Yep, another debate…
Yes, I watched…Most of it.
Live-tweeted through most of it too.

I have to say: Rick Santorum impressed the hell out of me lastnight! Now,…I think everyone knows what my objections are with him, and, even though he impressed me, those objections remain. However — that being said — He and Ron Paul were the ones talking issues lastnight, taking the fight to obama.

That was by design though. See, CNN is part of the liberal mainstream media, and lastnight Wolf Blitzer was showing the world how well he can carry obama’s water for him, and also be a good little socialist soldier for obama, in this year’s presidential campaign. Nothing has changed from ’08. He fed Newt and Mitt ‘baiting’ questions for a reason.

In any event, Wolf chose to pit Newt and Romney against each other, and BOTH candidates did so. To be fair though, early on in the debate, Newt made an offer to stick to the issues, because he agreed with Rick Santorum’s ‘stick to the issues’ statement. But, Mitt slapped him down, with the very next answer from his mouth. Mitt LOVES to ‘bait’ Newt. Sometimes Newt takes the bait, and sometimes he doesn’t. Lastnight, Mitt was rather snarky, and a ‘drama queen’ at times, and I think that was also by design, because he knows Newt cannot stand snarkyness.

In one exchange, Wolf directly asked Newt about the “anti-immigrant” ad he had against Mitt, and why he pulled it. Wolf asked Newt if he still felt that Mitt was “anti-immigrant”, and Newt said something like “of those of us on this stage, yes, I do”. Mitt had a melt-down, and admitted something that not many people know…His father was born in Mexico. Mitt then went on to accuse Newt of using an “epithet” against him (where this comes from, I do not know), but, Mitt has also opened the door for many investigations which will undoubtedly be done, delving into his father’s roots. Also take note that until Florida, Mitt really didn’t make that much hay about his father’s roots.

I know plenty of folks think Newt seemed a bit off his game lastnight but, I think this may be a tactic he’s using. He could sense, early on, that Mitt was loaded for bear, so instead of having a knock-down/drag-out with Mitt, he chose to remain cool, and perhaps seem a bit off his game, in order to let Mitt seem like a raging drama queen. For those of us who’ve been able to see the REAL Mitt since ’08…This was nothing new. But, thankfully, there were several times when Mitt showed his ass, and got it handed back to him on a silver plate. The whole exchange between Mitt and Newt, about Mitt’s investments…How he’s invested with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac…And then Mitt’s typical response “I don’t make my investments, I have a blind trust that does that for me”. If you compare this style of answer and evasion to how he handles direct attacks against his opponents (using SuperPACs), in order to seemingly remain ‘clean and pure’ in the eyes of voters…They match up, dead-on point. Mitt doesn’t like to take responsibility for anything questionable in his past.

I LOVED the exchange between Santorum and Mitt, regarding ‘Romneycare’. THAT was the best part of the whole damn debate! And hopefully people will pay attention to what Santorum got Mitt to admit…That yes, people in Massachusetts are required to buy healthcare, and if they don’t, they are required to pay the state for their healthcare. And if they do neither…They are fined. — THAT…IS…OBAMACARE!!!! — Congrats to Rick Santorum for getting Mitt to talk about the particulars of Romneycare, which Rick then used to compare to obamacare!!

My predictions are that Newt and Mitt will place in the top 3 in Florida (yes, that’s a given). But, how far will Santorum rise due to his performance in THIS debate alone? He has a few days left, and with very little time left in Iowa, his numbers soared. I guess we’ll see…

If you thought Mitt Romney would, as President, make attempts to FULLY repeal ‘Obamacare’ — Think again. Frankly, more than a few within the GOP leadership and establishment believe the same, and have already said so, time and time again. In their words, it’s better to just ‘pick apart’ ‘Obamacare’, instead of ‘going to the trouble’ of trying to repeal the entire thing. That kind of attitude shows up in the dictionary under the term “lazy ass”.

Anyway — here’s the info, released once again for We The People to digest and decipher, on Romney’s intent regarding ‘Obamacare’ (link via RedState blog):
(snip)

Romney Advisor: No Obamacare Repeal
Posted by Erick Erickson
Wednesday, January 25th at 9:10AM EST

As Ben Domenech notes in his Transom, Mitt Romney’s advisors have now advised him to support “a $2 gas tax, a VAT, and open Taliban talks.” Add to that list not repealing Obamacare. Norm Coleman, an advisor to Romney, went on record saying

We’re not going to do repeal. You’re not going to repeal Obamacare… It’s not a total repeal… You will not repeal the act in its entirety, but you will see major changes, particularly if there is a Republican president… You can’t whole-cloth throw it out. But you can substantially change what’s been done.

We’ve had this dribble out at the Romney Fan Club over at National Review too — just fix it, don’t repeal it. There are practical reasons for doing so, but we should not lose our perspective. The base of the Republican party is energized by the prospects of complete repeal. All the candidates have said they would repeal it. Mitt Romney, within the past two years, flipped his position going from nibbling to full repeal.

In the South Carolina debate on CNN last week, Newt Gingrich said he did not trust the congressional staffs (plural) and would therefore insist on full repeal via reconciliation, which is how the Democrats passed it in the first place through the Senate. His was a wise point. The congressional staffs, both Democrat and Republican, have started functioning as an entrenched legislative branch bureaucracy both doing what they think best for the country even when the voters want otherwise.

Read the whole thing at the link…

This is yet one more thing Romney didn’t need right now…He didn’t need to give both Newt and Santorum another piece of ammo to ‘fire across his bow’. Most recently, it was the whole tax release issue. Now it’s this. Seriously, the Romney camp has GOT to get better at this kind of thing. Aside from that, if Romney thinks for one minute that We The People will “respect the fact” that both he and Obama can “find common ground” on this issue…He’s just a tad ‘touched’.

And as for Romney’s most recent tactic of trying make Newt look like the ‘unethical elephant in the room’…Well, Mitt’s people should take at look at these numbers, just out from Rasmussen:
(snip)

68% of Republicans Think Gingrich As Ethical as Other Politicians
Wednesday, January 25, 2012

The charges have been flying fast and furious about Newt Gingrich’s marital and professional behavior and Mitt Romney’s business practices, but when it comes to ethics, voters always grade politicians on a curve.

Sixty-eight percent (68%)of Likely Republican Primary Voters nationwide believe Gingrich is at least as ethical as most politicians. Only 24% believe he is less ethical than his peers.

Granted, if you click the link to read the entire piece at Rasmussen, you’ll note that the percentage of people who believe Romney to be “as ethical as other politicians” is higher than Newt’s. Still, 68% wins an election. Mitt should remember that.

It’s not that the electorate are fully ignoring Newt’s negatives (or anyone else’s for that matter, because, let’s face it, ALL of the candidates have issues)…It’s that we’ve heard it all before, and when one compares/contrasts what they like about Newt, vs what they may be concerned with…The ‘likes’ win, every time.

As this blog has noted…Newt attracts voters because he’s VALIDATING what We The People have been thinking, feeling and saying for the past 3 years. We’ve been told, time and time again, by the GOP leadership, elitists, and establishment, that we shouldn’t do this, shouldn’t say that, shouldn’t think this way, shouldn’t act that way…And frankly, we are tired of it!! Newt knows this, and he knows how to articulate and validate those feelings. He also knows how to properly articulate and communicate conservatism, and why it is better for this country than what we have now, and what we could potentially see in an Obama 2nd-term.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Name

Email

Website

Tags: Newt, Obamacare, Romney

Tonight, Obama will give the annual “State Of The Union” speech.
Pardon me while I yawn

Seriously — does ANYONE think that a President who can’t get off his ass and produce a sound budget in 1000 days time will be worth listening to in yet another partisan SOTU speech? If you do, that “hope and change” has gone to your head. No no…This will be the ‘same shit, different day’. So, for those playing along, remember to drink a shot each time you hear “let me be clear” (PS – that phrase also works for Newt in any given debate), or each time you see the President point his finger, or adapt a vocal ‘swaggar’ usually reserved for the likes of rev. wright or perhaps jesse jackson.

In the meantime, I just came across this piece over at Ace’s place. If you’ve been eager to hear a bit of clarity on the top two candidates, feel free to read the whole thing. I will provide a snip below:

May 2011: Newt Gingrich Says He Supports The Individual Mandate
He supports a “variation” of it, but it’s not really even a variation: His idea is that you’re required to pay for health insurance, or post a big bond (your money, but you can’t touch it, as it’s held as a bond) to cover any potential health care costs you might encounter.

Presumably, if you refused to do that, you’d be fined… which is just the individual mandate. The only “variation” here is that Gingrich would allow very wealth self-insurers to post a bond in lieu of buying insurance.

Fine. Whatever.

Just don’t tell me that Romney would merely “manage the decay” of the big government social welfare state while Gingrich would “fundamentally” shake it up.

As I’ve said before, the dominant strain of thinking in the past couple of decades was neoconservatism, which was proposing alternate solutions (preferably without as much government involvement) to the liberal checklist of problems that needed to be addressed.

Gingrich was and still is a big neocon. So was and is Romney.

Again, feel free to read the entire article at Ace’s place, via the provided link.

Lest anyone forget that this blog is more about individual Liberty (and Freedom) and less about playing political “favorites”, I wanted to post the info from Ace’s article as a reminder: This blog is here to promote and advance the cause of individual Liberty (and Freedom), emanating and being promoted from all levels of government. If that means we have to take ‘baby-steps’ in order to reverse the path of socialism and big-government upon which members of BOTH parties have placed this country, so be it. If that means we have to take the political fight to Obama, his political and social surrogates, and all who would dare suggest we allow him to finish the job of “socialism’s messiah”, so be it.

If that means we have to accept a candidate for the GOP nomination who’s considered “weak” in one area, but strong in most other areas…So be it!!

I’ve said this many times before, and I’ll say it again: NONE…repeat NONE of the candidates for GOP nomination are perfect. Not a one of ‘em! Pretending otherwise is foolish. However — the candidate who can best articulate the definitions of conservatism, and why it’s a better choice for this country over the socialist policies of Obama and his administration,…THAT candidate will get this blog talking in their favor. The candidate who can best articulate and validate the deep concern, angst and feelings of betrayal felt by We The People,…THAT candidate will get this blog talking in their favor.

Any one of them is better than what we have now. The sooner the electorate realizes that, and starts demanding that all the candidates start taking the political fight to Obama and his policies, instead of each other…The better.

Then again,…Sometimes, the guessing-game of the primary season may actually be helping the GOP, if one really thinks about it. Either way, remember…Whomever becomes the nominee will need our support in order to beat Obama. There’s no getting around that.

Boy, these elitists and anti-Newt pundits are loaded for bear, aren’t they? You know, Rush mentioned something today that I think, on the face, is technically on-point:
(snip)

Newt is a Vessel: He Won South Carolina Because He Articulated Conservatism
January 23, 2012

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Let me just tell you something, again, going against the conventional wisdom. Everybody is out there thinking the reason Newt triumphed is because of his media smackdown. That’s not it. Everybody wants to credit Juan Williams and John King and the media for throwing softballs inadvertently setting Newt up for these answers. It’s important, there’s no question about it. It was great, but it’s not about that. It’s not even about Newt’s great debate skills. You notice now the establishment is not saying, “That isn’t gonna matter.” They’re trying to say that everything that’s got Newt where he’s got is not important. In fact, it’s going to hurt us in the general.

Let me tell you why Newt Gingrich won South Carolina. Let me tell you why he’s coming on. It is ’cause he is able to articulate conservatism, nothing more. John King, Juan Williams, could have asked any other Republican the same questions they asked
and they would have shriveled away in abject fear and defensiveness. If any of the Republican candidates had the same life story as Newt, or had said the same things about food stamp president and all that, Juan Williams’ question to Romney wouldn’ta helped Romney. John King setting up Romney, if Romney had three ex-wives and one of them was saying he wanted an open marriage, would not have mattered. It wasn’t those questions. It was that they asked somebody who can articulate conservatism.

To those of you in the Republican base, this isn’t complicated. Newt is winning. He is on a momentum roll here because he can articulate conservatism, that and he’s willing to take it to Obama.

Like him or hate him…Rush is right on this. The electorate have been BEGGING for someone to articulate conservatism and take the fight to the elitists and Obama. In Newt, we have that, and it’s driving the media, the elitists and loud-mouthed bitter pundits like Coulter and Beck to pull their hair out. Check out this piece by LauraW over at Ace Of Spades blog for more on Coulter, and read this snippy little protestation from Glenn Beck for a taste of his ‘tude on the issue.

If they were smart, they would check out the exit polling numbers (linked in this article from Erick Erickson over this past weekend at RedState blog). The writing on the wall is as plain as day. Mitt is not “it”…Not right now…Not yet…Not by a long shot…Maybe not ever. But ultimately, shouldn’t that be up to We The People…Making up our OWN MINDS…Not going along to “get along” one more time??!! If Beck and Coulter (and the rest of the pundits and elitists) want to blame someone for the sudden veer towards Newt, they might as well look in the mirror, because THEY are now doing what the media and their like-minded elitists did 4 years ago…Telling We The People who to vote for, “for our own good”.

In the end, it would serve each of them well to read this article from C. Edmund Wright at American Thinker:
(snips)

January 22, 2012
Psst: Hear the Roar and Pay Attention
By C. Edmund Wright

After Thursday’s debate was over in Charleston, I assumed that Newt had not only survived the Marianne episode, but had benefitted from it. I also figured he would win S.C. and that Santorum would fade as a challenger to him. Everyone I knew who saw the debate reached this same conclusion.

Yet as incredible as it may seem, all day Friday we were treated to multiple reviews from members of the conservative media on how Rick Santorum “won” the Thursday night debate in Charleston and that how this would help him in South Carolina. Dick Morris flatly proclaimed that Santorum did so well he might sweep in and take second from Newt Gingrich. Morris also predicted this would mean a S.C. win and nomination for Mitt Romney.

Terrence Jeffrey also proudly proclaimed a big Santorum win in the debate. On the Rush Limbaugh Show, the host refused to give his analysis, but mentioned multiple times that his personal email caucus was swept by the Pennsylvania Senator. Charles Krauthammer, meanwhile, admitted that Newt won it “in the first three minutes” but that Santorum had a very strong night after that.

And I’m thinking: what debate did these folks watch? Do they not pay attention to the crowd reaction? Do they not know what it indicates? Admittedly, Santorum got off some attacks that might have seemed like good hits, but they fell flat in the hall. Newt dominated crowd reaction, Mitt was a pretty clear second in that regard and of course Ron Paul’s crowd was the few, the proud, the loud.

(…)

Which brings us back to the crowd roar in South Carolina. In Myrtle Beach and Charleston combined, there were probably 3-4 thousand folks total in attendance. Now while that is not significant in and of itself — consider that every day we look at polls with far fewer folks and consider them gospel truth on everything from elections to mouthwash. In other words, my assumption was that those few thousand folks are indeed a darned good cross section of Republican voters across South Carolina and in fact the country. It wasn’t the few thousand who rose to give Newt his standing ovations per se, it’s that there were probably hundreds of thousands cheering at their television sets across the nation as well. That something like 60% of all likely voters in South Carolina did watch those debates was merely confirmation of just how important the crowd reaction should be assumed.

Yet the elites ignored the roar. After all, the roar came from the unwashed. It came from the fans of cockfights. It came from tea party folks and other such rabble. Inside the sterile cable studios and on their laptops, the pundits scored their debate and their election prospects without the roar. They have their little formulas about who has to raise doubts here and who has to score points there.

What they don’t understand is what the roar means.

The roar is passion. The roar is intensity. The roar is pent up frustration. The roar, put another way, is the national mood of conservatives. It is a roar that will demand a fighter. It will demand that those who want our votes must not cower in the face of the liberal template. If fact, it is a roar that demands that we do not accept any liberal templates.

That’s why Newt has gotten all the roars, and why he has vaulted into serious contention only days after being written off. Anyone else who wants the roar should heed the lesson. The roar comes only at the expense of liberals and liberalism. You won’t get the roar attacking others on the stage. Tell your consultants to take a hike if they tell you otherwise.

That roar was an easy predictor of what would happen Saturday night in South Carolina. I knew it and everyone I know knew it late Thursday night. And it was. Seems like no one inside the beltway got it. Until Saturday evening.

(Read the whole thing at the American Thinker link above)

I have a warning for those aforementioned elitists and pundits, and anyone else who would dare to chide any member of the electorate for voting as their conscience dictates:

Either you pay attention to the ‘roar’ — or be swallowed up by what’s behind it.
Choose wisely.

I interrupt the weekend to bring you a few thoughts on the results of the 2012 South Carolina primary.

First off, I encourage everyone to read this article by Erick Erickson over at RedState.
It is a primer, if you will, for anyone who’s scratching their head, wondering how Newt Gingrich won today’s primary. Here’s a sample snip from the article:

Newt Gingrich Wins. What It Means.
Mitt and Newt will both have trouble beating Barack Obama. Mitt’s trouble will come from Obama. Newt’s trouble from himself. But right now, the base doesn’t care.

Posted by Erick Erickson (Diary)
Saturday, January 21st at 7:07PM EST

We’re now confronted with a designated front runner, Mitt Romney, who got less votes in Iowa in 2012 than he got in 2008 and who lost South Carolina. His reason for being somehow remains that he is “electable.”

If you read a lot of the Republican commentary coming out of Washington even before the polls closed, suddenly South Carolina is irrelevant and the hick rubes of the Palmetto state are just petulant children.

Actually, like with Iowa, it is a rather desperate scream to get another player on the field. It is a red flag. It is the giant “Danger” sign ahead for the general election.

Newt Gingrich’s rise has a lot to do with Newt Gingrich’s debate performance. But it has just as much to do with a party base in revolt against its thought and party leaders in Washington, DC. The base is revolting because they swept the GOP back into relevance in Washington just under two years ago and they have been thanked with contempt ever since.

Adding insult to injury, the party and thought leaders now try to foist on the base a milquetoast moderate from Massachusetts. Newt Gingrich can thank Mitt Romney and more for the second look he is getting. Base hostility will now be exacerbated by Mitt Romney’s backers now undoubtedly making a conscious effort to prop up Rick Santorum to shut down Newt Gingrich.

I think Erick is on-point with his sentiments here, but, I’d like to expand on this theme with my own thoughts for a moment…

On Ron Paul: His base is partially conservative, but MOSTLY liberal. Paul is attracting (from Obama) the extreme left of the democrat voting base. These would be the same people that hate all wars and never believe America should so much as fire a shot to defend itself. They follow Paul and vote for him FOR THIS ONE REASON ALONE. How long they will hang on remains a mystery. But, Ron Paul is using them, just as Obama used them. How? Well, let’s look at the other non-foreign policy portions of Paul’s campaign strategy….For all intents and purposes, those other stances ARE conservative/libertarian. Paul is banking on those liberal voters to help get him enough candidates to be a “contender”, when it comes to dictating what the upcoming conservative platform should be. Injecting his stances and ideas (along with the number of backers to support them), is what Paul wants. He knows he doesn’t have a chance of winning the nomination the usual way.

On Rick Santorum: Rick maintains that in order to cure ALL of this country’s ills, we need only allow government to mandate/orchestrate/officiate/promote an “official”, government-approved, social policy. Essentially, he believes that if government cures our social ills, it will magically cure ALL of our ills. Trouble is…That policy has been tried before, time and time again. Prohibition, (being one of the most famous attempts) didn’t work, and for good reason. It’s the same type of intrusive behavior by a governmental body, just as Michelle Obama’s “food police” initiative has crept into our private lives. In order for Rick to maintain his “I’m the true conservative” mantra, he must be able to convince the electorate that social policy can fix everything else.

On Mitt Romney: The more he’s peppered with the tough, factual, valid questions about his political experiences and his policy stances, the more he seems to ‘wither on the vine’. If he can’t take the ‘heat’ from the leftist media right now, how’s he going to handle it if he’s the nominee & he’s the only one getting these questions, with Obama & the press double-teaming him with the speed of a jack-rabbit on a date?!

On tonight’s winner, Newt Gingrich: At one point this evening, early on in his victory speech, Newt said (this may not be an exact quote): “It’s not that I’m a good debator, it’s just that I am articulating the values and beliefs of Americans in an effective way”. He’s spot-on with that analysis, in my opinion. He’s not only doing that, he’s articulating CONSERVATISM effectively, contrasting it in a perfect way against what we currently have coming out of the obama regime…Pure alinsky policy, nothing more. Newt is doing a great job taking the fight to obama, and pointing out (using exacting language) what obama’s policies have done to this country…And for conservatives, that is ‘music to their ears’. They are FINALLY seeing and hearing someone perfectly articulating what they’ve been feeling and thinking for the past 3 years!

One final note: To those conservatives who say that those of us who don’t support Santorum must not be “conservative enough” or “Christian enough”…
To those conservatives and moderates who say that those of us who don’t support Romney are just angry and want to ‘take it out’ on obama….

I have news for you people: WE…DON’T…CARE what you think!!!!!!!!
YOU are the same people that convinced us 4 years ago that McCain was the “sensible choice”. “Go along” you said. “He’s electable” you said. “He’s level-headed” you said. His “language” is more “acceptable”, you said. Well – look around you…What do you see?
Is THIS “sensible”??? Is THIS “level-headed”??? Is this “acceptable”???

If your answer is anything but “no”…You’re fooling yourselves!! And you’re also dooming this country! We’ve spent the past 3 years BEGGING for the GOP leadership to fight for We The People. We’ve spent the past 3 years hoping and praying the GOP leadership would find their spine somewhere between the marinara, penne and angel-hair, and walk-the-walk when it comes to articulating effective political conservatism, and putting it into action. So, for those who now want to “calm” Newt, and get him to start using “sensible” language, I have a question….Which do you want?! More of the same elitist GOP-brand “sensibility”, telling us who to vote for, and what ‘tone’ our language should be? Or do you want someone who has (in the past), and will (in the future) fight for We The People, and articulate effective political-conservatism, and (once again) put it into action?!

Make your choice now. Lead, follow, or get out of the way, but know this: We The People are NOT giving up! No matter how this primary/caucus season shakes out…No matter who wins the election in November. We will NOT rest,…We will NOT retreat, when it comes to articulating and advancing political conservatism and individual Freedom and Liberty, at all levels of government.