Ron Paul.

64 If we're all against Obamacare, why would we elect someone that signed the same thing into law in his own state?

Because the same guy has vowed to repeal ObamaCare (the real ObamaCare) in forceful terms every time he's asked about it, and has every economic and political reason to do so.  Romney's smart enough to understand that economic recovery simply won't happen with ObamaCare in place, and that he'll be on the hook for that -- and that he's facing a national electorate far, far more conservative than what he had in Massachusetts.

And rather than the 90-10 Democrat legislature he was saddled with in Massachusetts (which overrode all of his eight vetoes on provisions of "Romneycare"), a President Romney will have a Republican congress backing him up/propelling him forward on repeal.  Indeed, Romney is the candidate who's likeliest to keep the Congress Republican, since Gingrich would be a huge drag on downstate tickets nationally and Perry probably would hurt them in the Midwest and Northeast, where much of our congressional gains were made last year.

65 17
I don't know why people are still wasting their time making the case for/against any of these candidates. Who is their target audience?

We all hang out at political blogs every day. We know what's what.

I know all about Mitt, Newt, and Rick, and the rest. Nothing anybody says can change my mind about any of the candidates.

Posted by: soothsayer at December 16, 2011 04:18 PM (sqkOB)

I think we will be switching to convincing each other that the eventual GOP pick will be a "Good Thing". Mostly. Almost. Hopefully.

66 1. 75% of MA citizens wanted it and are still happy with it. It's unsustainable as it now stands-and Massachusetts has the highest per capita state debt in the nation-largely because of RomneyCare.

67 15I can't vote for anyone that uses the word 'zany' as a pejorative. It's just weird.

Howie Mandell is zany. Jim Carey is zany. Newt Gingrich? Not so much.

Posted by: MJ at December 16, 2011 04:17 PM (BKOsZ)

 

Howabout "Coo coo"?

68 Although I doubt that comes up in the general.

69

"Daffy", maybe?

70 "Madcap"?

71 "Bonkers", that's it.

72

Not only constitutional, but easily and legally done.

Any candidate can drop out of their race and retain the campaign contributions in an interest-bearing account for use in a later race.  The person can spend from that account on anything campaign related, even if the actual election they are campaigning for is years away. 

Obama could purchase and staff a Boeing 757, maintain offices, pay consultants and even take a salary.

Posted by: jwest at December 16, 2011 04:33 PM (8moZm)

 

 

I wasn't referring to the money.

73

I don't like the '10th Amendment' arguments to explain bad policy, but I think that there are some examples where localities and states have different problems than the nation at large.

The real problem with Romney and Newt is that they think is it the role of government to fix problems in conservative ways. The aren't 'fundamentally' conservative in thinking that the role of government is the protection of individual rights rather than the creation of social means to fixing an ever-expanding list of liberal gripes.

74 How about: balanced the Massachusetts state budget and turned a $3 billion deficit into a $700 million surplus?
Posted by: chemjeff at December 16, 2011 04:29 PM (qVUxp)

The Massachusett's Constitution requires a balanced budget and Romney bragged to the rating agencies about raising revenues through "fees" and "closing loopholes" (aka, raising taxes).

75 Well, it's not like Mitt HAD to fucking run for every political office that MA had to offer. What about being a Senator from Michigan? Too tough? Well then... Now we know.

76 "Mashugina". Nah, too Yiddish.

77

tasker, no it doesn't. It's in the top ten but it's number 7 in the top ten.

1. Connecticut $5,402
2. Hawaii $4,755
3. New Jersey $4,217
4. North Dakota $3,181
5. New Mexico $3,144
6. California $3,060
7. Massachusetts $3,040
8. Delaware $3,026
9. Rhode Island $3,000
10. Oregon $2,960

78

I wasn't referring to the money.

Posted by: Jones at December 16, 2011 04:40 PM (8sCoq)

You thought it was unconstitutional for Obama to drop out?

79 2. It didn't raise taxes at all, much less like Obamacares $500 Billion tax increase. The funding for the 8% unensured was paid for by not having to have free emeregency room care.

Romneycare didn't raise taxes because it's getting half its funding from the Federal government.

80 Because the same guy has vowed to repeal ObamaCare (the real ObamaCare) in forceful terms every time he's asked about it, There's going to be a lot of contradictions from Romney on video to make every voter doubt Romney's veracity.

81 And rather than the 90-10 Democrat legislature he was saddled with in Massachusetts (which overrode all of his eight vetoes on provisions of "Romneycare"), a President Romney will have a Republican congress backing him up/propelling him forward on repeal. Didn't Bush have a Republican congress at first? Look what happened in his second term with a Democrat-controlled Congress. I don't buy that line of thinking. Bush didn't try for immigration reform until Pelosi was Speaker. He did all these crazy things (like the light bulb ban) when the Dems got Congress back. ---- 1. 75% of MA citizens wanted it and are still happy with it. Is this true? Then why the hell did he sign the god damn bill?

82 DrewM do you know what those loopholes were?

83 Balmy.

84 Tina Korbe has all the gravitas and political insight of a Jersey Shore cast member.

85 Romneycare didn't raise taxes because it's getting half its funding from the Federal government. which means every other taxpayer in the nation gets to pay for Romney's experiment with absolutely zero return.

86 So much for sunshine and optimism -- dwell time ~ 1 hour.

87 These are really shitty reasons to support Mitt. I'm asking simple questions, and the responses are pathetic. Just really fucking weak.

88

The real problem with Romney and Newt is that they think is it the role of government to fix problems in conservative ways. The aren't 'fundamentally' conservative in thinking that the role of government is the protection of individual rights rather than the creation of social means to fixing an ever-expanding list of liberal gripes.

Posted by: Paper at December 16, 2011 04:41 PM (iXvAQ)

They are Conservative Socialists. They can do socialism better than those incompetent Progressive Socialists.

89 Is this true? Then why the hell did he sign the god damn bill?

Posted by: Joffen at December 16, 2011 04:43 PM (zLeKL)

Uhmm, wow, good question. Maybe becasue 75% of the people he was working for wanted it? Just a guess.

90 Didn't Bush have a Republican congress at first? Look what happened in his second term with a Democrat-controlled Congress.

So.... what?  Re-elect Obama?

91 #79 that funding from the Fed was present before Romneycare. In fact that was another conservative accomplishment by Romney. He was able to get the Fed to agree that the states should be able to use that funding as they saw fit.

92 Uhmm, wow, good question. Maybe becasue 75% of the people he was working for wanted it? Just a guess. --- Wow. I totally read that as 1.75% of them didn't want it. Heh. Sorry.

93 Posted by: robtr at December 16, 2011 04:42 PM (MtwBb)

All blue states but ND. What's up with them?

94 Posted by: Alabaster Jones at December 16, 2011 04:43 PM (v0Vnz)

Not off the top of my head but the presentation is online.

95 So.... what? Re-elect Obama? --- Do you want someone that is more than likely to cave on bill that you don't agree with?

96 robtr OK I get that stat from Wall St. 24/7 There is also this from mass.gov: Existing Debt Burden Since the Patrick-Murray Administration instituted rigorous debt affordability policies, the CommonwealthÂ’s rankings in terms of debt burden have been improved by several measures from what the Administration inherited. Nevertheless, the CommonwealthÂ’s debt burden remains among the highest in the nation by certain measures. MoodyÂ’s Investors Service ranks Massachusetts fourth in total net tax-supported debt, fourth in total gross tax-supported debt (down from third in 2007), second in net tax-supported debt as a percentage of personal income, and second in net tax-supported debt per capita (down from first in 2007).[10] Standard and PoorÂ’s Massachusetts rankings are similar: second in tax-supported debt per capita (down from first in 2007), third in tax-supported debt as a percentage of personal income (down from second in 2007), and fourth in total tax-supported debt.[11] http://www.mass.gov/bb/cap/fy2009/exec/hdebtaffor d_5.htm

97 87 These are really shitty reasons to support Mitt. I'm asking simple questions, and the responses are pathetic. Just really fucking weak.

Winning the presidency and repealing ObamaCare are shitty reasons to support Romney?

Why?

98 #94 DrewM maybe you should read it before you categorize it in negative terms.

99

Romney is the GOP Bill Clinton: He'll take whatever stance he thinks will get him elected. Yeah, all politicans do that to an extent. But only a few will drop core principals from week to week.

So, he'll govern like a conservative, until it benefits him not to.

100 Didn't Bush have a Republican congress at first? Look what happened in his second term with a Democrat-controlled Congress.

Look what he did with the GOP congress. They expanded government way faster than under a divided government.

101 which means every other taxpayer in the nation gets to pay for Romney's experiment with absolutely zero return.

Posted by: tasker at December 16, 2011 04:44 PM (r2PLg)

Oh fuck, every state gets federal funding through medicade to fund emergency room service for those without insurance. Romney got a waiver from the federal government to use that same funding for insurance premium support for the uninsured.

I know you don't like the guy but don't accuse him of doing something every other goddamn state does like he is screwing you  or something.

102 Do you want someone that is more than likely to cave on bill that you don't agree with?

I have bad news for you.  We run that risk with every presidential candidate who ever lived, and every one we're ever going to be offered.

It doesn't mean you throw up your hands and give up.  Especially not when it comes to getting rid of this particular administration.

103 Posted by: Alabaster Jones at December 16, 2011 04:51 PM (v0Vnz)

No, I've read it. That was just my polite way of saying do your own damn research.

If you want to defend what he did, look it up and write about it.

104 74 How about: balanced the Massachusetts state budget and turned a $3 billion deficit into a $700 million surplus?
Posted by: chemjeff at December 16, 2011 04:29 PM (qVUxp)

The Massachusett's Constitution requires a balanced budget and Romney bragged to the rating agencies about raising revenues through "fees" and "closing loopholes" (aka, raising taxes).

Posted by: DrewM. at December 16, 2011 04:41 PM (YqXne)

Hey, you're right, Mitt doesn't deserve full credit for balancing the MA budget.  Then again Newt doesn't deserve full credit for balancing the federal budget (which wasn't even balanced, really, anyway).  Yet that one seemed to make it to your list.

Oh, and I believe Perry balanced his state's budget by also relying on "gimmicks" like raising fees or increasing licensing charges or somesuch.  In fact Perry created a special tax for topless bar patrons.  (Something we should be especially outraged over!)

If you're going to just say "hey I don't like Mitt because his thin record of conservative accomplishments is not up to my high standards", then fine - but you didn't say that, you just outright claimed that he didn't have ANY conservative accomplishments at all, which is just factually incorrect.

105

78

No. The Constitution says that a President is limited to 2 terms of office.

So- suppose Obama decides not to stand for re-election next fall, and goes home to Chicago. Then sometime in the future, he decides to run  for the office. But he can't, because a President can run for re-election to a 2nd term. In the above scenario, that 2nd term would theoretically be Obama's 3rd term, and that's against the law.

You can't run for the office if you are constitutionally ineligible to hold the office.

22nd Amendment, Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice

the Constitution says nothing about whether those 2 terms are consecutive or non-consecutive

106 #103 DrewM you are then just a dishonest hack.

107 Posted by: chemjeff at December 16, 2011 04:52 PM (qVUxp)

Balancing a budget isn't conservative in and of itself.

Andrew Cuomo balanced the NY state budget, so did David Patterson, Eliot  Spitzer, George Pataki and Mario Cuomo before him.

Would you call any of them conservative?

108 I have bad news for you. We run that risk with every presidential candidate who ever lived, and every one we're ever going to be offered. It doesn't mean you throw up your hands and give up. Especially not when it comes to getting rid of this particular administration. I'm not giving up. If Mitt ends up with the nom, I want to make peace with my concerns. And yes, that is a risk, you're right. However, I would like a candidate like Perry, whose risk of caving would be significantly less than Mitt's.

109 We can do that with any candidate. Hell, if that's all we're going for why not vote for Ron Paul?

Because no, we can't.

Obama is vulnerable for an incumbent, but no to such a degree that any of our candidates are likely to beat him.

Hell, even with the most electable of them (sadly, this is probably Romney), we're- at best- looking at a 50/50 chance of winning.

110 robtr,

June 2011 polling of Massachusetts residents (from PPP):

53% say they support Romney's plan to 33% who are opposed while 50% say they support Obama's plan with 40% in opposition. The main reason Romney's plan is more popular is that independents narrowly support what he did on health care (45/42) while they still oppose Obama's plan (35/54). Democrats support both of the plans but unsurprisingly like Obama's (77/11) better than Romney's (67/17). Republicans likewise oppose both of the plans but do give Romney's better marks (27/57) than Obama's (7/8 .

111

the Constitution says nothing about whether those 2 terms are consecutive or non-consecutive

Posted by: Jones at December 16, 2011 04:53 PM (8sCoq)

Obama isnÂ’t formally a candidate for president until the democrat convention names him. 

112 I don't want a president that wants to get along with the dems.  I'm afraid Romney would do just that.  I want a president who'll do his best to make sure he and congress abide by US Constitution, no matter what an uneducated public wants.

113

Even more than the MA health law, my concern is that I could not describe to another person what Romney's policy is on health care. Does anyone know?

95% of his time is spent explaining why Massachusetts is different than the nation and how everyone has their facts wrong. I don't know exactly what he would do besides what he has said he would do in repealing Obamacare.

He would replace it with something, I guarantee it. But what? When? Why? He sees a role for government here, different and better than Obama for sure, but what? I don't see a role for the federal government here, and I just don't like the fact the in all of the issue changes, I don't have any idea where he is on this and other issues issues besides (1) he has become more conservative over time and (2) he is not Obama.

114 Posted by: Alabaster Jones at December 16, 2011 04:54 PM (v0Vnz)

Yes, I won't be your personal research service so therefore I'm a hack.

115 I think it's telling that Mitt's apologists quote poll numbers on Democrats when trying to convince us of voting for the guy to be the GOP nominee. 

116 Hell, even with the most electable of them (sadly, this is probably Romney), we're- at best- looking at a 50/50 chance of winning.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at December 16, 2011 04:54 PM (SY2Kh)

 

You're not a very good DNC shill.  I don't see many people buying into your pessimism.

117 87 These are really shitty reasons to support Mitt. I'm asking simple questions, and the responses are pathetic. Just really fucking weak.

I agree that if you want a conservative warrior, Mitt is not your man.

But my highest priority is to defeat Obama.  And that means fooling the mushy middle independents into voting for someone that doesn't scare them, that doesn't have sky-high negatives, and who projects an image of leadership and competence.  That, quite honestly, could be any one of Mitt, Newt or Perry.  I happen to think Mitt is a little better in that regard.

Along with, of course, electing a solidly conservative Congress so that whatever our Empty Vessel of Leadership and Competence tries to do, he will be restrained and/or pushed in the "right direction" by Congress.

118 I want a president who'll do his best to make sure he and congress abide by US Constitution, no matter what an uneducated public wants.

Like it or not, that uneducated public elects the President.  Purity is irrelevant if you aren't in office. 

119 DrewM should have just cut and pasted his last 107 tweets. @parisparamus

120 Eh, i don't give Mittens the benefit of the doubt, it's just going to be him or Salamander and i dislike Salamander a smidge more than i dislike Mittens, simple as that.

121 However, I would like a candidate like Perry, whose risk of caving would be significantly less than Mitt's.

Well, I wouldn't, because Perry's a candidate who does this in front of a national audience even after months of preparation, coaching, and opportunities to recognize and remedy the way he comes across.  He blew his frontrunner status with stuff like this, and I'm not eager to risk this kind of campaign style in a do-or-die general election that will determine whether ObamaCare stands or falls, and whether this communist will have four more years to appoint a couple more SCOTUS Justices and up to half the federal judiciary.

And I don't see any reason to believe Perry would be any less of a potential caver on any given issue as president, especially since he seems completely out of his depth on policy and was right up there with everyone else last night talking about the need to "work with both sides in Washington".

122 Posted by: DrewM. at December 16, 2011 04:54 PM (YqXne)

I would consider balancing a budget to be a conservative act.

And even if you don't - then why does Newt get credit for it in your mind?

I don't consider Andrew Cuomo a conservative because he doesn't agree with hardly any conservative values whatsoever.

But if I had to come up with a list of "Conservative Things That Andrew Cuomo Did", I"d put "balancing the budget" on that list.  Of course it would probably be the only thing on the list and the list of "Liberal Things" would be about 100 miles long.

123 #114 DrewM I know what loopholes he closed. From how you categorized them it didn't appear you did. Seems you have no problem when tax breaks are used where they weren't intended. Good for you.

124

y-not,

I am not a big PPP fan. I was going by this collection of polls from politifact.

And such levels of support donÂ’t appear to be unusual. An annual survey sponsored by the Urban Institute and the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts Foundation has somewhat different methodology but found similar levels of support. Between 2006 and 2009, support for the law was, respectively, 69 percent, 71 percent, 72 percent and 67 percent. (We donÂ’t know the exact ratio of support to opposition because the survey did not release the percentages for those who opposed the law or who had no opinion.)

http://tinyurl.com/7g2hbjx

 

125 Like it or not, that uneducated public elects the President.  Purity is irrelevant if you aren't in office. 

Posted by: pep at December 16, 2011 05:01 PM (6TB1Z)

 

This is true to some extent.  But even the uneducated, including liberals, know when something is terribly wrong with the direction this country is taking right now.  It really wouldn't take much to orient even the most uninformed to the advantages of, at least, heading toward a more constitutional government.

126 I think it's telling that Mitt's apologists quote poll numbers on Democrats when trying to convince us of voting for the guy to be the GOP nominee. 

Posted by: Y-not at December 16, 2011 04:58 PM (5H6zj)

Uhmmm wait a minute. I beleive it is you that is quoting the pollster for the DAILY FUCKING KOS.

127 Between 2006 and 2009, support for the law was, respectively, 69 percent, 71 percent, 72 percent and 67 percent. (We donÂ’t know the exact ratio of support to opposition because the survey did not release the percentages for those who opposed the law or who had no opinion.)

PPP is liberal, if anything.  The poll I quoted was from few months ago.  The polls you like are two years old.

But whatever. 

128

Excellent Points, Drew. Still, I think it comes down to electability in the general election. Who can outsmart Obama without screwing the pooch.

 

129 I would consider balancing a budget to be a conservative act.
Posted by: chemjeff at December 16, 2011 05:06 PM (qVUxp)

It's a constitutionally mandated one. A governor who doesn't violate his/her state's constitution has done something conservative? That's a pretty low bar you have there.

I give Newt credit (not much but some) because you don't have to balance the federal budget.

Let me ask you this...do you think if Democrats had retained control of the House as they had for the 40 years prior that Clinton and the Democrats would have shown any restraint in spending? I don't.

130 Even the uneducated, including liberals, know when something is terribly wrong with the direction this country is taking right now.  It really wouldn't take much to orient even the most uninformed to the advantages of, at least, heading toward a more constitutional government.

I wish I shared your enthusiasm, I do.  But there is a significant portion of the electorate that doesn't respond to rationality.  They decide based on "gut" or "feelings" or, hell, whether they like a candidate's haircut.  And let's face it, Mitt's got it all over Newt in that department.  Granted, Rick Perry is no slouch there either.

131 Uhmmm wait a minute. I beleive it is you that is quoting the pollster for the DAILY FUCKING KOS.

Yeah and what does it show, asshat?  It shows that this year Masscare is not very popular.  The only way you get the 75% popularity you claimed was if you only looked at Democrats.   

132

No one here really believes Romney is more conservative than Gingrich.

They just think he has a better chance to beat Obama. The rest of their argument is just to provide a justification for supporting a desperate RINO who can win. Which might be reason enough to support him, no need to pretend.

133 Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at December 16, 2011 05:05 PM (YvRNV) --- How do you know Mitt won't select liberal Justices? Look at his damn record of caving to liberals! Mitt is not a conservative. ---- Perry is recovering very, very well. He's got a lot of good ideas, and I think he actually knows his stuff. He's got a great jobs record and is an actual conservative. ---

134 Tell you guys what, let's assume for the sake of argument that balancing the budget is a conservative act.

That's.....one.

What else you got?

135 I was in total despair a couple of weeks ago, figuring that Newt had the nom wrapped up, and would auger in for the general.  Sometimes it's nice to be non-omniscient.

136

Ok y not, we can play this fucking game all day.

Here is a reuters poll from march of this year.

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A large majority of Massachusetts residents are satisfied with the commonwealth's subsidized health plan, which has components similar to the Obama administration's federal plan, according to a poll released on Thursday.

The poll by Market Decisions, a research and consulting group, found that 84 percent of residents are satisfied with the Massachusetts plan, which requires most adults to have health insurance.

It's a huffpo link but if we are quoting Daily Kos, y not.

http://tinyurl.com/69xjqgw

 

137 #133 that's why Judge Bork has been advising Romney since 2008 so that he could be sure to get those liberal judges he wants onto the bench.

138 Romney dresses conservatively. Can this count?

139 How do you know Mitt won't select liberal Justices?

How do you know Perry won't select liberal Justices?

I do know what kind of Justices Obama will select, and they'll be way, way to the left of "liberal".

140 I wish I shared your enthusiasm, I do.  But there is a significant portion of the electorate that doesn't respond to rationality.  They decide based on "gut" or "feelings" or, hell, whether they like a candidate's haircut.  And let's face it, Mitt's got it all over Newt in that department.  Granted, Rick Perry is no slouch there either.

Posted by: pep at December 16, 2011 05:13 PM (6TB1Z)

 

Let's not get into the 19th Amendment.

141 How do you know Perry won't select liberal Justices? I do know what kind of Justices Obama will select, and they'll be way, way to the left of "liberal". --- Well, look at their record, for one. Are you even vetting your candidate or are you just picking one and that's it, no matter what? Why have primaries at all?

142 Vetoed in state tuition for Illegals. Veto upheld. Presented article to legislature to reinstate the Death Penalty. Opted out of the regional cap and trade initiative. Vetoed after morning pill. Authorized State Troopers to inquire about resident status.

143 Posted by: Alabaster Jones at December 16, 2011 05:20 PM (v0Vnz)

He's also tight with John "David Souter is a conservative" Sununu. Will Mitt be chatting with him about SCOTUS nominees?

144 Oh and Joffen, "Perry" does not have a great jobs record.  "Texas" has a great jobs record, and its economic engine was roaring long before Perry ever showed up.  (I know, I was there.)

145 Sununu isn't advising him on judicial matters. Judge Bork is. You cant spin that.

146 Oh and Joffen, "Perry" does not have a great jobs record. "Texas" has a great jobs record, and its economic engine was roaring long before Perry ever showed up. (I know, I was there.) --- Well, then obviously Perry knows how to continue that success even in a recession. Perry is far more trustworthy on the economy than Obama. He also has far more executive experience than the other candidates.

147 Well, look at their record, for one.

I have, and it doesn't tell me anything about the kind of Justices either will pick.  Because that's just not something anyone can know for certain.  What we CAN know for certain is that they won't be communists, and the real choice is between that and an incumbent who does select communists for the Court.

Ronald Reagan selected Sandra Day O'Connor.
George H.W. Bush selected Clarence Thomas.

148 Perry is far more trustworthy on the economy than Obama.

So is the slime mold under my sink.  Talk about a low bar.

149 Well, then obviously Perry knows how to continue that success even in a recession.

Perry sits in one of the weakest governor's offices in the nation.  He reaps the political benefits of Texas' great economy, but he isn't responsible for it.


Perry is far more trustworthy on the economy than Obama.

Well, that's a given.  So is Romney.


He also has far more executive experience than the other candidates.

Sure, because he's been sitting in political office for 27 years (from the state legislature to Ag. Commissioner to LG to four terms as governor).  We don't like career politicians, until we do.

150 We don't like career politicians, until we do. I don't have a problem with "career politicians" I have a problem with "corrupt politicians" or "politicians that want more government".

151 147 Well, look at their record, for one.

I have, and it doesn't tell me anything about the kind of Justices either will pick. Because that's just not something anyone can know for certain. What we CAN know for certain is that they won't be communists, and the real choice is between that and an incumbent who does select communists for the Court.

Ronald Reagan selected Sandra Day O'Connor and Antonin Scalia.
George H.W. Bush selected Clarence Thomas and David Souter.

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at December 16, 2011 05:28 PM (YvRNV)

And

@145 Reagan also wanted to appoint Bork and did appoint Kennedy, so the attempt that Bork is advising Romney as some sort of reassurance to his judicial appointments doesn't mean much to me.  And do you really think he won't offer his services to any other potential nominee if they get the nod over Romney?

152 And of course, while Rick Perry was spending those 27 years in political office, Mitt Romney was doing work in the private sector that resulted in a real net creation of jobs.  Actual job creation he was responsible for as a businessman, as opposed to economic conditions that a career politician claims credit for simply because he was there at the time.

153 Someone also told Michelle that Newt got 300,000 from Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac for work as a Historian. Boy was that some wrong info.

154 Here's the thing... I SUPPORTED Mitt Romney in 2007! I was actually on street corners, waving signs, in fracking TUCSON, AZ!!! I hate to be cast as simplistic but I am, fundamentally, a single issue voter. Mitt's "reluctance" to get involved in 2009-2010 tells me all I need to know about the man. He is NOT on my side! I wanted that HCR horse-shit to NOT PASS! He keeps trying to give it cover... FU, Mitt!!! You were *sooo* set up, to be a wise executive, chastened by experience, counciling against his previous errors... And then, SRSLY? You double down on Romney Care? Fuck you, Mitt!!! You are just as crazy-pants as Ru Paul in my book! I will have nothing to do with you. I think that you suck Donkey-Dicks! Wanna know WHY? I ain't gonna be a foot -soldier in any of your wards, come 2012? 2009. Asshole. Clueless, rich bitch, fucking ASSHOLE! Romnney, is pretty much just like fucking Corzie

155

Posted by: Deety Rubin at December 16, 2011 05:42 PM (Pm8ax

Hey Deety I saw the other day you were complaining about slow loading of the AoSHQ on your Droid.  You might want to go into the internet browser setting and set your Enable plugins to On Demand if you haven't.  That cuts down on things like youtube loading or some of the ads as well, unless you want them to.

156 Romney dresses conservatively. Can this count? ***** No. Why? The cost.

157 robtr They may think they are happy with MassCare now-but what about when it is unsustainable?

158 Romney 2012, He'll Use Lube

159 Just checked. Yep, Romney still sux.

160 Posted by: Alabaster Jones at December 16, 2011 05:23 PM (v0Vnz)

Let's go through your list (because with Romney the Devil is in the details):

Vetoed in state tuition for Illegals. Veto upheld.
Ok, fair enough.

Presented article to legislature to reinstate the Death Penalty.
And it didn't pass. That's like Bachmann's "leading" losing fights.

Opted out of the regional cap and trade initiative.
Not exactly. He was instrumental in setting it up and then on his last day in office he said he wouldn't join what he started. Of course, he did set up emission caps on some MA power plants.

Vetoed after morning pill.
Ok but the veto was overridden and it was also a massive flip by Romney but fine.

Authorized State Troopers to inquire about resident status.
That federal program was created long before Romney became Governor. So he signed that agreement on Day 1 of his administration, right? Not so much. He signed the memo authorizing it 6 weeks before his term was up and Duval Patrick already said he'd rescind it. The MA program never went into effect.

So yeah, he vetoed two bills, one of which was overridden. Quite the conservative record.

161 Romneycare IS unsustainable. By the by, remember how last night Romney told us all how he is against gay marriage? OK, so how did he allow Catholic Charities to shut down adoption services in MA while he was gov, or be forced to place children with gay couples? Catholic Charities does a lot of good work.

162 155

Posted by: Deety Rubin at December 16, 2011 05:42 PM (Pm8ax

Hey Deety I saw the other day you were complaining about slow loading of the AoSHQ on your Droid.  You might want to go into the internet browser setting and set your Enable plugins to On Demand if you haven't.  That cuts down on things like youtube loading or some of the ads as well, unless you want them to.

You can also try Opera mini, it really works well with Pixy's mu.nu here.

163

Wow i really found this to be an interesting read; thanks for sharing

164 Wow i really found this to be an interesting read; thanks for sharing

165 Thank you for the good writeup. It in fact was a amusement account it. Look advanced to more added agreeable from you! However, how could we communicate?

166 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.

167 NRO had an editorial in 2006 urging Newt to run.  Now they've flip flopped to Romney...oh, I guess that would explain it.

168 I love what you guys are frequently up too. Such clever work and reporting! Keep up the terrific works guys IÂ’ve added you guys to my blogroll.

169 Balancing a budget isn't conservative in and of itself.

Andrew Cuomo balanced the NY state budget, so did David Patterson, Eliot  Spitzer, George Pataki and Mario Cuomo before him.

Would you call any of them conservative?

In the voice of the hag lady booing the prices bride, "Booooo Boooo!"

Worst point EVER!  Balancing the budget is a gooood thing and it is something near and dear to our big conservative hearts.  Just because some dems came over to that conservative ideal does not make it suddenly "unconservative" or diminished in any way.  Does this mean if someone on the left supports pro life bills - pro life is no longer conservative?  There are dems who are pro defense - I guess that takes strong military off the conservative table as well.

Your being silly Drew in your rush to demonize all things Romney.

170 @154 Did your prescriptions for Xanax and Geodon expire?  Do you have one of those fancy white leather Italian jackets where the arms strap in the back?

You sure you were a Mitt supporter in 08 - a lot of your rant is full of crap if you look at the facts and not all the spin out there.  If Mitt was so for Obamacare - then he sure wasn't paying attention when he helped get Scott Brown elected in MA.  But I'm saying this in calm quit voice - please don't come and slit the throats of my family (and getting back on your meds is a good thing - so go make that call to the doctor).

171 I had a feeling last night. That feeling was, for the first time in a long time, We're not doomed.

172 The local Tea Party chapters are pushing back, saying it's a lie. But Michele Bachmann "hears" this or something. She would like it to be true. Ergo, it is true.