GMB: “If you consider yourself a conservative, they hate your effn guts and would line you up against a wall and shoot you, if the could.
Now act accordingly…”
Is that a garden variety persecution complex or pathological paranoia? I’m pretty socially conservative compared to most of my liberal friends, but they sure as heck don’t hate me like that. At least if they do I’m blissfully unaware of it.
I remember how many times Mark accused me of hating, simply based on my political opinions. Still trying to figure out what it is about you guys that is so centered on hatred. You know, most liberals don’t even like guns, and not that many of us own them. You conservatives are the ones far more likely to invoke the idea of shooting someone. Maybe you’re just projecting?
Green Mountain BoyJanuary 4, 2012 / 6:59 am
Dennis do you really want a list of all the people that have been murdered by left wing governments? That liat dwarfs any that you could assemble from any government other than leftist.
Projecting.HAH! Maybe we will ask Che if he projection when he was purifying cuba or mao about thee cultural revolution.
Mass executions. It’s a leftist thing don’t ya know. Mao, Pol, Josef. they approved of them.
And Yes Dennis , I suspect if barky gave you the order, you would pull the trigger. Not drama not hatred, just a truthful opinion.
Jack in ChicagoJanuary 4, 2012 / 8:54 am
Just another justification for hate, hate speech and violence. “They want to kill US, so it’s okay for us to want to kill THEM.” That is, sadly, how buildings end up getting blown up by crazy people. All it takes is one of them to believe that nonsense and…that’s the whole ball of wax.
Sad.
neocon1January 4, 2012 / 9:53 am
mehoff in chi town
.” That is, sadly, how buildings end up getting blown up by crazy people.
actually if by islamic cut throats you may be correct.
However I believe you were referring to the war Vet and (some believe) patriot Tim Mc Veigh.
Tims actions were DIRECT retaliation for an out of control left wing regime led by a serial adulterer, rapist, abuser and a dyke lesbian who on two different occasions used tanks, snipers, helicopters to out right murder eighty some women, children, and a few men.
“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” –
— Thomas Jefferson
ClusterJanuary 4, 2012 / 9:25 am
Jack,
Do you actually have any coherent political thoughts rattling around that empty head of yours, or is it all just regurgitated verbal diarrhea?
Incidentally, you never have told us how you set aside your principles to support Obama – care to share?
neocon1January 4, 2012 / 9:45 am
dennistooge and mehoff from chi town
look up murders by
1. communism
2. nazism
3. the KKK
4. fascism
ALL left wing, All murders.
then check out the MURDER rate in the US inner citys all donk leftists.
PS
you read WAY more into GMB advice than I did.
“appropriate action” could mean move to the country and have a food garden, only in the fever swamp of a so called leftist “mind” was it more.
Jack in ChicagoJanuary 4, 2012 / 9:54 am
I haven’t “set aside my principles” on Obama any more than sincere conservatives set aside theirs to support Dubya. I don’t agree with everything he’s done, certainly, but I support a clear majority of his agenda items and absolutely do not want to return to the Bush era of unfunded wars, unfunded entitlements (Medicare prescription), continually ballooning deficits, bailouts (TARP), and increasing unemployment.
I know you guys live in a little bubble of your own making here at B4B, but out here in the real world, it is generally acknowledged that Barack turned around a faltering economy handed him by Bush, that job losses eventually ceased and then jobs started increasing under his tenure, the economy actually showed growth over the past four years and he is still, despite every effort by the GOP, a very popular guy.
Can he beat Mitt Romney in a head-to-head in November? I dunno. Romney is exactly the kind of centrist, appeal-to-all-voters-because-I-have-no-core-principles candidate that can draw the undecideds. Because, of course, in order for a GOP candidate to win the general election, you have to appeal to two groups of voters: the crazy base and the middle of the road waverers. Romney knows the crazy base will vote for him over Obama despite their general loathing of him simply because they loathe Obama just a little bit more. And he can project himself as a moderate and appeal to the independents due to his liberal voting record in the past. So Romney is really your best choice. You know it. You just don’t like him because he is NOT a conservative. I feel your pain.
Santorum? Obama beats him all day long. Because Santorum only appeals to ONE set of voters: the crazy base. Get it?
But last night’s results (for Democrats) is absolutely wonderful. Because the two sets of voters (crazy base and moderate) are absolutely and (potentially) irrevocably split. The crazy base WANTS their pure conservative candidate. They need him like heroine. And the moderates are scared to death of far right-wing kooks like Santorum and Bachmann because they know, at the end of the day, that these people are unelectable.
So when one of them wins a caucus (or comes close)? Suits me just fine.
neocon1January 4, 2012 / 10:09 am
mehoff in chi town
I haven’t “set aside my principles”
of course you havent.you have none.
you love the POS, marxist, muslim, usurper, many loved hitler, stalin, mao also.
remember wright, loiue, ayers, GOD DAMN America
this is YOUR doper, back seat smoker, barry
neocon1January 4, 2012 / 10:14 am
mehoff in chi town
The crazy base
interpretation = CHRISTIANS
the long knives are out, the rhetoric has already begun, the template is set.
neocon1January 4, 2012 / 10:27 am
This is Rick Santorum’s Rousing Speech After His Surge in Iowa: ‘Game On’
“I’ve survived the challenges...by the daily grace that comes from God.”
yeah real CRAZY maaaan!!
RetiredSpookJanuary 4, 2012 / 11:06 am
but I support a clear majority of his agenda items and absolutely do not want to return to the Bush era of unfunded wars, unfunded entitlements (Medicare prescription), continually ballooning deficits, bailouts (TARP), and increasing unemployment.
ROTFLMAO!! Unfunded wars — still there. Unfunded entitlements — still there. Continuing ballooning deficits — maybe not ballooning; just stuck at over a $trillion/year. Bailouts — no just political graft to supporters who own companies like Solyndra. Increasing unemployment — over 2 million fewer people employed since Obama took office. And stuff that you didn’t mention: Gitmo — still there. Renditions — still there. Patriot Act — not only still there, but enhanced. Ordering assassinations of American citizens — not still there, brand new under Obama. Detainee provisions of the recently signed Defense Appropriations bill to include indefinite detention of American citizens — also brand new.
Stuck on stupid, Jack; stuck on stupid!
it is generally acknowledged that Barack turned around a faltering economy handed him by Bush,
On what planet? In 2011 the new housing market had its worst year in half a century. Much of the economic growth, especially during Obama’s first couple years, was nothing more than government spending and growth. And interesting that you should say “handed to him by Bush”. In the past (at least in my lifetime) it’s been Democrats who handed off a faltering economy to Republicans (Carter to Reagan, Clinton to Bush). How does it feel to be on the other end for a change and realize that you’re guy simply isn’t up to the task?
So Romney is really your best choice. You know it. You just don’t like him because he is NOT a conservative. I feel your pain.
The GOP primary process is nothing more than trying to nominate the most conservative candidate that the majority of Republicans think can win. Our local Tea Party group met last night, and most of the talk was about Iowa and the choices. Virtually everyone I talked to said the same thing. “Although he’s not my first choice, I’ll have much less of a problem voting for Romney if he’s the candidate than I did for McCain in 2008.”
ClusterJanuary 4, 2012 / 11:27 am
You said that better than I, Spook and wont it be fun to see how Jack responds?
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 11:28 am
“crazy base” def: Citizens who believe the best political system for governing the United States of America is the one laid out in and codified by the Constitution of the United States of America, in which the size and scope of the federal government is severely and specifically limited to its enumerated duties, and by which the bulk of power and authority is vested in state and local governments.
Crrrrazzzyy!!!!!!!!!!
Jack in ChicagoJanuary 4, 2012 / 11:44 am
The GOP primary process is nothing more than trying to nominate the most conservative candidate that the majority of Republicans think can win. Our local Tea Party group met last night, and most of the talk was about Iowa and the choices. Virtually everyone I talked to said the same thing. “Although he’s not my first choice, I’ll have much less of a problem voting for Romney if he’s the candidate than I did for McCain in 2008.”
That’s what I’ve been saying. Sheesh, you guys don’t really listen, do you?
You are faced with a clear choice: Abandon your conservative principles and support Romney (who is the likely nominee) OR nominate a truly conservative candidate like Santorum or Gingrich and hand the election to Obama.
Romney COULD win. The other candidates CANNOT. Think I’m wrong? PLEASE nominate one of them. I’m begging you to.
ClusterJanuary 4, 2012 / 11:49 am
You are faced with a clear choice: Abandon your conservative principles and support Romney – Jack in Chicago
Jack, didn’t you just say that you don’t support all of Obama’s agenda, when it was pointed out to you all of the items that Obama has done that contradicts the liberal agenda? But that is evidently not a compromise in your small mind?
We have already told you that there are some issues with Romney, but his agenda is still vastly superior to Obama’s and will gain the majority of conservative support.
What grade are you in?
Jack in ChicagoJanuary 4, 2012 / 11:52 am
Oh, I’m sorry. I thought you guys learned from the John McCain debacle last time around and were going to actually nominate a conservative this time. Silly me. I didn’t know you were going to once again tack to the center and nominate another left-of-center candidate. If that’s the plan, I applaud your political savvy. Because dumping the truly conservative candidates in favor of the most electable guy IS the only way to win. I just thought your far-right-wing base would be a little upset about that.
My mistake. Carry on.
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 1:07 pm
Let’s see if I’ve got this right.
According to “Jack” (who has yet to stake out a political position more mature than simple sneering ) it would be “ABANDONING” conservative principles to vote for someone to replace Obama, just because we would be voting for someone with less than 1000% absolutely impeccable by all possible standards conservative beliefs and actions, totally pure in his political ideology, with a perfect record of perfect positions on perfect conservative points, but who is still so dramatically to the Right of Obama that by comparison he is Super-Conservative.
According to “Jack” (who ducks and dodges every question about politics in favor of mindless attacks) it would be less of an ABANDONMENT of conservative principles to either vote for Obama or refuse to vote at all and in so doing contribute to the extension of the Radical Left’s dismemberment of the Constitution.
Many thanks, “Jack”, for the illustration of the utter chaos of the Pseudo-Liberal mind and its total lack of comprehension of anything more substantial than infantile sniping.
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 1:11 pm
Time to cut “Jack” loose, based on the adage that it is always a mistake to argue with a pig—you not only can’t do it without getting as dirty as the pig, but the pig LIKES it.
“Jack” has told us all he ever will—he is a blog vandal, here not to discuss politics but to wallow in his bigotry and pretend that mindless sneering is the same thing as political commentary.
(He aspires to be a speed bump but lacks the intellect, and instead of providing an impediment to political discourse has, although inadvertently, provided great insight into what passes for a Liberal these days.)
Jack in ChicagoJanuary 4, 2012 / 1:23 pm
First, the adage is “wrestle” with a pig. Not argue with one. Only an idiot would do the first. Only a winger would do the second.
I’m only pointing out the obvious: You have a dangerously divided electorate. On the one hand, you have ideologues who will not, I’m afraid, back a moderate like Romney. Vote for a man who was once pro-choice? Doesn’t that make him, in your parlance, an accessory to murder? Oh, but he’s changed his mind since then. Right. I forgot.
The other part of your electorate are more pragmatic. Ideals be damned: the goal is to oust Obama. If Mitt is the only guy who can do it (and he is), then we don’t need a true-blue conservative. We just need a Ken doll. Well, there he is. Send him a check, why dontcha?
The sniping and nastiness during this GOP primary (which will only get worse in the coming month or so) is all the entertainment we lefties need.
Please, continue.
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 2:28 pm
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
SOSO, GIGO
Count d'HaricotsJanuary 4, 2012 / 2:30 pm
First, I would hope and pray that everyone that supports abortion would grow and join us; I applaud Romney for that.
Second, I, as a fiscal conservative have supported Romney since the 2008 campaign; check the record.
Third, one guarantee I can make is that when the primaries are over all of the candidates that officially ran as Republicans will be around in four years and none will be indicted, convicted or on trial. Can the gaggle of leftist crooks, criminals and village idiots from the democratic campaign of 2008 say the same thing?
Finally, Romney is a conservative.
Count d'HaricotsJanuary 4, 2012 / 2:40 pm
Jack; “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity. Alinsky”
This is why “Jack” sticks to that meme that Romney isn’t conservative. Very transparent.
Romney isn’t as socially conservative as I am, or GMB or neo. But he is a Conservative, and in my opinion th3e most conservative candidate that can win and govern.
Don’t worry amy santorum already has enough nicknames- google santorum. Santorum has no shot at all. As someone from PA santorum came off as a jackass and PA was ready to get rid of him as fast as we could. He is way to conservative, makes stupid statements about homosexuality, makes stupid comments about public schools and many other things santorum stands for people cannot stand. He lost his senate seat by 17%. Most of the jewish population in PA hated him or anyone who was not that religious. He is unelectable for so many reasons
neocon1January 4, 2012 / 10:40 am
goldyFLAKE
The Christophobia and homosexual worshippers are coming out of the wood work.
The muslin, homosexual Ochimpy’s army has it’s marching orders.
This will get as ugly as it gets and we will see the evil that plagues almost half of our nation.
The HOUNDS of HELL have been loosed.
neocon1January 4, 2012 / 10:44 am
goldflake
He is way to conservative, makes stupid statements about homosexuality, makes stupid comments about public schools.
WoW
Wayyyyyy to conservative = CHRISTIAN values.
makes stupid statements about the pathology of homosexuality? = it is wrong and a sin.
makes stupid statements about public schools = they are failing under marxist idelogues / unions.
thanks for the wake up call flake.
neocon1January 4, 2012 / 10:48 am
goldBLUM
Most of the jewish population in PA hated him
he is a CHRISTIAN, and not a communist, not an isolated or new phenomenon.
ClusterJanuary 4, 2012 / 10:48 am
but I support a clear majority of his agenda items and absolutely do not want to return to the Bush era of unfunded wars, unfunded entitlements (Medicare prescription), continually ballooning deficits, bailouts (TARP), and increasing unemployment. – Jack in Chicago
And then he says….
I know you guys live in a little bubble of your own making here at B4B, – Jack in Chicago
Let’s discuss the bubble Jack occupies – everything he mentioned in the first paragraph that Jack says he opposes is being accelerated under Obama. Obama surged Afghanistan which was on borrowed money, and he opened a new front in Libya, which was again paid for with borrowed money. Obama has put forth Obamacare which is questionably constitutional, and is yet to be paid for. Obama has EXPLODED the deficits far more than Bush could ever dream of, and Obama’s policies has resulted in unemployment levels never seen under the Bush administration. Proving once again, that liberals simply don’t think too deeply. Thanks Jack, I couldn’t have done that without you
Jack in ChicagoJanuary 4, 2012 / 11:20 am
Ah, the old “Obama is just like Bush” argument, eh? Look, you guys are going to have to make a choice: either he’s a librul or he isn’t. At the same time that you decry Obama as being a ‘lefty, socialist, blah, blah, blah’ you also ask guys like me on the left how we can support him because so many of his policies seem tailored to the RIGHT. Pick a side, boys.
As for the rest:
“Obama surged Afghanistan which was on borrowed money” and ended the war in Iraq. And will, we hope, end the Afghan war, too. But the question was: where did the money come from when Bush started these wars? Ah, yes: they were on the credit card. Thanks, George.
“[Obama]opened a new front in Libya, which was again paid for with borrowed money…”. No ground troops, no invasion, no casualties and a clear victory. Yeah, that’s no way to run a war, is it?
“Obama has put forth Obamacare which is questionably constitutional, and is yet to be paid for.” The new healthcare law has not yet added a dime to the deficit. If it has, please demonstrate how. I’m not talking about Medicare or Medicaid. I mean the so-called ‘Obamacare.’
“Obama has EXPLODED the deficits far more than Bush could ever dream of, and Obama’s policies has resulted in unemployment levels never seen under the Bush administration.” Silly boy. Jobs were disappearing at an alarming rate toward the end of the Bush presidency and continued under Barack’s first year. Since then, job loss has disappeared and we have been adding jobs ever since. Don’t believe me? If you would, please Google “bikini graph” and have a gander for yourself.
You want to know what Barack will be running on? There’s your answer.
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 11:24 am
“Job loss has disappeared”
JOB LOSS HAS DISAPPEARED
JOB LOSS HAS DISAPPEARED
It just gets funnier and funnier
Jack in ChicagoJanuary 4, 2012 / 11:39 am
Keep laughing, A-zone. Because Barack has added jobs each of the past two years. Think he hasn’t? Prove it!
(P.S.- You can’t!)
ClusterJanuary 4, 2012 / 11:40 am
That is a rather large bubble you occupy Jack. You mentioned “unpaid: wars, I pointed out two examples and you change the subject. Obamacare is law and the unpaid for mandates are right around the corner, but you just keep ignoring that, it will do you well. And Bush’s last deficit was a couple of hundred billion less TARP I which was paid back. Obama’s deficits are $1.5 trillion for as far as the eye can see.
Liberals like you will result in a conservative take over so thank you for that
ClusterJanuary 4, 2012 / 11:45 am
Obama has added jobs alright, far less than projected and if you don’t mind working at McDonald’s well then all is well. I have a feeling jack runs the fry machine.
Thankfully Obama put the keystone pipeline and lots of well paying jobs, including union jobs, on hold. That was good decision.
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 12:08 pm
Some jobs have been added to the new level of employment set in Barry’s term. But that level is the basement, most of the “new” jobs are in government which means they are paid for by our taxes, and the “new” jobs still haven’t made up for the real jobs lost.
“Jack” seems to be using the delusional math used by compulsive gamblers—Lose $1,000 and then win back a total of $500 and walk away claiming to have “won” $500, ignoring the fact that you still have less than you did when you started.
RetiredSpookJanuary 4, 2012 / 12:08 pm
Keep laughing, A-zone. Because Barack has added jobs each of the past two years. Think he hasn’t? Prove it!
(P.S.- You can’t!)
Jack, Jack, Jack — never ask a question that you don’t know the answer to. The percentage of Americans who are working is at a 30-year low. The percentage of Americans working has dropped about 2.6% since Obama took office. Maybe you can use the same math that Liberals typically use for spending cuts (cuts in spending growth, not actual cuts) to show that somehow that is an increase in jobs. Your turn, sport.
BTW, are you ol’ pink tights Cyber Actor as someone asserted a while back?
dougJanuary 4, 2012 / 12:09 pm
Jack, the population increase has added jobs, under Obama the percentage of Americans who are working has dropped to a three decade low level. Obama has managed to add jobs in the public sector by losing jobs in the private sector. I don’t really consider that adding jobs, more like a government confiscation of jobs.
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 12:58 pm
“I don’t really consider that adding jobs, more like a government confiscation of jobs.”
look at the percentage of people who went to public schools versus private schools. Most people cannot afford public schools. THe public schools in the city are failing but to say all public schools are failing is not accurate. I went to a very good quaker school and a public school and the education was equal because i went to a very good school district. His views on public schools were distorted and wrong.
yes most of his beliefs i cannot support are hard core christian beliefs are that too dogmatic for me. Thinking contraceptives should be illegal, thinking homosexuality is the same as bestiality is ridiculous, making working mothers feel guilty for working is wrong, this guy is an extremist and has no chance of winning in the national election
most people can’t afford private schools- jeez to much coding last night. Sorry about that
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 11:20 am
“…this guy is an extremist..”
“Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. … Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.”
So don’t “support” his religious beliefs. What about his political beliefs? Do you support a belief in the Constitutional, small-federal-government political model, or the top-down-massive-government-control model? Because that is what we are going to be voting on.
Jack in ChicagoJanuary 4, 2012 / 11:39 am
Who are you quoting there? Ah, yes- another staunch conservative who lost. Well done.
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 12:02 pm
And “Jack” sticks with the PL playbook and attacks the person and not the idea.
So what about the IDEA do you find offensive, Jack?
Jack in ChicagoJanuary 4, 2012 / 12:14 pm
That you will NOT, in fact, be nominating the actual conservative. You guys say one thing and do another. It’s McCain all over again. You stamp and cheer for a real, actual conservative candidate but, in the end, you nominate the moderate, “most electable” candidate.
Look, I’m happy about Santorum’s victory. Know why? Because today, a bunch of conservative yahoos opened up their checkbooks and wrote “Rick Santorum” on the payee line. They are throwing their money away and every dime they give Rick is a dime that Mitt won’t have in the fall. Works for me.
Know what I really can’t wait for? The Newt/Mitt rumpus in New Hampshire. Ooooh, that’s gonna be UGLY.
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 12:46 pm
And yet again “Jack” squirms away from talking about ideas and sticks to the superficial, to Identity Politics where he can do all that he CAN do and snipe at people.
One more time, Jack—with what in Goldwater’s quote do you disagree?
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 12:49 pm
But “Jack” does titter and giggle about watching something he looks forward to being “ugly”—pretty much tells you all you need to know about Jack, doesn’t it?
A carrion eater eager to wallow in anything he finds “ugly”.
If it gets ugly enough, he might even have a thrill running up his leg.
And we already know the substance of the encounter he so gleefully anticipates will fly right over his head, being about politics and all.
Jack in ChicagoJanuary 4, 2012 / 1:27 pm
You bet I do. Remember when Hillary and Barack were hammering away at each other four years ago and you folks enjoyed it so much?
Our turn.
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 11:22 am
Did anyone ever say ALL public schools are failing?
“…to say all public schools are failing is not accurate…” but neither is a claim that anyone has said they are.
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 11:15 am
There will be people who can’t get past personal animosity to examine the political message of Santorum. No surprise there—-too many people are hung up on identity, and events to understand or even care about politics.
Santorum’s religiously based opinions should be of far less interest than Obama’s, which have been studiously ignored since he was put up as a candidate. Santorum’s are that homosexuality is a sin and so is contraception. Obama’s, at least as far as we can tell by the preachings and writings of his long-term pastor, friend, confidante and adviser, is that Jesus was a black man tortured and killed by white Europeans and that, therefore, whites are evil and God is black.
Personally, I find a belief system based on submission to God’s will less dangerous than one based on racial divisiveness and hatred.
Unless the RRL and PL contingent are going to argue that Obam’s religious beliefs have had a role in his presidency, it seems to me that they have to agree that personal beliefs of a religious nature don’t really matter all that much, and that political ideology is what we should care about.
BTW, Jake, one policy conservatives favor is a voucher system for education, so parents can decide where their tax money will be spent to educate their children. This would give equal access to private schools to people who can not now afford them, as well as force public schools to become more competitive.
Jack in ChicagoJanuary 4, 2012 / 11:37 am
Amazona: Let me be absolutely clear- if you honestly believe that Rick Santorum can appeal to a broad majority of Americans and be elected President of the United States this year, please, PLEASE nominate him.
You want a conservative candidate? Rick is your guy.
You want a Christian candidate? Rick is your guy.
You want an anti-gay, anti-birth control, (well, basically anti-most things)? Rick is your guy.
What you don’t seem to get is: We WANT you to nominate the most conservative guy (or gal) that you’ve got. Because Obama can beat them. It’s the centrist that could actually hurt him.
But see….you HATE that guy, too.
ClusterJanuary 4, 2012 / 11:51 am
But see….you HATE that guy, too.
Jack, “hate” is the emotional bastion of the left and you are a good example. Your posts are nothing more than paranoia of the personality with little actual substance. Predictable and tedious
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 11:54 am
Oh, get a grip, “Jack”—and stop projecting the Left, and the Pseudo-Left’s, addiction to HATE onto rational people who look beyond personality and identity to the core POLITICAL beliefs of our candidates.
You make it clear you don’t even know what “conservative” means, in the context of 21st Century U.S. politics.
Why don’t you outline for us the actual POLITICAL policies you find so hysterically funny, offensive, or whatever, held by Rick Santorum.
Jack in ChicagoJanuary 4, 2012 / 11:56 am
Cluster, there’s a heck of a lot of anti-Romney rhetoric both in and out of this blog and it’s mostly coming from the right.
Look, I’ll make is easy for you: The ONLY two candidates that I would not be afraid of getting as President from your side of the aisle are Huntsman and Romney. Because I know, in their hearts, they are much further left than the rest of your candidates. Put another way: A Santorum presidency terrifies me. A Romney presidency? Not ideal, but not terrifying.
You may draw your own conclusions.
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 12:01 pm
My conclusion is that the spectre of an nation returning to its code of law terrifies you.
That a country realizing the pitfalls, failures and miseries of Leftist ideology put in practice terrifies you
That an upwelling of understanding of and respect for our Constitution terrifies you.
As for people actually having a coherent political philosophy, that just bewilders you.
Jack in ChicagoJanuary 4, 2012 / 12:06 pm
As for people actually having a coherent political philosophy, that just bewilders you.
So, given your “coherent political philosophy,” exactly what it is about Romney’s philosophy that appeals to you? And “He’s not Obama” is not an answer.
You claim to be so coherent. Let’s see which of Mitt’s core, bedrock principals so perfectly matches your so-called “philosophy.”
Can’t wait.
dougJanuary 4, 2012 / 12:11 pm
Thanks Jack, I don’t know a whole lot about Santorum, but if he is against tax payer funding of birth-control like you said and it comes down to a choice between voting for someone who is against tax-payer funded birth control and government mandated insurance covering birth control, I’ll go with santorum.
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 12:16 pm
First, I am not a Romney supporter. I have followed his campaign to some extent but not closely.
Second, I can only go by what he tells us his political philosophy is now, at this point in time. Lacking the Crystal Ball so important to Lefties, which you seem to think allows you to discern the true hearts and minds of people no matter what they say or do, I am stuck with what I can actually see.
Romney has said he will work to repeal Obamacare, and has been quite specific about the difference between state and federal actions. As a Tenther, I understand and agree with this, and I also feel it shows a respect for states’ rights, with which I also agree.
Romney does not believe in penalizing productivity, and to sum up what he has said I believe he believes a meritocracy. I agree.
He believes in a strong national defense.
He believes over-regulation is stifling job creation where it counts, which is in the private sector.
He believes in the Constitutional model of government.
He believes the Leftist, central-control, top-down-big-government model is doomed to failure, as well as being unconstitutional.
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 12:43 pm
doug, are you saying that Santorum does NOT “want to make birth control ILLEGAL” but just doesn’t want the government to pay for it?
Really?
Gee, the anti-Santorum bigots are not going to like having THAT lie debunked.
i am somewhat for vouchers. I am not thrilled with ADL’s belief that voucher system will funnel money to catholic schools but it is better than nothing. i do believe santorum’s beliefs will influence his presidency too much for my liking. WHo says he is not going to make contraceptives illegal, or cut too much funding to public schools. Right now the US is falling behind in many science and math categories and it would hurt us if we cut spending. That is my belief but whatever. I would happily vote for Romney who is middle of the road and not nearly as scary as santorum. Santorum did a lot of bad for Pa and we were happy to vote him out
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 11:42 am
WHo says he is not going to make contraceptives illegal, or cut too much funding to public schools.
Well, the Constitution, for starters. He’s running for President, not for King.
Check out that Constitution and you will see that legislation is the job of Congress.
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 11:57 am
Jake, are you the vanguard of a new anti-Catholic campaign strategy? Are we to be treated to another “secret tunnel to the Vatican” smear campaign based on a man’s religious beliefs?
And what is so attractive about “middle of the road”? Is this the meeting place of people who have not bothered to develop and understand and align with a coherent political philosophy and just want a squishy kinda-this, kinda-that candidate who doesn’t represent a principled stand on anything?
bardolfJanuary 4, 2012 / 12:47 pm
Amy
What is attractive about middle of the road is that elections are typically won there. There is a thing called electoral strategy and Rick S. doesn’t take away any states that Obama won.
The desire for an empire by folks like you will keep Ron Paul far from power and the GOP will wind up with a big spending Mitt Romney if he manages to beat Obama.
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 12:54 pm
“…desire for an empire..”
Time to put Skippy back in the attic, dolf, or at least get him his own blog identity—his bizarreness is reflected on you, you know.
“What is attractive about middle of the road is that elections are typically won there.”
Guess that pretty much sums up YOUR political philosophy, eh, dolf? Kinda-this, kinda-that, pander to the other squishies.
Count d'HaricotsJanuary 4, 2012 / 3:11 pm
“What is attractive about middle of the road is that elections are typically won there.”
By whom? George HW Bush? Muskie? Dole? Ford? Humphrey? McCain? Anderson?
it has nothing to do with being anti-catholic as much as it has to do with santorum being anti-woman. If you want to throw extremes out there shit on the wall. Do you want to me state all the anti woman sediment he throws out there with working mom’s, contraceptives, abortion ect. We both can play this game. Most american presidents have been middle of the road. I want a fiscal conservative but social issues are also important and santorum is a nut job and unelectable. PA has had many conservatives governers and we call the middle of pa pensaltucky. Santorum lost in a landslide. I think the fact that santorum lost in a landslide should show you that he is unelectable
RetiredSpookJanuary 4, 2012 / 12:19 pm
Jake,
If that’s the case, then Romney will win the GOP nomination, and I don’t think there are more than one or two Conservatives on this blog who wouldn’t vote for him in the general.
Green Mountain BoyJanuary 4, 2012 / 2:06 pm
Thanks for the honourable mention Spook!! 😛
RetiredSpookJanuary 4, 2012 / 2:54 pm
You’re welcome, GMB.
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 12:41 pm
I think it indicative of bias to claim that respect for human life is “anti-woman”, to believe that women have the strength and character to handle unplanned pregnancies instead of opting for the easiest way out is “anti-woman”, to not only respect the women who stay at home to rear their children but to respect and honor the most important job they will ever have, which is the rearing of those children, as “anti-woman”.
I personally find it anti-woman to have the attitude toward women that says “We don’t think you have the strength or character to take responsibility for your own actions, we think you should just spread your legs for a man and then do it again for the doctor who will scrape out the consequence of your actions and reduce yourself to a pursuer of pleasure” . I find that dismissive attitude toward women despicable, as well as the indifference to the pain and anguish and guilt so many women go through after abortions when they realize that they were preyed upon in their most frightened and vulnerable moments and assured that abortion is consequence-free, nothing more than removing a clump of cells.
I personally think birth control is fine, if it prevents conception, but not if it ends life after conception. But I don’t care if Santorum’s personal beliefs are different from mine any more than I care if anyone’s religious beliefs are different from mine.
I do care if bigots try to spin religious beliefs into being “anti-woman” or other lies.
Yes, it appears that in a year of landslide response to the virulent anti-Bush rhetoric of the RRL, Rick Santorum was unelectable in one election a blue state. Let’s ignore the two times he won in that state, let’s ignore the entire mood of the nation in 2008, let’s ignore everything but your seething hatred for him and the vote tally for that one year.
bardolfJanuary 4, 2012 / 1:20 pm
Amy
You don’t seem to understand that Santorum is seen as a caveman not only by the RRL but by the many cultured folk in the GOP.
The Count will not comment on this thread because he would burst your bubble. Santorum e.g. scares Jewish voters like nobody else. Santorum wouldn’t crack the 20% that McCain got in 2008 among Jewish voters. Rick is seen as anti-woman among the cultured crowd which makes you either a man or uncouth.
The writing on the wall is clear. B4V has a new thread only every once in while because Matt and like bloggers can’t get excited about Mitt, don’t like Paul and know the rest of the field are sure losers.
Mitt only needs to go after Newt and put him down like the broken horse that he embodies. Watch NH, Mitt will barely mention Rick or Ron and just try to finish Newt.
AmazonaJanuary 4, 2012 / 2:26 pm
Oh, yes, the self-proclaimed “cultured” branch of the GOP. Can I assume that this does not include the dreaded “GOOPERS” or people who live in trailer parks, and other demographics looked down upon from on high?
Yeah, Jewish voters are soooo much more afraid of a Catholic who believes in the continued existence of Israel and our commitment to defend this ally than they are of the guys who think Iran getting nukes is OK, who disrespect and ridicule Israel’s leaders, and who have not indicated any interest in protecting Israel.
Just what is it about religious people that “scares” Jews? If they are not “scared” by an increasingly radicalized Leftist administration which is part of a political ideology that has persecuted not only Jews but people of all faiths, it is hard to figure out what, exactly, WOULD “scare” them.
Or are you talking about secular, hard-Left Jews who are “scared” of any degree of veering away from Leftist ideology?
Count d'HaricotsJanuary 4, 2012 / 3:02 pm
Shows how wrong you can be, look up thread a ways … I’ll wait.
I like Santorum a lot, and in a few years with some more exposure and experience he’ll be a viable candidate. I look forward to watching his career.
Santorum is seen as “anti-woman” to the Alinsky types, “”Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.” Nice you can represent them so well on this thread.
You of all people claiming that the Jews are frightened of Rick Santorum is laughable; please, tell us what we think, I welcome your insight. Santorum’s strong support of Israel is terrifying to Jews, isn’t it?
Ron Paul is a loon, pure and simple, your idiotic defense of him as being some kind of threat to the Washington establishment is reminiscent of the George Wallace crowd; so convinced that he was the savior of political purity that they abandon all reason in blind support of an avowed racist, Truther and anti-Semite, I am suspect of anyone that supports this demonstrable bigot.
santorum is one of the most unappealing people you can ever meet. Bob Casey did not even have to show up to the debates the people of PA wanted santorum out because his beliefs were so out of line with the rest of the state. We have a republican governor right now, and plenty of republicans throughout the state. I voted for spector when he was a republican. I think amy it is a little condescending to say that woman should not have the choice what to do with their own bodies and that they are too stupid to know what birth control is, or what abortion is and should just stay home and have babies which is pretty much what santorum wrote in his book. He doesn’t think woman should work and many other things that make him totally unappealing and has 0% chance of winning any state election. I do agree Ron Paul on foreign policy is a loon but on economic issues he is pretty accurate.
Count d'HaricotsJanuary 4, 2012 / 5:23 pm
Right, a , two-term Senator was so “unappealing” that he lost an election in a year that dimocrats won 6 Senate seats and 32 House seats. Wow! What a loser! As un-re-electable as Bill Clinton in 1980.
Nice straw-man on the woman thing as well, if a candidate supports traditional marriage he must be a Neanderthal. Tell ya’ what, you don’t vote for Santorum and I won’t vote for Specter.
neocon1January 4, 2012 / 5:59 pm
ROTFL
you KNOW when your (political) enemies swarm in full FARCE to tell who us who will beat THEIR candidate and thus WE should vote for him………..
the NEXT day after Iowa this thread has 225+ responses many from Ochinpy’s flying monkey brigade of morons, Christophobes, useless idiots, union bots, and dumbed down drones telling us which way to vote.
Soooooooo predictable
marx / alinsky 101 and paid agent provocateurs.
Count d'HaricotsJanuary 4, 2012 / 6:53 pm
“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”
“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.”
And
“Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity”
They’ve chosen to pick Romney and ridicule anyone that supports him as “selling out” our principles. As Amazona has often pointed out; they don’t know/understand their own principles, how can they possibly define ours?
AmazonaJanuary 5, 2012 / 11:43 am
Well, Jake, I never SAID that women are …too stupid to know what birth control is, or what abortion is and should just stay home and have babies…
You only prove what we already know, which is that the only way a Lefty can make an argument is to invent a foolish and stupid comment he can then flail away at with righteous indignation.
Of course women usually know what birth control is, though many have fallen prey to the lie that abortion is a legitimate form of birth control.
You seem to think that if a panicked woman, particularly a very young one, is told by her counselors and doctors that all an abortion “procedure” is is the removal of a “clump of cells” she will know they are lying. Evidently you have never read any of the articles about women who were told this vicious lie, only to later see ultrasound pictures of babies at the same stage theirs were when they were brutally killed.
In Colorado a few years ago there was legislation presented which would allow tax money to be used for abortions, if there was a 3-day waiting period, and the woman would participate in counseling sessions in which options were explained and ultrasound performed. It was based on the theory that no real “choice” can be made without full information. Naturally, the pro-death crowd pitched a fit—the last thing they wanted was a client base that had seen pictures of the at-risk babies, had seen them sucking their thumbs or showing proof of being actual human babies, putting the lie to the “just a clump of cells” lie.
There are abundant data available regarding the overwhelming grief and sadness experience by millions of women who have gotten abortions without the realization of the nature of the lives they ended.
BTW, I am a woman who does work that has traditionally been thought of as men’s work, and I enthusiastically support the right and ability for any woman to pursue any work she wants. I clean up pretty nice, but I am also a pretty good hand on a backhoe and have a pretty wide range of knowledge and skill in general construction. I am the daughter and niece of farm women and the granddaughter of a woman who came to Colorado in a covered wagon and homesteaded a section of land on her own. (A section is a square mile.)
So claiming that I think women should … just stay home and have babies… is beyond stupid, well into crazy.
I kinda figured Romney would win it last night, and he did…but, of course, it’s all about the money, as has been pointed out. And that’s sad, really, because the survival of this country should not be based on who has the most money. But who has the best credentials to do the job of the Presidency. But even though Romney’s money bags got him over the top last night, it wasn’t by much only 8 measly votes…so pretty much neck and neck, there.
So, it’s time to get down to business.
Count d'HaricotsJanuary 4, 2012 / 8:08 pm
Jeremiah,
As you know I support Romney, primarily because he is a fiscal conservative which I believe is most important right now. I, like you am a social conservative as well, but to those ends I believe the other 2/3 of our government at the Federal Level and 100% of the government at the State level is the driving force.
At the Federal level, I’m working to help elect like-minded congressmen to the House; I can’t do a darned thing about the Senate because we have the two biggest loony’s in the Senate as our representatives; Boxer and Feinstein.
The only other thing we can affect is electing a president that will give us Supreme Court Judges without a political agenda. Alito and Roberts are good models ~ Thomas and Alito would be better.
At the state level, I’m working with local groups to get the word out just how important every election at every level is critical to our survival.
In my opinion, Romney can do that and help the economy and restore our international standing from light-weight joke to the last-best-hope for democracy around the world.
I hope we both are pleased with our decision and the country’s direction a year or two from now.
I knew you were a Romney supporter, and I fully respect that.
I can only look at last night’s results and shake my head…how in the world could the GOP after 4 years of failed Democratic party policies, and teetering on economic collapse, not be united??? If anyone is able to explain that for me, I would appreciate it. Then again, it may just be me, but it just appears as if the GOP and Republicans in general are less united now than when we were six years ago. I don’t say that to disparage efforts of Republicans and Conservatives as a whole, but in effect just recognizing something that sticks out at me as “fact.”
Again, and getting back to what you were saying, Count, I fully respect your opinions for and in support of Romney, and I hope you are correct and that the outcome will satisfy our hopes for the coming election.
On another note, you point out that you are a social conservative, as well as I am…well, you know, there are a lot of social conservatives that fit in their own compartment as regards to the term given them “social” conservative. You say that you are leaning toward Romney mainly for economic/fiscal reasons. Hey, that’s perfectly fine. I realize we are in a financial mess, and millions have lost work due to Obama’s failed economic policies, he’s probably put more people out of work than LBJ and all other socialist Presidents combined. But the fact remains, and I stand on it to this day, the last best hope for this country is not in any President, as much as we need one, but our last and Only hope is in Jesus Christ, and I believe we should elect leaders who follow as closely as possible to the example God’s Word gives us. And right now, the only people I see up there worthy of that title would be Rick Santorum.
I really don’t want to win just for the sake of winning, you see….if Mr. Santorum loses, he loses. Simple as that. But I’m not going to cave on any issue to try and lessen the standards that I am to follow above all others, those of my Creator. I don’t lower myself as that’s just not the right thing to do, and I don’t God would be pleased with that. I think if others would do the same (not because I said, or do so … lol!), then God would heal our land. And it’s not merely voting for the right person, but doing what’s right in the first place. What did God say to his people Israel? “If my people who are called by My name, will turn from their wicked ways, humble themselves, pray, and seek my face, then will I hear from heaven, hear their prayer and heal their land.”
That’s what’s important, see. If we forget everything else, and just do that, what difference it would make in this country.
Again, I appreciate your opinions, an what you stand for. You have my respect there, and I hope you will take mine into consideration, as well.
I always respect your opinion and admire your unfailing faith. I wish I had an unshakable belief that God will smile on our endeavors and save us from the wicked; but I believe that He has given us free will, and in doing so we have created the very wickedness we seek to overcome by allowing it to exist.
As you also know I was a high school teacher, and I saw first-hand how we teach our children that we cannot judge the actions of others, all beliefs are equally valid, and evil is only a matter of personal choice. I believe we have a responsibility to speak out when we recognize the wicked, and I’ve never had a problem expressing my displeasure when I see it in myself or others.
I believe Republicans are united going into this election; get Obama out! The thing we disagree on is who best to do it. The thing we need to consider is who best to govern after winning. Every election we hear from the pundits that Americans live their government divided. That somehow we believe that we want a President from one Party and Legislators from another. Does that pass the laugh test with you? Do you want to elect someone to the highest office because you agree with him (mostly) and his agenda (mostly) and you want him in office where he’ll receive no support from Congress and never get his agenda enacted. Sounds kinda like a liberal mindset to me. Will a Gingrich be able to cooperate with a divided Congress? Will Santorum have the gravitas to get serious negotiations with the minority party? And which candidate will command the most respect from the world leaders that now scoff at our Teleprompter-in-Chief as he “leads from behind?
I believe Mitt can do both.
I would never expect you to cave on any issue, or sell out your beliefs for political expediency; I wouldn’t either, neither would GMB or neo. Which is why I stay engaged, write my Congressman, organize and donate. Once in office I expect to be able to move the elected official in my direction; Mitt changed his mind on abortion … this means we won that battle. Once in office I expect he’ll change other positions; with pressure from Americans those changes will be positive or we’ll kick him to the curb in 4 years too.
As far as Santorum over Romney based on their respective faith, I’m reminded of the question If God be for us, who could be against us? I’m sure Romney, in his deepest moments believes he is preparing to do what God asks of him, just as Santorum is doing. I believe they both will do the best according to their faith, and would accomplish much the same.
I couldn’t agree with you more. We certainly could use some clarification as to which of the candidates/contestants is best suited for the Presidency. You, and others happen to believe it is Romney, and I and others happen to believe it is either Santorum or one of the others like Gingrich or Bachmann, who have you (however much good that would do for their cause at this point?). And that’s okay … it is, as you say, the basic driving force behind all of our (Conservatives, GOP, Republicans) efforts is to put Obama out of the house!! As I said, too, anyone is better than who we have currently in the White House, and I stand by that statement. I mean, I know there are people out there in the GOP that could be rightly described as “Wolves in sheep’s clothing” that have basically the same intent, and policies as Obama and many of the Democrats (Ron Paul for example), but what level of danger would they possess as opposed to Obama? In my view, they don’t want to tear us down from within like the “socialist-wing” of congress does. They realize that domestically we are hurting, and something must be done to fix it. Even though foreign affairs must be capitulated to fit in equally with domestic concerns.
You know, I think, if we were to win back the White House, that it would unite the House Republicans tremendously no matter who is the top runner/winner for President in the GOP race. And just hopefully at the same time we can pick up some seats in the Senate to “put the icing on the cake” so to speak, it would strengthen the bond, and unite both houses in agreement. Hopefully the people are smart enough to see the difference it would make, and put strong conservative leaders in the Senate come the next Senate election cycle. People ought to know that the “wheel” can’t turn in the forward direction when you’ve got half the government going backwards, and the other half going forward…you can’t get the centrifugal force desired, or that is needed, in that respect. The energy must be focused together, in the right direction going forward! Unfortunately that is not the case in this country, because we have so many welfare entitlements going out, and the people are voting for this type of income rather than the person who wants to truly help them and put them to work, and thus social security is bankrupt, and the futures of millions are going down the toilet due to these socialist welfare entitlement programs working their poison/cancer whatever you want to call it, in the system.
So, who can turn the ship around? I would say three-fourth’s of them are capable of doing it. Gingrich in my opinion would double down and do the right thing, he would get the ball rolling again, as would Santorum, Bachmann, etc. My only fear with Romney, is that he would cave on any number of given issues from abortion to to earmarks, to welfare entitlements, etc, etc. It’s a trust issue with Romney. Not that he “doesn’t” have upstanding character, afterall he is a business man, and he understands how to deal with the unemployment issue, no doubt. Like you said, however, that’s where we have to buckle down and try our best to force him in the right direction, or we oust him in four years. The problem there, however, we are liable to get another socialist Democrat back in office which wouldn’t bode well at this critical stage in our nation. We’ve really hit a low point, and it’s going to take many years of good leadership to get us back to, as Mr. Romney has said many, many times “A Shining city on a hill,” or for America to be the “last best hope of the world.”
I will say this, it is very hard to find guys like Ronald Reagan this day and time. He was a bold, and God-fearing leader, who would stand up to any dictator any day of the week, and he really strengthened America’s economy. I’d say if it wasn’t for Ronald Reagan, we would have long been under a communist dictatorship already. And you know, that’s the thing; America had people back then who still had intellects that weren’t polluted with all the Marxist garbage that now fills the minds of many of our younger voters today, and it was those people back in Ronald Reagan’s day who made the common sense choice to choose the man that was Ronald Reagan for President. We should really feel fortunate that America chose him to be our President when they did back in the 80’s. There should be a statue of him in every state, at every state Capitol.
Now, if people would only look back to their ancestor’s decision in the 80’s in choosing Reagan, they could use their example to become role models for future generations…how great would that be? 🙂
On a final note – as to a comment made earlier in your post, you know, you’re right….God did indeed give us free will, and much of the evil we see around us is as a result of our lack of action in doing something about it…but where do we start in trying to fix it; eliminating or deterring the evil we see? We have a guide that was given to us by our heavenly Father and it is His Holy Word, the Holy Bible, the inspired Word of the Living God … it is living and active, it pierces to the bone marrow and lays open every deed, whether good or bad, and it has the solution to every problem across the entire span of time, from age to age, and to the end of time when Christ Jesus comes again to take all those who have been born-again according to the Holy Spirit with Him to be in heaven, in which we will have glorified bodies, purified by the cleansing of the Son.
Yes, God will smile on those who do His Will, He says in Ephesians 5:14 – ““Awake, O sleeper, and arise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you.”
And therefore, we become Light, to a lost and dying world. 🙂
God bless!!
neocon1January 5, 2012 / 9:05 am
Jer…….T~E~A
Rick Santorum surges in Iowa due to the support of the ”Tea Party”
Wednesday, January 4th at 2:43AM EST
17 Comments
Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney are tied in a very close race to win the Iowa Republican caucus. And the lesson that was learned in 2010, was once again on display in 2012. People constantly talked about how well financed and organized the Romney and Paul campaigns were, but us tea partiers turn out to vote!! And elections are decided by votes, not by who has the biggest staff or the largest war chest.
Site polling showed that Santorum received the most tea party votes. Iowans that were seeking ”a candidate with high moral character” also made Rick their top choice.
So what happens now? I see Mitt winning in New Hampshire and Newt or Rick taking down South Carolina. That leaves Florida as the key state in this race. My home state is Florida and I am active in politics as part of Tea Party Fort Lauderdale so I will give my opinion of who will win in Florida, and why.
The tea party movement is very strong in Florida. And the 2010 election results will show that. Tea party favored candidates knocked off well funded establishment Republican candidates in every primary race from governor(Rick Scott) to senator(Marco Rubio). This is also the state that gave Herman Cain the big bump with his Orlando straw poll win.
I think the race will be down to four candidates by then. Romney, Gingrich, Paul and Santorum. I will review all four candidates.
Blogs For Victory 
GMB: “If you consider yourself a conservative, they hate your effn guts and would line you up against a wall and shoot you, if the could.
Now act accordingly…”
Is that a garden variety persecution complex or pathological paranoia? I’m pretty socially conservative compared to most of my liberal friends, but they sure as heck don’t hate me like that. At least if they do I’m blissfully unaware of it.
I remember how many times Mark accused me of hating, simply based on my political opinions. Still trying to figure out what it is about you guys that is so centered on hatred. You know, most liberals don’t even like guns, and not that many of us own them. You conservatives are the ones far more likely to invoke the idea of shooting someone. Maybe you’re just projecting?
Dennis do you really want a list of all the people that have been murdered by left wing governments? That liat dwarfs any that you could assemble from any government other than leftist.
Projecting.HAH! Maybe we will ask Che if he projection when he was purifying cuba or mao about thee cultural revolution.
Mass executions. It’s a leftist thing don’t ya know. Mao, Pol, Josef. they approved of them.
And Yes Dennis , I suspect if barky gave you the order, you would pull the trigger. Not drama not hatred, just a truthful opinion.
Just another justification for hate, hate speech and violence. “They want to kill US, so it’s okay for us to want to kill THEM.” That is, sadly, how buildings end up getting blown up by crazy people. All it takes is one of them to believe that nonsense and…that’s the whole ball of wax.
Sad.
mehoff in chi town
.” That is, sadly, how buildings end up getting blown up by crazy people.
actually if by islamic cut throats you may be correct.
However I believe you were referring to the war Vet and (some believe) patriot Tim Mc Veigh.
Tims actions were DIRECT retaliation for an out of control left wing regime led by a serial adulterer, rapist, abuser and a dyke lesbian who on two different occasions used tanks, snipers, helicopters to out right murder eighty some women, children, and a few men.
“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” –
— Thomas Jefferson
Jack,
Do you actually have any coherent political thoughts rattling around that empty head of yours, or is it all just regurgitated verbal diarrhea?
Incidentally, you never have told us how you set aside your principles to support Obama – care to share?
dennistooge and mehoff from chi town
look up murders by
1. communism
2. nazism
3. the KKK
4. fascism
ALL left wing, All murders.
then check out the MURDER rate in the US inner citys all donk leftists.
PS
you read WAY more into GMB advice than I did.
“appropriate action” could mean move to the country and have a food garden, only in the fever swamp of a so called leftist “mind” was it more.
I haven’t “set aside my principles” on Obama any more than sincere conservatives set aside theirs to support Dubya. I don’t agree with everything he’s done, certainly, but I support a clear majority of his agenda items and absolutely do not want to return to the Bush era of unfunded wars, unfunded entitlements (Medicare prescription), continually ballooning deficits, bailouts (TARP), and increasing unemployment.
I know you guys live in a little bubble of your own making here at B4B, but out here in the real world, it is generally acknowledged that Barack turned around a faltering economy handed him by Bush, that job losses eventually ceased and then jobs started increasing under his tenure, the economy actually showed growth over the past four years and he is still, despite every effort by the GOP, a very popular guy.
Can he beat Mitt Romney in a head-to-head in November? I dunno. Romney is exactly the kind of centrist, appeal-to-all-voters-because-I-have-no-core-principles candidate that can draw the undecideds. Because, of course, in order for a GOP candidate to win the general election, you have to appeal to two groups of voters: the crazy base and the middle of the road waverers. Romney knows the crazy base will vote for him over Obama despite their general loathing of him simply because they loathe Obama just a little bit more. And he can project himself as a moderate and appeal to the independents due to his liberal voting record in the past. So Romney is really your best choice. You know it. You just don’t like him because he is NOT a conservative. I feel your pain.
Santorum? Obama beats him all day long. Because Santorum only appeals to ONE set of voters: the crazy base. Get it?
But last night’s results (for Democrats) is absolutely wonderful. Because the two sets of voters (crazy base and moderate) are absolutely and (potentially) irrevocably split. The crazy base WANTS their pure conservative candidate. They need him like heroine. And the moderates are scared to death of far right-wing kooks like Santorum and Bachmann because they know, at the end of the day, that these people are unelectable.
So when one of them wins a caucus (or comes close)? Suits me just fine.
mehoff in chi town
I haven’t “set aside my principles”
of course you havent.you have none.
you love the POS, marxist, muslim, usurper, many loved hitler, stalin, mao also.
remember wright, loiue, ayers, GOD DAMN America
this is YOUR doper, back seat smoker, barry
mehoff in chi town
The crazy base
interpretation = CHRISTIANS
the long knives are out, the rhetoric has already begun, the template is set.
This is Rick Santorum’s Rousing Speech After His Surge in Iowa: ‘Game On’
“I’ve survived the challenges...by the daily grace that comes from God.”
yeah real CRAZY maaaan!!
but I support a clear majority of his agenda items and absolutely do not want to return to the Bush era of unfunded wars, unfunded entitlements (Medicare prescription), continually ballooning deficits, bailouts (TARP), and increasing unemployment.
ROTFLMAO!! Unfunded wars — still there. Unfunded entitlements — still there. Continuing ballooning deficits — maybe not ballooning; just stuck at over a $trillion/year. Bailouts — no just political graft to supporters who own companies like Solyndra. Increasing unemployment — over 2 million fewer people employed since Obama took office. And stuff that you didn’t mention: Gitmo — still there. Renditions — still there. Patriot Act — not only still there, but enhanced. Ordering assassinations of American citizens — not still there, brand new under Obama. Detainee provisions of the recently signed Defense Appropriations bill to include indefinite detention of American citizens — also brand new.
Stuck on stupid, Jack; stuck on stupid!
it is generally acknowledged that Barack turned around a faltering economy handed him by Bush,
On what planet? In 2011 the new housing market had its worst year in half a century. Much of the economic growth, especially during Obama’s first couple years, was nothing more than government spending and growth. And interesting that you should say “handed to him by Bush”. In the past (at least in my lifetime) it’s been Democrats who handed off a faltering economy to Republicans (Carter to Reagan, Clinton to Bush). How does it feel to be on the other end for a change and realize that you’re guy simply isn’t up to the task?
So Romney is really your best choice. You know it. You just don’t like him because he is NOT a conservative. I feel your pain.
The GOP primary process is nothing more than trying to nominate the most conservative candidate that the majority of Republicans think can win. Our local Tea Party group met last night, and most of the talk was about Iowa and the choices. Virtually everyone I talked to said the same thing. “Although he’s not my first choice, I’ll have much less of a problem voting for Romney if he’s the candidate than I did for McCain in 2008.”
You said that better than I, Spook and wont it be fun to see how Jack responds?
“crazy base” def: Citizens who believe the best political system for governing the United States of America is the one laid out in and codified by the Constitution of the United States of America, in which the size and scope of the federal government is severely and specifically limited to its enumerated duties, and by which the bulk of power and authority is vested in state and local governments.
Crrrrazzzyy!!!!!!!!!!
The GOP primary process is nothing more than trying to nominate the most conservative candidate that the majority of Republicans think can win. Our local Tea Party group met last night, and most of the talk was about Iowa and the choices. Virtually everyone I talked to said the same thing. “Although he’s not my first choice, I’ll have much less of a problem voting for Romney if he’s the candidate than I did for McCain in 2008.”
That’s what I’ve been saying. Sheesh, you guys don’t really listen, do you?
You are faced with a clear choice: Abandon your conservative principles and support Romney (who is the likely nominee) OR nominate a truly conservative candidate like Santorum or Gingrich and hand the election to Obama.
Romney COULD win. The other candidates CANNOT. Think I’m wrong? PLEASE nominate one of them. I’m begging you to.
You are faced with a clear choice: Abandon your conservative principles and support Romney – Jack in Chicago
Jack, didn’t you just say that you don’t support all of Obama’s agenda, when it was pointed out to you all of the items that Obama has done that contradicts the liberal agenda? But that is evidently not a compromise in your small mind?
We have already told you that there are some issues with Romney, but his agenda is still vastly superior to Obama’s and will gain the majority of conservative support.
What grade are you in?
Oh, I’m sorry. I thought you guys learned from the John McCain debacle last time around and were going to actually nominate a conservative this time. Silly me. I didn’t know you were going to once again tack to the center and nominate another left-of-center candidate. If that’s the plan, I applaud your political savvy. Because dumping the truly conservative candidates in favor of the most electable guy IS the only way to win. I just thought your far-right-wing base would be a little upset about that.
My mistake. Carry on.
Let’s see if I’ve got this right.
According to “Jack” (who has yet to stake out a political position more mature than simple sneering ) it would be “ABANDONING” conservative principles to vote for someone to replace Obama, just because we would be voting for someone with less than 1000% absolutely impeccable by all possible standards conservative beliefs and actions, totally pure in his political ideology, with a perfect record of perfect positions on perfect conservative points, but who is still so dramatically to the Right of Obama that by comparison he is Super-Conservative.
According to “Jack” (who ducks and dodges every question about politics in favor of mindless attacks) it would be less of an ABANDONMENT of conservative principles to either vote for Obama or refuse to vote at all and in so doing contribute to the extension of the Radical Left’s dismemberment of the Constitution.
Many thanks, “Jack”, for the illustration of the utter chaos of the Pseudo-Liberal mind and its total lack of comprehension of anything more substantial than infantile sniping.
Time to cut “Jack” loose, based on the adage that it is always a mistake to argue with a pig—you not only can’t do it without getting as dirty as the pig, but the pig LIKES it.
“Jack” has told us all he ever will—he is a blog vandal, here not to discuss politics but to wallow in his bigotry and pretend that mindless sneering is the same thing as political commentary.
(He aspires to be a speed bump but lacks the intellect, and instead of providing an impediment to political discourse has, although inadvertently, provided great insight into what passes for a Liberal these days.)
First, the adage is “wrestle” with a pig. Not argue with one. Only an idiot would do the first. Only a winger would do the second.
I’m only pointing out the obvious: You have a dangerously divided electorate. On the one hand, you have ideologues who will not, I’m afraid, back a moderate like Romney. Vote for a man who was once pro-choice? Doesn’t that make him, in your parlance, an accessory to murder? Oh, but he’s changed his mind since then. Right. I forgot.
The other part of your electorate are more pragmatic. Ideals be damned: the goal is to oust Obama. If Mitt is the only guy who can do it (and he is), then we don’t need a true-blue conservative. We just need a Ken doll. Well, there he is. Send him a check, why dontcha?
The sniping and nastiness during this GOP primary (which will only get worse in the coming month or so) is all the entertainment we lefties need.
Please, continue.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
SOSO, GIGO
First, I would hope and pray that everyone that supports abortion would grow and join us; I applaud Romney for that.
Second, I, as a fiscal conservative have supported Romney since the 2008 campaign; check the record.
Third, one guarantee I can make is that when the primaries are over all of the candidates that officially ran as Republicans will be around in four years and none will be indicted, convicted or on trial. Can the gaggle of leftist crooks, criminals and village idiots from the democratic campaign of 2008 say the same thing?
Finally, Romney is a conservative.
Jack; “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity. Alinsky”
This is why “Jack” sticks to that meme that Romney isn’t conservative. Very transparent.
Romney isn’t as socially conservative as I am, or GMB or neo. But he is a Conservative, and in my opinion th3e most conservative candidate that can win and govern.
which is why Romney is my candidate of choice.
Don’t worry amy santorum already has enough nicknames- google santorum. Santorum has no shot at all. As someone from PA santorum came off as a jackass and PA was ready to get rid of him as fast as we could. He is way to conservative, makes stupid statements about homosexuality, makes stupid comments about public schools and many other things santorum stands for people cannot stand. He lost his senate seat by 17%. Most of the jewish population in PA hated him or anyone who was not that religious. He is unelectable for so many reasons
goldyFLAKE
The Christophobia and homosexual worshippers are coming out of the wood work.
The muslin, homosexual Ochimpy’s army has it’s marching orders.
This will get as ugly as it gets and we will see the evil that plagues almost half of our nation.
The HOUNDS of HELL have been loosed.
goldflake
He is way to conservative, makes stupid statements about homosexuality, makes stupid comments about public schools.
WoW
Wayyyyyy to conservative = CHRISTIAN values.
makes stupid statements about the pathology of homosexuality? = it is wrong and a sin.
makes stupid statements about public schools = they are failing under marxist idelogues / unions.
thanks for the wake up call flake.
goldBLUM
Most of the jewish population in PA hated him
he is a CHRISTIAN, and not a communist, not an isolated or new phenomenon.
but I support a clear majority of his agenda items and absolutely do not want to return to the Bush era of unfunded wars, unfunded entitlements (Medicare prescription), continually ballooning deficits, bailouts (TARP), and increasing unemployment. – Jack in Chicago
And then he says….
I know you guys live in a little bubble of your own making here at B4B, – Jack in Chicago
Let’s discuss the bubble Jack occupies – everything he mentioned in the first paragraph that Jack says he opposes is being accelerated under Obama. Obama surged Afghanistan which was on borrowed money, and he opened a new front in Libya, which was again paid for with borrowed money. Obama has put forth Obamacare which is questionably constitutional, and is yet to be paid for. Obama has EXPLODED the deficits far more than Bush could ever dream of, and Obama’s policies has resulted in unemployment levels never seen under the Bush administration. Proving once again, that liberals simply don’t think too deeply. Thanks Jack, I couldn’t have done that without you
Ah, the old “Obama is just like Bush” argument, eh? Look, you guys are going to have to make a choice: either he’s a librul or he isn’t. At the same time that you decry Obama as being a ‘lefty, socialist, blah, blah, blah’ you also ask guys like me on the left how we can support him because so many of his policies seem tailored to the RIGHT. Pick a side, boys.
As for the rest:
“Obama surged Afghanistan which was on borrowed money” and ended the war in Iraq. And will, we hope, end the Afghan war, too. But the question was: where did the money come from when Bush started these wars? Ah, yes: they were on the credit card. Thanks, George.
“[Obama]opened a new front in Libya, which was again paid for with borrowed money…”. No ground troops, no invasion, no casualties and a clear victory. Yeah, that’s no way to run a war, is it?
“Obama has put forth Obamacare which is questionably constitutional, and is yet to be paid for.” The new healthcare law has not yet added a dime to the deficit. If it has, please demonstrate how. I’m not talking about Medicare or Medicaid. I mean the so-called ‘Obamacare.’
“Obama has EXPLODED the deficits far more than Bush could ever dream of, and Obama’s policies has resulted in unemployment levels never seen under the Bush administration.” Silly boy. Jobs were disappearing at an alarming rate toward the end of the Bush presidency and continued under Barack’s first year. Since then, job loss has disappeared and we have been adding jobs ever since. Don’t believe me? If you would, please Google “bikini graph” and have a gander for yourself.
You want to know what Barack will be running on? There’s your answer.
“Job loss has disappeared”
JOB LOSS HAS DISAPPEARED
JOB LOSS HAS DISAPPEARED
It just gets funnier and funnier
Keep laughing, A-zone. Because Barack has added jobs each of the past two years. Think he hasn’t? Prove it!
(P.S.- You can’t!)
That is a rather large bubble you occupy Jack. You mentioned “unpaid: wars, I pointed out two examples and you change the subject. Obamacare is law and the unpaid for mandates are right around the corner, but you just keep ignoring that, it will do you well. And Bush’s last deficit was a couple of hundred billion less TARP I which was paid back. Obama’s deficits are $1.5 trillion for as far as the eye can see.
Liberals like you will result in a conservative take over so thank you for that
Obama has added jobs alright, far less than projected and if you don’t mind working at McDonald’s well then all is well. I have a feeling jack runs the fry machine.
Thankfully Obama put the keystone pipeline and lots of well paying jobs, including union jobs, on hold. That was good decision.
Some jobs have been added to the new level of employment set in Barry’s term. But that level is the basement, most of the “new” jobs are in government which means they are paid for by our taxes, and the “new” jobs still haven’t made up for the real jobs lost.
“Jack” seems to be using the delusional math used by compulsive gamblers—Lose $1,000 and then win back a total of $500 and walk away claiming to have “won” $500, ignoring the fact that you still have less than you did when you started.
Keep laughing, A-zone. Because Barack has added jobs each of the past two years. Think he hasn’t? Prove it!
(P.S.- You can’t!)
Jack, Jack, Jack — never ask a question that you don’t know the answer to. The percentage of Americans who are working is at a 30-year low. The percentage of Americans working has dropped about 2.6% since Obama took office. Maybe you can use the same math that Liberals typically use for spending cuts (cuts in spending growth, not actual cuts) to show that somehow that is an increase in jobs. Your turn, sport.
BTW, are you ol’ pink tights Cyber Actor as someone asserted a while back?
Jack, the population increase has added jobs, under Obama the percentage of Americans who are working has dropped to a three decade low level. Obama has managed to add jobs in the public sector by losing jobs in the private sector. I don’t really consider that adding jobs, more like a government confiscation of jobs.
“I don’t really consider that adding jobs, more like a government confiscation of jobs.”
Well said, doug.
look at the percentage of people who went to public schools versus private schools. Most people cannot afford public schools. THe public schools in the city are failing but to say all public schools are failing is not accurate. I went to a very good quaker school and a public school and the education was equal because i went to a very good school district. His views on public schools were distorted and wrong.
yes most of his beliefs i cannot support are hard core christian beliefs are that too dogmatic for me. Thinking contraceptives should be illegal, thinking homosexuality is the same as bestiality is ridiculous, making working mothers feel guilty for working is wrong, this guy is an extremist and has no chance of winning in the national election
most people can’t afford private schools- jeez to much coding last night. Sorry about that
“…this guy is an extremist..”
“Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. … Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.”
So don’t “support” his religious beliefs. What about his political beliefs? Do you support a belief in the Constitutional, small-federal-government political model, or the top-down-massive-government-control model? Because that is what we are going to be voting on.
Who are you quoting there? Ah, yes- another staunch conservative who lost. Well done.
And “Jack” sticks with the PL playbook and attacks the person and not the idea.
So what about the IDEA do you find offensive, Jack?
That you will NOT, in fact, be nominating the actual conservative. You guys say one thing and do another. It’s McCain all over again. You stamp and cheer for a real, actual conservative candidate but, in the end, you nominate the moderate, “most electable” candidate.
Look, I’m happy about Santorum’s victory. Know why? Because today, a bunch of conservative yahoos opened up their checkbooks and wrote “Rick Santorum” on the payee line. They are throwing their money away and every dime they give Rick is a dime that Mitt won’t have in the fall. Works for me.
Know what I really can’t wait for? The Newt/Mitt rumpus in New Hampshire. Ooooh, that’s gonna be UGLY.
And yet again “Jack” squirms away from talking about ideas and sticks to the superficial, to Identity Politics where he can do all that he CAN do and snipe at people.
One more time, Jack—with what in Goldwater’s quote do you disagree?
But “Jack” does titter and giggle about watching something he looks forward to being “ugly”—pretty much tells you all you need to know about Jack, doesn’t it?
A carrion eater eager to wallow in anything he finds “ugly”.
If it gets ugly enough, he might even have a thrill running up his leg.
And we already know the substance of the encounter he so gleefully anticipates will fly right over his head, being about politics and all.
You bet I do. Remember when Hillary and Barack were hammering away at each other four years ago and you folks enjoyed it so much?
Our turn.
Did anyone ever say ALL public schools are failing?
“…to say all public schools are failing is not accurate…” but neither is a claim that anyone has said they are.
There will be people who can’t get past personal animosity to examine the political message of Santorum. No surprise there—-too many people are hung up on identity, and events to understand or even care about politics.
Santorum’s religiously based opinions should be of far less interest than Obama’s, which have been studiously ignored since he was put up as a candidate. Santorum’s are that homosexuality is a sin and so is contraception. Obama’s, at least as far as we can tell by the preachings and writings of his long-term pastor, friend, confidante and adviser, is that Jesus was a black man tortured and killed by white Europeans and that, therefore, whites are evil and God is black.
Personally, I find a belief system based on submission to God’s will less dangerous than one based on racial divisiveness and hatred.
Unless the RRL and PL contingent are going to argue that Obam’s religious beliefs have had a role in his presidency, it seems to me that they have to agree that personal beliefs of a religious nature don’t really matter all that much, and that political ideology is what we should care about.
BTW, Jake, one policy conservatives favor is a voucher system for education, so parents can decide where their tax money will be spent to educate their children. This would give equal access to private schools to people who can not now afford them, as well as force public schools to become more competitive.
Amazona: Let me be absolutely clear- if you honestly believe that Rick Santorum can appeal to a broad majority of Americans and be elected President of the United States this year, please, PLEASE nominate him.
You want a conservative candidate? Rick is your guy.
You want a Christian candidate? Rick is your guy.
You want an anti-gay, anti-birth control, (well, basically anti-most things)? Rick is your guy.
What you don’t seem to get is: We WANT you to nominate the most conservative guy (or gal) that you’ve got. Because Obama can beat them. It’s the centrist that could actually hurt him.
But see….you HATE that guy, too.
But see….you HATE that guy, too.
Jack, “hate” is the emotional bastion of the left and you are a good example. Your posts are nothing more than paranoia of the personality with little actual substance. Predictable and tedious
Oh, get a grip, “Jack”—and stop projecting the Left, and the Pseudo-Left’s, addiction to HATE onto rational people who look beyond personality and identity to the core POLITICAL beliefs of our candidates.
You make it clear you don’t even know what “conservative” means, in the context of 21st Century U.S. politics.
Why don’t you outline for us the actual POLITICAL policies you find so hysterically funny, offensive, or whatever, held by Rick Santorum.
Cluster, there’s a heck of a lot of anti-Romney rhetoric both in and out of this blog and it’s mostly coming from the right.
Look, I’ll make is easy for you: The ONLY two candidates that I would not be afraid of getting as President from your side of the aisle are Huntsman and Romney. Because I know, in their hearts, they are much further left than the rest of your candidates. Put another way: A Santorum presidency terrifies me. A Romney presidency? Not ideal, but not terrifying.
You may draw your own conclusions.
My conclusion is that the spectre of an nation returning to its code of law terrifies you.
That a country realizing the pitfalls, failures and miseries of Leftist ideology put in practice terrifies you
That an upwelling of understanding of and respect for our Constitution terrifies you.
As for people actually having a coherent political philosophy, that just bewilders you.
As for people actually having a coherent political philosophy, that just bewilders you.
So, given your “coherent political philosophy,” exactly what it is about Romney’s philosophy that appeals to you? And “He’s not Obama” is not an answer.
You claim to be so coherent. Let’s see which of Mitt’s core, bedrock principals so perfectly matches your so-called “philosophy.”
Can’t wait.
Thanks Jack, I don’t know a whole lot about Santorum, but if he is against tax payer funding of birth-control like you said and it comes down to a choice between voting for someone who is against tax-payer funded birth control and government mandated insurance covering birth control, I’ll go with santorum.
First, I am not a Romney supporter. I have followed his campaign to some extent but not closely.
Second, I can only go by what he tells us his political philosophy is now, at this point in time. Lacking the Crystal Ball so important to Lefties, which you seem to think allows you to discern the true hearts and minds of people no matter what they say or do, I am stuck with what I can actually see.
Romney has said he will work to repeal Obamacare, and has been quite specific about the difference between state and federal actions. As a Tenther, I understand and agree with this, and I also feel it shows a respect for states’ rights, with which I also agree.
Romney does not believe in penalizing productivity, and to sum up what he has said I believe he believes a meritocracy. I agree.
He believes in a strong national defense.
He believes over-regulation is stifling job creation where it counts, which is in the private sector.
He believes in the Constitutional model of government.
He believes the Leftist, central-control, top-down-big-government model is doomed to failure, as well as being unconstitutional.
doug, are you saying that Santorum does NOT “want to make birth control ILLEGAL” but just doesn’t want the government to pay for it?
Really?
Gee, the anti-Santorum bigots are not going to like having THAT lie debunked.
i am somewhat for vouchers. I am not thrilled with ADL’s belief that voucher system will funnel money to catholic schools but it is better than nothing. i do believe santorum’s beliefs will influence his presidency too much for my liking. WHo says he is not going to make contraceptives illegal, or cut too much funding to public schools. Right now the US is falling behind in many science and math categories and it would hurt us if we cut spending. That is my belief but whatever. I would happily vote for Romney who is middle of the road and not nearly as scary as santorum. Santorum did a lot of bad for Pa and we were happy to vote him out
WHo says he is not going to make contraceptives illegal, or cut too much funding to public schools.
Well, the Constitution, for starters. He’s running for President, not for King.
Check out that Constitution and you will see that legislation is the job of Congress.
Jake, are you the vanguard of a new anti-Catholic campaign strategy? Are we to be treated to another “secret tunnel to the Vatican” smear campaign based on a man’s religious beliefs?
And what is so attractive about “middle of the road”? Is this the meeting place of people who have not bothered to develop and understand and align with a coherent political philosophy and just want a squishy kinda-this, kinda-that candidate who doesn’t represent a principled stand on anything?
Amy
What is attractive about middle of the road is that elections are typically won there. There is a thing called electoral strategy and Rick S. doesn’t take away any states that Obama won.
The desire for an empire by folks like you will keep Ron Paul far from power and the GOP will wind up with a big spending Mitt Romney if he manages to beat Obama.
“…desire for an empire..”
Time to put Skippy back in the attic, dolf, or at least get him his own blog identity—his bizarreness is reflected on you, you know.
“What is attractive about middle of the road is that elections are typically won there.”
Guess that pretty much sums up YOUR political philosophy, eh, dolf? Kinda-this, kinda-that, pander to the other squishies.
“What is attractive about middle of the road is that elections are typically won there.”
By whom? George HW Bush? Muskie? Dole? Ford? Humphrey? McCain? Anderson?
Fah!
it has nothing to do with being anti-catholic as much as it has to do with santorum being anti-woman. If you want to throw extremes out there shit on the wall. Do you want to me state all the anti woman sediment he throws out there with working mom’s, contraceptives, abortion ect. We both can play this game. Most american presidents have been middle of the road. I want a fiscal conservative but social issues are also important and santorum is a nut job and unelectable. PA has had many conservatives governers and we call the middle of pa pensaltucky. Santorum lost in a landslide. I think the fact that santorum lost in a landslide should show you that he is unelectable
Jake,
If that’s the case, then Romney will win the GOP nomination, and I don’t think there are more than one or two Conservatives on this blog who wouldn’t vote for him in the general.
Thanks for the honourable mention Spook!! 😛
You’re welcome, GMB.
I think it indicative of bias to claim that respect for human life is “anti-woman”, to believe that women have the strength and character to handle unplanned pregnancies instead of opting for the easiest way out is “anti-woman”, to not only respect the women who stay at home to rear their children but to respect and honor the most important job they will ever have, which is the rearing of those children, as “anti-woman”.
I personally find it anti-woman to have the attitude toward women that says “We don’t think you have the strength or character to take responsibility for your own actions, we think you should just spread your legs for a man and then do it again for the doctor who will scrape out the consequence of your actions and reduce yourself to a pursuer of pleasure” . I find that dismissive attitude toward women despicable, as well as the indifference to the pain and anguish and guilt so many women go through after abortions when they realize that they were preyed upon in their most frightened and vulnerable moments and assured that abortion is consequence-free, nothing more than removing a clump of cells.
I personally think birth control is fine, if it prevents conception, but not if it ends life after conception. But I don’t care if Santorum’s personal beliefs are different from mine any more than I care if anyone’s religious beliefs are different from mine.
I do care if bigots try to spin religious beliefs into being “anti-woman” or other lies.
Yes, it appears that in a year of landslide response to the virulent anti-Bush rhetoric of the RRL, Rick Santorum was unelectable in one election a blue state. Let’s ignore the two times he won in that state, let’s ignore the entire mood of the nation in 2008, let’s ignore everything but your seething hatred for him and the vote tally for that one year.
Amy
You don’t seem to understand that Santorum is seen as a caveman not only by the RRL but by the many cultured folk in the GOP.
The Count will not comment on this thread because he would burst your bubble. Santorum e.g. scares Jewish voters like nobody else. Santorum wouldn’t crack the 20% that McCain got in 2008 among Jewish voters. Rick is seen as anti-woman among the cultured crowd which makes you either a man or uncouth.
The writing on the wall is clear. B4V has a new thread only every once in while because Matt and like bloggers can’t get excited about Mitt, don’t like Paul and know the rest of the field are sure losers.
Mitt only needs to go after Newt and put him down like the broken horse that he embodies. Watch NH, Mitt will barely mention Rick or Ron and just try to finish Newt.
Oh, yes, the self-proclaimed “cultured” branch of the GOP. Can I assume that this does not include the dreaded “GOOPERS” or people who live in trailer parks, and other demographics looked down upon from on high?
Yeah, Jewish voters are soooo much more afraid of a Catholic who believes in the continued existence of Israel and our commitment to defend this ally than they are of the guys who think Iran getting nukes is OK, who disrespect and ridicule Israel’s leaders, and who have not indicated any interest in protecting Israel.
Just what is it about religious people that “scares” Jews? If they are not “scared” by an increasingly radicalized Leftist administration which is part of a political ideology that has persecuted not only Jews but people of all faiths, it is hard to figure out what, exactly, WOULD “scare” them.
Or are you talking about secular, hard-Left Jews who are “scared” of any degree of veering away from Leftist ideology?
Shows how wrong you can be, look up thread a ways … I’ll wait.
I like Santorum a lot, and in a few years with some more exposure and experience he’ll be a viable candidate. I look forward to watching his career.
Santorum is seen as “anti-woman” to the Alinsky types, “”Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.” Nice you can represent them so well on this thread.
You of all people claiming that the Jews are frightened of Rick Santorum is laughable; please, tell us what we think, I welcome your insight. Santorum’s strong support of Israel is terrifying to Jews, isn’t it?
Ron Paul is a loon, pure and simple, your idiotic defense of him as being some kind of threat to the Washington establishment is reminiscent of the George Wallace crowd; so convinced that he was the savior of political purity that they abandon all reason in blind support of an avowed racist, Truther and anti-Semite, I am suspect of anyone that supports this demonstrable bigot.
santorum is one of the most unappealing people you can ever meet. Bob Casey did not even have to show up to the debates the people of PA wanted santorum out because his beliefs were so out of line with the rest of the state. We have a republican governor right now, and plenty of republicans throughout the state. I voted for spector when he was a republican. I think amy it is a little condescending to say that woman should not have the choice what to do with their own bodies and that they are too stupid to know what birth control is, or what abortion is and should just stay home and have babies which is pretty much what santorum wrote in his book. He doesn’t think woman should work and many other things that make him totally unappealing and has 0% chance of winning any state election. I do agree Ron Paul on foreign policy is a loon but on economic issues he is pretty accurate.
Right, a , two-term Senator was so “unappealing” that he lost an election in a year that dimocrats won 6 Senate seats and 32 House seats. Wow! What a loser! As un-re-electable as Bill Clinton in 1980.
Nice straw-man on the woman thing as well, if a candidate supports traditional marriage he must be a Neanderthal. Tell ya’ what, you don’t vote for Santorum and I won’t vote for Specter.
ROTFL
you KNOW when your (political) enemies swarm in full FARCE to tell who us who will beat THEIR candidate and thus WE should vote for him………..
the NEXT day after Iowa this thread has 225+ responses many from Ochinpy’s flying monkey brigade of morons, Christophobes, useless idiots, union bots, and dumbed down drones telling us which way to vote.
Soooooooo predictable
marx / alinsky 101 and paid agent provocateurs.
“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”
“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.”
And
“Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity”
They’ve chosen to pick Romney and ridicule anyone that supports him as “selling out” our principles. As Amazona has often pointed out; they don’t know/understand their own principles, how can they possibly define ours?
Well, Jake, I never SAID that women are …too stupid to know what birth control is, or what abortion is and should just stay home and have babies…
You only prove what we already know, which is that the only way a Lefty can make an argument is to invent a foolish and stupid comment he can then flail away at with righteous indignation.
Of course women usually know what birth control is, though many have fallen prey to the lie that abortion is a legitimate form of birth control.
You seem to think that if a panicked woman, particularly a very young one, is told by her counselors and doctors that all an abortion “procedure” is is the removal of a “clump of cells” she will know they are lying. Evidently you have never read any of the articles about women who were told this vicious lie, only to later see ultrasound pictures of babies at the same stage theirs were when they were brutally killed.
In Colorado a few years ago there was legislation presented which would allow tax money to be used for abortions, if there was a 3-day waiting period, and the woman would participate in counseling sessions in which options were explained and ultrasound performed. It was based on the theory that no real “choice” can be made without full information. Naturally, the pro-death crowd pitched a fit—the last thing they wanted was a client base that had seen pictures of the at-risk babies, had seen them sucking their thumbs or showing proof of being actual human babies, putting the lie to the “just a clump of cells” lie.
There are abundant data available regarding the overwhelming grief and sadness experience by millions of women who have gotten abortions without the realization of the nature of the lives they ended.
BTW, I am a woman who does work that has traditionally been thought of as men’s work, and I enthusiastically support the right and ability for any woman to pursue any work she wants. I clean up pretty nice, but I am also a pretty good hand on a backhoe and have a pretty wide range of knowledge and skill in general construction. I am the daughter and niece of farm women and the granddaughter of a woman who came to Colorado in a covered wagon and homesteaded a section of land on her own. (A section is a square mile.)
So claiming that I think women should … just stay home and have babies… is beyond stupid, well into crazy.
I kinda figured Romney would win it last night, and he did…but, of course, it’s all about the money, as has been pointed out. And that’s sad, really, because the survival of this country should not be based on who has the most money. But who has the best credentials to do the job of the Presidency. But even though Romney’s money bags got him over the top last night, it wasn’t by much only 8 measly votes…so pretty much neck and neck, there.
So, it’s time to get down to business.
Jeremiah,
As you know I support Romney, primarily because he is a fiscal conservative which I believe is most important right now. I, like you am a social conservative as well, but to those ends I believe the other 2/3 of our government at the Federal Level and 100% of the government at the State level is the driving force.
At the Federal level, I’m working to help elect like-minded congressmen to the House; I can’t do a darned thing about the Senate because we have the two biggest loony’s in the Senate as our representatives; Boxer and Feinstein.
The only other thing we can affect is electing a president that will give us Supreme Court Judges without a political agenda. Alito and Roberts are good models ~ Thomas and Alito would be better.
At the state level, I’m working with local groups to get the word out just how important every election at every level is critical to our survival.
In my opinion, Romney can do that and help the economy and restore our international standing from light-weight joke to the last-best-hope for democracy around the world.
I hope we both are pleased with our decision and the country’s direction a year or two from now.
Count d’Haricots,
I knew you were a Romney supporter, and I fully respect that.
I can only look at last night’s results and shake my head…how in the world could the GOP after 4 years of failed Democratic party policies, and teetering on economic collapse, not be united??? If anyone is able to explain that for me, I would appreciate it. Then again, it may just be me, but it just appears as if the GOP and Republicans in general are less united now than when we were six years ago. I don’t say that to disparage efforts of Republicans and Conservatives as a whole, but in effect just recognizing something that sticks out at me as “fact.”
Again, and getting back to what you were saying, Count, I fully respect your opinions for and in support of Romney, and I hope you are correct and that the outcome will satisfy our hopes for the coming election.
On another note, you point out that you are a social conservative, as well as I am…well, you know, there are a lot of social conservatives that fit in their own compartment as regards to the term given them “social” conservative. You say that you are leaning toward Romney mainly for economic/fiscal reasons. Hey, that’s perfectly fine. I realize we are in a financial mess, and millions have lost work due to Obama’s failed economic policies, he’s probably put more people out of work than LBJ and all other socialist Presidents combined. But the fact remains, and I stand on it to this day, the last best hope for this country is not in any President, as much as we need one, but our last and Only hope is in Jesus Christ, and I believe we should elect leaders who follow as closely as possible to the example God’s Word gives us. And right now, the only people I see up there worthy of that title would be Rick Santorum.
I really don’t want to win just for the sake of winning, you see….if Mr. Santorum loses, he loses. Simple as that. But I’m not going to cave on any issue to try and lessen the standards that I am to follow above all others, those of my Creator. I don’t lower myself as that’s just not the right thing to do, and I don’t God would be pleased with that. I think if others would do the same (not because I said, or do so … lol!), then God would heal our land. And it’s not merely voting for the right person, but doing what’s right in the first place. What did God say to his people Israel? “If my people who are called by My name, will turn from their wicked ways, humble themselves, pray, and seek my face, then will I hear from heaven, hear their prayer and heal their land.”
That’s what’s important, see. If we forget everything else, and just do that, what difference it would make in this country.
Again, I appreciate your opinions, an what you stand for. You have my respect there, and I hope you will take mine into consideration, as well.
God bless!!
count
anybody but mittens
except for
rupaul
hitlery
satan
Obamma
🙂
LOL…Neocon!!
You watchin’ that game?
Jeremiah,
I always respect your opinion and admire your unfailing faith. I wish I had an unshakable belief that God will smile on our endeavors and save us from the wicked; but I believe that He has given us free will, and in doing so we have created the very wickedness we seek to overcome by allowing it to exist.
As you also know I was a high school teacher, and I saw first-hand how we teach our children that we cannot judge the actions of others, all beliefs are equally valid, and evil is only a matter of personal choice. I believe we have a responsibility to speak out when we recognize the wicked, and I’ve never had a problem expressing my displeasure when I see it in myself or others.
I believe Republicans are united going into this election; get Obama out! The thing we disagree on is who best to do it. The thing we need to consider is who best to govern after winning. Every election we hear from the pundits that Americans live their government divided. That somehow we believe that we want a President from one Party and Legislators from another. Does that pass the laugh test with you? Do you want to elect someone to the highest office because you agree with him (mostly) and his agenda (mostly) and you want him in office where he’ll receive no support from Congress and never get his agenda enacted. Sounds kinda like a liberal mindset to me. Will a Gingrich be able to cooperate with a divided Congress? Will Santorum have the gravitas to get serious negotiations with the minority party? And which candidate will command the most respect from the world leaders that now scoff at our Teleprompter-in-Chief as he “leads from behind?
I believe Mitt can do both.
I would never expect you to cave on any issue, or sell out your beliefs for political expediency; I wouldn’t either, neither would GMB or neo. Which is why I stay engaged, write my Congressman, organize and donate. Once in office I expect to be able to move the elected official in my direction; Mitt changed his mind on abortion … this means we won that battle. Once in office I expect he’ll change other positions; with pressure from Americans those changes will be positive or we’ll kick him to the curb in 4 years too.
As far as Santorum over Romney based on their respective faith, I’m reminded of the question If God be for us, who could be against us? I’m sure Romney, in his deepest moments believes he is preparing to do what God asks of him, just as Santorum is doing. I believe they both will do the best according to their faith, and would accomplish much the same.
That’s what I believe.
Count d’Haricots,
I couldn’t agree with you more. We certainly could use some clarification as to which of the candidates/contestants is best suited for the Presidency. You, and others happen to believe it is Romney, and I and others happen to believe it is either Santorum or one of the others like Gingrich or Bachmann, who have you (however much good that would do for their cause at this point?). And that’s okay … it is, as you say, the basic driving force behind all of our (Conservatives, GOP, Republicans) efforts is to put Obama out of the house!! As I said, too, anyone is better than who we have currently in the White House, and I stand by that statement. I mean, I know there are people out there in the GOP that could be rightly described as “Wolves in sheep’s clothing” that have basically the same intent, and policies as Obama and many of the Democrats (Ron Paul for example), but what level of danger would they possess as opposed to Obama? In my view, they don’t want to tear us down from within like the “socialist-wing” of congress does. They realize that domestically we are hurting, and something must be done to fix it. Even though foreign affairs must be capitulated to fit in equally with domestic concerns.
You know, I think, if we were to win back the White House, that it would unite the House Republicans tremendously no matter who is the top runner/winner for President in the GOP race. And just hopefully at the same time we can pick up some seats in the Senate to “put the icing on the cake” so to speak, it would strengthen the bond, and unite both houses in agreement. Hopefully the people are smart enough to see the difference it would make, and put strong conservative leaders in the Senate come the next Senate election cycle. People ought to know that the “wheel” can’t turn in the forward direction when you’ve got half the government going backwards, and the other half going forward…you can’t get the centrifugal force desired, or that is needed, in that respect. The energy must be focused together, in the right direction going forward! Unfortunately that is not the case in this country, because we have so many welfare entitlements going out, and the people are voting for this type of income rather than the person who wants to truly help them and put them to work, and thus social security is bankrupt, and the futures of millions are going down the toilet due to these socialist welfare entitlement programs working their poison/cancer whatever you want to call it, in the system.
So, who can turn the ship around? I would say three-fourth’s of them are capable of doing it. Gingrich in my opinion would double down and do the right thing, he would get the ball rolling again, as would Santorum, Bachmann, etc. My only fear with Romney, is that he would cave on any number of given issues from abortion to to earmarks, to welfare entitlements, etc, etc. It’s a trust issue with Romney. Not that he “doesn’t” have upstanding character, afterall he is a business man, and he understands how to deal with the unemployment issue, no doubt. Like you said, however, that’s where we have to buckle down and try our best to force him in the right direction, or we oust him in four years. The problem there, however, we are liable to get another socialist Democrat back in office which wouldn’t bode well at this critical stage in our nation. We’ve really hit a low point, and it’s going to take many years of good leadership to get us back to, as Mr. Romney has said many, many times “A Shining city on a hill,” or for America to be the “last best hope of the world.”
I will say this, it is very hard to find guys like Ronald Reagan this day and time. He was a bold, and God-fearing leader, who would stand up to any dictator any day of the week, and he really strengthened America’s economy. I’d say if it wasn’t for Ronald Reagan, we would have long been under a communist dictatorship already. And you know, that’s the thing; America had people back then who still had intellects that weren’t polluted with all the Marxist garbage that now fills the minds of many of our younger voters today, and it was those people back in Ronald Reagan’s day who made the common sense choice to choose the man that was Ronald Reagan for President. We should really feel fortunate that America chose him to be our President when they did back in the 80’s. There should be a statue of him in every state, at every state Capitol.
Now, if people would only look back to their ancestor’s decision in the 80’s in choosing Reagan, they could use their example to become role models for future generations…how great would that be? 🙂
On a final note – as to a comment made earlier in your post, you know, you’re right….God did indeed give us free will, and much of the evil we see around us is as a result of our lack of action in doing something about it…but where do we start in trying to fix it; eliminating or deterring the evil we see? We have a guide that was given to us by our heavenly Father and it is His Holy Word, the Holy Bible, the inspired Word of the Living God … it is living and active, it pierces to the bone marrow and lays open every deed, whether good or bad, and it has the solution to every problem across the entire span of time, from age to age, and to the end of time when Christ Jesus comes again to take all those who have been born-again according to the Holy Spirit with Him to be in heaven, in which we will have glorified bodies, purified by the cleansing of the Son.
Yes, God will smile on those who do His Will, He says in Ephesians 5:14 – ““Awake, O sleeper, and arise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you.”
And therefore, we become Light, to a lost and dying world. 🙂
God bless!!
Jer…….T~E~A
Rick Santorum surges in Iowa due to the support of the ”Tea Party”
Wednesday, January 4th at 2:43AM EST
17 Comments
Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney are tied in a very close race to win the Iowa Republican caucus. And the lesson that was learned in 2010, was once again on display in 2012. People constantly talked about how well financed and organized the Romney and Paul campaigns were, but us tea partiers turn out to vote!! And elections are decided by votes, not by who has the biggest staff or the largest war chest.
Site polling showed that Santorum received the most tea party votes. Iowans that were seeking ”a candidate with high moral character” also made Rick their top choice.
So what happens now? I see Mitt winning in New Hampshire and Newt or Rick taking down South Carolina. That leaves Florida as the key state in this race. My home state is Florida and I am active in politics as part of Tea Party Fort Lauderdale so I will give my opinion of who will win in Florida, and why.
The tea party movement is very strong in Florida. And the 2010 election results will show that. Tea party favored candidates knocked off well funded establishment Republican candidates in every primary race from governor(Rick Scott) to senator(Marco Rubio). This is also the state that gave Herman Cain the big bump with his Orlando straw poll win.
I think the race will be down to four candidates by then. Romney, Gingrich, Paul and Santorum. I will review all four candidates.
more here
http://www.redstate.com/mikeymike143/2012/01/04/rick-santorum-surges-in-iowa-due-to-the-support-of-the-tea-party/