AllahP is retweeting MSNBC contributors that hear "Talking to Obama supporters and Dems in general that they are taking everyone to vote for Newt to keep him going".

Uh huh

No matter the weather, you know who none of this helps...Buddy Roemer.

My buddy JazzShaw tweeting ALL of S.C. under Tornado watch.

ABO! ABO! ABO! ABO! ABO!!!

I think Newt wins by 2, Mitt is right behind, Crazy Uncle trails but still beats Santorum. But I have no more clue than the next clown.

I have this fantasy that whoever wins the nomination, all the other (R) candidates and office hoders- Perry, Christie, McDonnell, Newt or Mitt or Santorum, Bachman, Boehner, Huntsman, Pawlenty, McConnell, Kasich, Palin, Rubio, all of them are out on the stump every day, doing their damnedest to beat Obama and elect a Republican House, Senate and President. (Crazy Uncle can take a long vacation to the Falklands.)

It's as likely as my other fantasy, in which the Dallas Cowgirl cheerleaders bringing me breakfast in bed. Hey, a guy can dream, right?  

BHO is a SCOAMF...

Posted by: Miss Marple at January 21, 2012 01:32 PM (GoIUi)

If you'd like to join me for dinner in Argentina, perhaps I'll show you.

Posted by: journolist at January 21, 2012 01:31 PM (70duB)

Don't get in the way when a Mittbot is having a moment.

And those "values voters?"  I will no longer pay attention to them.  They sold themselves for a couple of soundbites and the ability to stick it to a Mormon.  Some Christians they are.

Really? Whats next? Calling them religionists? Sorry if your boy Mitt is losing support but the base.doesn't.like.him. He's probably going to go on and win Florida and on to the nomination, but you really aren't making the case for us to vote for your boy when he wins the nomination.

"I know I called you a bigot in the primary but umm could you please vote for Mitt?"

Meanwhile back on the liberal ranch, the administration just named a new ambassador to Russia, the Russian Federation to be exact.  A liberal professor who is now agitating the Russian occupy crowd and on Facebook stating that, "this is going to be fun."

This is a very real concern.

Posted by: Jimbo at January 21, 2012 01:37 PM (O3R/2)

By your logic, Obama should be your trusted friend with the Constitution. Hows that working out?

Seriously- I think Newt's the brilliant, charming, arrogant, horndog 17 year old boy with ADD. (With all due respect to Newt, a lot like Clinton.)

Mitt is the dull, boring, rich, reasonably smart and competent geek. None of the girls at the party want to go home with him; but he'll probably make a decent husband.

Either one will be orders of magnitude better than four more years of the SCOAMF. 

Posted by: Jimbo at January 21, 2012 01:40 PM (O3R/2)

Posted by: wheatie at January 21, 2012 01:42 PM (ALwK/)

There are quite a few all over the South. Keep in mind that the South is probably the most bible belt area outside of Utah there is.

Posted by: Jimbo at January 21, 2012 01:44 PM (O3R/2)

Boy thats a false question, but to answer:

YES

Newt is the most articulate, intelligent, and experienced candidate available. I could care less about his marriages. The choices are Romney, Obama, and Newt. Which one of these is not like the other two?

@19

I hope everyone keeps your second paragraph in mind. We need to insure that we vote the Acorn-in-Chief (and all the pond scum that will be flushed out with his loss) from office.

We can work on the squishes later.

Drudge has a headline about a paper writing "America hates Newt Gingrich"

true enough but

You never see headlines like "American hates Obama"  do you?

This is a very real concern.

 Posted by: journolist at January 21, 2012 01:37 PM (70duB)

Global Community Oranizin' is Fun!

Posted by: Jumbo Jogging Shrimp at January 21, 2012 01:48 PM (qjUnn)

HEE!

(Among those familiar)

Do the accusations give

you major concerns about Newt Gingrich,

some concerns, or do they not concern you at

all? (Asked only of Friday respondents)

Major concerns

............................................... 21%

Some concerns

............................................... 26%

No concerns

.................................................... 51%

Not sure

.......................................................... 2%

Posted by: Miss Marple at January 21, 2012 01:27 PM (GoIUi)

yeah if value voters vote for Newt you would have to ask what values exactly do you hold dear.

I agree with Shrimps on Newt. It's the Cain train all over again.

I do admit I have serious doubts Newt could actually beat Obama, but I have even more serious doubts that Romney would actually govern as a conservative. Plus, given his flagrant flip-flopping and plutocratic demeanor, he is not nearly as electable as some people here believe. His unfavorables are already in the 40s.

Ideally, I want Newt to win in South Carolina, then flame out and have his support go to Santorum, who can confront Romney one on one. But it's a long shot.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at January 21, 2012 01:51 PM (UTq/I)

Not in the general but the primaries are about the same. Wife just got back and the polls were still empty.

8 Well I was clinging to hope that we wouldn't let the MFM eliminate good candidates, but Perry is gone. Can someone give me Romney's short bio or do I have to give wiki the click? I have the feeling he thinks he should be POTUS and has done f*ck all besides prepping for that since the SLC Olympics.

--------------

I think Romney has been prepping for Potus runs his whole life, Palerider .....I think that the Reelect Obama Team thinks this too. This is why they have put out all this class warfare-1%er propaganda.

I have been waiting for Romney to give a cogent explanation as to why he wants to be president. .....So far, I haven't heard one. Just the standard bs.

The basic flaw in Romney's background is the Corporate-Raider-LBO stuff. ....Most guys who have made 100's of millions at this, are content to just buy politicians......not become one, and open up their past to scrutiny. He could not be running at a worst time with a background like that.

I have been following Newt for sometime. I was appalled at how he slandered Democratic House Speaker Jim Wright years ago.  It was dispicable and while there certainly is a lot to give pause as respects Newt's personal past, I would remind everyone here that past mistakes are just that, past and one should look at the present in how the individual has acknowledged their past transgressions.  

Many here believe actively or passively in their minds of faith and the concept of redemption as the paramount requirement to their Christian faith. And it should be that way since redemption is the non-denominational doctrine of Christendom.

Given this, why would we apply stronger standards to a presidential candidate over our own belief and understanding as to the main doctrine and metric of Christianity and the path to living eternally with our Creator?

Posted by: Jimbo at January 21, 2012 01:54 PM (O3R/2)

We don't consider it stupid. And whats this betrayal of two wives crap? This Marianne gal asked for a divorce, Newt came home to an empty house. This was pre-Callista.

HotAir posted this: ARG Poll says SC GOP women favor Newt over Romney 42% to 26% .

Looks like the "women won't vote for Newt" idea is out the window. And this is in social conservative SC. Go Newt!

#19  That's not a bad idea.  Local enthusiasm for popular governors and other officeholders could drag some reluctant voters (and there will be,  regardless of who is the nominee) to the polls.

I wonder how long Perry will be waiting for that call from Newt about the Tenth Amendment task force?  Probably a loooong time,  as Newt will have gone on to other ideas.

This is all good thinking, but, there is no reason Perry needs to wait on Newt. He can take the initiative, start talking to governors, start floating trial balloons on policy directions, get people on board, get that thing going.

It is an awesome idea and I really hope to see him run with it, regardless of who gets the nomination.

Posted by: eman at January 21, 2012 01:51 PM (3VSsp)

Of the people running probably. There are 3 polls out that show Newt upside down in favorability ratings with only 25% veiwing him favorably and over 50% going the other way. Romney and Obama are pretty close and Romney is the only one who is not upside down but that is only in one fo the polls.

Can Newt change that and get people to like him? I don't know, he doesn't seem to have that kind of personality.

He throws red meat to primary voters, the rest of the country not so much.

Posted by: CoolCzech at January 21, 2012 01:50 PM (niZvt)

Well there are an unbelievable number of divorced couples in this country these days.  I find it hard to believe that this just happened in a pristine world where no one ever violated any marriage vows.  It is also rather hard to cast stones, when your own hands aren't exactly clean.  Bottom line, I don't think even values voters consider divorce the ultimate disqualifier for high office.  Maybe once upon a time, when this country wasn't so debauched, this would have been a critical issue.  Not saying I approve of divorce, but I think it is a lot lower on the list of critical issues for most people.

>>BHO is a SCOAMF...Posted by: Bodacious..

Damn straight Skippy Bodacious!

This past week, President Osurper spoke at the EPA, telling the workers there that "our country is stronger because of you." Let's see, 8.5% unemployment (and true unemployment at 15%) - that doesn't seem like a strong country.

In just the past few months, President Obumbles and the EPA have decided that jobs are no longer the number one priority in America (although, for the EPA – jobs were never a concern). That's why many people have begun calling it the Employment Prevention Agency. President Ohomo now believes that getting votes from extreme environmentalists (those who believe we should all be living in the woods) is more important than the 20 million Americans looking for full-time employment.

I WON and the agency have made several decisions that will cost hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions of jobs and billions of dollars in economic activity - and make electricity prices rise.

First, SCFOAMT delayed a decision on the Keystone XL pipeline, which would have created thousands of jobs and lowered gas prices - but would have cost the tree-hugger vote. Because of this, President OFUCKYOU delayed one of the most economically beneficial projects in recent memory. These enviro-wackos didn't like the pipeline because they claimed a single aquifer in Nebraska was at risk. What you may not know is that there are numerous other pipelines running through that same aquifer and drinking water has not been affected. The delay was purely political and had nothing to do with the environment.

Second, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar decided that no new uranium mining claims would be approved in the area surrounding the Grand Canyon. Current claims would still be honored, but new claims would be stopped.

Uranium is vital to our national defense. If we don't continue to mine our own, who will we buy it from? Countries that hate us? Even though this mining creates jobs and increases economic activity in the area, and has been taking place for decades without any adverse effects to the landmark - President Bitch decided liberal environmentalist votes were more important.

The EPA has been given free rein to regulate and destroy jobs in this country. Luckily, some conservative Members of Congress are trying to control its job-killing agenda. The Defending America's Affordable Energy and Jobs Act (H.R.750 in the House and S.228 in the Senate) would curtail the EPA's destructive policies. President OFuck-up thinks that our country is better with the EPA? What about the fact that before the EPA existed, states were already steadily improving the quality of the air and water.

And what about the thousands of people who are out of work because of the EPA's damaging regulations? Their recent coal ash regulations (which are supposed to stop global warming ::eyeroll: have already meant a death sentence for several power plants across the country, which not only hurts the economy but will raise electricity prices dramatically. Amirite Vic?

Due to new federal air pollution regulations, more than 32 power plants across the country will be forced to close their doors. Those plants, which are mostly coal-fired, discharge enough electricity to supply more than 22 million households and their closure will lead to job layoffs, depleted tax revenues, and a considerable hike in electric bills. The areas that will be hit hardest are the Midwest and in the coal belt (Virginia, West Virginia, and Kentucky), where dozens of plants will likely be retired. Like Vic.

Does that sound like a stronger country?

Don't forget that when these plants close, tax revenue will drop dramatically. That's because these power plants not only supply - in some areas - the most jobs, but also pay the most in local taxes. And since Democrats are all about raising taxes, guess who they'll come after to make up for the shortfall?

Hint: it's you. 

ABO period.

These aren't even half of what the EPA has been up to during the Obamarama Administration. Remember the offshore drilling moratorium which punished every single driller in the Gulf of Mexico because of the mistake of one? It cost tens of thousands of jobs and millions in economic activity for the area - absolutely decimating the economy of those states.

And what about the new vehicle fuel standards that are supposed to also cut down on greenhouse gas emissions that supposedly cause global warming? These new rules will make cars cost about $5,000 more than they do now, and because they'll need to be smaller and made of lighter material to meet the new standards - they'll be much less safe.

One of the more absurd rules coming out of the EPA is a regulation which controls dust. Yes, dust, like what you find when you drive down a dirt road or don't clean the top of your bookshelf for awhile. The EPA believes it makes the air dirtier and increases global warming - so they want to regulate it. What does it mean? Well it means less economic activity as people try to comply with the new rules. Even worse, it could lessen our food supply because farmers will be the hardest hit.

But remember, as Prezdent I WON said, the EPA is making the country stronger. How much longer will our economy have to suffer because of the EPA's job-killing regulations?

How much longer do we have to live under the thumb of the EPA, who can now destroy your dreams by regulating your property?

How much longer will we have to bleed jobs and prevent more jobs from being created because the EPA doesn't think they're good enough? 

Stop this madness!

I'm reminded of what Karl Rove said on his strategy to get Bush elected twice:

"You must and I repeat MUST solidify your base in order to win a general. Independents won't matter if you don't do this".

Sorry, Mitt won't do this.

70 Does South Carolina have a lot of Mormons?

Posted by: wheatie at January 21, 2012 01:42 PM (ALwK/)

There are quite a few all over the South. Keep in mind that the South is probably the most bible belt area outside of Utah there is.

--------

If you're including Kansas-Oklahoma-Texas in the 'South', then yeah.....I can see that. .....Some people cut off their definition of 'the south' at Arkansas, and consider the states further west to be 'western'.

In law, we have the doctrine of unclean hands  -  allowing one being accused of malfeasance to make an affirmative defense against the accuser of similar malfeasance.

So consider this when analyzing whether Newt can beat Obama --- when the incongruency of Obama's corrupt administration, Fast & Furious, Obamacare (which was negotiated behind closed doors by the democrats, involving graft, midnight votes and misleading data submissions and outright lies, couple this with the political graft associated with the Stimulus and Solyndra, et al).

Oh, yes, my friends, if Newt is the nominee, we going to be making a striking affirmative defense to the smut, the democrats will loft.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 21, 2012 02:05 PM (piMMO)

The point being that the biggest weapon we had against O is now gone. Mitt cannot argue against socialized medicine. He implemented it.

148: My metaphor for the GOP race two months ago: It's  10 on Saturday night at the bar. This cowboy is lonely and frustrated. There are several decent looking ladies in here tonight but none of them ring the bells for him. Wait a minute- look who just walked in the door. I need to talk to her.

 (Ten minutes later).

Well, THAT didn't go well.

Like you said, it's gettitng late and most of the other hot chicks have left.....   

I want to see Newt knock Barky's dick in the dirt.

Mittens will coddle the bastard. 

Newt will eviscerate his phony, lying ass.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 21, 2012 02:05 PM (piMMO)

We seem to be only for states rights and capitalism if it doesn't have the name Romney attached to it. If it does we are all the 99%!

Romney will solidfy the base when the alternate choice is Obama.

As to RomneyCare, it wasn't passed in MA through trickery. While the individual mandate is awful, Romney didn't use trickery to pass it. That is a huge distinction.

In law, we have the doctrine of unclean hands  -  allowing one being accused of malfeasance to make an affirmative defense against the accuser of similar malfeasance.

Posted by: journolist at January 21, 2012 02:07 PM (70duB)

Exactly why Mitt can't go after Obama on Obamacare. Thanks for that.

Romney will solidfy the base when the alternate choice is Obama.

As to RomneyCare, it wasn't passed in MA through trickery. While the individual mandate is awful, Romney didn't use trickery to pass it. That is a huge distinction.

Posted by: journolist at January 21, 2012 02:11 PM (70duB)

Hahahahahaha.

Posted by: journolist at January 21, 2012 02:07 PM (70duB)

or This., if you want the unabridged version.

Tendstl - he can by exlplainging it was analyzed and promulgated in MA (albeit a horrible, horrible statute) through good-faith and fair dealing.  Obamacare was not analyzed through good-faith and fair dealing.  It was forced upon the electorate.

You must understand this distinction.  It is not nuance, it is factual and should be underscored.

164 -

Newt's bigger problem will be squaring the circle on is recent attacks on Mitt's Bain stuff. 

I mean, I can make it make sense, but Newt is going to have a harder time with it because I don't think the truth would be a problem too.  Maybe not as big a problem as having so-called conservatives thinking it's evil to have a Republican say anything negative about Mitt's supposed "success" at Bain because that's an attack on CAPITALISM, APPLE PIE, MOMS AND ALL THAT IS GOOD AND HOLY!

Or something like that.  Still, just because voters are silly and emotional, you still have to woo them.

Posted by: journolist at January 21, 2012 02:14 PM (70duB)

You and I can understand the distinction, the American people are not policy wonks. They will see him as a hypocrite for going after Obama on Obamacare when he himself has implemented it.

What will make it worse is Mitt won't go after Obama on it because Mitt refuses to say it was a bad idea.

177 Everybody keeps complaining that Newt is not "likable". Sorry - I don't see that as an issue in this campaign.

Who wants to sit down and have a beer with either Bambi or Mittsy? Santorum or Crazy Uncle for that matter. The likable ones: Cain and Perry - are long gone.

---------

My sentiments as well. .....Perry was my guy. He has a great record, and is very likable. .....But in these early primary states...you know, the ones that matter so much more than the rest of us......there just wasn't the support for Perry.

So now we're supposed to be concerned with 'likable'? .....Too late. None of the remaining candidates are likable.

Posted by: Jumbo Jogging Shrimp at January 21, 2012 02:15 PM (qjUnn)

That's another Job Saved or Created!

Tendstl,

I believe Romney will be tuning up his responses on RomneyCare.

179 -

Let me get this straight... if Mitt put on the skirt and started waving the pom poms around saying "hooray for socialized medicine," whereas Barack forced it on us like a thief (a thief who had the majority of both houses, btw, just like Mitt) in the night, America will be ok with the buggery that is socialized medicine?

Good to know there's a difference. 

70 Does South Carolina have a lot of Mormons?

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration said yesterday that most health insurance plans must cover contraceptives for women free of charge, and it rejected a broad exemption sought by the Roman Catholic Church for insurance provided to employees of Catholic hospitals, colleges, and charities.

Most employers and insurers must comply by Aug. 1, but church-affiliated organizations will get one additional year — until Aug. 1, 2013 — to comply with the requirement.

Leaders of the Catholic Church had appealed to President Obama to grant the broad exemption. He made the final decision after hearing from them, as well as from family planning advocates, scientific specialists, and members of Congress, administration officials said.

The rule takes a big step to remove cost as a barrier to birth control, a longtime goal of advocates for womenÂ’s rights and specialists on womenÂ’s health.

Catholic bishops issued a statement saying they would fight the issue.

‘‘In effect, the president is saying we have a year to figure out how to violate our consciences,’’ said Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan of New York, president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley of the Archdiocese of Boston spoke out against the announcement on his blog last night and expressed his ‘‘deep disappointment at this unprecedented infringement on religious liberty in our country.’’

‘‘Catholic health plans do not allow for any of those services the Obama administration is trying to force us to do,’’ said Terrence Donilon, a spokesman for the Boston Archdiocese. ‘‘Our employees know that when they come to work here.’’

Romney has stated over and over that he would repeal ObamaCare. He may not need to if the courts take care of it. Newt it not electable in the general. Yes yes - he's more conservative than Romney. Doesn't matter. Old fat white guy vs. cute young black man with media at his back. Do the math. No wonder the dem media want Newt to win SC.

Posted by: CoolCzech at January 21, 2012 02:12 PM (niZvt)

But that's never how Romney defends it.  Its never "I was in a very liberal state doing everything I could to push a conservative solution, and there was a veto proof majority so I took what I could get and it still ended up being a pile of shit"

Instead its the doubling down, its "there are some good things and some bad things" but never really specifying what is good or bad, and there is the "everyone in Massachusetts just loves it."

The republicans are in the crucible right now. This process is to our benefit. The A game starts at final pick.

Posted by: anthony at January 21, 2012 02:15 PM (VUvXQ)

What the fuck? Conservatives ignoring Newt's adulterous past has nothing to do with God, it has everything to do with our cultures rot. It may be a personal choice to go with Newt feeling he may be a better President, but that's only because society has degraded to a point where it's become relevant. What's God's role in that?

Soothsayer,

Good post.

This is a core issue of the Catholic Church as enunciated through Pope Paul VI's encyclical, humane vitae.

216 -

Sorta like when a new male lion takes on the old male lion.  If he kills the old guy, or chases him off, he goes to all the female lions and says "I'm not going to keep the old lions cubs around.  I'm going to repeal them.  Honest!"

You know what he does after he's done repealing the old lion's offpring?  Makes his own, that's what. 

Yes, Mitt wants to repeal Obamacare.  I believe him when he says that.  I really really do. 

Maybe some of these bible-thumpers should go start their own party. Like the "Hand of God" party. Oh wait, the muslims already have that one.

Short memories here. Newt just last year on MTP said he was in favor of a health care mandate. Newts Mandate would be that you would be forced to buy either insurance or a payment bond. Payment bonds in that amount are impossible to get unless you have the assetts to back up the bond.

If a payment bond is enforced the bond company will make you pay for whatever they spent on your behalf. In other words unlike insurance companies bond companies will come take your stuff to satisfy your bills that they paid.

Some convenient memory loss going on around here.

Yes, Mitt wants to repeal Obamacare.  I believe him when he says that.  I really really do. 

Posted by: BurtTC at January 21, 2012 02:26 PM (TOk1P)

If he gets ObamaCare repealed, it will be because he has a Republican Congress.  If he's got a Republican Congress - he won't get RomneyCare to replace it.

224 -

Catholic Church.  Repentance/forgiveness and all that.  Catholics believe sinners are forgiven when they confess and repent.  You may not believe it, but they do.  They also believe it's God's role to judge, not yours and mine. 

So yeah, if you are Catholic, the stuff you did in the past is not supposed to be held against you, as long as you ask for forgiveness. 

Soothsayer,

Obama is pathetic.

And for those who are fretting over Romney's RomneyCare, I don't recall Romneycare forcing contraception, making it illegal for doctors to own hospitals nor the entire take over of the Student Loan industry or new strictures on holding gold.

238 -

You have more confidence in the Republican Congress than I do.  It's generally very hard for Congress to stand up and say no to a President of their own party.  Politics tends to trump ideology.  Especially if Mitt feels he has a mandate. 

BurtTC,

Redemption is central to Christendom period.

Soothsayer --- good to hear that.

CoolCzech,

Obamacare is filled with such goodies as I pointed out. RomneyCare, while inconstitute, doesn't have the layers of tyranny begotten through tyranny.

This is a central point that is not nuance.

Posted by: eman at January 21, 2012 02:33 PM (3VSsp)

Well he hasn't backed off on that but it's nice to know that whatever Newt says while running for president can just be catagorized as "muzings" and that we shouldn't take him seriously. Why? Because he isn't Mitt!

241 -

That's a good point.  I like Romney too, he seems to be a really nice guy.  Somebody somewhere said something about nice guys and where they tend to finish... I think it was Tom Jefferson, in his famous book called... heck, you know that book. 

Posted by: CoolCzech at January 21, 2012 02:31 PM (niZvt)

Considering unemp. among that group is less than 5% I doubt thats who he was talking about, and you know it. 99 weeks of unemp. is an associates degree, or computer training for those that don't have any.

Come on, get serious bro. How many people would take that job they could if the alternative was to go back to school? I would say a lot.

255 -

So if Newt gets elected President, you're afraid he'll... what, cheat on American with another country and then marry that other country?

CoolCzech,

Let's not enter strawmen.

Would you want to be piloted by a blind man? Probably not, however, that's not really what we are talking about eh?

238 -

You have more confidence in the Republican Congress than I do.  It's generally very hard for Congress to stand up and say no to a President of their own party.  Politics tends to trump ideology.  Especially if Mitt feels he has a mandate. 

Posted by: BurtTC at January 21, 2012 02:33 PM (TOk1P)

Not so much confidence in a Republican Congress - just don't think they'll pass much of anything having to do with health care.  Not enough Republicans really like the idea of a national solution to the problem - and those that do, won't be able to agree on what it is.

CoolCzech,

I know brother.

Well he hasn't backed off on that but it's nice to know that whatever Newt says while running for president can just be catagorized as "muzings" and that we shouldn't take him seriously. Why? Because he isn't Mitt!

Posted by: robtr at January 21, 2012 02:36 PM (MtwBb)

And its nice that whenever Mitt was running for office in Mass when he said he was Pro choice, pro healthcare for all higher taxes etc etc etc its catagorized as "muzings" and that we shouldnt take him seriously! Why? Because he isn't NOOT! W00t!

We have to support New Media.  And stand up.

Posted by: eman at January 21, 2012 02:33 PM (3VSsp)

Eman, presidents can't repeal shit. They can either sign a bill repealing it or not sign it. Congress would have to repeal it and yes I beleive Romney would sign that bill.

Unless we take over the Senate with at least 60 votes their will be no bill though unless we can convince some democrats to vote our way and then ONE person in the senate could block it.

264 -

That's the hope.  I'd be more concerned about the first hurdle though, which is repeal.  It's likely the repeal process, if it goes forward, would not be tossing the entire lot, but having to go piece by piece.  If so, and assuming Rs are strong enough to get some of that done, I don't think a President Romney would allow ALL of it to get done unless he was sure he could replace it with his new and improved version. 

Twitter is alive. 305 new tweets on the incoming feed.

Oh, and that reminds me. We are just getting started on Twitter through my friend Brice Buckley. The handle is @bricebuckley.

Noot may pull a win out of SC...Moreover, he may well be the nominee which should please the large percentage of Republicans looking for ABR...And yet, I don't see him pulling female voters or independants away from Hussein.  Many of those fooled by Obama are looking for an alternative.  A fat old gas-bag on his third and finally trophy wife is not going to impress them.  Win the battle lose the war...Kinda like SC voting to secede and then losing the war.

Posted by: CoolCzech at January 21, 2012 02:40 PM (niZvt)

If those training programs eliminate BILLIONS from the Federal Budget and get people back to work then yes! One last thing, there are a MILLION jobs out there that require a little technical know how. I have been looking for a new job for months and number of jobs is astounding. I am currently training for a certification in A+ then move on to my CCNA in order to get one of these.

Article after article from companies saying they can't fill jobs because people just aren't qualified, period. If you are trained in HVAC/heating/welding etc you can write your own ticked.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at January 21, 2012 02:40 PM (7IpLl)

Space Mirrors! He says they are to light the freeways and reduce our carbon footprint but I beleive he wants them so he can look at himself.

Unless we take over the Senate with at least 60 votes their will be no bill though unless we can convince some democrats to vote our way and then ONE person in the senate could block it.

Posted by: robtr at January 21, 2012 02:42 PM (MtwBb)

Yes and No, groundgame is already set that will repeal Obamacare through reconciliation, just like it was implemented. So all we need is 51.

Posted by: tonynoboloney at January 21, 2012 01:50 PM (pcYdg)

I'm sorry, I really would prefer Newt but this is wishcasting. The MSM will make Newt's personal life issue #1 and the economy will be totally ignored. Newt cannot win, and defeating Bambi is the one and only job this time. We may not survive another 4 years of the crypto-muslim crypto-communist.

Posted by: phil at January 21, 2012 02:45 PM (QzdcC)

If it gets people back to work and expanding the tax base, deal. And like I said above, how many are on unemployment because they won't take that entry level position they were offered? They are making more on unemployment then that job would offer. Take the job or go back to school, I think many will say they hell with it and take the job.

279 -

Ds tend to get 55-60% of the female vote anyway.  Rs don't win on the female vote. 

I know there are conservative women who don't like Newt.  However, I haven't yet met one who likes Barack, so I think they will do with Newt what some of us will do with Mitt, if we have to... namely, put the clampdown on our noses and go vote for the guy. 

292 -

No, not at all.  I like Mitt, he's nice.  As President though, if I have to choose between him and Newt, I'll take Newt.  I didn't want to have to take Newt either, but that wasn't up to me, obviously.

If it gets people back to work and expanding the tax base, deal. And like I said above, how many are on unemployment because they won't take that entry level position they were offered? They are making more on unemployment then that job would offer. Take the job or go back to school, I think many will say they hell with it and take the job.

Posted by: Tendstl at January 21, 2012 02:49 PM (kb15i)

I have to ask, have you ever seen one federal job training program that has produced jobs? We have had hundreds of them and spent billions on them. None of them have worked that I am aware of. They have all ended in bigger government and more waste.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at January 21, 2012 02:48 PM (7IpLl)

No, I know every Newt supporter I know would crawl to vote for Mitt, what we hate are his supporters that say shit like this. You sound like Obama supporters when they said that a vote for McCain was racism. You can't rationalize his stances, his statements, his aloofness his defense of Romneycare so it comes down to:

HATE

Posted by: soothsayer at January 21, 2012 02:51 PM (sqkOB)

Heh? What's wrong with Legal Insurrection? Insty quotes and links him all the time.

Posted by: CoolCzech at January 21, 2012 02:50 PM (niZvt)

He needs to appeal to the base first.

Heh? What's wrong with Legal Insurrection? Insty quotes and links him all the time.

Posted by: joncelli at January 21, 2012 02:54 PM (+MbqG)

Exactly, its a well respected site. A professor at Cornell U, a conservative in the lions den. If you don't respect that site and the accuracy of the professor you need to rethink your conservatism.

I hope that the citizens of the Great State of SC see the bad weather as an opportunity to make a statement about how important the process is to them individually and collectively. A tad of shared physical suffering, even a little stroll through some bad weather together, might make everyone there stand a little taller in the morning. A record turnout, given the inclement weather, would really send a message to the puss left, not to mention to the citizens of later-on primary states. Come on, SC, get out there and participate!

Newt is getting a lot of "protest support".

You know, people don't like to be forced into doing something. .....I think that Romney supporters, who are wondering why people are backing Newt, are overlooking this basic aspect of human nature.

For months we've been told that Romney is the "inevitable" one.....that he will be the nominee. .....Then, there is that crap in VA, that keeps the other not-Romneys off the ballot, which smacks of election tampering in favor of Romney.

Many of us out here in Middle Earth don't get to participate in this early voting that gets to 'weed out' some of the candidates. .....So it all adds up to the impression that the Repub-Royalty gets to decide who we will vote for, and the rest of us are supposed to stfu and vote and send our taxes to DC like good little boys and girls.....and not mind that we are being screwed.

We had a thing go on back in the late 18th century......where the people rose up against the Royalty telling them what to do. .....Something about 'no taxation without representation'. .....The euro-royals said that it would never work, that peons could not self-govern. And now we've got that same thing happening to us again, with the way that our election process has been so corrupted.

So a lot of folks are as pissed off now at the R-Royalty as they were with the ruling class of royals, 250 years ago.

Posted by: Tendstl at January 21, 2012 01:37 PM (kb15i)"

No kidding.  Sheesh.   These guys do Mitt no favors.  We don't give a crap that he's a Mormon.  If that's what you think it's about, I guess you never heard of "strong gun control", Romneycare, or MA's pathetic performance on debt, jobs, and limited government on Romney's watch... let alone even trying to take the fight to the left rather than  collaborating with them.

Newt is the best candidate remaining.  Easily.  Mitt is terrible in debates with his thin skin and need for defense from fans like Meghan Mccain and Donald Frum... and even Anderson Cooper!  He's provably dishonest about his ideology.  His only advantage today is connections and money, used to trash other candidates with 75:1 ad spending (such as in Iowa where he LOST anyway).  Obama will not have any disadvantage there.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at January 21, 2012 02:59 PM (7IpLl)

Sometimes things that are obvious to you aren't so. With my degree and experience Its obvious to me I  should have employers blowing my phone up, for some reason its not happening.

Personally, I remember Reagan (Hate to use his name cuz its cliched) extorting the virtues of conservatism. Newt, for me, does that. Mitt can't or won't. One of the two, and its troubling. If he could and did it with fucking passion he would be my man, its not hate.

@Vic

As I said earlier, some have already touted that they would pursue reconciliation to remove Obamacare, hence 51 votes. Not sure if its true but there it is.

No kidding.  Sheesh.   These guys do Mitt no favors.  We don't give a crap that he's a Mormon.

Heh, comment 324 was bad timing for you wasn't it?

Posted by: Miss Marple at January 21, 2012 01:35 PM (GoIUi)

That's putting it mildly.

 Santorum and Paul have performed better than Gingrich in several swing states. Still, electability now doesn't mean electability in November. For the very Goldwateresque scenario we might get with Gingrich, there is a McCainian scenario with Romney that is still possible (though I think it's less likely). A loss is a loss whether its by 100 electoral votes or 2.

I would love to watch the results today, but I have to go get 2 of my wisdom teeth (which I didn't even know I had) pulled today.

I think the pulling will be more enjoyable. At least I get drugs.

@toddstarnes Team Romney delivers cake to Newt - marking 15th anniversary he became first Speaker reprimanded for ethics violation #lowclass

Keep it classy Mitt

@328...Vic,

Yeah Vic......pitchforks and rolling pins! ....People are that pissed off.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at January 21, 2012 03:13 PM (7IpLl)

Of course he can, look what a good job he did of getting on the ballot of his HOME state of Virginia. Newt is all about being organized.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at January 21, 2012 03:13 PM (7IpLl)

Your fear is the same as mine. But the difference is I will take the risk with Newt fighting for conservatism and convincing the electorate that Obama and his policies are for shit. Whereas Mitt will be like McCain and just be Mr. Nice Guy. Remember "You have nothing to fear from an Obama presidency, my friends."

I mean I was waiting for takeout at a restaurant last night and they had Rachel Maddow on, and they were playing clips of Romneys interview with Laura Ingram where Romney said, Im paraphrasing "The economy has turned around and is getting better".

Really? is that how you fight? They had that on a loop on MSNBC.

@toddstarnes Team Romney delivers cake to Newt - marking 15th anniversary he became first Speaker reprimanded for ethics violation #lowclass

Keep it classy Mitt

THIS  -  This stupid Ivy League, bullshit college tee hee shit, is what destroys Mitt.

Newt says "Where is Mitt I thought we were going to debate?"  Mitt sends a snarky message with a fucking cake.  Newt's people will just take a piss in their cars, while eating the cake.

In 1960, the people who heard the Presidential debate twixt Kennedy and Nixon on the radio said that they thought  Nixon had held the edge in the debate. As we know, JFK won the election because he was one of the more handsome men in political history.

Now we have a chance of nominate Newt, who looks like McCain, a has-been dredged from the swamps of Washington DC, or Mitt, whose father was born in Mexico, and has been evidently advised to look friendly and non-threatening. Do you  know how tough it is to get a Repub over that buut-he's-a-a-a-mm-m-MONSTER!! hill, and how implausible it is when accusing Romney? Really, if McCain had not been so knarled, (plus Mc was/is a fighter, like Newt, at least concerning his own interests) we wouldn't have seen anymore of Barack after '08.

I would love to watch the results today, but I have to go get 2 of my wisdom teeth (which I didn't even know I had) pulled today.

I think the pulling will be more enjoyable. At least I get drugs.

Posted by: CAC at January 21, 2012 03:07 PM (oIKUW)

But don't the residents of MA like Romneycare? I mean, so we're for states' rights when those states choose what we want them to choose?

Yes, the liberals of MA like having the federal government and the other states float them cash for their socialist health care, and be their to bail their insolvent asses out when the bill comes do.

But no, states do not have the right to do that to each other.

Mitt Romney: So inspiring and instilling in confidence that people are willing to look at elect Newt Gingrich for president.

FIFY.

(plus Mc was/is a fighter, like Newt, at least concerning his own interests)

He endorsed Obama you liar.

In the middle of his own campaign he stumped for the jugeared bastard.

So as not to seem... wait, can you guess?

Are you ready?

Did you right down your guess on a sheet a paper?

Fold it in half and set it on top the monitor?

Racist.

I think the most important issue facing this country is racism, so... I can only vote for black guys.

You better Cain's ass back in there somehow.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 21, 2012 03:07 PM (piMMO)

Well then, I guess you and yours should go ahead and start throwing those stones at him.  I hear God doesn't have a problem with that at all.   

DrewMTips Unpossible! RT @GOP12 Married women going for Gingrich; single women split between Mitt and Newt. #Foxexitpoll

That gave me the lulz.....