-
What Those Who Boycott Israel Really Want
May 14, 2013 | 142 comments
-
Mitt on Marriage
May 8, 2013 | 38 comments
-
The One Constant
May 1, 2013 | 118 comments
-
Trudeaus and Terrorism
April 22, 2013 | 15 comments
-
I Was Almost There
April 16, 2013 | 171 comments
Campaign Crawlers
Could Mitt Lose Michigan?
If Mitt Romney loses the Michigan primary, as polls suggest he might, it will be a stinging rebuke.
Mitt Romney appeared to regain his footing this weekend. After being swept by Rick Santorum in the Missouri primary and in the Minnesota and Colorado caucuses, Romney rebounded with victories in the CPAC straw poll and the week-long Maine caucus.
But Romney could soon face his toughest battle yet, and in the place he would have least expected it: Michigan. Rick Santorum is winning over Republicans and blue collar Reagan Democrats in the Wolverine State and has scratched his way to the top of the polls. The American Research Group currently has Santorum leading Romney by six points (33 percent to 27 percent). Meanwhile, Public Policy Polling gives Santorum an even more substantial lead of fifteen points (39 percent to 24 percent) and notes that he is ahead in every area of the state except Oakland County, where Romney grew up. This is not good news for Romney.
Should Romney lose to Santorum in Michigan, be it by six points or fifteen, it will be a stinging rebuke. After all, the people of Michigan thrice elected his father George Romney during the 1960s, though one could argue that the elder Romney is a distant memory now. That said, the younger Romney convincingly won the state’s 2008 primary, beating eventual GOP nominee John McCain by nine points. A loss in Michigan on Feb. 28 could very well put a dagger through the heart of Romney’s campaign, even if he were to win the Arizona primary later that same evening. If Romney can’t beat Rick Santorum in Michigan, then how could he expect beat President Obama there?
However, Romney has time on his side. Two weeks to be exact. If a week in politics is a lifetime, then two weeks is an eternity. It is more than enough time for Romney to sharpen his Wolverine claws and rip Santorum to shreds, as he did with Newt Gingrich last month in Florida following the former Speaker’s upset victory in the South Carolina primary.
The question now is whether Santorum’s hide is thick enough to withstand Romney’s persistent attacks. I’m not sure how helpful it is for Santorum to suggest that Romney rigged the results of the CPAC straw poll. This is something on which Santorum ought not dwell. He is far better served by looking ahead than by looking back. As Satchel Paige often said, “Don’t look back. Something might be gaining on you.” In this case, that something would be Romney with his teeth bared. Given what is at stake on Feb. 28, these encouraging poll numbers for Santorum in Michigan are certainly more worthy of his attention than a far less consequential straw poll.
Besides, what exactly can Romney say against Santorum? He cannot credibly criticize Santorum on social issues, such as abortion and gay marriage, without drawing attention to his own inconsistencies on those matters. He certainly cannot criticize Santorum on foreign affairs and national defense. At best, Romney can call Santorum a Washington insider and accuse him of pork barrel spending and earmarks. But whatever Santorum’s transgressions from his days on Capitol Hill, they pale in comparison to Romneycare, which hangs over the former Massachusetts governor’s perfectly coiffed hair like the sword of Damocles. It certainly doesn’t help Romney that Santorum has been more effective than any other Republican rival at drawing attention to its shortcomings, so much so that Romney referred to his own scheme as “Romneycare” in one of the recent GOP debates.
Another factor working against Romney is that many conservatives do not want him to attack Santorum in the manner he did Gingrich. As Byron York noted in the Washington Examiner, a group of conservative activists met with Romney prior to his CPAC speech and beseeched him to refrain from going after Santorum. Clearly, Santorum has not made enemies on the right the way Gingrich has, and while many conservatives were more than happy that Romney went medieval on Gingrich, the same cannot be said when it comes to Santorum. Romney could pay the price for disregarding this counsel.
The only way Romney’s strategy will work is if Santorum, like Gingrich, becomes his own worst enemy. If Romney can manage to get Santorum to sound like a sullen, sanctimonious, scolding sourpuss in the next two weeks, then he will have found a way to turn back yet another Republican challenger. But if Santorum’s skin proves thick enough, Republicans might very well defang Romney.
About the Author
Aaron Goldstein writes from Boston, Massachusetts.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (158) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Aaron Goldstein
More Articles From Campaign Crawlers
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/02/14/could-mitt-lose-michigan
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- The Demise of Money and Credit
- Wincing at Cumberbatch
- We Have Her Example
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Richard Baker| 2.14.12 @ 6:31AM
Maybe the citizens of Michigan remember Mitt's father and one Romney was enough for them.
Judy| 2.14.12 @ 6:37AM
Romney will beat Obama.
JJ| 2.14.12 @ 12:48PM
How, not enough GOP RINOs to push him over the finish line.
Eyes & Ears in Oregon| 2.14.12 @ 9:33PM
And MAYBE there are enough dissatisfied and former Obama supporters to do the job! Not so sure those voters will go for Santorum. Just a thought.
Marco2| 2.14.12 @ 9:00AM
If you live in Michigan, as I do, you know that George Romney is fondly remembered as a fine governor. Unless, of course, you're some kind of sourpuss union organizer or untreatable lib.
JJ| 2.14.12 @ 12:49PM
George Romney was also a progressive Republican who attacked Barry Goldwater. I remember Romney well.
Tommy Frisco| 2.14.12 @ 12:59PM
Marco2,
Most of the people in Michigan that fondly remember George Romney are in rest homes...and they're really getting him mixed up with someone else, but they don't know who.
Remember this: George Romney is why you have to pay a state income tax.
Lyneuss Fields | 2.14.12 @ 1:12PM
And Mitt Romney is losing in every county in the state except Oakland. It's fascinating that you two believe he is doing so great.
http://lyneussfields.blogspot......gious.html
Vern Crisler | 2.14.12 @ 11:40AM
Mitt Romney not attack Santorum? What fantasy world is Goldstein living in? We've already seen Romney's smear campaign against Newt succeed in convincing Republican whores in Florida to go with the money-bags politician. There's no chance in hell that Romney will play nice with Santorum if he perceives Santorum as a threat to his election bid. An empty suit with money doesn't care what conservatives want; he'll do what ever it takes to win.
JJ| 2.14.12 @ 12:51PM
Problem now for Romney is that people are wise to his tactics. He is in danger of serious blowback.
Worried for the country| 2.14.12 @ 1:13PM
Name one attack that Romney has made that isn't a fair vetting issue?
Either you are full of Newt's pious baloney or you are an Axelrod operative.
Nick| 2.14.12 @ 3:57PM
"Name one attack that Romney has made that isn't a fair vetting issue?"
Romney lied, repeatedly, when he asserted that former-Speaker Gingrich "had to resign in disgrace" and was "a failed leader."
O'Romney is a slime merchant who will say anything to get elected.
Now, go away, concern troll.
Worried for the country| 2.14.12 @ 4:14PM
Pious baloney.
Ask Steve Largent, Tom Coburn or other conservatives who staged a coup because of Newt's unsteady leadership. There is no question that Newt resigned his speakership in disgrace. Anything else is revisionist history.
Also, the ethics charges against Newt were plea bargained away. Just like Charlie Rangel. The congress protects their own. Yes, Newt was later exonerated by the one narrow charge that they let stand but that doesn't clear him of the other wrong doings.
I don't think Newt is a bad guy but his executive leadership abilities are suspect. I suspect his super large ego is the problem. Even Santorum describes Newt's leadership as chaotic. Santorum did this while praising Newt as his personal mentor.
Nick| 2.14.12 @ 4:53PM
"There is no question that Newt resigned his speakership in disgrace."
Then why isn't O'Romney saying it anymore? Answer: Because he got caught LYING!
The coup was lead by conservatives because Speaker Gingrich let RINOs, like Shuster, Lewis, Young, et al, chair the key committees, wrecking the Revolution of 1994. Also, he let Bubba "The Rapist" Clinton raise funding for programs like the National Endowment for the Arts and AmeriCorps, to cut deals.
O'Romney is a businessman. Meaning he is a deal-cutter. He would be worse than McLame, Dole, and Trent Lott rolled-up into one!
Also, it was Representative Gingrich's leadership skills that were responsible for the Republican's take-over of Congress for the first time in 40 years.
O'Romney denounced the Contract with America, while he was trying to out-pro-abort The Swimmer Kennedy, remember? He will SAY ANYTHING to get elected. All he's missing is a boom-box!
Worried for the country| 2.14.12 @ 5:15PM
As a great man once said: "There you go again"
You don't have the facts on your side all you can come up with is red herrings.
Nick| 2.14.12 @ 5:42PM
Says the guy with no counterarguments, I see.
If I have no facts, as you falsely claim, my statements should be easily debunked, no?
The scarlet fish-heads are your's and O'Romney's, not mine.
Garfield| 2.14.12 @ 6:54PM
Actually if you read into what actually happened you would know the IRS later cleared Gingrich and in a 74 page report, explained how they came to the conclusion that Gingrich did nothing wrong to begin with.
Worried for the country| 2.16.12 @ 3:12AM
Yes, but 47 of the original 80 charges were plea bargained away. He was not exonerated of those charges. They did the same thing with Charlie Rangel. They make some headlines and then give a slap on the wrist. Congress protects their own. They do it over and over again.
Worried for the country| 2.16.12 @ 3:15AM
Also he still resigned his speakership in disgrace. That is a fact. The ethics charges were only part of his problem. He lost the faith of his caucus. He especially lost the faith of the conservative wing of his caucus. Just ask Tom Coburn or Steve Largent. It was a leadership problem. He didn't have the votes. It is really quite sad that the great man had to go down that way.
Worried for the country| 2.16.12 @ 3:18AM
IMHO - the reason he went down was his ego got in the way of his leadership. His ego clearly hasn't gone away and it would be a problem for his Presidency.
Worried for the country| 2.14.12 @ 4:19PM
Newt is the slime merchant. He has repeatedly distorted Romney's record and he knows he was being dishonest too. Santorum, under the cover of Newt, has started the desperate attacks too.
Did you know Newt was robocalling in FL that Romney was withholding Kosher meals from holocaust survivors? Disgusting!!!
Nick| 2.14.12 @ 4:59PM
O'Romney did withhold Kosher meals from Holocaust survivors. It was in all the papers.
Besides, O'Romney started it. He poked the hornet's nest, and now you're whining because he got stung!
"Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!"
Worried for the country| 2.14.12 @ 5:16PM
I'm not the one whining. I'm just happily pointing out lies and hypocrisy with a smile on my face.
Nick| 2.14.12 @ 5:45PM
You're not whining?
Didn't you just whine about Mr. Gingrich's robo-calls?
You can't even remember what you write.
Jacobite| 2.16.12 @ 11:32PM
Yes, that worthless George was great. He fought Barry Goldwater tooth and nail in '64 (which he never did for LBJ, just as Mitt will never ever smear O'bwana as he has Newt, Santorum, Bachman, etc.), blessed Michigan with its first state income tax, and diddled around in '67, not allowing the MNG to arrest anybody or shoot looters/snipers because the rioters might get upset. I knew a MNG guy from Warren who claimed he got to loose Ma Deuce on a Buick full of rioters at a roadblock, but maybe he was just boasting... Damn, woulda been cool though. Anyhow, Detroit is all black and wonderful now, so it all turned out fantastic, especially north of 8-Mile.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 2.14.12 @ 6:34AM
Santorum has no chance of winning a general election and appears to be on his way to becoming the second coming of John McCain.
Even if Romney loses Michigan he shouldn't panic. There are many states ahead and Romney needs to focus on what he has to offer.
The media would love nothing better than to see Romney knocked off his game and that's precisely what Santorum seems to revel in doing.
Bruce| 2.14.12 @ 8:53AM
I totally disagree about what "the media would love". I think the media wants the Republicans to go with Romney so they can paint him as "Obama light". What does Romney bring to the table that Obama doesn't? The ability to work across the aisle he showed in Massachusetts? The fact he was "forced" into doing what the Dems wanted? (See G.W. Bush for that excuse). His help to bail out failing companies? (Obama will say he's doing that already.)
Dai Alanye | 2.14.12 @ 9:06AM
Most of us can tell the difference between the candidate who is a true, if sometimes wavering, conservative, and the candidate who believes if he says "conservative" often enough it will convince the doubters. Mitt's act has worn thin.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 2.14.12 @ 9:42AM
So what's the alternative? Gingrich? who is a corrupt Washington insider or Santorum?, who loved big government before he hated it.
Al Adab| 2.14.12 @ 10:52AM
That is always the argument Bill. Who is the alternative? What do we do with a Romney though who represents nothing except the same old accomodationist GOP dating back to Dewey which has opposed the Conservative Movement since its inception? Do we really intend to follow another such a one to another such defeat? We rejected this guy four years ago in favor of the "more conservative" McCain, why would we follow him now?
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 2.14.12 @ 11:50AM
McCain wasn't more conservative. That indicates that one of two facts is true: 1. there isn't a conservative base in the Republican Party, 2. The conservative base isn't conservative in fact and is merely another group of independents who must be catered to in an effort to get their vote.
Al Adab| 2.14.12 @ 12:26PM
Bill:
That's why I put it in quotes.
A moderate republican and a liberal republican and a conservative republican walk into a bar. The bartender says, "Hi Mitt".
Mike Rogers | 2.14.12 @ 10:06AM
The media likes news, and Santorum knocking off Romney in MI would be news, but you are all wrong otherwise.
Personally, I'm with Newt, because I'll take bold colors over pale pastels, even if those bold colors resemble a Picasso.
On the other hand, it is Mittens who is the second coming of John McCain - it was McCain who conspired with other candidates (wasn't it Romney?) to squeeze out his rivals, and was tireless attacking other Republicans, until he won, and went Mr Nice Guy on Obama.
One thing we can be sure of, neither Santorum nor Newt will go soft on Obama - there is no such guarantee with Mittens, whether he is the second coming of John McCain, or the 3rd coming of Bob Dole, or the shadow of Gerald Ford - he'll lose like they did.
If Santorum comes out on top, I'll embrace him as the man to stand up for the first, second, and a few more amendments that neither Obama, not Mittens really cares for!
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 2.14.12 @ 11:50AM
Yeah, Gingrich's bold colors of insider information sold to the highest bidders.
Appleby| 2.14.12 @ 7:06AM
The Public don't LIKE Romney. The media and the usual bobble-heads are trying to shove him in our faces and wallpaper over his inch-deep platform and his lack of vision, and the fact that he's got the face and the suit of the guy who fired us for no apparent reason just before Christmas and walks sheepishly round the office avoiding the eyes of those who have not been fired YET.
Rick Santorum is a consistent Catholic, a consistent Conservative, and he may not only win votes, he may win Catholics to take a real good look at what I call "YeahBut" Catholicism and take a deep breath and decide to review their baptismal vows.
Mitt isn't going to inspire anybody. He has the voice of a CPA and the wardrobe of the guy who drops into your office from Home Office and gets in your way, and goes back Uptown to recommend shiny new gadgets for the office that doesn't have enough working printers and that they save money by giving the help promotional items from the company store instead of bonuses.
The one thing the hoi polloi can see about Romney that the press and the pudits cannot is that we don't like him. Get us together in small groups and ask us why.
Tim the Enchanter| 2.14.12 @ 8:07AM
"Inch-deep platform?" You're being kind (and generous)!
Bruce| 2.14.12 @ 8:56AM
Why get us together in "small groups"? Large groups are already saying they don't like him. I can compare Rick Santorum and his stand as far as being a Catholic and Mitt Romney and his stand as far as being LDS and tell you one seems to uphold his church's teachings (Santorum) while one does not (Romney).
Mike Rogers | 2.14.12 @ 10:11AM
That is the message, loud and clear as the field narrows - "Give me Not-Romney"!
Unless Newt can undo the damage he inflicted on himself by attacking Romney from the left, Santorum has the chance to be the Likeable Not-Romney who is left standing.
rssg| 2.14.12 @ 7:34AM
As a life-long Michigander........no one under 65 remembers Gov. George Ronmey. Furthermore, George Ronmey was a liberal republican. He was not, is not "loved".
Santorum has a real chance to defeat Mittens.
Mike Rogers | 2.14.12 @ 10:12AM
And wasn't George Romney the one who said "we should listen to Saul Alinsky"? Whether he meant it as oppo research, it's not a phrase I'd want to be associated with.
Al Adab| 2.14.12 @ 10:55AM
George Rpmney was one who, along with Nelson Rockefeller, opposed the Conservative Movemant at its inception. I will take my Goldwater/Miller sign to any Romney rally I can and ask, "Do you repudiate the policies of your father?"
Al Adab| 2.14.12 @ 10:57AM
Sorry, I'll get better control over my fat fingers someday. That's George (Rpmney) Romney.
Tommy Frisco| 2.14.12 @ 12:15PM
You have George Romney to thank for your state income tax. I wouldn't vote for his son (Mitt) for that reason alone.
I lived in Michigan for seven years (thanks to my in-laws) and hated paying that state income tax. I'm, thankfully, back home in Texas now where I don't have to pay a state income tax.
SUBVET| 2.14.12 @ 4:31PM
The fruit doesn't fall to far from the tree.
Fawnridge Farm| 2.15.12 @ 7:42AM
As a 58 year old, life-long Michigander, I happen to remember George Romney very well. In fact, I met the man personally in the office of my father, who was an attorney, constitutional conservative, and local Republican Party leader.
My father went to his grave disliking George Romney for the very reason you state: he was a liberal Republican. In fact, we Michiganders to this very day still suffer from the man's political legacy. He initiated Michigan's state income tax, and he also gave state employees collective barginning rights. Those two things alone have extracted hundreds of millions of hard-earned dollars from Michigan's taxpayers, and caused thousands to lose their real property because they couldn't afford the tax burden imposed upon them by unionized school employees.
Ken (Old Texican)| 2.14.12 @ 7:45AM
Aaron,
I sure do hope Rick reads this column
martin j smith| 2.14.12 @ 8:03AM
Time will tell--but in the meantime--still-Romney's support will weak no matter what. His percentages when he wins is well under a majority and that is telling. For me they key is to keep Romney's victories minimal ones--to force a brokered convention if need be.
Mike Rogers | 2.14.12 @ 10:14AM
Exactly. The more people know him, the less they like him - that is the clear message in the low percentage when he ekes out a win, and the low turnoout where he ekes out a win.
Clint| 2.14.12 @ 8:10AM
Romney's 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.....
Versus,
Santorum's Record On Voting For Earmarks, Even The Bridge To Nowhere, His Support For The Lobbyist "K-Street Project" , His Tariff Votes, Medicare Prescription Drugs, No Child Left Behind,Etc.
However, Ricky Specter-Santorum Is A Useful Dupe To Swipe Delegates From Mittens And Head To A Brokered Convention.
The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To A Brokered Convention.
Fred Farkel| 2.14.12 @ 9:20AM
Romney/ Paul that's the winning ticket! Unite now behind them. Go for broke.
Clint| 2.14.12 @ 9:47AM
Bibi /Farkel that's the loser ticket! Farkel's now behind him, literally. Go for broke.
Fred Farkel| 2.14.12 @ 12:59PM
I am broke. Too late Islamist Firster.
Clint| 2.14.12 @ 6:15PM
America First, Israel Firster Smear Bund Traitor Bastard, Farkel.
Mimi| 2.14.12 @ 8:53AM
I Thought it was quiet lately....So the BIG BOYS got to MITT and had a nice talk...Interesting.
Where were the Boys when NEWT got slamed in Iowa ? His numbers were in the 30's and 40's before Mitts money got active...and then Florida.
Makes you wonder if all those , who gave all those millions to Romney wanted it going to such DIRTY business.
Who is looking out for the country's GOOD in all this....I say let the "FOLKS" do the picken! Get the thing settled...we need to get on to the REAL STUFF...the "KID" in the Whitehouse is out of control...now he's "P"ing off the HOLY Bishops for crying out loud. WE NEED A STRONG VOICE, to start yelling, loud and CLEAR...Where is NEWT ????
Bruce| 2.14.12 @ 8:59AM
Mimi;
The "establishment" HATES and LOATHES Gingrich, so Romney was encouraged to and supported in taking Gingrich out. The "establishment" also so how well that played with Republican voters (not good). Therefore, they now need a kinder, gentler Mitt to present to the public. No one will remember that Newt didn't go after Mitt until he saw that Mitt was using no-holds-barred campaign tactics.
Marco2| 2.14.12 @ 9:05AM
Romney must shine a little light on our would-be national pope. Familiarize the voters with Santorum's positions and actual record, and they will flee. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
JoshInHB| 2.14.12 @ 9:06AM
Romney won MI in 08 because McCain told the state the truth - their auto manufacturing jobs are never coming back.
JohnM| 2.14.12 @ 11:15AM
Yes, then Romney wasted the votes by quitting. Huckabee could have had a real good showing against McCain, if Romney would have quit sooner.
Drunken Sailor| 2.14.12 @ 12:49PM
Read Huckabee's books. He has some "Compassionate Conservative" issues of his own that he like to solve with goverment help.
Bill| 2.14.12 @ 9:12AM
Romney's problems:
1. Romneycare
2. Pro abortion, pro gay marriage, pro gun control, and pro climate change
Romney's strength:
1. Money
2. Organization
3. New England moderate heritage
4. NH, FL, NV, ME
and He'll lose MI and AZ. A death blow to Romney campaign.
Von Mises Jr.| 2.14.12 @ 9:43AM
Santorum has appeal to social conservatives and patriots working to repeal ObamaCare. He also has appeal to residents of places such as Western PA and MI since he is running on a platform of reversing the "Rust Belt."
While I do not agree with his tax policy to zero out manufacturer's federal tax liability due to the fact it can be likened to reverse discrimination; it has appeal to many struggling in fly-over country.
Romney has appeal to the DC Establishment and his friends on Wall Street that are loding up his boat with donations. But the race is based on votes, not cash.
Bill| 2.14.12 @ 11:17AM
Santorum has appeal to those union-thugs in PA. Whatever!
Von Mises Jr.| 2.14.12 @ 11:40AM
Bill, the point is that Obama is winning votes by handing out $2K to subprime borrowers for votes, giving people EBT cards and free cell phones, and 99 weeks paid Sabbatical from work. Some people can be bought, and while I am not condoning it, Santorum is offering hope to the "Rust Belt" in bringing back lost jobs.
I would prefer if he just announced reduced corporate taxes for all, but his manufacturing plan has advertizing appeal to the heartland.
Bill| 2.14.12 @ 12:04PM
Santorum is seeking the endorsement of the big labor union bosses. It ain't happen when Obama is running for the 2nd term.
Von Mises Jr.| 2.14.12 @ 1:26PM
That doesn't seem logical when unions are a money laundering operation for Democrats.
Bill| 2.14.12 @ 1:46PM
Santorum is from PA, and PA is a pro-union state. Plausible!
Von Mises Jr.| 2.14.12 @ 3:29PM
Quite a profound syllogism.
Jimbo| 2.14.12 @ 9:47AM
Romney won't let this happen, expect to see more scorched earth tactics like those we saw in Florida.
Bill| 2.14.12 @ 10:12AM
Santorum's record:
1. voted for raising debt ceiling 8 times, adding to the national debt $3 trillion because PA was a blue state
2. voted against "Right-to-Work" law because PA is a pro-union state
3. voted for the Medicare Part D because PA has a large population of retirees
Time and time, santorum surrendered to his liberal constituents and failed to stand up with the majority of people of PA, and that is why he lost his senate bid by 18 points to a "silly" liberal Bob Casey in 2006.
wanne be the President? You wish!
Crassus| 2.14.12 @ 10:12AM
A conservative, a liberal, and a moderate walk into a bar. What does the bartender say?
"Hello, Mitt."
Casey Abell| 2.14.12 @ 10:18AM
The big winner if Santorum takes Michigan walks into a bar. What does the bartender say?
"Hello, Barry."
Casey Abell| 2.14.12 @ 10:14AM
It would be fun to watch Aaron "I love gay marriage" Goldstein try to sound enthusiastic for the national scold in the general against Obama. At least Aaron did allow himself to describe Santorum accurately: "a sullen, sanctimonious, scolding sourpuss."
Of course, Goldstein hates Romney with a passion. But I think he's starting to realize the GOP might actually nominate Santorum. Aaron knows that would mean a landslide for Barry in November, and he sure doesn't much like Santorum's wackier stuff on social issues.
Aaron Goldstein| 2.14.12 @ 10:57AM
First, I do not hate Mitt Romney. In fact, he was the first Republican for whom I cast a ballot when he was elected Governor here in 2002. He was a mediocre Governor and in the last two years of his term made it abundantly clear he was more interested in the White House than in governing the Bay State. Nothing Romney did in his four years as Governor made me want to get out of bed and the morning and exclaim, "My God, we must elect Mitt Romney President forthwith!!!" Nevertheless, while I am less than impressed with Romney's credential that's a long, long way from hating him. I don't operate that way.
Second, I've made no secret of my disagreements with Santorum on social issues. But I am impressed with his foreign policy knowledge especially where it concerns Iran. When it appeared that Santorum might not be in it for the long haul I suggested that Santorum would make one hell of an Ambassador to the UN. Well, it might very well be the case that it will be Santorum who will appoint our next UN ambassador.
Third, I think Santorum stands a far better chance against Obama than Romney. I am not saying dislodging Obama will be easy by any means. But if Santorum is the nominee a state like Pennsylvania has a chance of turning from blue to red. Santorum is a far better standard bearer in states like Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Minnesota, Iowa and Wisconsin. If Santorum can win these states then he wins the White House. Again, the odds are against it but as of now they are our best odds.
Worried for the country| 2.14.12 @ 12:17PM
Santorum has no chance in the general election. His positions are far to extreme on social issues. He has made it clear that he wants the government to regulate the internet for content. IF a miracle occurs and he gets the nomination he will be chewed up by the MSM for his past positions.
Regarding Romney I respectfully disagree. I believe you have been in too much of a Boston Globe editorial bubble to be objective. The Globe still has no love for Romney and that speak volumes in Romney's favor. For argument let's look at the first two years. When Romney came into office we were in fiscal crisis. ALL the experts said the ONLY solution out of the crisis was broad based tax increases. Romney said no. He went on and actually cut government. I, as a MA taxpayer, appreciate his efforts. Once the economy improved and he lost his leverage with the legislature his reforms were blocked. The reforms he was proposing were about closing hack patronage havens and that was too close to home for the pols. I also appreciate the 800 vetoes he executed to protect the taxpayer.
I also appreciate the good work he did to oust the corrupt midget out of UMass. His crisis management skills during the big dig collapse were impressive.
Romney also tried to rectify the 85% dem legislature by recruiting candidates to contest races. He was ineffective in this effort. Maybe this is a ding on Romney but we also saw the problems with the GOP in MA in 2010. There were sweeping changes across the country but not in MA (or CA). I suspect there is something structurally wrong in MA that makes it unique.
Personally, I think Romney has the executive turn around skills that the country needs right now. Romney's successful executive public and private executive experiences post up well against Obama's very poor executive skills. I would argue that it is Obama's poor executive skills that have prevented more radical change.
Even though Romney will be the better President he still must get the nomination. I agree that MI is critical for Romney. If he can't beat the Senator from PA who lost to Bob Casey by 18 points, trashed the TEA party in 2010 as 'dangerous', is a K street and DC lifer, has zero executive experience and voted for the bridge to nowhere in a full on battle; then he doesn't deserve the nomination and we will be screwed.
JJ| 2.14.12 @ 12:55PM
Lets see "too extreme". Like being against abortion or not approving of "gay marriage". Looks like we have here is a Democrat pretending to be a Republican.
Worried for the country| 2.14.12 @ 1:06PM
Nice try! Do you have any doubt what the MSM will do to Santorum?
Personally, I AM worried about Santorum's views on government control. He seems OK with having the government control the internet.
However, I do like Santorum overall. His lack of executive experience is major problem for me. This is especially true when the government is in crisis and there is so much bloat and waste.
I've always thought from the beginning that he would have little chance in the general election.
Maybe Santorum would be a good AG?
btw - Obama agrees with Santorum on gay marriage so why do you pick that out as extreme? Also, ALL of the GOP candidates agree on the issues you brought up. You are not making a good case.
loulou| 2.14.12 @ 2:46PM
Santorum is smart enough to learn executive skills quickly. I'm not worried about it.
Romney on the other hand can't change what he is: a moderate Republican (RINO) and owner of Oromneycare.
Worried for the country| 2.14.12 @ 3:31PM
If Romney is RINO so is Santorum and Newt because they have 95% agreement on policy issues. Also, Romney was had a very high rating by the CATO institute as a conservative governor. Get off your partisan talking points and analyze how Romney governed.
Romney will repeal Obamacare just like every other candidate. RC is a states rights solution to a federal mandate that had deadbeats clogging up ERs for non-urgent care. It has nothing to do with Obamacare.
Nick| 2.14.12 @ 3:48PM
"Romney will repeal Obamacare just like every other candidate."
Not according to Romney adviser Norm Coleman.
Did you miss this one?
http://thehill.com/blogs/healt.....health-law
Worried for the country| 2.14.12 @ 4:02PM
Have you ever heard, I am not by brothers keeper?
The Romney campaign quickly rebutted Coleman's remarks and said Coleman's statements don't represent Romney's position.
Very weak argument my friend.
Nick| 2.14.12 @ 4:40PM
Of course they did. They didn't want the TRUTH to get out, now did they? Isn't Coleman an O'Romney adviser? Wouldn't he know better than you?
O'Romney won't touch ObamaCare. RomneyCare was its inspiration, after all.
darcy| 2.14.12 @ 8:38PM
This is just way too silly -- Romney will repeal Obamacare? Sure. And at every opportunity he has sought to distance himself from and denounce the horror that is state-administered health care?
NO. He hasn't; and NO, he won't. Because that's not who he is.
And remember this, above all things, all things, let me repeat -- ALL THINGS -- Obamacare must be repealed in toto. And if Republicans -- in whatever office -- back track on that promise and that goal, there will be hell to pay. Know this, Republican establishment -- do not dare attempt to re-package state-administered health care in any form.
This is why Romney cannot win in the general; he cannot be trusted to repeal Obamacare; he would not be able to convince the Republican base that he is that much different from Obama -- because he's not. For while Romney may not be a Marxist, he's demonstrated that he is a statist. And if he's appealing to independents, that's why.
Worried for the country| 2.14.12 @ 10:23PM
Of course Romney will repeal Obamacare. It is the cornerstone of his campaign. Romney is a very honorable man and can be trusted.
For some reason you are repeating Axelrod's talking points.
Romney is the best candidate we've had for President since Reagan. Thank God because we need someone with his turnaround skills now. Now more than ever.
Nick| 2.14.12 @ 11:24PM
Worried,
You're delusional.
O'Romney is worse than McLame.
Casey Abell| 2.14.12 @ 2:07PM
"But if Santorum is the nominee a state like Pennsylvania has a chance of turning from blue to red."
Sure. Last time he ran in Pennsylvania, Santorum did a great job of turning the state from red to blue...by eighteen points.
Look, I realize you gotta be a loyal soldier at the Spectator and pretend that the national scold has a chance against Obama. But please don't go overboard with goofball comments like this PA howler.
And, okay, from now on I'll just say that you really, really dislike Romney, if the h-word is too blunt.
Finally, I'm getting resigned to the economy bailing out Obama against anybody. So go ahead and nominate Santorum.
I don't think that even Rick can lose the entire GOP House majority, though you could kiss away (chastely, of course) any chance for a GOP Senate. I think enough House Republicans could distance themselves from the wipeout at the presidential level.
David| 2.14.12 @ 11:14AM
Finally, all the things I have been posting for months. Simply put, Santorum does not have the political baggage of Newt and Mitt, and does not have the personal baggage of Newt. He also has a completely different temperament than Newt. He is not an attack dog against fellow repubs like Romney and Paul.
Bill| 2.14.12 @ 11:18AM
Santorum's record:
1. voted for raising debt ceiling 8 times, adding to the national debt $3 trillion because PA was a blue state
2. voted against "Right-to-Work" law because PA is a pro-union state
3. voted for the Medicare Part D because PA has a large population of retirees
Time and time, santorum surrendered to his liberal constituents and failed to stand up with the majority of people of PA, and that is why he lost his senate bid by 18 points to a "silly" liberal Bob Casey in 2006.
wann be the President? You wish!
Nick| 2.14.12 @ 11:22PM
You are a moron and a racist, Bill.
GO AWAY!
Worried for the country| 2.14.12 @ 11:40PM
Nick, all you do is throw out invectives and attacks without adding any substance. In this one you accuse Bill of being a racist but there was nothing racial in his comment.
What did Bill say that was untrue?
btw - you give Santorum a bad name by supporting him in this way.
Nick| 2.15.12 @ 12:27AM
Go check out the Time for Newt to Do the Honorable Thing thread before you type your inanities, brainiac.
And, I didn't mention Mr. Santorum in that comment. Did I?
Unless, you meant the rest of my comments?
Sorry, I'm not going to let O'Romney-bots lie about a decent man. Especially some newbie.
p.s. Invective? Who called whom an "idiot"? Not I.
Worried for the country| 2.16.12 @ 3:34AM
Nick, my specific response was to Bill post above with your 'moron, racist and go away' response.
Nothing in Bill's post was untrue. The votes are facts and most of the reasons are the ones Santorum gave as an excuse.
Maybe Bill said something you didn't like elsewhere but I didn't see it.
Also, you go around calling Romney - O'Romney and other names. Very mature. You give Santorum a bad name. You are right he is a decent man and he wouldn't appreciate this kind of 'support'.
RJ| 2.14.12 @ 11:45AM
Since Romney attacked Newt in Florida as not being conservative, who knows what he will attack Santorum with, but such attacks will not convince us that Romney should be the nominee. We have come to know Romney during his two campaigns for President. Many of us have decided that he does not represent our values. There isn't a runway long enough for Mitt's campaign to take-off.
Worried for the country| 2.14.12 @ 11:46AM
Romney penned an op-ed in the MI newspaper that superbly made the case against Obama's takeover of the auto industry. He also reasserted the case he made in 2009 that a managed bankruptcy would have left the companies in a superior position.
Nick| 2.14.12 @ 3:16PM
So what?
Romney is a bigger flip-flopper than J.F. Kerry.
He is becoming the Republican Biden, sticking his foot in his mouth every chance he gets.
Romney cannot beat President Downgrade, because more of the base will stay home than did with McLame in '08.
Worried for the country| 2.14.12 @ 3:27PM
I've heard Axelrod say everything you just said. I hope he is paying you well.
Nick| 2.14.12 @ 3:40PM
No, you haven't. Quit making things up.
And, quit projecting, concern troll.
Worried for the country| 2.14.12 @ 4:06PM
You are making things up. The base will not stay home. Romney would make a much better President than McCain. Romney is a proven leader. He is a proven turn around executive who has turned around a state in fiscal crisis, turned around a corrupt and bankrupt olympics and turned around failing businesses. He has the perfect skills for our national crisis.
Even if there are some doubters in the base they will vote for Romney because of the age of the supreme court. Another Kagan or Sotomayor will destroy our country.
Nick| 2.14.12 @ 4:32PM
Your political acumen is about as good as your knowledge of history. O'Romney has no chance of beating O'Bama. T.E.A. Partiers hate him more than they did McLame. They will proudly stay home, and convince people they know to do the same.
But, I take back the concern troll label. You are obviously a Romney-bot.
Worried for the country| 2.14.12 @ 5:17PM
I am TEA party you idiot.
btw - Newt released a video of Santorum in 2010 trashing the TEA party as dangerous to the GOP.
Nick| 2.14.12 @ 5:53PM
Suuuuuuure you are.
And I'm Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Say "Hi" to Axelrod for me, okay?
Worried for the country| 2.14.12 @ 6:02PM
Nick, you are clearly the Axelrod troll. Good night!
Nick| 2.14.12 @ 6:15PM
Says the guy devoid of any logical arguments, whatsoever.
David| 2.14.12 @ 11:53AM
I am not saying Gingrich should drop out now (as Newt did to Santorum over a month ago!!!), and I hope Santorum doesn't suggest it himself.
The stupid claims that Santorum is not conservative is ridiculous. For one, yes, he did help scuttle the National Right to Work Act (17 F_CKING YEARS AGO), and has repeatedly said he will support such an act as president. I believe him - I trust him - unlike Mitt and Newt.
Ronald Reagan did all sorts of things when governor of CA that he regretted. He even made abortion more prevalent by some of his actions. He could never get the repub nomination in 2012.
None of the candidates are PERFECT conservatives, but Santorum comes the closest. And always being the underdog he knows how to fight and win. You will not see his support slip as happened to Bachmann, Perry, Cain, and Gingrich - it will continue to grow.
Santorum IS the real deal who we can trust to do what he says.
Saul| 2.14.12 @ 12:00PM
Michigan no doubt will vote for Santorum. Western Michigan is conservative,as is most of the upper peninsula. The real reason Santorum will win though is that Michigan is an open primary,Dems can vote in it. In 2000,Dems crossed over in big numbers to vote for McCain,as a rebuke to Gov.Engler,a Bush supporter.
JJ| 2.14.12 @ 12:57PM
If dems crossed over for Mc Cain, then they will cross over for his successor Romney.
Richard | 2.14.12 @ 9:55PM
No, the dems will cross over for Santorum. It's easier for Obama to beat Santorum than Romney. Obama will win by a landslide against Santorum.
Tommy Frisco| 2.14.12 @ 3:59PM
Yes, Michigan is mostly conservative, but the folks in Detroit run the show unless conservative turnout in the rest of the state is very high.
I was happy to see a Republican takeover in 2010 and happy to see that the economy is already improving in Michigan. Good job, Michiganders!
Marco2| 2.14.12 @ 8:11PM
The power and wealth in Michigan has moved out of Detroit, north and west. Detroit is a bankrupt, burned out shell with less than 700,000 people in it. The Democrat vote fraud is still there, Obama will win Detroit 300,000 to 3,000, but the phoney lead just ain't what it used to be heading outstate. Romney might well carry Michigan.
Anthony| 2.14.12 @ 12:12PM
Well we know Romney can't speak conservative without a teleprompter, so that begs the question if Michigan Rs are as dumb as their D counterparts.
If MI Rs believe the b.s. coming out of Obozo and their skunk of a senator, Levin, then they'll probably vote Romney.
Let's hope they've seen the light and vote for Santorum, unlike some of the dolts that post here claiming Santorum is not a conservative.
Romney is as reliable a conservative as Detroit's own Chevy Volt. Plug him in, and he sputters 40 conservative buzz words du jour, per charge.
Rick| 2.14.12 @ 12:21PM
A vote for Santorum is a vote for Obama Care...FACT! He will not beat Obama! The independent voters will not elect a right wing BIGOT! Nice guy, but, has too much hate baggage!Also, just ask yourself why Main Stream Media is now pushing hard for Santorum & not Romney??
Tommy Frisco| 2.14.12 @ 12:52PM
So....what will the Dow be at in November? I'd like to get in on a sure thing.
Fred Farkel| 2.14.12 @ 12:56PM
What is hate baggage??
JJ| 2.14.12 @ 12:56PM
Sorry but this premise has already been debunked. Romney is just another Mc Cain or Dole and will not get the GOP base behind him.
Worried for the country| 2.14.12 @ 1:11PM
Hey, JJ if Romney is a RINO then so is Newt AND Santorum since the agree on 95% of all major policy issues.
Your posts on this board look like those from an Axelrod operative.
loulou| 2.14.12 @ 2:49PM
YOU'RE the Axelrod operative.
Nick| 2.14.12 @ 3:19PM
Yeah, what Loulou said.
Anthony| 2.14.12 @ 1:08PM
Right, so now Santorum is a right wing bigot, yet independents will vote for a Muslim Marxist instead.
Go away troll, you sound like lit'le johnny from last week.
P.S. genius, a vote for Romney is for sure a vote for Obozocare!!
daboss| 2.14.12 @ 12:37PM
face it - all the candidates blow. looks grim from where i sit.
JJ| 2.14.12 @ 12:58PM
Unless you compare it to 2008 or 2004 or 2000 etc.
Terry| 2.14.12 @ 4:16PM
JJ-While most conservatives believe Santorum is more elctable,Obama and the Dems do not. That is why they ran adds against him in Florida and not Newt or Rick.
As for Mr.Goldstein,I respectfully disagree on Santorum being more electable. He may do better hypothetically now in Ohio or Wisconsin,but I think he will do much worse over the long haul in Florida and Virginia. His positions will alienate many women voters. Just the reality. Obama will demagouge the hell out of him.
Marco2| 2.14.12 @ 8:19PM
Agreed, and our would-be political pope would lose in a Goldwateresque landslide, all the way down to animal control officer. Be careful what you wish for, self-styled "real" conservatives, you won't get many (any?) do-overs. 2012 might be the last chance.
Minuteman78| 2.14.12 @ 5:01PM
I can't believ I just read in one of these replies: "...the economy bailing out Obama..."
Are you NUTS? I have yet to talk to anyone who doesn't know at least 6 to 8 people personally who have been whacked and out of work for a year or more. And that against that same group knowing of maybe 1 or 2 but no more who actually HAVE found a job. That's a completely inverted ratio for a so-called recovery after 3 painful years.
Oh, and when gas hits $5 a gallon this summer, see how everybody feels about this wonderful "recovery" and Omarxist's don't drill in America energy policy.
Mike Hawk| 2.14.12 @ 8:49PM
It won't hit 5 dollars. We already know that economic activity will stall just above $4 like it did the last time. Being that the economy is far worse now than then the slowdown will be more abrupt and harder to recover from.
Naturalborn Texicanette| 2.14.12 @ 6:08PM
I hope Romney is TOAST!!!!
Take a gander at this from NewsMax.com:
http://www.newsmax.com/Politic...../id/429318
Nite| 2.14.12 @ 9:21PM
Conservatives as a whole, don't want Romney. He is a liberal and not a conservative. The GOP establishment has been shoving him down our throats. They should be very concerned that if Romney wins the nomination that religious conservatives may stay home. I won't vote for him.
Worried for the country| 2.14.12 @ 10:27PM
Rush, Jim DeMint, Santorum, Jason Chavetz, John Thune and countless other conservatives disagree with you. They all agree that Romney is a strong conservative and he governed as a conservative in MA. I know as a taxpayer that Romney was protecting us every day.
Why would a 'liberal' veto 800 liberal bills from the 85% dem legislature? Your analysis defies ALL logic.
Maddox| 2.15.12 @ 12:44AM
Rush has not said that.
Worried for the country| 2.16.12 @ 3:00AM
In 2008.
POST American| 2.14.12 @ 11:04PM
"NOTICE, again, as the REAL campaign
approaches, the REAL issues disappear."
---Police state criminalization of the
AMerican people
-----Full spectrum surveillance
--------Pervasive, and soon to be 'aggressive'
EUGENICS
-----------NDAA 1021
----------------the Globalist RED China handover
Meanwhile,
---------voter FRAUD in IOWA
------------voter FRAUD in South Carolina
--------------voter FRAUD in Florida
-----------------voter FRAUD in Nevada
But TAKE HEART!
74% of ALLLLL donations
from our serving military
are going to
------------RON PAUL-----------
Worried for the country| 2.14.12 @ 11:52PM
Santorum is now tied in the polls with Romney in MI because of TEA party support.
Newt just released a video of Santorum trashing the TEA party in 2010. Once the TEA party sees this video his support should plummet.
Nick| 2.15.12 @ 12:10AM
But it won't.
Because Mr. Santorum never trashed the T.E.A. Party.
Worried for the country| 2.15.12 @ 1:37AM
Yes he did.
Here is one copy I quickly found:
http://wwwwakeupamericans-spre.....t-tea.html
Worried for the country| 2.15.12 @ 2:01AM
If that didn't work here is a youtube version. This one comes from Ron Paul:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxeg22lDFps
Worried for the country| 2.15.12 @ 2:06AM
I listened to this again and it is very possible that the editing puts this completely out of context. Without the complete video I cannot stand by this as an issue any longer. My apologies.
Nick| 2.15.12 @ 11:47AM
Worried for the country,
Apology accepted.
Maybe you like to revisit some of your other comments against Mr. Santorum, hmmmm?
What Romney, and many of his supporters, refuse to realize is that you don't build yourself up by tearing down friends and allies with lies and half-truths.
Worried for the country| 2.16.12 @ 3:03AM
That is precious. That is exactly what Santorum is doing to Romney now and what Newt did to Romney since SC.
Santorum knows Romney has been long against cap and trade but is now running ads that claim Romney supports cap and trade.
btw - Santorum is running negative ads against Romney but Romney is staying positive for now.
Nick| 2.16.12 @ 2:16PM
So, Mr. Gingrich and Mr. Santorum aren't allowed to defend themselves?
Only O'Romney and his super-pac are allowed to run negative ads? Ads that are full of lies and half-truths, by the way. Ads that Forehead Begala and Snake-head Carville would run.
You must be so proud!
Worried for the country| 2.16.12 @ 3:08AM
Also, you should take your own advice about spreading lies and half truths. Also, you can throw in ad hominem attacks and invectives. Most of your posts are full of them.
Nick| 2.16.12 @ 2:17PM
Name one lie that I have written. You can't.
You are out of your league, newbie.
Maddox| 2.15.12 @ 12:45AM
The administrators of this site need to monitor the troll for lies.
Worried for the country| 2.15.12 @ 1:52AM
Yes, you like to censor the internet against people that disagree with you. There are many lies smearing Romney but you don't call them out.
btw - Santorum wants the government to control the internet. Do you want that too? How is that conservative. I want the government out of my life.
Maddox| 2.15.12 @ 12:48AM
What will your #40dollars buy?
Today it t seems my #40dollars may have paid the hourly wages of the troll who works for the Democrat candidates.
Worried for the country| 2.15.12 @ 1:44AM
Obama is the worst president in my lifetime. The debt he is creating is destroying our country. I am also concerned that there will be several vacancies in the next four years.
We are blessed to have one of the most skilled and experienced leaders running to replace Obama. Fortunately, Romney has the turn around skills we need in DC today. He will be able to shrink the size of government working with a congress led by Paul Ryan.
I understand there are other partisans supporting their candidates but they many deal in character assignation because they can't attack with substance. It is disappointing that my fellow citizens resort to this kind of shallow attack.
Worried for the country| 2.15.12 @ 1:45AM
That was vacancies in the SCOTU.
Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel | 2.15.12 @ 1:51AM
I think that there is a good possibility for Michigan primary voters to reject Romney. Recently, the Romney people have been running a political ad, here in Michigan:
"Is Mitt Romney's Michigan ad a rehash of his New Hampshire campaign:?"
http://www.mlive.com/politics/.....l#comments
Mitt Romney may choose to live off some fainting flames of the past with this nostalgic political ad, but I think Michigan Republican primary voters had better think twice about voting for another Romney. Here is why:
If Mitt Romney has no compassion for his pet dog, how will he ever have compassion for the American people, as president?
So far, Romney hasn't had the media spotlight many of his negatives. I can only assume that as more voters get to know the real Mitt Romney, they will not vote for him, - especially, many animal / pet owners:
I think it is appropriate to question Romney's character as a candidate for US president based upon the sad and pathetic manner in which Romney treated his pet dog. If he treated his dog this way, how would he treat the American people as president? Worse than Obama?
Romney's rude and crude treatment of his pet dog reminds me of the following Biblical Scripture:
"Whoever is righteous has regard for the life of his beast, but the mercy of the wicked is cruel." [Proverbs 12:10 - ESV]
"Protest against Mitt Romney held outside Westminster Dog Show:"
http://www.globalpost.com/disp.....ter?page=1
So, as you view this [aforementioned] Michigan mlive.com video of Romney driving his car, think of the cruelty he subjected his dog to, having it strapped to the top of his auto.
Oh yes, I failed to mention: I think that Santorum would be a better choice for Michigan Republican primary voters, rather than the animal cruelty Romney candidate.
Worried for the country| 2.15.12 @ 1:57AM
Animal cruelty. That is weak. Axelrod used that one against Romney in December. You are just now picking up on Axelrod's talking points. You need to check you email more often.
I noticed ABC is running with this one too. Yup, the same ABC that tried to ambush Romney in the debate with the contraception trap. Them MSM assumes Romney will be the nominee and that is why George Stephanopolous tried so hard to trap Romney but in the end they will go after whomever the nominee is.
Wake up America. The MSM is desperately trying to reelect Obama. That is why they have been attacking Romney for months. They have had 78% negative news stories against Romney. This is far more than any other candidate.
Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel | 2.15.12 @ 2:32AM
Worried -
My comment here was original. I don't follow Obama's Axelrod. I had no idea until yesterday of Romney's animal kingdom callousness.
Furthermore, my wife brought this Romney cruelty to my attention. I think that it is evident that you have missed the point and thrust of my comment, vis-a-vis Romney's cracked and flawed candidate character.
Romney is such, that he is fanatic in nature. His Mormon religion has its believers riding hee haw on their own planets in the hereafter.
Also, it sounds as if you are a Romney supporter chafing under the media's spotlight of Mitt. Perhaps, you should grow some thicker political skin? Also, perhaps, you should remember your candidate's relentless Gingrich carpet bombing ads? What comes around, goes around.
Finally, I think that, simply, put, Mitt hates Mutts......
Worried for the country| 2.15.12 @ 2:54AM
Sorry for the insinuation on Axelrod but your are very gullible if you believe everything you read. Mr. Romney is a very honorable man and I am certain he would do nothing to harm the pet he loved.
Your attack on someones religion is the lowest form of bigotry. It has no place in American politics. You may know our nation was formed as a home of religious freedom and that freedom is at the core of our constitution. You attack the religion of a candidate for President during the same week that the current President attacks my religious institutions. Watch out. Your religion might be next.
God bless and good night.
Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel | 2.15.12 @ 9:51PM
Worried - Please allow me to directly answer your comment response. Also, please allow yourself not to take offense, as this is American politics being discussed and those who have thin skin need to retire to the back of the crowd.
You stated: "Mr. Romney is a very honorable man and I am certain he would do nothing to harm the pet he loved." [Your words]
I say: Why should I believe your suggestion that the account is a dog story as a fish story? Here is what the AP news piece stated:
".....The half-hour lunchtime demonstration in front of Madison Square Garden took issue with Romney's oft-told story of traveling with his Irish setter, Seamus, on a family vacation in 1983. Romney has said he put the dog inside a crate and strapped it to the roof rack for a 12-hour drive from Boston to Canada......."
http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/w.....zxgpsVDvNV
Now, until I hear Romney disavow (flip flap) this account of the nasty dog treatment, I have to stand by what Romney related, as reported in the media.
Secondly, you assume in the second paragraph of your reply comment that I have not taken exception to Obama's attacks on your religious institutions. Apparently, you have not visited my Facebook page and talked to me about Obama's recent and flagrant attempted molestation of our First Amendment rights.
And, if you are saying that my "religion" "may be next" on BO'S hit list, you are mistaken again. I've never been Catholic, but as a Protestant I stand by the Catholic Church's opposition to this latest White House assault on religious freedoms. I simply don't understand the distinction that you assume. Catholics and Protestants are professing Christians under the banner of the Christian Religion. I confess the Apostle's and Nicene Creeds, the same as the Catholics. While I am on the subject, please realize that your "Catholic camp" is not alone in this protest against the assault upon religious freedoms and conscience, as other Protestant religious groups have joined the protest. This has been reported in the media.
Finally, you stated the following:
".....Your attack on someones religion is the lowest form of bigotry. It has no place in American politics. You may know our nation was formed as a home of religious freedom and that freedom is at the core of our constitution....." [Your words]
First of all, you assume that I am a bigot, simply because you perceive that I've attacked someone's religion. Would you call me a bigot and hate-monger if I objected about Islam and its harsh eccentric and fanatical religious beliefs? Just because our nation was "formed as a home of religious freedom" [as you state] does not prohibit some political dissent upon a person who is a member of this or that particular religion or sect.
I clearly grant Mr. Romney his choice of Mormonism. That is his 1st Amendment right and American freedom. My tolerance to Mr. Romney's free will choice does not (though) negate my 1st Amendment right to object to Romney's citizen choices. If I perceive, as an American voter that Mr. Romney has been fanatical in any way, (whether it be in the practice of his religion, or not), that is my 1st Amendment right to do so. I've never questioned Mr. Romney's right to choose his religion. But, I won't allow myself to be lectured that I cannot question Mr. Romney's character, and told in the process that I am un-American for doing so.
By the way - please look up the following site, and read for yourself. Then, you may understand more fully my reference to "riding hee haw on their own planets in the hereafter."
http://carm.org/mormonism
God bless you also. Have a great day and weekend!
Worried for the country| 2.15.12 @ 11:00PM
Just to be clear, are you saying the single fact that Mr. Romney is of the Mormon faith impugns his character and disqualifies him for your vote? Also, do you have the same litmus test for Presidential candidates of the Muslim faith?
A religious litmus test is of course in your right. Many in this country used to have the same litmus test for Catholics and African Americans. I, for one, am very happy we have moved on from that era.
Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel | 2.15.12 @ 11:34PM
Worried - I said what I said. As to "litmus tests," I know of no single law baring individual voters from exercising their own personal litmus tests.
Worried for the country| 2.16.12 @ 2:59AM
You are correct there is no law against personal litmus test. There was no law when people refused to vote for Catholics or African Americans either.
Nick| 2.15.12 @ 11:59PM
Worried,
Did you check-out Bill's racist comments in that other thread?
I'm waiting for another apology.
Worried for the country| 2.16.12 @ 2:55AM
Who's Bill?
Nick| 2.16.12 @ 2:11PM
"That nigger lover President Clinton had the pen and vetoed so many good bills passed by the Gingrich-led Congress."
- Written by Bill, yesterday, in the Time for Newt to Do the Honorable Thing thread:
http://spectator.org/archives/.....ent_749403
You're a moron and a racist, Bill.
GO AWAY!
Nick| 2.16.12 @ 2:13PM
Does that clear it up for you?
jstwndring| 2.15.12 @ 2:32AM
Can Mitt close the deal?
Not with me. I hope Michigan smacks him down.
somnolence| 2.15.12 @ 2:42PM
As Ann Coulter said yesterday, she wouldn't be surprised if he did lose Michigan because he didn't support the GM bailout while Santorum did. She also affirmed that Romney doesn't really have to win Michigan since Arizona and Virginia would soon offset that defeat. But if Romney loses there it is all due to his hardline stance against the bailout, and he was RIGHT to take that stance.