The American Spectator

coal carrier| 1.25.12 @ 6:32AM

Sounds like a great commercial. However, what has Mitt done in the last four years that will make him a better candidate then he was when he lost to the guy who lost to Obama.

Jack in Wi.| 1.25.12 @ 6:57AM

Newt Gingrich is the shill for the most extreme elements of the Zionist movement. He is a bought and paid for lackey of Sheldon Adelson, the gambling billionaire and funder of the most extreme people in Israel. These filthy racists want to expel half the population of Israel Palistine so that the build their fantasy promised land, and Rebuild the Great Temple of Herod. Who by the way was an Arab.

Adelson's wife Miriam is a dual citizen and was born in Israel. She also is dumping money into Gingrich's campaign. Why do we have dual citizenship anyhow? It is in fact illegal for foreigners to give mony to American political campaigns. Lets get rid of dual citizenship.

Gingrich in 2005 was pushing for 2 state solution for Palistine with reasonable and livable borders. He called the Palistinians fine people, who were well educated, and that there should be peace in the region. Then Adelson strarted dropping many millions into Newt's organizations and now is funding his campaign. Since then Gingrich has called the Palistinians an invented people and has started mouthing extreme statements that would make Meir Kahane proud. He has also promised to pardon the traitor Jonathon Pollard who was responsible for the deaths of so many American agents in the Soviet Union.

Gingrich on top of all his other dispicable acts is pushing for an attack on Iran in violation of all concepts of International Law and Christian Just War Doctrine. Advocating and planning for such a war is crime against International Law for which many Germans were hung after WW2. It is time to call Gingrich out, for what he is, the enemy of all decent people.

Jack in Wi.| 1.25.12 @ 7:06AM

If Mitt really wanted show a difference between himself and Gingrich. He would fire all the Neocons he has let hang around his campaign and put forth a real American First foreign policy, for peace and prosperity. The reason the extremists are trying to sink Romney is because deep down they know he isn't stupid enough to attack Iran. In fact as soon as he gets the nomination he would push for a peaceful foreign policy. It is the only way he could possibly win the Presidency. The time to do that is now. He should finally call out these people for what they are, enemies of America. Of course that would take tremendous political courage, which Mitt has never shown that he has.

W| 1.25.12 @ 10:33AM

Jack
Do you consider Israel a bigger threat to the USA than Iran?
When Iran attacked our embassy in 1979 and held over 200 Americans hostage for over one year, was that an act of war towards the USA, or was Iran justified?

Jack in Wi.| 1.25.12 @ 10:41AM

Israel is by far a worse enemy then Iran. It has hundreds of nuclear weapons, a vast worldwide terror operation, the Mossad, and owns most of our political class using bribery, blackmail, and intimidation. Iran is a backward 3rd world country with no nuclear weapons and no nuclear weapons program. It has repeatedly called for the end of nuclear weapons. Iran is a peaceful cultured country which hasn't attacked anyone in 2 hundred years. Israel attacks or threatens to attack someone every other week. It is the worst threat to world peace today. It won't be happy until we are in WW3.

W| 1.25.12 @ 11:39AM

Jack,
You have admitted that you will vote only for Ron Paul, which means you will stay home. You also said the USA is basically evil. Now with you saying Israel is a worse enemy to the USA than Iran, you hit the trifecta.
You are truly delusional. You hate the USA, Israel, and Jews. Why do you think any rational person would take you seriously?
Stop wasting your time and our time by posting your nonsense.

Jack in Wi.| 1.25.12 @ 1:26PM

I will respond to the 1979 invasion of the embassy, in which no one died, when you respond to the attack on the USS Liberty in which many Americans died or were wounded and has been pushed down a memory hole. Israel has been rewarded for this crime with many hundreds of billions in american taxpayer money. Iran was invaded by our bought and paid for ally Saddam Hussain and had a million casualties. We also shot down an Iranian airliner which killed hundreds of civilians. That on top of overthrowing their Democratic government in 1953 and re-installing the Shah as a brutal tyrant.They did this at the behest of the oil companies. All the Iranian government wanted was control of it's own natural resourses.

W| 1.25.12 @ 2:15PM

You just answered it, Jack. It is our fault, and the Jews, that Iran attacked our embassy and held Americans as hostages.

Jack in Wi.| 1.25.12 @ 1:39PM

I hope if Romney or Gingrich is the nominee to vote 3rd Party. I should have voted for Howard Philip's Constitution Party in the last few elections. Howard by the way was born a Jew, but is now a Christian. I have the highest respect for him. If Romney dumps the neocons and becomes the peace candidate, he gets my vote. I don't expect that to happen.

Alan Brooks| 1.25.12 @ 3:57PM

"I should have voted for Howard Philip's Constitution Party in the last few elections."

It was YOUR oversight.

W| 1.25.12 @ 11:41AM

Jack,
You did not respond to the question about the 1979 attack on our embasssy and the hostages.

Occam's Tool| 1.25.12 @ 12:09PM

The Packers lost, Jack. Two rounds back. And, you know, the point of an enema is to be found when you remove the tube. Jack, you are an antisemitic maggot and a terrorist supporting scumbag, just like Bradley Manning.

By the way, what's up with the Iranian. Iraqi war? The cultured folk sent little boys out to die, didn't they?

Thanks.

W| 1.25.12 @ 12:23PM

OT
The Iraq-Iran War from 1982-1988 was started and directed by Israel.
The 1979 embassy attack and hostages was started and directed by Israel.
You should have known this by now.

Blackwatch| 1.25.12 @ 4:53PM

The Battle of the Little Big Horn was also started by and directed by Israel too. After all the US Army was taking on a lost tribe of Jewish looking Indians...

Homer| 1.26.12 @ 3:22AM

It was them damn Joos looking funny at Helen of Troy that started one hell of a big mess let me tell you...

Al Adab| 1.25.12 @ 6:08PM

Nephites or Lamanites? I can never keep it straight.

loulou| 1.25.12 @ 12:21PM

W, ignore the creep.

american| 1.27.12 @ 10:09AM

Symptoms
By Mayo Clinic staff
Schizophrenia symptoms also can be attributed to other mental illnesses, and no one symptom can pinpoint a diagnosis of schizophrenia. In men, schizophrenia symptoms typically start in the teens or 20s.
Positive symptoms
In schizophrenia, positive symptoms reflect an excess or distortion of normal functions. These active, abnormal symptoms may include:

* Delusions. These beliefs are not based in reality and usually involve misinterpretation of perception or experience. They are the most common of schizophrenic symptoms.
* Hallucinations. These usually involve seeing or hearing things that don't exist, although hallucinations can be in any of the senses. Hearing voices is the most common hallucination among people with schizophrenia.

RCV| 1.25.12 @ 11:23AM

Jack means "fire all the Jews on his staff." What he doesn't realize is that, to Romney, they're all Gentiles.

Al Adab| 1.25.12 @ 12:38PM

Now there RCV is a conversation worth having. What moral obligation do Mormons have toward Gentiles? It reveals much about the mindset of adherents to that faith. The LDS church has wanted a President since Jopseph Smith himself was a candidate.

RCV| 1.25.12 @ 3:32PM

Al Adab: Living in Southern California for the past 50 years, I've come to know a lot of Mormons. With rare and not disproportinate exceptions, I've found them to be good, decent folks who treat everyone pretty much the same. When I look at Mormons integrated into general society -- like Romney, John Huntsman, Harry Reid, for example -- I see no reason to have any concern about them feeling that they have different moral obligations to society in general than the rest of us.

Mormon history is endlessly fascinating, to be sure, but for most contemporary Mormons it is just that - history. If we were talking about Mormon candidates coming from isolated, sef-contained communities, I would have the same concern you allude to, but that is a concern that I would also have about Hassidic Jews from such communities, apocalyptic Christians from such communities, Islamicists, or even Catholic prelates from the Curia in Rome. I have no such concerns about contemporary Mormons such as Romney or Hunstman.

Al Adab| 1.25.12 @ 3:59PM

RCV:
I appreciate the courtesy and civility of your reply. It raises some interesting questions and perhaps puts the lie to those who would treat each of us as a member of a group (hostage to groupthink or socio-economic pressures) rather than as the individuals we are.

W| 1.25.12 @ 4:04PM

Al Adab
One of my relatives married a Mormon. Aside from her occupation as a tax lawyer, she is a fine person, and like most people does not talk about her religion much.

I think the Giants will beat the Pats but would not bet. Pats have the smartest coach and best quarterback. Should be a great game.

Al Adab| 1.25.12 @ 5:13PM

W:
Oh no, it is an election year so the Patriots must prevail. Ha Ha I have no dog in the fight nor real preference.

RCV| 1.25.12 @ 6:19PM

As a litigator, I feel the same way about tax lawyers. :)

Jack in Wi.| 1.25.12 @ 1:33PM

I said neocons. That means scum like Bolton, who is a gentile as well as all the others. Bush listened to them in 2003 and attacked Iraq against the best advise of his fathers advisors. He destroyed his Presidency when he did that. He refused to bomb Iran, perhaps because he didn't want to be remembered as the guy who started WW3.

Romney should learn from his mistakes. Kick the neocons out now and call them out for what they are, enemies of the American people.They have almost destroyed the conservative movement and the Republican Party.

Mimi| 1.25.12 @ 10:20AM

WOW ! Newt's full of support of Israel....that sure helps in Florida with the Jewish vote!
YOU IDIOT...The United States has always supported ISRAEL and....ALWAYS WILL !!!

RCV| 1.25.12 @ 11:23AM

I'm proud to stand with you on that sentiment, Mimi!

loulou| 1.25.12 @ 12:22PM

Me too!

Blackwatch| 1.25.12 @ 4:55PM

ditto!

Blackwatch| 1.25.12 @ 4:55PM

ditto!

coal carrier| 1.25.12 @ 7:07PM

You didn't answer the question.

Alan Brooks| 1.25.12 @ 3:56PM

"These filthy racists want to expel half the population of Israel Palistine so that the build their fantasy promised land, and Rebuild the Great Temple of Herod. Who by the way was an Arab."

Then vote for Obama, Jack: he is not Jewish, that's for sure! see you at the polls next November.

Jack in Wi.| 1.25.12 @ 4:13PM

Alan: Obama has been in the pocket of the Zionists, his whole political career. I think he hates them as any slave would hate his master. One good thing he has done is a negative. He hasn't bombed Iran yet. I hope he hangs tough like Bush did and doesn't do it. i think the radical zionists are spending so much money on Gingrich to get someone to attack Iran. They may have given up hope that Romney or Obama will pull the trigger.

Alan Brooks| 1.25.12 @ 7:51PM

Jack, this is what Jim Lacey (NRO) had to say on Ashcanistan:
"I recently attended the umpteenth conference at which I heard how we can win in Afghanistan by creating a vibrant economy there. If one is to believe the speakers, all that is required for success in one of the most blighted regions on earth is the tweaking of this aid package and the refocusing of that one. After which, we will be well on our way to building a new Switzerland in the Himalayas.
This is a pipe dream.
After a decade’s effort, nearly 12,000 Americans killed or wounded, and almost $350 billion, we have managed to double the size of the Afghan economy. In doing so, we have picked all the low-hanging fruit. From now on, things just get harder. A second doubling of the Afghan economy will take far longer and cost much more than the first. But let’s assume we can double the Afghan economy again if we just hang in there for ten more years, 12,000 more casualties, and another $350 billion. What would we get?

One more doubling would give Afghanistan a per capita GDP equal to Chad’s. In short, Afghanistan would still rank among the poorest nations on earth. Instead of a new Switzerland in the Himalayas, we would have created a mountainous Chad.

Afghanistan expert and retired Marine colonel T. X. Hammes once told me, “Chad might be good enough.” Yes, it just might be, but we should know going in that what we are aiming for is Chad. Too many so-called experts are still looking at this problem with rose-colored glasses.

Two years ago I attended a conference where much was made of Afghanistan’s probable trillion dollars of mineral wealth. Most of the participants were ecstatic over the geological surveys. Mineral exploitation was going to propel Afghanistan into a prosperous future. At the time, no one wanted to be troubled by “minor” problems, such as Afghanistan’s possessing no modern infrastructure worthy of mention, no settled rule of law to defend contract rights, and no functioning market economy. Moreover, Afghanistan is a landlocked country, which would make it expensive to transport anything the mining companies did manage to extract. On top of all that, there is still a war raging over large swaths of the country, and rich mining communities are a magnet for men with guns.

Of course, the world’s hunger for various ores is ravenous. So, in time, the mining companies might venture into Afghanistan, but only after they have been just about everywhere else. In the years since Afghanistan’s mineral wealth was discovered, there has been scant progress toward exploiting it. I believe that a decade hence I will still be able to write the same thing.

It is time to face facts. Afghanistan has always been poor. It will still be poor when we leave. And it will probably be poor long after I have departed this world. To become wealthy takes a certain mindset and dedication to creating the institutions that underpin a stable market economy. Foremost among them is the willingness to forswear killing visiting businessmen, engineers, and workers. Outsiders can sometimes, but not often, graft a workable market system onto an alien culture. For the most part, though, if the locals are unwilling to make the fundamental cultural shifts (à la turn-of-the-last-century Japan), the grafts will not take.

Nothing I have seen, heard, or read makes me optimistic that Afghanis are ready or willing to build the lasting institutions required for success in a globalized world. The country was an economic basket case when we arrived in 2001. It will be little better when we leave. At some point, we have to accept the fact that we gave the Afghanis their best shot at peace and prosperity. That they failed to grasp it cannot be laid at our doorstep. I, for one, am finding it harder and harder to reconcile myself to the idea of expending the blood of another 12,000 men and women, along with another several hundred billion dollars, just to create Chad.

So, what are the reasons for staying and making one more supreme effort? The first and most emotional is that we have already sacrificed so much that we must see this endeavor through to the end. I understand this desire and often fall prey to it myself. It took someone wiser than me to point out that the past is rarely justification for the future. Our 12,000 dead and wounded in Afghanistan are not honored by adding thousands more to their number.

Others want to stay the course in Afghanistan to ensure that al-Qaeda is never again able to establish bases there. Well, al-Qaeda has adapted to the loss of Afghanistan. In fact, its post-9/11 decentralized organization has made its members much more difficult to track and target. Many in our military would welcome al-Qaeda’s finding a new safe haven where it can set up camps and begin to mass again. Unlike in the years before 2001, there is today no reluctance among the American military to strike terror groups wherever they are found. Departing Afghanistan would not mean we will not go back if it is in our interest to do so. In the future, though, we won’t stay for any longer than it takes to eliminate those who threaten us.

The military has done everything that has been asked of it in Afghanistan. It has, in fact, performed magnificently under the most trying of conditions. Our armed forces have fought and died in a hundred places we have never heard of. But it is now time to honor their service and start bringing them home. What becomes of Afghanistan now is up to the Afghanis. The world is becoming a much more dangerous place. We must begin conserving our blood and treasure for possible use in places much more vital to our national interest and safety (as Afghanistan was in 2001) — places where we can make a real difference.

By the time this article is published, I will have been in Afghanistan for the first 48 hours of a two-week trip. I will report my overall impressions upon my return. If I am wrong, I will say so. If nothing I see there changes my impression of Afghanistan’s future, then I will repeat that it is time for Americans to wish the Afghanis well and hope they will find their way toward a peaceful and prosperous future. They will just have to get there without us."

Red in Denver| 1.26.12 @ 1:49PM

One of the things which should make him a bit more acceptable to the Republican base is his support, campaigning and donating to tea party Republicans (such as Christine O'Donnell and Marco Rubio) to try to help them win in the 2010 mid-terms.

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 1.25.12 @ 6:48AM

Those cuts should be of Newt sitting on a bench with Nancy.

darcy| 1.25.12 @ 11:56AM

Before I'll listen to anything Romney has to say he has to apologize for the lie he made during the last debate that Newt "resigned in disgrace." He slandered Gingrich (see Byron York's article today at the Washington Examiner), and until Romney looks Gingrich in the eyes and tells Newt he was wrong, I do not care what Mitt does! I won't be voting for him, much less watching his ads.

chuck| 1.25.12 @ 8:46PM

Romney will do and say anything, and spend as much money as he can, to be president. He's a despicable POS.

Adjoran| 1.26.12 @ 3:26AM

Why do you think he resigned? Why do you think conservatives rebelled - finally - against his leadership and antics?

You think it was because we were so proud of the job he had done? The damage he did to the Party and conservatism's image persists to this day.

Newt's no conservative. Over the past decade or more, he's been consistently to the left of Romney where they disagreed on everything but Pro-life issues, where Romney is a later convert.

darcy| 1.26.12 @ 1:14PM

Is this the same Romney whom George Soros admits is no different from Obama?

darcy| 1.26.12 @ 1:29PM

And obviously, Adjoran, you failed to read Byron York's Washington Examiner story from yesterday in which the entire episode was laid bare. Pity you. Passion without knowledge is merely frenzy.

That being said, as far as Mitt vs Newt is concerned, I'm afraid we're between the devil and the deep blue sea. The powers that be have determined that we will have no choice in the selection of our nominee -- they are equally bad, sometimes for the same, sometimes for different reasons. The fix is in.

When my state goes to vote in the primary, I won't be choosing either one of them. And not RP either.

Red in Denver| 1.26.12 @ 1:53PM

Regardless of how Romney or anyone else characterizes it -- The fact is that Gingrich could not get the support of 88% of his fellow Republicans in order to retain his position as Speaker. They found his leadership to be erratic and unreliable.

Clint| 1.25.12 @ 6:58AM

We Are Being Set Up By The RINO-CINO Flunkie Stooges For The Ruling Elites' Frontman Mittens Romney.

These Are The RINO-CINO Flunkie Stooges Who Gave Us The Serial Traitor To Conservatism, John McCain Of McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy,McCain-Lieberman,Gang Of 14, Opposing Bush Tax Cuts Of 2001 & 2003,TARP.

Now They Are Trying To Give Us RomneyCare,TARP, Cynical Flip-Flops On Abortion, Gays, Refuses to Sign Pro-Life Pledge, Illegal Immigrants, "Little Chain Saw Al" At Bain, Crony Capitalism Campaign Money Trail.....

The Tea Party Rebellion Is Headed To A Brokered Rebellion.

Dai Alanye| 1.25.12 @ 2:15PM

Please stop leaving out "chickenhawk," you medal-encrusted hero, you.

Clint| 1.25.12 @ 9:10PM

Bibi Says Your Ass Is Crusted, Dai Job.

Now,Go Eat Bibi's Bone, Dai Job.

Michael Tomlinson| 1.25.12 @ 7:33AM

Like him or not Romney is a jobs creator who earned his fortune in the private sector and not from being a DC insider like Gingrich, Santorum and ultimate DC insider and hypocrite Ron "Earmark Porker" Paul.

emilio lizardo, PhD| 1.25.12 @ 7:36AM

Dude- the only reason why Mitt Romney is not a Washington insider is that he loses so many elections. He has tried his damndest to become a Washington insider and has failed. It is not a selling point here

Patrick Henry| 1.26.12 @ 2:23PM

Abraham Lincoln also lost several elections... just saying.

martin j smith| 1.25.12 @ 7:40AM

The ad should be about Obama and only Obama. From now on if Romney or anyone else wants to be elected they must show primarily they can take it to Obama. Failure to do that they are not qualified.

Al Adab| 1.25.12 @ 11:45AM

Martin:
Your "take it to Obama" is exactly on point. In reading a biography of George McClellan I cam across a letter from Lincoln urging the general to march the army and engage Lee. Lincoln wrote, "press closely to him... fight him and try to beat him to Richmond. I say 'try' ; if we never try we shall never succeed".

There is the frustration the Conservatives feel with the GOP. The party is so afraid of failure, it fails to try. Man up, in the vernacular, stand for something and if we fail, we at least have striven as men and not as cattle.

KennesawJack| 1.25.12 @ 12:04PM

Al, as for manning up, you're spot on. The measure of man isn't how many fights he wins, it's how many he shows up for. We need to start showing up.

W| 1.25.12 @ 1:00PM

Al Adab and KJack,
I agree. Remember Bush 41 in 1988 took it to Dukakis, and Bush took it to Dan Rather when he told Rather how would you like it if your career was judged by your one act of walking off the news show? Then in 1992 Bush was the "gentleman" towards Clinton, and in 1996 Dole was the "gentleman" towards Clinton. Meanwhile Clinton attacked both, and won. Dole said Clinton was his opponent, not his enemy, but Clinton's people like Carville/Begala always refer to the Reps as the enemy.
Mitt and Santorum better show they can be agressive towards Obama if they want to stay in the running.

Last night Obama said the solution to the mortgage foreclosures (caused by the government forcing banks to loan to people who can't afford the loans) is to refinance all those loans in a simplified procedure. Like not asking for income verification and other little details. Obama assumes the people are too stupid to know they should refinance if possible so he has to tell them. The problem is they cannot refinance because of bad credit caused by the original mortgages.

chuck| 1.25.12 @ 8:52PM

Bingo!

We want someone with balls. Big brass balls. A damned street fighter with BIG BRASS BALLS!

And it isn't "Ken Doll" Romney, or Santorum with his sweaters and his "I haven't taken a dump in a month" look.

And it sure as hell ain't the geriatric kook!

Nemo| 1.25.12 @ 8:00AM

The trouble is, at this moment in history the US doesn't happen to need a trader or investor, no matter how successful. It needs a leader with an understanding of the tides of history and ideology - and Newt is the only one on the horizon.

Patrick| 1.25.12 @ 1:02PM

Oh really? What about "right-wing social engineering"? Gingrich is a Washington whore.

I could vote for Romney (sure I'd have to get roaring drunk, but it's possible). I could possibly even vote for Paul (provided that I don't black out first). Gingrich, no.

Scott McInnis| 1.26.12 @ 12:29AM

Of course, the words “right wing social engineering” get all the attention, but Gingrich’s argument was a bit more nuanced than the sound bites imply.

This longer excerpt provides a bit more context:

I don’t think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering. I don’t think imposing radical change from the right or the left is a very good way for a free society to operate.

That last line is important.

Gingrich frequently quotes Margaret Thatcher‘s maxim that, “First you win the argument, then you win the vote.” His point regarding Ryan’s plan (though inartfully worded), was simply that — just as it is foolish for liberals to force legislation down our throats — it is also unwise for conservatives to do so. This is especially true when it comes to fundamental change, such as entitlement reform.

Philosophically, conservatives should understand this. Evolutionary — not revolutionary — change is conservative.

It’s also smart politics. And Republican leaders must quietly agree; I don’t see them clamoring to push the Ryan plan. In fact, I haven’t heard much about it since Democrats used it as a cudgel in a special election many months ago.

Back to the main point: The way to bring about fundamental change — such as entitlement reform — is to educate the public — to bring them along with you — to win the argument. This takes some time, and requires leaders with the rhetorical ability to persuade.

Gingrich understands this perhaps better than his opponents.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/12.....z1kXUrwiBR

Indy| 1.25.12 @ 8:24AM

Yes, that would be a good ad and I'm sure some of us here could do the same thing comparing Romney to Obama, let's start with their views on global warming
http://biggovernment.com/awrha.....ed-plants/

We have a bad field of candidates, Mitt and Newt are bad choices, both are big government supporters.

Patrick| 1.25.12 @ 1:03PM

Yeah, it's a pathetic field out there.

Blackwatch| 1.25.12 @ 4:59PM

draft Rep. Tom McClintock
now!

Dai Alanye| 1.25.12 @ 2:21PM

We have Santorum, whose greatest sin seems to be he lost one election in five. And he's the most conservative, as well.

C'mon, get with the sweater.

Indy| 1.25.12 @ 3:54PM

He's not without issues but as of now, Sweater Vest it is

Why did he lose by such a wide margin, there's more to it than most voters know.
http://chestnuthill.patch.com/.....torum-iowa

Derek Leaberry| 1.25.12 @ 8:49AM

Romney's big problem isn't his business success but his political record as a liberal Republican and then a moderate Republican. He now is pretending to be a conservative Republican.

In the venerable old film "Shane", Alan Ladd explains why he has returned to gunslinging after trying to work in ranching. "You can't break the mold," says Shane. Likewise, Romney can not break the mold.

Nancy in NC| 1.25.12 @ 9:00AM

How about: I made money the old fashioned way. I EARNED IT!

Vern Crisler| 1.25.12 @ 9:24AM

If Romney wants to win, he should quote Hayek in a commercial. Of course, with Romney, it's more like "Who's Hayek?"

That's precisely the problem with Romney.

Anthony| 1.25.12 @ 10:06AM

I'm Mitt Romney and I paid more in taxes last year than the Obozo's have collectively.
I'm Mitt Romeny and I gave more money to charities last year than the president and the D senate combined.

Patrick| 1.25.12 @ 1:05PM

True, but most of the posters here can boast the second part.

1ConservativeUSA| 1.25.12 @ 10:14AM

Well done, Ross.

I agree that if Romney ran an ad like this, he would be deserving of the Republican nomination.

Conversely, if he fails to run a similar ad, or if he fails to articulate this message otherwise, then he does not deserve to be our candidiate.

George S| 1.25.12 @ 10:25AM

So the mess that we are in is because a former Speaker was... looking to "profit"? Nary a mention of Karl Marx as transcribed by Saul Alinsky and interpreted by Barack Obama?

Newt sat on a couch! Romney's deals made some people lose jobs! Get real, Obama and Company destroyed our economy and are stepping all over the Constitution. You focus on the irrelevant crap and what Obama did becomes "no big deal". Is that what you want the focus on?

If Romney wants to win, his opponent is Obamaism -- not Newt.

J. Moses Browning| 1.25.12 @ 10:28AM

A timely reminder that Willard didn't actually "run the Olympics." He ran the WINTER Olympics.

Al Adab| 1.25.12 @ 10:28AM

Here in a nutshell is exactly the problem with Republicans. The GOP continues to attempt to legitimize the world view of its opposition instead of standing firm on the principles it once espoused. There is a distinction between Left and Right which all too often the GOP tries to ignore. That is why Conservatives are frustrated with the RINO or rather the establishment GOP. Those who fail to stand for something, stand for nothing.

Mimi| 1.25.12 @ 10:34AM

Mitt's memorized liness are getting old and boring....WHAT on earth does he really stand for ? Sorry, a handsome guy...Looks the part, but there is nothing REAL there....show me something to be for....anything. On the other hand there is NEWT, at least you see "HUMAN", flawed in the past but entirely gripped in the NOW. He reveals his great passion for us and the COUNTRY full of outrage of what the DEMS have done...and a CLEAR way forward!

Bulbul| 1.25.12 @ 11:01AM

Romney's records:
-RomneyCare
-pro abortion
-pro gay marriage
-pro gun control
-pro climate change
Voters in FL are smart and Romney is a "dead man walking" in FL because FL has a close primary, only registered Republican voters will participate, and Romney's approval among them is no better than Gingrich.
FL is a Southern state, Gingrich has southern heritage and conservative credentials, and Romney lacks both.

Interested Conservative| 1.25.12 @ 11:17AM

Images . . . Success . . . images of success . . . successful images . . .

OK. Then?

shoebox57| 1.25.12 @ 11:18AM

Mitt Romney does not care one twit about the average American nor does Barak. Newt is feared in Washington D.C. because the elite know full well what they did to this man and should he get elected heads will role. Newt has had a conversion and he is old enough to avoid the arreogance of his youth. Until we find a perfect candidate, which is not going to happen, it needs to be Newt!

Dai Alanye| 1.25.12 @ 2:28PM

Newt certainly is "...old enough to avoid the arreogance [sic] of his youth," but he simply can't stand prosperity. Once in a leading position the narcissism and grandiosity spurts out. He's as predictable as Old Faithful.

And if you think he's bad now, wait for the general election.

JimP| 1.25.12 @ 11:33AM

Now conservative columnists are writing columns about their fantasies on how to stop Newt and help Mitt. I'm sorry to say it, but this is getting patheticly embarrassing.

actuarius| 1.25.12 @ 11:47AM

If Romney would start to take the fight to the opposition in the way you describe, I would consider supporting him. Until then, no way.

Peter McGrath| 1.25.12 @ 12:02PM

Thanks, for that. The guy just keeps parroting the same, focus-group tested, lines. He's a fine person, a family man, but has no fire in his belly.

The next Republican President needs to GO TO WAR. Has Mitt ever taken on the Left? NO. He's accomodated the Left, on everything from the 2nd Amendment, abortion, state-run health insurance, you name it. Wrong Guy for the job.

loulou| 1.25.12 @ 12:28PM

Romney CAN'T fight the opposition--it's not in his DNA. He sees Obama as a nice guy.

darcy| 1.25.12 @ 1:00PM

I agree with you, loulou. To Romney, Obama is just another Democrat and this 2012 election is just business as usual. He seems clueless that much of the country's people view Obama as a domestic enemy, as in, "enemies foreign and domestic."

DANSHANTEAL| 1.25.12 @ 12:10PM

I'LL TRADE PLACES WITH MITT ANY DAY. SO WOULD ALL THE 99ERS. I'M LOOKING FOR A MAN TO MATCH OUR MOUNTAINS AND HE'S THE GUY.

Occam's Tool| 1.25.12 @ 12:11PM

I just want a guy who will fight in a filthy Phil, sewer rat fashion, 'cause only that will win against that scumbag in the WH. Who's the more slippery, underhanded, backstabbing, anything to win character: Newt or Mitt?

Patrick| 1.25.12 @ 1:11PM

Yes, but Newt is better at all those things against Republicans. Newt is out for Newt, and is no less a narcissistic scumbag than our current president.

If it isn't his idea, it must be destroyed. If it doesn't give him money, it must be destroyed. If you want another Nixon, Gingrich is your guy.

RCV| 1.25.12 @ 1:44PM

Kudos to Marco Rubio for calling out Gingrich today on his ads. What a loose cannon this guy would be, and understandable why Republican office holders don't want him heading the ticket.

darcy| 1.25.12 @ 2:54PM

Loose cannons? Romney's campaign today is echoing Nancy Pelosi's threat that Newt will never be president because she knows something that will stop his ascendancy in its tracks. She backs off, and now Romney's staff distances itself from its fishing expedition.

Romney reeks like the fish in Denmark. Rotten and smelly. This guy Romney and his people will jump on any bandwagon to trash Newt without having a shred of evidence. Meanwhile, Obama, to Romney, is pure as the driven snow: just another member of the "other" party.

Knowing you as I do, RCV, any candidate YOU like, on the R ticket, is one whom conservatives should view with the greatest skepticism.

Al Adab| 1.25.12 @ 4:02PM

Hi Darcy,
You don't suppose Newt and Pelosi... She wouldn't kiss and tell, would she?

darcy| 1.25.12 @ 4:15PM

Nice to hear from you, Al Adab.

But ick, eeuuwwe (sp?). Pelosi? You're a card, Al Adab. And shame on you for putting that image in my head ;-).

Al Adab| 1.25.12 @ 5:15PM

Darcy,
Have a great evening, sweet dreams:
tee hee

Mike D| 1.25.12 @ 12:17PM

Romney better start acting presidential soon or he will be left behind in Gingrich's rear view mirror. Great ad! I hope Romney is reading AS.

loulou| 1.25.12 @ 12:27PM

It depends on what your definition of presidential is. One needs a spine and core constitutionalist convictions to be presidential in my eyes. Romney is hollow.

Al Adab| 1.25.12 @ 4:03PM

He's not reading AS Mike. More likely the Nation or The Economist.

loulou| 1.25.12 @ 12:25PM

A great ad can't change what Mitt is--a pantywaist who wants to run a "respectful" campaign against Obama whom he has described as a nice person.

Mitt is McCain, bobdole, Jerry Ford and all the other hapless moderate/liberal Republicans. The people are seeing through the scam and no ad will change that.

Bulbul| 1.25.12 @ 12:49PM

Romney is phony. No amounts of ads will change the hearts and minds of Floridians, it's not NH, and Romney will lose FL to Gingrich, in double digit. He will remain the race, as an under-dog.

Bulbul| 1.25.12 @ 12:55PM

On Fox & Friends in FNC, Romney praised and embraced Obama's policies. Romney is a losing cannon, he's dishonest and liar.

Patrick| 1.25.12 @ 1:18PM

Oh, and we have Gingrich's little love-in with Pelosi. Both are unworthy, but Gingrich is slime.

Bulbul| 1.25.12 @ 3:24PM

I don't know how Romney can get away the fact that RomneyCare was the foundation for ObamaCare, and that helped Obama craft the bill. Romney will invoke the 10th amendment, yet he'll never convince the American people why 49 other states do not have RomneyCare in their states.

RCV| 1.25.12 @ 3:35PM

I guess the same way that Gingrich gets away with his long-standing support for an individual mandate.

Bulbul| 1.25.12 @ 5:12PM

Gingrich never supported the individual mandate, but Obama did.

RCV| 1.25.12 @ 6:20PM

You're ill-informed, sir.

RCV| 1.25.12 @ 6:22PM

From "The Hill" newspaper:
Presidential contender Newt Gingrich argued in favor of an individual healthcare mandate during a speech at the Alegent Health Clinic in 2008, saying it was “immoral” for those who can afford to have insurance not to buy it.

The individual mandate was the centerpiece and most controversial aspect of the Obama administration’s Affordable Care Act, which has widely been blasted by Republicans — including Gingrich — as government overreach.

“I think you have got to require everybody to either have insurance or post a bond,” Gingrich said.

Marc Jeric| 1.25.12 @ 1:17PM

Romney needs better advisers. Also, he can do all that without destroying Gingrich on the way. Newt could be useful to him as adviser to the President.

Patrick| 1.25.12 @ 1:19PM

Well, at least he'd know which lobbyists will give Mitt the most money.

Joe D.| 1.25.12 @ 2:27PM

Ross, I did not know, like Romney you were such a con-man. Gingrich did not sell his influence or lobbying to Freddie Mac.

You can not wipe out 2 1/2 decades of being a good conservative with an association with Freddie Mac. Also, you can not make Romney look like a conservative when his whole government career is as a moderate/liberal Republican (RINO) from the northeast. Let him go back to business. He does that well. He does not know how to work/force the evil democrats to balance budgets, pick the right people or judges.

He could not hold up the Mass constitution (gay marriage). What makes you thinks he will do better with the US Constitution.

Indy| 1.25.12 @ 3:56PM

Here's the video of Coleman saying RomneyCare is not likely to be fully repealed...uh oh, Willard has to go into damage control mode, someone went off message
http://hotair.com/archives/201.....-entirety/

I like a little sunshine, it shows what I have suspected, Willard will not go to the mat to repeal, I don't trust him

W| 1.25.12 @ 4:12PM

Obamacare will be repealed only if we have a Republican majority in the House and Senate and a Republican president. We need all three, otherwise it does not matter who is president, unless we have a veto proof Congress. Without Congress, the President can issue waivers but that does not repeal the law. The law will be there ready to be applied by the next president to reverse the waivers, or even a Democratic Congress that will force the repeal of the waivers.

Indy| 1.25.12 @ 8:55PM

I understand the GOP has to take the Senate and hold the House, let's say they even succeed and take the Senate (and even get to 60), we know there are some squishes whose votes cannot be depended on, it will take Presidential leadership to get this repealed...Coleman's comment was telling, what if he were appointed HHS? Who would Romney appoint? I don't trust Romney to repeal it fully. We cannot leave any structure in place, it must be repealed and replaced with free market solutions and it must happen quickly, the exchanges are being built, the structure will be in place.

W| 1.25.12 @ 9:05PM

If Congress passes it, Romney, Newt, or Santorum will sign it. You raise another question about which of the three can persuade them to vote. I believe all the Republicans will vote, and maybe some Dems like Minchin from W.Virginia.

PattyMor| 1.25.12 @ 4:40PM

Precisely Indy. Romney is trying to sell himself as something he clearly is not. He's not one scintilla of conservative. He's done nothing conservative.
And the Father of Romneycare is trying to tell us he'll repeal it (get real). Now his advisors are telling us what we already knew--no repeal.

I'll take Santorum or Gingrich. But, I think Gingrich (for all his flaws/failings/shortcomings)
is man who will and can take on Obama, the "food stamp" president.

Pimarily Exhausted| 1.25.12 @ 6:33PM

Rarely do I hear what Willard did as MA governor. It's not enough to say he had to capitulate against overwhelming Democrat odds.

He is as big an opportunist as anybody up there in the primary. Attacking his Bain Capital is not an assualt on capitalism when you ask yourself how did he make all that money (high rate of returns)? He only talks about a 3 or 4 companies. What Bain did most of the time was to buy companies at a huge discount by bid-rigging and selling off its assets (but not before stopping to fund the pension funds), borrowing money (paying himself large management fees), and finally declaring it dead in court.

Willard is a member of the classic Baby Boomer leadership who contributed to the destruction of much of America's industrial base by tearing things down, not building them up. Take away Staples and the other few companies you hear about and you got a raider.

He is not a good or even fair business leader by the looks as how he runs and spends money for his campaign. The fallacy of an MBA president has been proven to be false.

Is this the guy you want to hear or see on a regular basis? What exactly is his vision except for canned statements that say nothing such as "do the right thing because it's the right thing to do" (this type of euphanism)?

This guy is electable? Look at his record. He's got a losing record. The MA governship was a fluke and he didn't run again because he knew he'd get creamed. If you want a real liberal, stay with Obama.

coal carrier| 1.25.12 @ 7:15PM

You are the only one that answered my question. “what has Mitt done in the last four years that will make him a better candidate then he was when he lost to the guy who lost to Obama.” Nothing!

David| 1.25.12 @ 7:41PM

Ya'll keep making the for Santorum for me. Romney and Gingrich and Bam Bam all support individual mandates, all support the theory that any warming that exists is man-caused, and all supported the Wall Street bailouts. There is more, but I won't bother to educate you.

Santorum is the clear contrast with Bam Bam, not the two folks are kinda like him.

Wake up and get behind Santorum. He can't be attacked for his wealth, flip flopping, lobbying, his religion, or his personal life. Support the guy who has much much less baggage than Newt or Mitt - go Santorum.

David| 1.25.12 @ 7:42PM

Excuse me, "Ya'll keep making the CASE for Santorum for me".

Paul from SA| 1.25.12 @ 8:10PM

The ad would likely backfire.

There is a growing disconnect between Romney supporters and Gingrich supporters, and each's attacks on each other are getting childish. The only difference I see is that prominent Republicans are directly attacking Gingrich supporters on TV and calling them stupid -- or worse. Ann Coulter thinks I'm a Neanderthal. Romney has the Republican media on his side; Newt does not.

Each would make so-so presidents, but Gingrich would be busy battling liberals while Romney would be battling conservatives trying to appease the media.

I think Democrats fear a Gingrich presidency the most, but fear a Romney candidacy the most. Romney is the most likely to produce a conservative third-party.

Tom| 1.25.12 @ 10:49PM

Only one problem - Mitt invested lots of $$ in Freddie and Fannie - ooops.

POST American| 1.26.12 @ 12:24AM

"---You know what I think?
I think RED China's going to be taking
us into receivership within a few years.
I mean actual, boots to the ground,
takeover. And it won't be 'framed'
like a military or imperial 'conquest'
---but as just the 'inevitable' next stage
of the Globalist business plan."

WAKE UP!

ROMNEY is
-------------architect of Obamacare
--------------PRO 'Banker Bailouts'
----------------PRO 'a--bore--shun'
------------------PRO open borders
---------------------PRO NAFTA/GATT
------------------------ANTI 2nd Amendment
-----------------------------PRO EUGENICS

ALL this as the country continues to
implode-----and unaccountable, ILLEGAL,
psychopathic, debt serf generating

-----------USURY MAN'S THE HELM------------.

Actuarial PSYCHOPATHY charts our
---'FEW--T--your'.

No more time to mince words about
this feeble capstone excuse for a campaign.

"When an IDEAL ---ANY IDEAL
gets its hands on the REAL levers
of power ---you get PURE EVIL."
D H Lawrence
1920

Globalism ---Usury ----and EUGENICS
are IDEALS.

-------------------I.D. ---ALLLLLS-----------------------

------------THE REPUBLIC HAS FALLEN------------

Look into the eyes of others.

Even 2 people make a universe.

Take hold.

------------------'STAND WITH ME!-------------------

---------------HUAC/ Nuremberg 2012---------------

-------------------YOU ARE THERE!-------------------

Scott McInnis| 1.26.12 @ 12:30AM

The Tea Party loves Newt because he is historically against Big Govt. Spending. That’s why ABC hates him.

To the Romney that said, "Newt resigned in disgrace over ethics violations." You have no idea what you are Talking about!. Newt taught a history class in a small Georgia school. The dems tried to say it was partisan and said the non-profit status of the class was illegal. The IRS several years later released a 70+ page document saying the charges were nuts and had no foundation. Gingrich resigned as speaker TWO YEARS LATER, after he lead the congress to shut down the government over TOO MUCH SPENDING. The dems had a better spin on that so... in an election year... the republican house put some distance between themselves and Gingrich to get re-elected. The Republicans held the house, but Newt got his feelings hurt and had had enough... so he resigned. To say that Newt Resigned in Disgrace over ethics violations.... is just a big, stupid, misinformed LIE. 

Romney just came out with an ad accusing Newt of not really knowing Reagan, it says that Reagan only mentioned Newt once in his diary. That one mention says that Newt wanted to CUT FEDERAL SPENDING and Reagan thought it would hurt defense. SO newt was to the right of Reagan when it came to spending.  

Romney has flip flopped again today. In Mass. he said, "Blind trust are a ruse that shady politicians use to hide their investments. You can see your investments any time you want to." Today he said that his investments into Freddie and Fannie were in a blind trust that he didn't know about. And then to say that Newt was a lobbyist for Freddie and Fannie after the only published advice that Newt gave to house republicans was to NOT SPEND MONEY on the agency.... is just a LIE.  

Romney has flip flopped on all the major issues and authored Obama Care. Romney is to the left of John McCain and Charlie Crist. Newt has consistently been against BIG GOVT SPENDING. .... and he can articulate that well.  

That's why the Tea Party love him. 

POST American| 1.26.12 @ 1:19AM

-------------------FINAL WORD-------------------------

-------------------'I.D.---ALLLLLL'----------------------

-Told ya' they loved word play
that throws it in your face!

LOL

chris| 1.26.12 @ 6:59AM

In the free market, consultants are paid to advise and work to further the interests of their client. Although I abhor the existence of Freddy Mac, it is a legal entity and not the Cali Drug Cartel. The more so called conservatives refuse to address Mitt Romney's atrocious leftist record, the less I like him. After all, we now know that he's incapable of defending himself, even when wrongfully attacked on issues pertaining to capitalism - which is supposed to be his strong suit. I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me the conservative elements of Romneycare, opposing Bush's tax cuts, supporting affirmative action in all public businesses, cap & trade, support of the Department of Education, ethanol subsidies, support of Obama's Stimulus and all of the other far left ventures Mitts championed for as Governor of Massachusetts.

Dave| 1.26.12 @ 9:09AM

I am sick of these attacks from the Republican National Media Elite (RNME). Try pronouncing the acronym Our Enemy! If the GOP nominates Obama light than I am out and on to a 3rd party. I HATE THE GOP ESTABLISHMENT AND THE RINOS!

John| 1.26.12 @ 9:51AM

Ross Kaminsky Rules! This article that highlights Romney working for One Dollar on numerous projects is something every American should know.
How many politicians would do such a thing?

Simon Templar| 1.26.12 @ 9:52AM

Ross,

That commercial, if a truth meter were applied, would come out more like this...

Hi, my name is Mitt Romney, and I want to be your next President. I am a east coast progressive Republican hand picked by the GOP establishment to lead this great nation into the twenty first century because they firmly believe that a real conservative would jeopardize their congressional elections and control of the Washington DC money purses.

I have a long record of liberal stances and helped author my states health care program that is now going bankrupt and is a disaster. So, do not ask me any questions about that subject as I have no intention of rescinding Obamacare if elected. I know I have said a lot about Obama and how incompetent he is but the truth is I really do not see what the big deal is about this guy. I will not call him a socialist as I really do not see him that way at all. Sure, elect me and I will continue with the same big government that you have grown accustom to but without all the class warfare rhetoric.

Yes, I know my proposals to fix this mess are long winded, complex, and so numerous that they are essentially useless but they were never intended to be actually enacted. It really is not about change it is about adapting..yes, the system has a few kinks but it really is a good one. What really matters the most is what Ross so loves to focus on...unbridled international global commerce and corporate activity. I really do not give a damn what happens domestically as the future is well beyond this country as well as the money to be made.

It's a brave new world, my fellow Americans, and there is no room for these social conservatives and there rantings about the culture, abortion, family values....so you will be pleased to know I will just play lip service to it..do not get your nickers in a twist.

For those concerned about the possibility of real change, do not be ridiculous, everything will be essentially the same if I am elected with perhaps a few changes and some new government programs that I hope to enact to stimulate the economy. Well, at least look like I am stimulating it and doing something new and fresh.....

So, it is inevitable, accept it as you have always done and get in line at those voting booths as I am going to be the nominee come hell or high water whether you want it or not, or how many articles Ross writes or does not write tearing my opponents down and shoring me up.

Romney 2012! Paid for by the Elect Romney Campaign. This message approved by Mitt Romney.

Dave| 1.26.12 @ 10:39AM

Love your comment, spot on!

soldiermom11| 1.26.12 @ 12:56PM

Didn't know this about Romney...How could the bleeding hearts ever bad mouth working for the Olympics for free? Thank you. Oh by the way...how much did Gingrich donate to the government or Fannie May?

Gazinya| 1.26.12 @ 1:06PM

I thought the "PERFECT" add from the Romney camp would be Romney being asked if 'at anytime you were at Bain Capitol, did you or any of your associates, ever buy 2000 guns and give them to drug runners who would then go on to murder hundreds of Mexican nationals? Did you or any of your associates ever invest as much as $535 million dollars of other peoples money on a boondoggle like Solyndra? Did you ever take you family on a $6million vacation with funds given you to invest with? Because The Obama and his administration has done all these and they call him 'smart'."

Willy| 1.26.12 @ 1:47PM

Bravo!

harold| 1.29.12 @ 12:23AM

this opinon piece by ross kaminsky about what romney should say in an ad is about right

what all these experts miss is the central point

while congress appropriates funds
the president is the real influence on how they are used

who would you want to invest your retirement funds
romney or obama

i dare say the internal rate of return on romney investments is much more positive than any of the others and really except for commander in chief the president must know how to handle the money of the government to get the best return

gail| 1.30.12 @ 2:10AM

That would be an awesome ad!