November 23, 2011
— Ace The basics of this were covered by Drew, below, but this is Newt Gingrich himself saying it, from his own Twitter account.
Romney is pretty brazen about forgetting his myriad past positions. It's just odd to me that he attacks aggressively on an issue like this, when he himself has pro-amnesty statements in his very recent past. (So recent they are pop culturally relevant.)
It might be some kind of strategic decision that the best defense is a shameless offense, or a calculation that people can only remember the attack and not the counter-attack.
Or it could be that he is thinking -- with some justification -- that the base is going with various unknown quantities and, because they are unknown, they are blank screens upon which the base can project its own hopes (as Barack Obama observed about himself in 2008 ). Ergo, each candidate flies to the top of the heap because the base projects on to each newest blank slate a perfect (or near-perfect) conservative record. So Mitt's calculation may be "You all know I've flipped and flopped and am really not terribly conservative, but you don't know that each of your new Flavors of the Week have done similar things, so my mission is to bring each candidate's Romneyesque deviations from conservative orthodoxy to your attention. Then you'll see each is nearly as flawed on ideology as I am, and you'll pick me not on ideology, but on general competency, because if everyone's kind of a RINO in one or more important ways, you might as well pick the guy who's polling the best."
Maybe. But there's a real shamelessness here that gets off-putting. It's just not very honest for Romney to be so hard-charging as a Tough on Immigrants Sheriff Joe type.
There comes a point at which it does seem that he believes us to be stupid, or needs us to be stupid, at least.
I waver between thinking Romney's aggression and shamelessness are actually useful tools in the toolbox -- could use some of that against Obama -- and thinking they're liabilities. Sometimes stuff like this begins to undercut the central argument in favor of Romney -- he's smart, disciplined, and competent.
If he's making attacks like this, shamelessly ignoring his own past... well, is he those things?
via @lamblock.
Also Undercutting... the idea that Romney is a more elevated candidate than the various bumpkins who oppose him.
Some people want a more elevated candidate, one who doesn't feel the need to play dumb. I get that. Sometimes I get a little pissed off at the apparent necessity of reasonably intelligent men playing a little dumb, because some people seem to think dumb skews conservative.
But this shameless "These aren't the droids you're looking for" attack by Romney is, to me, yahoo-ish and bumpkin-ish. Certainly it's not elevated, and certainly the pitch being made here is not to the higher-function regions of my brain. The higher-function regions of my brain are kind of aghast at this.
Conceding, arguendo, that a smarty-pants candidate, a sort of elevated intellect, would be sort of a nice thing -- is Romney being that candidate here?
Or is he being low and cheap and dumb, and therefore exactly the sort of candidate that his supporter don't like?
Posted by: Ace at
08:12 AM
| Comments (225)
Post contains 561 words, total size 3 kb.
Posted by: Navycopjoe at November 23, 2011 08:17 AM (k6qqF)
Posted by: nickless, back with the banned (99.174.64.43) at November 23, 2011 08:17 AM (cBVAS)
I waver between thinking Romney's aggression and shamelessness are actually useful tools in the toolbox...
If Romney could just focus these skills in the right direction; learn to control his powers...
Posted by: Soothsayer at November 23, 2011 08:17 AM (sqkOB)
I think they're liabilities. He's not very likable (or warm). He needs us - all of us conservatives - fighting on his behalf in the general when the Obama-MSM smear machine gets rolling, but I am disinclined to do so because he obviously doesn't give a shit if I vote for him.
And I don't believe he is that much of a fighter when it comes to liberals. I think he thinks he'll make nice with the media and that will somehow save him. It won't.
Posted by: Y-not, dirty papist at November 23, 2011 08:19 AM (5H6zj)
Been sayin' that for weeks. Romney's refusal to reach out to the conservative base on the theory that they/we will fall in line once he is nominated smacks of arrogance. And if there is anything the base despises more than Obamunism, it's arrogance from the Republican Establishment.
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 23, 2011 08:19 AM (azHfB)
New thread smell.
BTW Ace, palin steele is whining on the other thread that you're a hard hard man.
Posted by: toby928© has plans and schemes at November 23, 2011 08:20 AM (IfkGz)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 23, 2011 08:20 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: NotALibertarian at November 23, 2011 08:20 AM (psns8)
Posted by: Any von Moltke you care to choose at November 23, 2011 08:20 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: buzzion at November 23, 2011 08:20 AM (GULKT)
Posted by: Blaster at November 23, 2011 08:21 AM (Fw2Gg)
Yeah, that is wierd I'd think they would avoid the subject.
Posted by: willow at November 23, 2011 08:22 AM (h+qn8)
New thread smell.
BTW Ace, palin steele is whining on the other thread that you're a hard hard man.
Posted by: toby928© has plans and schemes at November 23, 2011 12:20 PM (IfkGz)
But he's not hard on me in the right way. Ace why won't you return my calls. All my girlfriends say I'm good at fellating
Posted by: dum-dum at November 23, 2011 08:23 AM (GULKT)
Posted by: NotALibertarian at November 23, 2011 08:23 AM (psns8)
Posted by: your winnings, sir at November 23, 2011 08:24 AM (IfkGz)
Posted by: joncelli at November 23, 2011 08:24 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at November 23, 2011 08:24 AM (0yt4x)
Man, I love this convection roast setting. My turkey started browning 15 minutes into cooking. ET"T" (estimated time to turkey): 90 minutes!
/Romney hate mode on
Posted by: Y-not at November 23, 2011 08:24 AM (5H6zj)
Posted by: joncelli at November 23, 2011 12:24 PM (RD7QR)
Posted by: willow at November 23, 2011 08:25 AM (h+qn8)
Posted by: toby928© has plans and schemes at November 23, 2011 08:26 AM (IfkGz)
To claim that you "only" support a "path to legality" is sophistry of the highest order.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 23, 2011 08:26 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: tasker at November 23, 2011 08:27 AM (rJVPU)
EoJ,
He said:
Here's a trip down memory lane: http://bitly.com/sdk8RE So what's your position on citizenship for illegals again? (I oppose it.)
Posted by: Y-not at November 23, 2011 08:27 AM (5H6zj)
Posted by: joncelli at November 23, 2011 08:28 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: Fritz at November 23, 2011 08:28 AM (/ZZCn)
Posted by: tasker at November 23, 2011 08:29 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at November 23, 2011 12:24 PM (0yt4x)
He links the video Drew posted in the previous thread and is asking Romney about his stance on illegals getting citzenship (which Newt opposes)
The video is a 14 second clip of Romney on Meet the Press talking about how we need to be able to allow the illegals that are here to sign up for permanent residency or citizenship.
Posted by: buzzion at November 23, 2011 08:29 AM (GULKT)
alright but i'll bring the toothbrushes and scope.
shudder
Posted by: willow at November 23, 2011 08:30 AM (h+qn8)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 23, 2011 08:30 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: kathleen at November 23, 2011 08:30 AM (YI+rH)
He's just there with everyone wishing he wasn't cause he's not the best candidate but just might be the best survivor, the best game player. Maybe Mitt's error is that he isn't capitalizing on his old fashioned American steadiness. Something millions of American fathers can relate to. Let's face it, it's not glamorous to be an American Father. There are way many more negatives and positives yet many men live that life and look back and thank God they have what they have and lived the way they lived.
There is a commercial out there where people are saying they aren't going to vote for a party this time, they are going to vote for a person. It's very effective as a lot of people are feeling the same way. They are looking for a leader with a heart and soul they can see and feel. They are craving someone who will do what they say they are going to do, which the BO fans claim has been accomplished by BO, but, BO hasn't made any more plans since the campaign. Sure he followed through on most of his stuff, despite the complaining from us, the American people, protesting loudly with cards, letter, emails, tea party gathering, that we didn't want it, he insisted on giving it to us anyway. They want a listener and someone who can react to the mood of the country. Maybe Mitt is that person, but he has to show us that he is that person.
Posted by: blue bonnet at November 23, 2011 08:31 AM (oZfic)
Posted by: ace at November 23, 2011 08:31 AM (nj1bB)
Posted by: ace at November 23, 2011 08:31 AM (nj1bB)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at November 23, 2011 08:32 AM (XE2Oo)
No he doesn't.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 23, 2011 12:30 PM (8y9MW)
Well he wanted to know what Newt said, and that's what Newt said.
Posted by: buzzion at November 23, 2011 08:32 AM (GULKT)
Nah, that's his entire primary strategy. Never sticks his neck out. Rarely says anything notable. Avoids the base.
His campaign strategy is "inevitability." Then in the general he can run even further left.
Posted by: Y-not at November 23, 2011 08:32 AM (5H6zj)
See my link at 156 from the thread below. Worth a giggle.
Happy Thanksgiving, Assholes!
Posted by: laceyunderalls at November 23, 2011 08:33 AM (pLTLS)
Posted by: robtr at November 23, 2011 08:33 AM (MtwBb)
Posted by: ace at November 23, 2011 08:33 AM (nj1bB)
It's no accident that the occupation 'politician' comes in under lawyers and used car salesmen in survey after survey.
So if you think that I am being hard on your particular candidate, you are right. What you are missing is I dislike mine too. Just not as much.
Posted by: GnuBreed at November 23, 2011 08:33 AM (ENKCw)
So, take your pick. A guy that is for amnesty now (Newt), or one that supported it in the past but has since changed his mind. At least give Romney credit for knowing where the base is on this issue.
Posted by: Ken Royall at November 23, 2011 08:34 AM (9zzk+)
she should be taken seriously
Not really, not for President anyway. She's a US Representative only. I think even Senators need not apply for the job. Governors and war-winning generals are okay.
But, I would seriously hit that.
Posted by: toby928© has plans and schemes at November 23, 2011 08:34 AM (IfkGz)
Posted by: tasker at November 23, 2011 08:35 AM (rJVPU)
True. Newt says he doesn't support a path to citizenship. I'll grant that much.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 23, 2011 08:35 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at November 23, 2011 08:36 AM (jucos)
The babbling psycho speaks!
How about that Dem Wave of 2010, huh, curious?
Posted by: Waterhouse at November 23, 2011 08:36 AM (N+nDK)
But I bet Mitt's poetry is better with that BA in English from BYU and all.
Posted by: Y-not at November 23, 2011 08:36 AM (5H6zj)
Posted by: I am the 99% at November 23, 2011 08:36 AM (/7UK3)
. So Mitt's calculation may be "You all know I've flipped and flopped and am really not terribly conservative, but you don't know that each of your new Flavors of the Week have done similar things, so my mission is to bring each candidate's Romneyesque deviations from conservative orthodoxy to your attention. Then you'll see each is nearly as flawed on ideology as I am, and you'll pick me not on ideology, but on general competency, because if everyone's kind of a RINO in one or more important ways, you might as well pick the guy who's polling the best."
Hey, that's a completely cromulent strategy. I'm not sure that's what he's doing, but I wouldn't knock that from a strategic pov.
Believing that Romney will shut down the border
Is there a legitimate belief that any of them will shut down the border? I do believe some will try harder than others but as far as believing that will actually happen? Not so much. That's not necessarily a slam on the candidates so much as a belief that the other side will do everything humanly possible to prevent that.
Posted by: alexthechick at November 23, 2011 08:36 AM (VtjlW)
But, I would seriously hit that.
Posted by: toby928© has plans and schemes at November 23, 2011 12:34 PMI thought we all agreed the babe of the day was Katie Pavlich???
Posted by: Vic at November 23, 2011 08:37 AM (YdQQY)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 23, 2011 12:35 PM (8y9MW)
Well at least until someone rummages through tapes of his previous statements.
Posted by: robtr at November 23, 2011 08:37 AM (MtwBb)
Posted by: alexthechick at November 23, 2011 12:36 PM (VtjlW)
+1
Posted by: willow at November 23, 2011 08:37 AM (h+qn8)
Posted by: laceyunderalls at November 23, 2011 08:37 AM (pLTLS)
Posted by: Sub-Tard Backhoe at November 23, 2011 08:38 AM (0M3AQ)
Posted by: CAC at November 23, 2011 08:38 AM (JEVge)
There's a babe of the day? Why doesn't she get her own post? In fairness to the 'ettes, I'd also be okay with a "dude of the day" post- I just wouldn't hang out there.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 23, 2011 08:38 AM (8y9MW)
If Michelle Bachmann is George Washington-ish, as Glenn says, then I'd do sex to George Washington.
Posted by: Soothsayer at November 23, 2011 08:38 AM (sqkOB)
Posted by: Vic at November 23, 2011 08:38 AM (YdQQY)
It almost seems like the sexual harassment allegations helped him with his core supporters, but that now that things have died down and we're back to issues, his support may be fading.
Posted by: Y-not at November 23, 2011 08:39 AM (5H6zj)
"So you think you're gonna cross me And mess with my shit?
Openin' your fuckin' trap And flappin' your lip?
Don't fuck with me, newt Cause you're gonna get dropped
I'll snap off your neck With a crackle and pop! "
Posted by: Michelle Crahzee-Eyz Bachman at November 23, 2011 08:39 AM (f7VXx)
Posted by: willow at November 23, 2011 08:39 AM (h+qn8)
Well, they are both terrible on this issue. And that's a serious problem. Any Republican soft on immigration should be disqualified for the simple reason that more immigration will eventually destroy the Republican Party. It's just math.
If you think Obama is socialist, just wait until we have a one party Democratic state 30 years from now, sustained by immigrants and their children.
Posted by: Chris at November 23, 2011 08:40 AM (xzLHn)
Posted by: joncelli at November 23, 2011 08:40 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: kathleen at November 23, 2011 08:40 AM (YI+rH)
70 Michelle Bachmann is a "hiding in the bushes" nutcase.
She made that plain and clear when she insisted she met a woman whose daughter went tard after Gardisil, then refusing to even question it.
It was curious's mother she met. Would you question it?
Posted by: buzzion at November 23, 2011 08:40 AM (GULKT)
Posted by: Some spam crap phony post at November 23, 2011 08:40 AM (9wLy+)
There's a babe of the day? Why doesn't she get her own post? In fairness to the 'ettes, I'd also be okay with a "dude of the day" post- I just wouldn't hang out there.
In fairness to me, I think there should be both. Bow before my special snowflakeness bitches!
Posted by: alexthechick at November 23, 2011 08:40 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: Fritz at November 23, 2011 08:40 AM (/ZZCn)
I don't even have to do that, I've already pointed out that his currently stated position "path to legality" will inevitably lead to a "path to citizenship." They are, logically speaking, the same thing.
And, giving him the benefit of the doubt (that he really does want a path to legality but not a path to citizenship) makes him delusional. I want to eat all the chocolate cake I can get my hands on, but I don't want to get fat. If I do the first, the second follows- whatever my desires.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 23, 2011 08:40 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: Herman Cain at November 23, 2011 08:41 AM (jucos)
Posted by: (insert flavor of the week here)-istas Local 560 at November 23, 2011 08:41 AM (JEVge)
Posted by: Hermoinee Cain at November 23, 2011 08:42 AM (YdQQY)
Posted by: alexthedude at November 23, 2011 08:42 AM (0+B+X)
Posted by: alexthedude at November 23, 2011 08:43 AM (0+B+X)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 23, 2011 12:40 PM (8y9MW)
Yeah but if I had to bet it would be that there is a tape out there with Newt wanting to make illegals citizens. He has been all over the board on every issue.
If you stop and think about it that is why we didn't like him in the first place.
Posted by: robtr at November 23, 2011 08:43 AM (MtwBb)
Posted by: Hermoinee Cain at November 23, 2011 08:43 AM (YdQQY)
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at November 23, 2011 08:44 AM (f9c2L)
Posted by: willow at November 23, 2011 08:44 AM (h+qn8)
Posted by: Howard Hughes at November 23, 2011 08:44 AM (0+B+X)
#RomneyFail - When you're trying to spank your opponent and end up with "stuff" on your face.
Posted by: Theo Kojak, Dick as in Detective at November 23, 2011 08:44 AM (9wLy+)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at November 23, 2011 08:44 AM (PLHIl)
Liberals like politicians because underneath all the lies liberal politicians tell to their base, the base knows there is money in it for them. Bigger government, more programs, expansion of existing programs, more more more. When does a liberal ever run on a platform of less government and less spending? Liberals don't care if illegals come here and get in line for the free money, just as long as the free money spigot keeps flowing.
Conservatives want less government, less spending, and just want to be left alone to live their lives and spend their own money as they see fit. Which is why it's easy to run as a liberal and get votes, you're bribing people with their own (borrowed) money to vote for the liberal politician who makes all the sexy promises and winks at you while the conservative is lecturing about personal responsibility.
Posted by: Boots at November 23, 2011 08:46 AM (neKzn)
Posted by: Herman Cain at November 23, 2011 08:47 AM (jucos)
Interesting article that explains the time-line of the investigation and how slow it was to get rolling (and the possible consequences of that fact).
They only searched Sandusky's house this summer, for example.
Posted by: Y-not at November 23, 2011 08:47 AM (5H6zj)
Posted by: Jerry Sandusky at November 23, 2011 08:48 AM (f7VXx)
Posted by: Theo Kojak
...............
Like his "let's fire school janitors and let the kids do it" idea?
Curb those impulses? He's just getting started!
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at November 23, 2011 08:48 AM (f9c2L)
Posted by: joncelli at November 23, 2011 08:48 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: Dave at November 23, 2011 08:49 AM (Xm1aB)
___________
Vowels are fair game, but you need a licensing agreement for consonants and other characters.
Posted by: Anachronda isn't a copyright lawyer at November 23, 2011 08:49 AM (xGZ+b)
Posted by: Chris at November 23, 2011 08:49 AM (xzLHn)
Posted by: CAC at November 23, 2011 08:50 AM (JEVge)
Posted by: joncelli at November 23, 2011 12:48 PM (RD7QR)
Analanium is the shit.
Posted by: The Big Oosik at November 23, 2011 08:50 AM (EL+OC)
The video in context. For the life of me I can't figure out what he's trying to say. Reading this I get the picture of a squid squeezing under a rock & taking whatever shape necessary to avoid a predator.
GOV. ROMNEY: Now let's, now let's look at those very carefully, OK, and you're, you're a careful reader. In the interview with The Boston Globe, I described all three programs that were out there, described what they were, acknowledged that they were not technically an amnesty program, but I indicated in that same interview that I had not formulated my own proposal and that I was endorsing none of those three programs. I did not support any of them. I called them reasonable. They are reasonable efforts to, to look at the problem. But I said I did not support--and I said specifically in that interview I have not formulated my own policy and have not determined which I would support. And, of course, the Cornyn proposal required all of the immigrants to go home. The McCain proposal required most of them to go home, but let some stay. And the Bush proposal I, frankly, don't recall in that much detail. But they had very different proposals. My own view is consistent with what you saw in the Lowell Sun, that those people who had come here illegally and are in this country--the 12 million or so that are here illegally--should be able to stay sign up for permanent residency or citizenship, but they should not be given a special pathway, a special guarantee that all of them get to say here for the rest of their lives merely by virtue of having come here illegally. And that, I think, is the great flaw in the final bill that came forward from the Senate.
MR. RUSSERT: But they shouldn't have to go home?
GOV. ROMNEY: Well, whether they go home--they should go home eventually. There's a set per--in my view they should be--they should have a set period during which period they, they sign up for application for permanent residency or, or for citizenship. But there's a set period where upon they should return home. And if they've been approved for citizenship or for a permanent residency, well, thy would be a different matter. But for the great majority, they'll be going home.
MR. RUSSERT: The children they had born here are U.S. citizens, so do the children stay here and the parents go home?
GOV. ROMNEY: Well, that's a choice, of course, the parents would, would make. But my view is that those 12 million who've come here illegally should be given the opportunity to sign up to stay here, but they should not be given any advantage in becoming a permanent resident or citizen by virtue of simply coming here illegally. And likewise, if they've brought a child to this country or they've had a child in this country, that's, that's wonderful that they're growing their families, but that doesn't mean that they all get to stay here indefinitely. We're fundamentally a nation of laws. And let me underscore something here that I think's awfully important, because this immigration debate can sound anti-immigrant to a lot of people. It's not intended to be that by myself or, I believe, by the vast majority of others that talk about it. We value legal immigration. We welcome people coming here with different cultures and skill and education, but we are a nation of laws. And our freedoms and our liberty are associated with following the law. We have to secure our border, we have to make sure there's an employment verification system to identify who's here legally and who's not. And then for the 12 million who've come here, welcome them to get in line with everybody else, but no special pathway.
Should they stay, or should they go now? If they go it could be trouble (with Latino voters), but if they stay it will be double (with Conservative voters). So, ya' gotta let me know, Slick Willard, should they stay or should they go?
Posted by: 29Victor at November 23, 2011 08:50 AM (ES9R7)
Posted by: joncelli at November 23, 2011 12:48 PM (RD7QR)
No, that's the strange tingles quark.
Posted by: Vic at November 23, 2011 08:50 AM (YdQQY)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at November 23, 2011 08:50 AM (0yt4x)
Romney has 'No Core' - Plouffe
They are salivating over running against Mitt. Focus on flip-flops instead of economy. The MFM will help carry them by comparing to Kerry and making Kerry look like the Rock of Gibraltar.
Posted by: Schwalbe : The Me-262© at November 23, 2011 08:51 AM (UU0OF)
If I went around saying "this person who I don't even know said his dog transforms into an alien every time he eats Skippy Peanut Butter"
Are you an expert that appears on the History Channel by chance? (just got around to watching the South Park History Channel episode about aliens at Plymouth)
Posted by: ParanoidStillAGirlInSeattle at November 23, 2011 08:51 AM (RZ8pf)
He is existentially Bush III--just like George in terms of being pro-big government and putting "compassion" ahead of freedom when he 'really feels" it---but Romney doesn't have any of the core beliefs tath Bush has.
George W. (under the tutelage of Karl Rove) managed to betray all conservative principles oterh than 'strong defense"and to turn the conservative ascendancy of 2000 into a set-up for the far-left Obamaist victory of 2008.
All a Romney victory would ultimately do is advance the Left. We'd be better off with a second Obama term, while fighting him in the courts, the congress and the states.
Posted by: Kasper Hauser at November 23, 2011 08:51 AM (HqpV0)
Just faster than you.
I'm looking for a guy that's got a slow touch, who doesn't come and go in a heated rush.
Posted by: ParanoidStillAGirlInSeattle at November 23, 2011 08:52 AM (RZ8pf)
Posted by: tasker at November 23, 2011 08:52 AM (rJVPU)
Particle man, particle man
Doing the things a particle can
What's he like? It's not important
Particle man
Posted by: toby928© has plans and schemes at November 23, 2011 08:53 AM (IfkGz)
I'm looking for a guy that's got a slow touch, who doesn't come and go in a heated rush.
Posted by: ParanoidStillAGirlInSeattle at November 23, 2011 12:52 PM (RZ8pf)
I'm your man.
Posted by: Eric Clapton at November 23, 2011 08:53 AM (f7VXx)
He is easily the most liberal contender for the GOP nomination.
He would be one of the most liberal contenders in the party's entire history. This is someone who is plausibly a socialist, and a champion of abortion rights, gun grabbing, and amnesty (all things he's flipped on now, of course).
He would be liberal for a DEMOCRAT. Even today!
Many democrats rejected Obamacare! Including state level Obamacare (Romneycare)!
Ugh ugh ugh.
Romney knew spending was too high and he increased it. Why in the hell does he have any supporters? Even Huntsman was a better governor.
Posted by: Dustin at November 23, 2011 08:53 AM (rQ/Ue)
----
The reason I back (and defend) Perry is that I think he has the best set of achievements and is currently governing. Because of that I can put more weight on record over rhetoric.
The trouble with a guy like Romney is his public service record is short and has this bloody big asterisk next to it (that he would have been so much more conservative had he not been in Massachusetts) and he's been out of office for a while and not doing anything of consequence, even as a spokesperson for conservative principles.
Posted by: Y-not at November 23, 2011 08:53 AM (5H6zj)
Posted by: joncelli at November 23, 2011 08:53 AM (RD7QR)
When he's underwater does he get wet?
Or does the water get him instead?
Nobody knows, Particle man
Posted by: toby928© has plans and schemes at November 23, 2011 08:54 AM (IfkGz)
CMS=Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Posted by: Miss'80s at November 23, 2011 08:54 AM (d6QMz)
Posted by: CAC, Professor of Mammareolaogy, Academy of Art University at November 23, 2011 08:54 AM (JEVge)
Posted by: Herman Cain at November 23, 2011 08:54 AM (jucos)
Posted by: 29Victor at November 23, 2011 08:55 AM (ES9R7)
I have found the proper application of alcohol can slow it just enough to experiment on.
Posted by: Buzzsaw at November 23, 2011 08:55 AM (tf9Ne)
And in the case of a guy like Santorum, he has not been in charge of anything so it's much harder to credit his achievements and he's been out of office for a bit (and left in a pretty bad loss).
Posted by: Y-not at November 23, 2011 08:55 AM (5H6zj)
Should they stay, or should they go now? If they go it could be trouble (with Latino voters), but if they stay it will be double (with Conservative voters). So, ya' gotta let me know, Slick Willard, should they stay or should they go?
Posted by: 29Victor at November 23, 2011 12:50 PM (ES9R7)
Thanks for posting that, I figured that clip was out of context, it was pretty short.
Posted by: robtr at November 23, 2011 08:56 AM (MtwBb)
Posted by: joncelli at November 23, 2011 08:56 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: alexthedude at November 23, 2011 08:56 AM (0+B+X)
Screw it! I'm writting in John Bolton.
I'm not voting Willard, Salamander, Ru Paul, Steve Perry, BockMan! Screw all of you!
Posted by: Spicoli at November 23, 2011 08:57 AM (JMsOK)
QUITMAN, GA (WALB) - 12 former Brooks County officials were indicted for voter fraud. The suspects are accused of illegally helping people vote by absentee ballot.
Strangely, no party at all was mentioned. It's probably just a random selection of Ds, Rs, and Independents.
Posted by: GnuBreed at November 23, 2011 08:57 AM (ENKCw)
I don't like the comparisons between Romney and W. Whatever his flaws, W was a leader of this country during a time of crisis and the troops loved him. I've seen very little leadership from Romney, except on healthcare where he was an utter fail.
Posted by: Y-not at November 23, 2011 08:57 AM (5H6zj)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at November 23, 2011 08:57 AM (vzFJV)
Posted by: joncelli at November 23, 2011 12:56 PM (RD7QR)
So you're saying that he's a political mirror? Hmmph. Can't be. He's got way too much hair.
Posted by: 29Victor at November 23, 2011 08:57 AM (ES9R7)
Universe man, Universe man
Size of the entire universe man
Usually kind to smaller man
Universe man
He's got a watch with a minute hand,
Millenium hand and an eon hand
When they meet it's a happy land
Powerful man, universe man
Posted by: toby928© has plans and schemes at November 23, 2011 08:57 AM (IfkGz)
.................
And, did you know Mr Ed was really a Zebra?
Posted by: Mr. Ed at November 23, 2011 08:58 AM (f9c2L)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at November 23, 2011 08:59 AM (jucos)
toby, I would yell at you for getting that song stuck in my head but it's awesome. Have my thanks instead (imagine that there's a link leading to a picture of Dita at the thanks, not gonna bing images of Dita at work).
Are you an expert that appears on the History Channel by chance? (just got around to watching the South Park History Channel episode about aliens at Plymouth)
Oh. God. I am crack addicted to Ancient Aliens. Crack. Addicted. The stupider and more bizarre the theory, the more I love it. Though, seriously, I do think only alien tech explains that one guy's hair.
Posted by: alexthechick at November 23, 2011 08:59 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: Mr Ed at November 23, 2011 08:59 AM (IfkGz)
Curb those impulses? He's just getting started!
WTF? Damn. There's always the 2012 end of the world.
Posted by: Theo Kojak, Dick as in Detective at November 23, 2011 09:00 AM (9wLy+)
We are listening to Christmas music while the turkey cooks. This Pandora app for the iPhone is fabulous (as long as you have an unlimited data plan).
Posted by: Y-not at November 23, 2011 09:01 AM (5H6zj)
Oh, like OWS, Tea Party and Ron Paul?
Posted by: jeanne! at November 23, 2011 09:01 AM (GdalM)
Posted by: joncelli at November 23, 2011 09:02 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: tasker at November 23, 2011 09:02 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: Spicoli at November 23, 2011 09:02 AM (JMsOK)
Posted by: Kasper Hauser
...........
You gotta be nuts.
If the Supremes don't strike down Obamacare, guess what? It's law.. a GOP House and Senate combined cannot do anything about it without a GOP prez. And it starts kicking in big-time.
Guess what else happens on Jan 1, 2013, Mr Smartypants? Bush tax cuts run out. We all get a nice several thousand dollar tax hike. Once again, a GOP majoity in both houses of Congress can do nothing to stop that. Thank you very much.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at November 23, 2011 09:03 AM (f9c2L)
124 We'd be better off with a second Obama term, while fighting him in the courts, the congress and the states.
If Obama was a normal politician that might be a good strategy, but given the depth of his apparent hatred for us and the country that would be a very long four years. And in the meantime he could make unlimited recess appointments to the courts and federal agencies, every commie in the country would get a turn and at the end of their appt be replaced by the next commie in line.
Do you really think businesses will start hiring if Obama gets another four years? Do you really think the economy will perk up? After eight years of Obama it could take the rest of the 21st century to climb out of that hole, and in the meantime more and more liberals will be created by the simple fact that if you don't have a job or job prospects, free money from Obama's stash starts to look pretty good. Another FDR strategy at work.
Posted by: Boots at November 23, 2011 09:03 AM (neKzn)
So Mitt's calculation may be "You all know I've flipped and flopped and am really not terribly conservative, but you don't know that each of your new Flavors of the Week have done similar things, so my mission is to bring each candidate's Romneyesque deviations from conservative orthodoxy to your attention. Then you'll see each is nearly as flawed on ideology as I am, and you'll pick me not on ideology, but on general competency, because if everyone's kind of a RINO in one or more important ways, you might as well pick the guy who's polling the best."
dingdingding
there it is
Posted by: Truman North at November 23, 2011 09:03 AM (I2LwF)
Posted by: Georgio Tsoroadklfjdasfjasdhfdasfhis at November 23, 2011 09:04 AM (JEVge)
Doing the things a particle can
What's he like? It's not important
Particle man
__________
I like particle man. He always waves at me.
Posted by: Anachronda at November 23, 2011 09:04 AM (IrbU4)
Posted by: Timt Ryonem at November 23, 2011 09:07 AM (JEVge)
Posted by: Spicoli at November 23, 2011 01:02 PM (JMsOK)
---
I love football and also like to catch some of the Macy's parade. So after years of me struggling to put the meal on on T-day and getting kind of frustrated by missing the games, Mr Y-not suggested we have the dinner the day before so we can both enjoy the football.
Our families are small and very far away, so it's just us. This works out great. We spend real Thanksgiving in our pyjamas eating leftovers and relaxing.
Posted by: Y-not at November 23, 2011 09:08 AM (5H6zj)
[& sorry, I'm really having trouble wrapping my head around having to hold my nose and vote for a g-dm liberal squish whose names remind me of a movie about a rat and a nursery rhyme involving crying kittens.]
Posted by: Mark E at November 23, 2011 09:09 AM (w5RwR)
Posted by: tasker at November 23, 2011 09:09 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 23, 2011 12:19 PM (azHfB)
It's the Mike Castle problem. Not to rehash that race, but Castle could have won the nomination if he'd just sucked up to conservatives. Instead he made a few votes -- unpopular among even moderates and wholly unnecessary -- in order to establish that he wasn't one of those icky conservatives.
It isn't hard. You kiss up to conservatives a little and you'll reassure them.
Posted by: AmishDude at November 23, 2011 09:10 AM (73tyQ)
@162,
WindyCity,
Yep.....I couldn't agree more. That's what just kills me about the Romney Bashers. We collectively need to make a decision and most everybody is still on the purity test rollercoaster. I guess they haven't figured out yet that they will not be getting what they want regardless.
The decision?
Either take Obama out now, or except the chaos of leaving him in, in hopes that it all passes quickly, and we have a collective redo. I believe that Romney and Gingrich know what needs to happend, and will be quite friendly to the Conservative Movement, so I think we should push one of them thru. And BTW......you purity testers out there...Please point out the purist Conservative in the field...because from my perspective they all suck, and I'm not impressed, but it doesn't mean I'm not out to boot Obama regardless!
Posted by: Spicoli at November 23, 2011 09:11 AM (JMsOK)
_________
Did I say my first name was Mitt? I meant, of course, that it's W.
Posted by: W. Mitt Romney, angling for the W base at November 23, 2011 09:11 AM (NmR1a)
Posted by: tasker at November 23, 2011 09:12 AM (rJVPU)
I reject Gingrich. I reject Romney. I reject Perry. Hell, I reject all of them RINOs. I reject all.
Listen up, punks, politics is about litmus tests. If you're not getting 100% of what you want that just means you're losing slower. Romney is a flip-flopper. Turns out that Gingrich is an amnesty-pushing illegal immigrant pimp. Don't even get me started about that vaccine pimp and Mexican lover, the RINO from Taxes, Price Perry. Each of them has failed my litmus tests, which means they got to get gone. If Gingrich is the nominee then I'll be voting for Obama. If Romney is the nominee I'll vote for Obama twice, just to make sure. If Perry is the nominee, hell, then I'll never vote for a Republican again in any election at any level of government. That'll show 'em.
I live my non-political life the same way. It's like that time that pencil necked geek at the insurance company didn't agree to all my demands regarding my life insurance. So what I did is I pulled my business, canceled the coverage, surrendered the policy and then blew the proceeds on booze, hookers and card clubs. Now if something happens my wife and kids literally will starve to death, but that's okay, chumps, on account of the fact that I sent my message: No compromise.
Compromise is only for sissies and chumps. Like our Founding Fathers said when they set up the federal government: No compromises!
Now that Gingrich, Romney and especially Perry are dead to me my purity of conservative intellect has led me to support Chairwoman Michele Bachmann for president. Governor Bachmann is a true and pure white Christian conservative. That alone is good enough for me. Plus we know she's qualified to be president because she's had a bunch of kids and then taken in a bunch more as a foster parent. Most importantly, and unlike PerryAmnesty, CEO Bachmann is not a Mexican loving, amnesty smoking RINO wimp.
Bachmann-Cain, '12. Lipstick and leather!
Posted by: Totally Irrational Political Malcontent at November 23, 2011 09:13 AM (f8XyF)
As far as the Illegals are concerned I'd love to hear ANY of our candidates start their reply to any question about illegal immigrants with the obvious: Illegal immigrants are FELONS to start with, and *IF* they're in our penal institutions for any other reason, they qualify under "two strikes your out", and after completing their term, they get deported. THEN we'll talk about what to do with all the other illegals. We don't need ANY illegal immigrants that are showing us that their best efforts leave them a burdon on our economic base via their incarceration in addition to their breaking INTO our country to start with.
Second: the BS idea that "asking about anyone's status is profiling" is just that. Pure and simple BS. Cain tried to dodge the issue the other night by referring to it as "selective investigation" or some such nuanced term. But it should be obvious by now that 99.99% of terrorists are arabic muslim males between the ages of 18 and 45. Also the largest percentage of illegal immigrants are "Mexican Nationals below the age of 45". While 50%+ of our incarcerated citizens are "illegal immigrants". Who then has anything to gain by ruling any background checks as "profiling and therefore politically incorrect"??? ONLY those who are guilty of crimes in the first place. Simply put, we need to bring back the right to profile as an aid to criminal investigation and USE our INS to deport those who we wouldn't have allowed through the immigration process to start with. The whole "they broke one law but we can't enforce another law already on the books because that would be profiling" concept is just bogus. Pure and simple.
Posted by: MrObvious at November 23, 2011 09:13 AM (2uovW)
Posted by: tasker at November 23, 2011 09:17 AM (rJVPU)
Well, I'm not a purity voter. You can tell yourself it's just the hard-core purity conservatives who are rejecting Mitt, but you're kidding yourself.
If Mitt had spent the past few years dissecting the problems with Masscare and putting out a hundred-page policy white paper on what went wrong with it and explained what his "replace" plan is in his "Repeal and Replace" promise, I would consider voting for him. Instead, he refuses to apply his alleged expertise in health care (you remember, the one he ran on last time) to show me a viable conservative solution. And he decided to double down on ethanol.
Hell, I'm not even a social conservative in the political sense, but even I'm offended by how much he's snubbed them.
There are better choices than Mitt, even amongst centrists. Had Christie run, I'd have supported him (although not over Perry) because he's shown he can kick the shit out of libs. Mitt really hasn't demonstrated he can do that, perhaps because he doesn't really want to do that.
Posted by: Y-not at November 23, 2011 09:18 AM (5H6zj)
Gawd I wish this were a thread about Sarah Palin spanking Michelle Bachmann on Youtube.
Or, better yet, on one of those adults-only BDSM sites...
Posted by: Sasha -N- Malia at November 23, 2011 09:20 AM (Bjf6P)
-----
By the way, voting is not a collective process. The collective decision comes at the convention when all the factions try to come together to sell the GOP nominee. That's a long ways away.
Posted by: Y-not at November 23, 2011 09:21 AM (5H6zj)
@179
I can sympathize...but place your bets, because I hate to be the one to tell you, but I'ts either gonna be Newt or Romney. Both of them are SHIT!
And when Nov. 2012 comes around I will breathlessly run to the booth to place my SHIT vote, with a SHIT eating grin on my face!
Posted by: Spicoli at November 23, 2011 09:22 AM (JMsOK)
Posted by: S. Weasel at November 23, 2011 09:27 AM (5CAkB)
At this point it's about figuring out who sucks the least and has the most potential upside.
Posted by: DrewM. at November 23, 2011 09:28 AM (dw7rB)
Posted by: DrewM. at November 23, 2011 09:29 AM (dw7rB)
Posted by: buzzion at November 23, 2011 09:36 AM (GULKT)
Posted by: tasker at November 23, 2011 09:44 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: buzzion at November 23, 2011 09:47 AM (GULKT)
Posted by: tasker at November 23, 2011 09:53 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: buzzion at November 23, 2011 09:54 AM (GULKT)
Posted by: lions at November 23, 2011 10:02 AM (NWUVP)
Posted by: kathleen at November 23, 2011 10:04 AM (YI+rH)
Posted by: westerncon at November 23, 2011 10:22 AM (VKm2f)
Posted by: jjshaka at November 23, 2011 10:33 AM (413sW)
Posted by: tasker at November 23, 2011 10:36 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: tasker at November 23, 2011 10:37 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: tasker at November 23, 2011 10:39 AM (rJVPU)
I didn't watch the debate. I had a commitment was forcefully committed.
Posted by: ace at November 23, 2011 12:31 PM (nj1bB)
Fixed it for you. You're welcome.
Posted by: kathysaysso posting nonsense, too at November 23, 2011 10:42 AM (ZtwUX)
We did far more for conservatism and this country under Clinton with a GOP House and Senate than we did under Bush.
Under Romney we will still have a Democratic President.
Sorry, I will not vote for Romney any more than I voted for that despicable John McCain.
I will not hinder the revolution.
Posted by: Kasper Hauser at November 23, 2011 10:46 AM (HqpV0)
Good Lord this is embarassing for conservatives.
A presidential candidate baiting people on twitter like a school girl with an half-quote that is a lie, and the base goes wild.
It s lie people. A half-quote lie. Newt looks like a real douche.
Posted by: Winning at November 23, 2011 11:27 AM (80nuu)
Posted by: Pragmatist at November 23, 2011 11:29 AM (lTnzg)
Posted by: Pragmatist at November 23, 2011 11:51 AM (z8Cts)
Gingrich is a bigger liar than anyone I have seen in this election cycle (e.g. "anyone who quotes me when I said that is lying"...WHAT????!!!!). The only reason he gets away with it is because people think his belligerence is "refreshing". It would be a huge mistake to follow this man. It will lead you to a cliff. He paints Romney as a liar by taking Romney's words out of context. Words showing Gingrich's lies are NOT out of context.
Posted by: Hmmmm at November 23, 2011 12:29 PM (4I5PU)
Posted by: Rex the Wonder God at November 23, 2011 12:50 PM (vahvH)
Posted by: steevy at November 23, 2011 01:09 PM (7WJOC)
At this point it's about figuring out who sucks the least and has the most potential upside.
Posted by: DrewM. at November 23, 2011 01:28 PM (dw7rB)
In walks Roemer.
Posted by: CAC at November 23, 2011 01:11 PM (PUokA)
Romney is right... Again....
Newt acts like he is entitled to take positions that contradict the Republican Norm (i.e. Immigration Amnesty, Petitioning Government to put controls on his view that Man is responsible for Global Warming, Being against the Bush Tax Cuts, etc.)... He thinks he's protected in his decision to flush Republican Ethics and Morals (i.e. cheating on two wives and with possibly more than 2 women and then breaking the news that he wants a divorce so he can openly romance Calista while wife #2 is in the Hospital)... He thinks that it is okay to fleece Taxpayers by stealing unearned consulting fees from Freddie Mac..... Or to lie under oath and get fines $300K and get sanctioned, then run out of office by his own party...
If you ask me this article is "Shameless" and Desperate....
Romney is the best qualified candidate to be President on either side of the aisle... Deal with it.
Posted by: poyman at November 23, 2011 01:25 PM (kyYy+)
Newt took it down - disappeared it off his Twitter account.
Either Newt, or a Newtrino. According to the OPERA team at CERN in France, low mass decayed neutrino might be able to go faster than the speed of light; maybe, maybe not - but it appears Newtrinos can go faster than the speed of Ace.
Posted by: Rex the Wonder God at November 23, 2011 04:50 PM (vahvH)
Its still there for me. Still there on his main twitter feed for 11:16am. Twitter's interface is absolute shit and it fucks up so much not surprising you don't see it, but it is still there.
Posted by: buzzion at November 23, 2011 01:34 PM (GULKT)
Go anybody but Romney!
Posted by: Pragmatist at November 23, 2011 01:34 PM (AEKuS)
Posted by: jonathan at November 23, 2011 03:03 PM (fDB4D)
Yeah, he's bound to tack this way and that in terms of his public statements. You simply cannot get through both the Republican primaries and the general election otherwise. Anybody who's just a total straight arrow say what he means 100% of the time solon will wind up with a 2% of the vote consolation prize.
Romney has no intention of that, I think -- of being a Ron Paul, with a passionate groupie following tending his extensive Wikipedia page listing the many races he almost won. He wants to be President, the winnah and new champeen, and if he has to adjust what he says and how, along the way, without fully betraying his principles, he will.
I don't think he's much worried about the deeply conservative wing of the Republican Party. There are two possibilities: either (1) there are enough of these voters to deny him the nomination, in which case, since the American voting public is not, in fact, deeply conservative -- cf. Obama, Barack, 2008 victory of, Clinton, William Jefferson, 1992 and 1996 victories of, Bush, "Compassionate conservative education President" George, 200 and 2004, victories of -- whoever wins the nomination will go on to Goldwater/McGovern-like defeat next fall, or (2) there aren't enough of these voters to deny him the nomination.
In short, if he can't win the nomination by doing as he's doing, then he can't beat Obama next fall, so there's no upside and considerable downside to being pleasingly consistently conservative.
Posted by: Carl Pham at November 23, 2011 03:41 PM (cj5jm)
I'll tell you what is shameless is the supposed "Christians" who are willing to sink to all levels of lying to make Romney out to be someone else - all because the idea of a Mormon in the White House scares them so much.
Posted by: Iowa Hawkeye at November 23, 2011 03:55 PM (iKHMx)
Posted by: Brett at November 23, 2011 04:31 PM (8X9bo)
Posted by: Culo by Mazzucco ePub at November 23, 2011 04:37 PM (wUW/i)
Posted by: valwayne at November 23, 2011 05:07 PM (mzJ8b)
Romney 2012!!!!
Posted by: Poqui at November 23, 2011 05:22 PM (Ghjbp)
Excellent blog, thanks for the share. I'll be a regular viewer.
Posted by: The Drop iBooks at November 23, 2011 05:22 PM (oZhf0)
Posted by: The Impossible Dead Audiobook at November 23, 2011 05:37 PM (sKGGa)
There is never a perfect candidate.
At some point, conservatives are going to have to realize that there is no perfect candidate and assemble a compatible team between the President, Vice President, and the Secretary of State to provide an effective, experienced team to rebuild a Constitutional America.
It is futile to ask a conservative to accept a candidate that is conservative in self-proclaimed name only (because it is the flavor du jour). We saw how disastrous that was in 2008 when the Republicans put forth a progressive candidate and tried to wrap him in conservative clothing. 58% of the Conservatives stayed home from the polls. We canÂ’t afford for that to happen again.
First and foremost we need a candidate with proven commitment to conservative principles; a love and knowledge of the Constitution; and fervor to restore Constitutional governance.
The basic candidate must also have proven experience as a leader with demonstrated ability to assemble the talents and experience required to solve complex and vexing problems.
ItÂ’s easier to augment their shortcomings in other areas if they are firmly grounded in the Constitution and are capable problem-solvers. A knowledgeable and experienced diplomat at State can fill the need for a capable representative in foreign affairs. A knowledgeable and experienced politician at vice president can guide and direct political efforts to earn cooperation in the Congress for problem solving legislation.
We havenÂ’t had a president in generations who didnÂ’t encounter the unexpected once in office, to such a degree that they couldnÂ’t have been prepared for it. Those who were successful were the ones that surrounded themselves with experienced professionals in their cabinet; rather than equally inexperienced ideologues.
It would not be surprising to learn that many diplomatic scenarios are far different than they appear based solely on publically available information; or by observation from a distance. To expect any candidate to have an intimate understanding of every facet of international and domestic politics, economics, trade, military operations, education, and business is utterly unrealistic.
Reagan wasnÂ’t the sharpest knife in the drawer, but his belief in the Constitution; his experience with the American Dream; his faith in the American people; and his indomitable optimism made him a formidable president.
Posted by: fbanta at November 23, 2011 07:58 PM (W4W9Q)
Posted by: The Oxford Companion to Beer ePub at November 23, 2011 09:28 PM (ILWQW)
Posted by: dougx at November 23, 2011 09:40 PM (s8BxZ)
Posted by: nanonu at November 23, 2011 11:10 PM (2fxKp)
Posted by: Steve at November 24, 2011 08:54 AM (TsQiv)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2398 seconds, 353 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Kink-y...!
Posted by: Hedley Lamar at November 23, 2011 08:14 AM (cBVAS)