The American Spectator

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 7:19AM

I'll say it, again: Who'd you have to sleep with to get this gig?

Michigan was a "BIG WIN"? He won by 3 points in his Home State? He won in the suburb of Massachusetts. He won in the States in and around Mormon Nation, and he won in Florida, where we know from listening to the LEFT, that these people are too old and confused to get an I.D. Card, let alone understand a Ballot.

Too many Big Mockers, on this Mag, ignore all of the Votes he's NOT getting. They cover their ears and close their eyes and go: Wah wah wah and blah blah blah, whenever they're hit with THE OBVIOUS: How's he gonna go after Obama on Rombama Care? He can't run around the Country slamming a guy, for doing what he did FIRST. He can't go around trashing the other guy's Plan, when the other guy used YOUR Plan, and YOUR Guys, to craft his Plan. They (Pick a News Outlet) will "Rip him a new one".

He's got a 59 Point Economic Plan, that we'll have to Pass so we can find out what's in it. He's got all of that BAGGAGE from Massachusetts. Telling everyone he's NOT a Conservative. PROMISING 10 Year olds that: If Mommy and Daddy won't get you an ABORTION? Come see Uncle Mitt, and he'll find a JUDGE who will get it for you, anyway, and your Parents can GO SCREW!

He told everyone how he Voted for Paul Tsongas, and how he packed the Courts, in Massachusetts, with Liberal Judges. (He said it was just "Easier" that way.)

I know that you ELITES (You are ELITE, aren't you Ross?) think that Brigham Young's Boy is the only one who can beat the Muslim. I think that I've spelled out, clearly, why he is the LEAST of the group. Not only is he NOT a Conservative?

I'm starting to wonder if he's even a Republican.

John - TMF| 3.1.12 @ 7:34AM

AND The Metrosexual Mitt didn't even get a majority of the vote. His was a thin plurality. I wonder what some of these contests would be like if the party actually had to come up with a 50+1 winner.

Santorum+Newt = 44% which is greater than 41% - The Elites don't seem to grasp that particular fact of math.

A run off would have Santorum vs The Mittened One in a dog fight in Mr. Tasseled Gucci Loafers' backyard.

What did Mitt get? 2 more delegates than Santorum? Some big victory.

Mitt Romney = the Establishment = The people who own The One. Soros has already said that The Mittster is just fine. Which means electing Willard is no big change, the Status Quo is maintained, Elite power remains unchallenged.

That is why I refuse to indulge the masters. I am not their serf, shuffling off to do their bidding with their "chosen one".

The Pledge:

Willard Milton Romney is a Limousine Liberal Democrat masquerading as a Republican; therefore I WILL NOT vote for him, EVER!

Newt, Santorum or Bust,

John - TMF

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 10:49AM

Don't go crazy. It's ANYONE but Obama. I don't want Romney either, but I'll be damned if I'm gonna sit home. I will vote for WHOMEVER is on the Ticket, and so should you.

Think: Castor Oil.

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 10:50AM

You can be a MFer. Just don't be a DUMB MFer. Ya hear?

Emily| 3.1.12 @ 11:14AM

Watch your language, Pennell!

If you can't have a civil tongue, then don't post. We're getting tired of your obscenities and profanities. Do you live in public housing smack dab in the middle of a Detroit ghetto?

PickingUpLitter| 3.1.12 @ 11:17AM

I doubt Pennell lives in the ghetto.

He just expresses himself in the ghetto lingo. His posts are always disgusting rants.

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 11:44AM

Perhaps you'd be better off at a Disney site. Or maybe something with Smurfs on it's home page.

And, EMILY. Shame on you, you Hypocrite old Biddy.

Do I live in the Ghetto smack dab in the middle of a Detroit Ghetto.

Are you calling me A N-word? What are you implying, Emily? That I sound just like a N-word.

And who's "WE", and why do I give a sh*t?

Grammar Dog| 3.1.12 @ 3:05PM

Timothy,

I'm here to promote correct English.

Change hypocrite to the adjective form--hypocritical.

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 4:43PM

Will do.

Arthur C. Clarke| 3.1.12 @ 4:54PM

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...

Let me see what do we have hya?

What is that you say?

Look!

It is a...

NIGGUH!

Con Chef (NB)| 3.1.12 @ 11:48AM

Anne Landers called. She wants her gig back.

Al Adab| 3.1.12 @ 1:06PM

Dear Mr. Pennell:
Whatever else the arguments for or against particular syntax may be, language that hurts the cause or that makes adherents appear inarticulate or ignorant (neither of which do I attribute to you) does no good in the larger world. It harms the cause.

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 1:16PM

C'mon now, Al. We're all big boys and girls, here. I'm a Vet, and I've been doing Hard Manuel Labour, my whole life, and guys like me use that kinda language.

I thought that a Syntax was something you pay on Beer?

timmy| 3.1.12 @ 2:11PM

How can you be doing Hard Manuel Labour (is that a Mexican-Englishman?) if you are always posting here all day long?

Grammar Dog| 3.1.12 @ 3:08PM

What's that comma doing after "Labour"? And why the British spelling instead of the American (labor)?

Al Adab| 3.1.12 @ 3:14PM

Tim, we are all "big boys" as you say. Amongst the fellows at the coffee shop or the bar, many do speak such. However, when attempting to argue a point to the uninitiated, it is not helpful.

BTW, tax on beer, funny.

Emily| 3.1.12 @ 3:05PM

Thank you, Al. I can see that you are a gentleman.

Al Adab| 3.1.12 @ 3:13PM

Emily, I try. Thank you.

Butch| 3.1.12 @ 4:16PM

Who's "we?"

Marco2| 3.1.12 @ 7:54AM

What a ridiculous screed! The ONLY Republican candidate who isn't a career Washington insider, scares the Santorum/Talk Radio/Big Labor/Obama alliance , has any managerial talent, knows his butt from a bass fiddle on economic issues, and, frankly, doesn't sound a little bit nuts, is Romney. Let's hope that more "less than high school", "under $30,000" voters stay home next Tuesday.

John - TMF| 3.1.12 @ 8:44AM

That's just what this nation needs all right. A one season high school football coach with an 0-11 record hired to coach the NFL championship team... yup... we're goin' back to the Super Bowl!!!!

1. Romney is a failed governor of a socialist mess of a state.
2. Romney was, until it was convenient, a Democrat who voted for Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale (against Reagan both times - which is telling)... He supported Paul Tsongas, and ran to the left of Teddy Kennedy... even after his more than convenient party switch.
3. His only claim to fame is passing Obamacare in his state, before Obummer even thought of it.

And I want him to "manage" the decline? Right.

Ridiculousness is in the eye of the beholder. Romney as the GOP nominee is the epitome of Ridiculous. If he didn't have the money to buy the votes, he'd just be the failed former one term governor of an annoying and unimportant failed state.

Romney has no qualifications to be President, other than Willard Milton Romney thinks that it would be neato-torpedo to be one.

I WILL NOT vote for Limousine Liberal Democrat Willard Milton Romney, EVER!

-Cao
PS as to the Olympics? Don't much watch those foolish wasteful spectacles. Since the US Hockey Team beat the Sovs at the 1980 games, its all been a fetid sordid mess. Anyone claiming those bribe and graft fests as bona fides can have it. Yeesh.

Soljerblue| 3.1.12 @ 10:50AM

If Mitt Romney is the GOP nominee, I'll consider writing in the name of Donald Duck. I will NOT vote for Romney. If we are going down in November, I would rather go down with someone who's a helluva lot more conservative than this RINO. For all the reasons cited above, this guy will never beat the Termite-in-Chief. If there's anything more than a political grease spot left of him after November, it'll be only by the grace of God.

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 10:54AM

See? This is what I'm talking about when I tell John - TMF, don't be a DUMB MFer.

See, John? You don't wanna be like this guy, do ya?

He was probably gonna vote for Donald Duck anyway.

bobo| 3.1.12 @ 11:18AM

What does MFer mean? You've lost me.

loulou| 3.1.12 @ 11:31AM

Ask the fastidious Emily.

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 11:45AM

Loulou I love ya. (You're a chick, right?)

loulou| 3.1.12 @ 12:12PM

Love you back.
Not a chick--a broad.

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 1:18PM

Ya gotta love the Broads.

Ya just gotta.

Oopah Sarong| 3.1.12 @ 3:10PM

"a broad"

A broad ass, no doubt!

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 11:49AM

It just means Manufacturer. It's Text Code. Like LOL or OMG or POS or STFU. It's just a cool new way to chat.

SYL.

See? That was See Ya Later.

Cool, right?

Oopah Sarong| 3.1.12 @ 3:12PM

Cool? Only to a fool.

I'm in a rhyming mood today. Love that new poster--Grammar Dog.

He can do a lot of good on this blog.

Thanks, Grammar Dog. Keep up the good work.

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 4:46PM

Yeah. He's really adding to the conversation.

jcrew| 3.1.12 @ 4:44PM

Hate to break it to you but Donald Duck is Mormon too. You got served player.

Judy Hopson | 3.2.12 @ 9:14AM

Oh my. You would risk the certain demise of this constitutional republic. That's exactly what we can look forward to if Obama is unleashed without any constrictions on his hearts desire. Mitt Romney does not despise this country or its people. Take one for the Gipper buddy.

gearjammer| 3.1.12 @ 5:51PM

Tell me about your state that is not a mess. Romney actuall cut taxes and regs and the state is doing well. Even the looney left guv they have now is leaving well enough alone. So, tell me about your state.

Simon Templar| 3.1.12 @ 8:47AM

No, Mittens is a career northeastern progresssive republican that the Washington insiders want to shove down the throats of the conservative base of the party.
Liked the classist remark about the "under 30,000 dollar'" voters....

It also proves my point that you share the same elitist attitudes and superiority complex as your liberal cousins. Yes, I know you know what is good for them better than they do themsleves.
Only if those damn bible and gun clinging idiots would get in line and do what we tell them!

jcrew| 3.1.12 @ 3:52PM

As a bleeding heart liberal I'm torn. It's always unseemly to see this sort of confrontation. On the other hand, it will lead to Obama's victory so I guess this is a war I can support. Republicans, please continue tearing yourselves apart so I can watch poor people buy Ipads with your tax money while I sip my Latte and get rich off the stock market. Peace my brothers and sisters, Namaste!

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 8:52AM

Obviously, some of the Ron Paul insomniacs, have taken to defending Romney, on the basis of the Rom/Ron Secret Alliance.

Obviously, he didn't read a word I wrote.

Obviously, dumb*ss just doesn't know WTF he's talking about.

I'm betting it's both.

Idiot.

Emily| 3.1.12 @ 3:13PM

Please refrain from using the ugly F word! Can you not utter a sentence without using this obscenity?

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 4:49PM

Sweetheart. Have you ever considered getting La*d?

It might loosen you up.

God. What a tight ass.

Con Chef (NB)| 3.1.12 @ 9:22AM

Yeah, the fake "conservative" who thought that the government was the best answer to this state's health issues is sure as hell the guy to go up against MaoBama. Get your head examined.

jcrew| 3.1.12 @ 3:55PM

Are psychological visits covered by your insurance company? Or should I go clog up the ER like you because I don't have enough personal responsibility to buy insurance?

R Lopez| 3.1.12 @ 9:41AM

Absolutely right on!

Simon Templar| 3.1.12 @ 8:32AM

Tim, it is precisely that Mitten is not a conservative that Rossy's is in his corner and rooting for him.

Santorum represents that social conservative cabal that Ross can not tolerate for one moment and fears to death more than he does Obama.

Ross is a libertarian, not a conservative.
See for libertarians, the worst thing in the world is the possibility of judeo-christian values to return to the public arena and people who have faith and values to be included in public debate, discussion, and policy making. The ideal world is more like that of a brave new world where the state actually keeps these people out of the equation and encourages drug use, promiscuity, free love, abortion, pornography, rampant materialism, atheism, etc. as this is perceived as real freedom for libertarians.

Such antiquated ideas about religious expresssion and religion itself is irrevelant to a modern world. Why would one ever cling to such things as they have no value. Morality like truth is relative and in the eye of the beholder. It is those that have a definite sense of morality and values that are the ones that are dangerous to their vision of a truly 'free' society.
See Ross, he does not buy the idea that this culture war is real and the claim that the Left has attempted to destroy American traditional values, the family, the church, the educational system so as to destroy the very fabric that supports it and its Republican form of government. This is fantasy to him.

As long as he is not restricted too much in his ability to make money particularly on a global scale not much else really matters. Just as long as regulation is not so burdensome that it completely shuts down free markets and the financial system and there is still an ability to buy politicians, then everything is just fine.

This national pride thing and national interest thing is also an antiquated idea. Ross believes we live in a global world and our representives in this republic should be serving not American economic interest but rather the broader interest of a global economic direction. Nations no longer compete but rather global corporations and the interest behind them. Conservatives like Santorum that talk about bringing back manufacturing to the US, drilling here, and encouraging capital to come back to the US through government policy, etc. are not only out of date but dangerous to his global free market and global corporate economics.

Ross Kaminsky| 3.1.12 @ 8:57AM

"Simon",

You simply have no idea what you're talking about.

In my writings and on my radio show, I routinely express my view that our judeo-christian heritage is both important and valuable.

I routinely support Christian conservative politicians with endorsements and campaign contributions.

And I have been extremely clear that my motivation in this election is to beat Obama, as I don't particularly like any of the Republican candidates.

My parents were both US Navy officers and I am a strong believer in both national pride and national interest. And that our leaders should be focused on our national interest, not on some "global good."

In short, other than correctly identifying me as a libertarian, everything you ascribed to me is untrue.

But I've come to expect that from you.

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 9:10AM

Speak of the Devil.

Simon Templar| 3.1.12 @ 2:27PM

You are the one that made it clear that "you do not cling to your bible." You are the one that makes smarmy remarks about social conservativism and Santorums positions on these issues.

You are the one that consistently takes a global perspective on free trade issues and does not seem to get the idea that its fair trade. You are the one that fall into the chorus that China should not be restricted or confronted in any manner about its imbalanced, exploitive trade practices and intellectual property theft.

You have also made it clear on a number of occasions that you can not connect the dots on the progressive agenda to destroy traditional values and push religion out of the public arena so as to destroy the underpinnings and foundational cultural cornerstones of this Republic.

You are the one that wants GOP candidates to keep their mouth shut on these issues and does not see them relevant.

See, I actually read your articles. I read your post very closely in these threads when you get into it with others that hear the same thing I do.

Simon Templar| 3.1.12 @ 2:45PM

I forgot the biggest one of all. You are the one that had to make it very clear that you are not a conservative, not me. Perhaps, you could make that even clearer about what you think that exactly means.

You are the one that calls yourself a libertarian. Given what is known about libertarians of today, I think my analysis is spot on. You have made remarks and have taken positions which seem to echo that thinking.

Now, if I am am wrong about you I will be the first to apologize but I am going on what you write.

As far as character, I did not attack your character. As I have said in the past, you sound like a good family man, probably work very hard, and sincerely believe what you believe. I do not think it appropriate to attack mine.

I just think your view of the world and many of your political positions are innacurate as a libertarian. Not all of them, of course, but the ones I addressed. Many of these comments you make lead one to extrapolate that you most likely hold the views that I described that undergird these positions you take.

Simon Templar| 3.1.12 @ 2:58PM

Furthermore, saying that Santorum's potential win in Ohio means nothing is really a stretch and show a bias that is unworthy of your pretense that you are not biased and you are objective.

Now, if Romney wins this state it will be more than likely be presented by all the talking heads that this is a sign of inevitability and electability. It will be presented as over. If Romney wins Ohio it will be indeed a significant political win just as it would be if Santorum did so.

When you make these pronouncements like these, it puts yourself in the position as having an obvious hidden agenda and loyalties that put your credibility and opinions as suspect.

Ross Kaminsky| 3.1.12 @ 3:52PM

Simon,

You said I believe that government should encourage various sorts of behavior, that I discount the importance of religious values on our nation, that I'm some sort of globalist who doesn't believe in national interest, and other things which are simply wrong.

I would also point out that there's a reason I'm a libertarian (with lower case "l") registered Republican and not a Libertarian Party member.

My agenda is anything but hidden. It's obvious and I'm proud of it. It is to support liberty and limited government.

jcrew| 3.1.12 @ 4:10PM

I think you're both right. Maybe if you could find some common ground you could better exchange ideas. Let me get you started - Pet cats? Bratz dolls? A sense you have no control over your destiny? Justin Bieber trading cards? Bedazzlers? A more popular older sibling who voted for Clinton and gets way more attention? Musicals?

Simon Templar| 3.1.12 @ 5:38PM

clothing retailer,

Do you have a point or just gazing at yourself and your percieved smarminess and cleverness?
Go buy yourself another shirt or pair of faded jeans.

Simon Templar| 3.1.12 @ 4:24PM

Ross,

You are the one who stated that other than Pauls views on national security, you were largely in agreement with all his positions and world view.

You have still not addressed the remarks that I pointed out that you have made that have given me cause to make these assertions and conclusions about your positions.

Since, you insist on skirting them, fine. Let's leave it at that as I am not interested in beating a dead horse.

Would it be too much to ask, however, that you give us a complete analysis with solid reasoning and evidence of why you think Mitt is inevitable, electable, and the best candidate to beat Obama?
Moreover, convince us just how a progressive republican from Mass. is going to bring about the sweeping changes you would like in the areas of liberty and limited government?

Perhaps you can explain to us just how Mitt is going to get around his liabilities like Romenycare when facing Obama in the summer and early fall?

For now, we will accept your explanation of your libertarianism, small l, whatever that is...and talk of it no further.

DRed| 3.1.12 @ 5:15PM

Mittens isn't remotely progressive.

jcrew| 3.1.12 @ 5:29PM

If by progressive you mean likable, nice, capable, non-greedy, resolute, charming, cool, interesting, motivational, inspirational, electable, masculine, strong, good, humble, modest, bright, charismatic, real, authentic or having even the remotest chance of beating your President Barack Obama then yeah I think you're on to something.

Simon Templar| 3.1.12 @ 5:41PM

clothing retailer,
I suggest you address the person by their moniker so as everyone else knows who you are replying to and can make sense out of your rambling.

Simon Templar| 3.1.12 @ 5:31PM

And you are not an insincere, lying, mentally disordered liberal troll.

jcrew| 3.1.12 @ 6:07PM

Simone Templari,

Sorry lady I didn't mean to offend you. When you use words like "moniker" it makes ycu sound like a college educated RINO. That means you have a total crush on Mitt Romney. At our secret liberal meetings we laugh about how you sheep are falling in line behind the most beatable man in America! We knew we could count on you to nominate the rich guy, they've been fooling you for years. Can't wait to cut defense and use the money to educate, clothe and feed illegal aliens. Not to mention free healthcare! Yes! It's a New Day for America! Socialists Unite!!!

Ross Kaminsky| 3.1.12 @ 5:55PM

Simon,

I don't have time for a full answer here so I hope you will accept my brevity.

I do not think Romney is inevitable, but I think he's most likely (as far as being the nominee.) I'm not alone, obviously, with his betting odds remaining very high -- even during the temporary spikes in other candidates' popularity.

I do not say this either with glee or anger. Just commenting on what is.

I think he's most likely to beat Obama because I think many of the issues that make conservatives nervous about him are positives in the general election.

In short, I think he's the only one who can get a majority of the necessary Independent vote.

I agree that Romneycare is a weakness for him...a big one. But I don't think it's electorally fatal. Indeed, I think it could help get some Independent voters.

What it comes down to in my mind is whether enough skeptical conservatives/libertarians will support him because they/we are so highly motivated to beat Obama.

For the record, I take Romney at his word that he's become more conservative over time. That said, there are a lot of things he says that really annoy me, such as his own version of tax policy class warfare, his stupid views on China, etc.

I'm not a Romney cheerleader other than thinking he has the best chance to beat Obama.

I realize that others, including probably you, disagree with me on that. But that doesn't make me your political enemy.

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 9:09AM

Judeo Christian Values. Hmmm.

"Such antiquated ideas about Religious expression and Religion itself, is irrelevant to a modern world. Morality, like Truth, is relative and in the eye of the beholder. It is those that have a definite sense of Morality and Values that are the ones that are dangerous to their vision of a truly free society."

Interesting.

Ya know that picture of Ross, up above? That's him in Africa. Lots of people go to Africa. Lots of people with Money, go to Africa. A guy with No Judeo Christian Values, could do anything he wants to do, in Africa. A guy with lots of Money, and No Judeo Restrictions on himself, could buy lots of things in Africa. Lots of things that he could never get over here. Old things. Young things. Pretty things.

I'm just saying.

You may be on to something.

Ross Kaminsky| 3.1.12 @ 10:10AM

Timothy, I accept your apology for your brain-dead reprehensible comment no doubt fueled by jealousy.

For the record, that picture was taken on my honeymoon. Furthermore, you seem to be confusing Africa with Thailand when it comes to the immoral behavior you are suggesting. So your comment is not just reprehensible, it's also ignorant.

Like Simon, you're true to character.

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 11:33AM

You can get the same things in Africa. The UN Peacekeepers do it, all the time. And, for all I know, that's who you were hanging out with in the Flies On Your Face Capitol of the World.

See how Stupid you are? You coulda gone anywhere, and you went to that Hell Hole.

And, don't try to change the subject by interjecting Thailand, in to all this. A big shot Trader, like you, knows full well that his "Tourism Money" can buy way more in the Land of the Bone Through Your Nose, than it can in Thailand.

And, I take offense at your implication that I was suggesting "Immoral Behavior". I hope you're not making such wild assumptions, when making your trades.

You Sir, are the ignorant one. Libeling Me, and Slandering the good people of THAILAND. If you had any sense of Honour, you would Apologize to us Both.

For the Record: Only a Pompous Ass would go to Africa for their Honeymoon. No Normal Person goes to Africa. If there was ever a LIST of the best things to do? Doing THAT, would surely be at the bottom.

Take a Chill Pill, Rossy. Don't take yourself so serious. You're living the life. Some relative of yours got you in on this do nothing job, and you've obviously got more money than you know what to do with. So what, if your Articles resmble a 7th Grade Creative Writing assignment. Who cares that, compared to the Real Writers on this site, your articles are like a Child's crayon doodlings on a piece of Manila Paper?

I have faith in you.

I believe in you.

As they say in Africa: "Is there some reason that we can't eat all of these flies?"

DRed| 3.1.12 @ 11:40AM

You back on the yayo, Timmy? I hope not.

Ross Kaminsky| 3.1.12 @ 11:55AM

You think going to Africa was bad, you should have seen the rest of my honeymoon itinerary.

You would have been even more jealous, petty little person that you clearly are.

By the way, there were no relatives or even close friends involved in my being able to write for the Spectator.

If you think you can do a better job, which you certainly imply, give it a shot. Seriously. Put up or shut up.

scotchieguy| 3.1.12 @ 12:04PM

Might have to learn how to write with a few less F-bombs. But then there wouldn't be much to say.

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 1:29PM

I "Put up" every day.

Who's jealous? You went to the Land of Famines and Genocides. The Land of Slavery and Starvation. The Land of Malaria and Dysentery. The Land of The Rebel Army and Mass Rapes. The Land of Somali Pirates and Severed Arms and Legs, Muslim Massacres and Female Genital Mutilation. The closest place to HELL, on the Planet.

Good choice.

You're right. I admit it.

You're way smarter than me.

DRed| 3.1.12 @ 1:50PM

You know Africa is a big place, right? What the fuck is wrong with you? You like to talk about your own Christianity, but all you are is filled with hate. When Matthew asked Jesus what the most important commandments were, did he reply that you should be filled with rage, envy and contempt towards those you disagree with? I'm not even sure why you're mad at Ross. Because he can afford to go on vacation?

Grammar Dog| 3.1.12 @ 3:16PM

Make that "You're way smarter than I."

I, not me!

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 4:53PM

Actually, Grammar Dog, it would be: You're way smarter than I AM.

Idiot.

Ross Kaminsky| 3.1.12 @ 3:55PM

For the record, Capetown is one of the nicest cities in the world. The picture you see was taken in northern Namibia. None of the attributes you mention applies to either place. Again, I just think you're jealous.

Oh, since it's sorta fun making you jealous, I will also tell you that I've been to South Africa four times and will gladly return.

It is a wonderful country, though clearly with serious issues to deal with. And it has the nicest people on the planet, bar none.

And I say that as someone who (again, I trust you'll be jealous) has been to 58 countries (at least the last time I tried to count...I might have missed one or two.)

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 4:54PM

Keep telling yourself that.

Doctor Right| 3.1.12 @ 10:38AM

Not only are you a blow-hard, master-of-the-obvious, Timmy...

But you're also a complete moron.

Now please...go write a 50-paragraph diatribe with no real insight whatsoever.

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 11:34AM

Just so you know.

I only did it because you said: Please.

Now, GFY jackass.

Doctor Right| 3.1.12 @ 12:09PM

Hey, everybody!

L'il Timmy Pennell has a NEWSFLASH!

Obama IS a Democrat! And...according to Timmy, he (Obama) MIGHT have socialist inclinations!!!

WOW!!! Thanks, Timmy! You are sooooooo insightful!!!

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 1:38PM

Isn't he great?

Doctor Right| 3.1.12 @ 4:16PM

No, not really. He's a shmuck.

Timmy is merely the latest in a long line of self-appointed "wise-men" (sarcasm intended) who roam this board thinking they're brilliant when, in truth, they have no real insight whatsoever, and nothing to say.

In that sense, he's not much different than Clint, although Clint has more staying power than most of the other fools. Usually they burn brightly for a few months, but then burn-out quickly when people realize how shallow and inane they actually are.

Clint is smarter than Timmy, too. Clint at least has the good sense to NOT waste his time writing long-winded, pointless diatribes that no one bothers to read. Instead, he robo-posts the same pointless information over and over again.

The end result is the same: no one reads Clint's posts, and no one reads Timmy's posts. But Clint is far more efficient with his time.

Emily| 3.1.12 @ 3:17PM

Monitor!

Is there a monitor on this blog. I cannot continue to read these comments if Timothy is determined to use the F word on every post!

Censor him!

jcrew| 3.1.12 @ 4:16PM

You guys are all about censorship I see. Better get it out while I can - Oh Popsicle Sticks You Dropped Your Aspirin!

Thomas F. Williams | 3.1.12 @ 4:50PM

Censor free spee....?

Timothy L. Pennell| 3.1.12 @ 4:57PM

"CENSOR HIM!"

I think that's all we need to know about Ms. Tight*ss, don't you?

Heil Hitler, Frau Emily.

Sieg Heil!

W| 3.1.12 @ 5:12PM

Emily
We are conservatives and libertarians who do not believe in monitors.
Just respond in kind, don't be bashful. Try it.

Vern Crisler| 3.1.12 @ 9:23AM

Simon, excellent analysis. I don't know if it pertains to Ross in particular, but it does describe libertarianism in general.

Clint| 3.1.12 @ 10:41AM

Ronald Reagan,
" If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.

Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are traveling the same path."

The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To Super Tuesday.

Vern Crisler| 3.1.12 @ 1:54PM

Clint refuses to accept the idea that libertarianism has morphed in the last few years under the leadership of the Lew Rockwell loons. It is not the libertarianism of Reagan or Buckley (or even Hayek or Mises).

W| 3.1.12 @ 3:07PM

Do you really believe that libertarians have a leader, especially one like Rockwell, that they all follow? Every libertarian I know is different except for one constant : reduce the powers of the government. Some are libertarian about economics, some about drug laws; it varies. It is consistent with true conservatives who wish to limit government. The argument is always where to draw the line. The best analysis I saw is by David Boaz of the Cato Institute titled "Libertarianism." You are confusing the theory with some people you do not like.
Rockwell is a loon but I don't know anyone who thinks he is a the "leader" of anything. By their nature, libertarians are not followers of one person.

Elron H.| 3.1.12 @ 10:04AM

Assoc. Press:

Ron Paul on Tuesday confirmed the idea he’s in cahoots with Mitt Romney, saying Rick Santorum is a Lapsed Catholic-Anti- Asshats. After CNN’s Wolf Blitzer asked Senator Silly if the rumors were true that he was protecting Romney in order to see his son Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on the ticket, Paul said “Yes, it’s definitely true. Although some people are much more into conspiracies than others, but there’s nothing conspiratorial here.

For example, if I told you that I was abducted by aliens and that they implanted tracking devices in my anal canal…and they did…then THAT would be a conspiracy theory. And it is. These anal-implanting aliens are working in concert with Jewish Bankers, the Bilderbergs, Elvis, Ben Bernanke, and the Susan Komen Foundation – you thought they were about breast cancer, didn’t you? – to control our breeding cycles and terra-form our planet to make it warmer and more habitable to giant, talking lizards. Santorum will do nothing to stop these lizards, but I will,” Paul said.

Clint-coherence| 3.1.12 @ 10:09AM

The Big Government Crony Capitalists, Who Were Handed Our Force Confiscated Taxpayers Money By Big Government Statists, Want Their RINO-CINO Frontman, Mittens Romney To Win. You're An Israel Firster Smear Bund Serial Liar, Con Job. You're American Spectator's Resident 4-F Neo-Chickenhawk Coat Holder Coward,Who Attempts To Use Our American Warriors,As Cannon Fodder & Piss Away Our Big Government Force Confiscated Taxpayer Money To Police The Middle East Sand Monkeys For Your Israel Firster Traitor bastard Agenda, Con Job. Follow The Romney Money Trail. Goldman Sachs $521,180, JPMorgan Chase & Co $356,400 , Morgan Stanley $297,550… You're One Of American Spectator's Resident Lapsed Catholic-Anti-Catholic Asshats. You're The RINO-CINO, Who Said You'll Vote For The RINO-CINO Frontman, Mittens Romney. It Was You Israel Firster Smear Bund RINO-CINO's Who Gave Us The Serial Traitor To Conservatism,
Credit Suisse Group $296,160, Citigroup Inc $280,050, Bank of America $245,900, Kirkland & Ellis $225,202… John McCain Of McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy,McCain-Lieberman,Gang Of 14, Opposing Bush Tax Cuts Of 2001 & 2003,TARP, Barclays $217,150, HIG Capital $188,500, PricewaterhouseCoopers $185,550, Blackstone Group $178,050
Bain Capital $151,500… Aaaand, Israel Firster Smear Bund Buffoon, 9th IDiot, "Ron Paul on Tuesday shot down the idea he’s not a douchebag, saying Rick Santorum is “brilliant.” Wells Fargo $148,950, UBS AG $140,650, mares eat oats and does eat oats and little lambs eat ivy.

How Do You Like Havin' Your Head Up Bibi's Butt, betty betty lou, lou,betty ,betty,pig , oink.

Aaaaan Your All Asshats.

Clint| 3.1.12 @ 10:43AM

Uh Oh !
The Israel Firster Smear Bund Poseur Poster Coward Is In The Building.

Call Bibi In The Morning.

The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To Super Tuesday.

Clint-coherence| 3.1.12 @ 11:06AM

How Do You Like Havin' Your Head Up Bibi's Butt, betty betty lou, lou,betty ,betty,pig...oink. The Israel Firster Smear Bund Poseur Poster Coward Is In The Building. You're The RINO-CINO, Who Said You'll Vote For The RINO-CINO Frontman, Mittens Romney. It Was You Israel Firster Smear Bund RINO-CINO's Who Gave Us The Serial Traitor To Conservatism.

Call Bibi In The Morning.

Soljerblue| 3.1.12 @ 10:45AM

Wish to heck I'D said that!!

loulou| 3.1.12 @ 10:50AM

Ross shows mainstream, unimaginative thinking. He goes with Romney because that's what the big boys are doing.

Purp| 3.1.12 @ 6:45PM

Startingly, I find myself agreeing with you Tim.

Judy Hopson | 3.1.12 @ 9:11AM

Ross, thank you for the information. Despite the privious tirades, I appreciate the fact that you have laid out some facts I, until now, was not aware of. I do support Mitt Romney because the economy, the debt and the deficit are first and foremost the issues of the day. With regard to the headline, it seems Romney must win every contest by a large number but for the others, not so much. The goal is to rid the country of this administration and send Mr. Obama on his money making talking, singing tour.

John - TMF| 3.1.12 @ 9:22AM

OK... set aside the comments for a second. I just saw a flash that Andrew Breitbart has just passed away, suddenly.

If this is true: The Conservative Movement has lost a fierce warrior for the good. A pall is cast, the loss is great.

Regards,

John - TMF

Vern Crisler| 3.1.12 @ 9:24AM

Looks like it's true.

John - TMF| 3.1.12 @ 9:34AM

Drudge link to Big Hollywood...

Damn...

He was 43.

We have lost one of the people who actually "Got It", and could handle the MSM/Dem Propaganda Machine.

I didn't agree with him on absolutely everything, but then, I am the world's most opinionated man... just ask my wife of 25 years.

Be at piece Andrew.

-John - The Mighty Fahvaag

Tommy Frisco| 3.1.12 @ 11:00AM

John,
It's odd that Drudge only has a link, although red, with news about Breitbart's sudden death. Matt Drudge, Breitbart, and Ann Coulter were all very close friends.

His sudden death comes the night before one of the biggest newstories of his career...the day that Sheriff Joe holds a news conference to discuss the results of his investigation into Obama's eligibility to be POTUS.

I know Andrew Breitbart has done a lot for the conservative movement, but his background is very shocking. He's made a very dramatic conversion from extreme liberalism to conservatism.

John - TMF| 3.1.12 @ 11:34AM

Persecutor of Jesus's followers, Saul of Tarsus was knocked off his horse and "saw the light" of the Truth.

Augustin was a hedonist Roman epicurean... Before the Truth was revealed to him.

Just ask David Horowitz what that process is like.

Converts are often our strongest advocates.

-John The Mighty Fahvaag

jcrew| 3.1.12 @ 6:45PM

Not sure what you're on but you need to divide it don't hide it homey. Had some stuff that made me see the Four Horsemen. They looked kind of like the Monkees. Not the animal, the band.

Con Chef (NB)| 3.1.12 @ 9:41AM

My thoughts & prayers to his family. We've lost a great conservative warrior.

Goodspeed, Andrew. And THANK YOU for all that you did!

loulou| 3.1.12 @ 10:53AM

I am grateful for all that Andrew did. He was fearless and singlehandedly exposed ACORN for the criminal enterprise it is.

RIP.

Casey Abell| 3.1.12 @ 9:32AM

I know Ross is suspected of pro-Romney leanings. And at the Spectator that makes him the turd in the lemonade. This is the foaming-at-the-mouth Neumayr/Hillyer site, where Romney supporters better get deep into the closet and stay there.

So I can understand the title of Ross' post, making Ohio into a must-win for Romney. Really, though, the must-win guy in Ohio is Santorum. If he loses OH the whole rationale for his candidacy - I'm the blue-collar guy! - goes down the tubes. Michigan has already pushed the rationale pretty far down the drain.

I thought Santorum did what he had to do in Michigan when he robocalled Democrats with a way-left pitch. But the backlash among Rpublicans was severe, as Romney won them going away. Even noted foamer-at-the-mouth Quin Hillyer almost brought himself to admit that his Saint Rick might have made a teensy-weensy boo-boo.

So Santorum may have to abandon the working class hero baloney in OH. And at that point I have to wonder where his appeal lies, except with social cons who hate birth control (the Neumayrs and Hillyers of the world).

Ross Kaminsky| 3.1.12 @ 10:30AM

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I have slight pro-Romney leanings ONLY because I think he's the only GOP candidate who can beat Obama.

I realize that supporters of the other candidates think their guys can win. That's what makes a market.

But it's fairly annoying how the conservative thought police think it's reasonable to attack me for an article which no rational person could read as particularly pro-Romney. Much less to attack me personally, as most of you readers know almost nothing about me.

Having been a trader on a trading floor in Chicago for 15 years, there's nothing someone here can say which would actually bother me in terms of denting my ego or whatever. But it does trouble me how remarkably intolerant some of these readers are of a writer who does more to promote liberty than most people they know, just because we have a difference on which Republican candidate to support.

Al Adab| 3.1.12 @ 10:41AM

Mr. K:
I do not know which potential nominee can defeat this president in November. I do however know that States like Mich, CA, NY, NJ and so on will vote for the DEM in any event. It is the States of FL, NC, VA and Ohio, as you rightly note which will decide the issue. The question is rightly put, winning Michigan means little, but winning states like Ohio, where electoral votes are in play means everything. The 2008 margin of victory was 70 votes. FL, NC, VA and Ohio have 75.

loulou| 3.1.12 @ 10:55AM

Precisely, Al Adab.

Ross might want to return to trading--he's a sub-par conservative columnist, that much I know about him .

W| 3.1.12 @ 2:39PM

Al Adab
Romney won Florida. Santorum did not even compete in Florida but went campaign in the thre states he won. Neither Newt or Santorum are on the ballot in VA, I believe, because they din not get their petitions in. Poor organization. In Ohio it will be between Santorum and Romney, the polls have them even.
Rasmussen has Romney tied with Obama, Paul beating Obama, and Obama beating Santorum by two.

Al Adab| 3.1.12 @ 3:07PM

That's the deal W. Who does the GOP have who can carry it off. Is only a Tom Dewey - Rockefeller - Dole - McCain type the ones who get nominated? Goody. We can once again follow them to defeat.

W| 3.1.12 @ 4:08PM

Al Adab
I don't agree that Romney is like McCain. Santorum and Cain endorsed Romney in 2008.

McCain was a lousy campaigner but he had to deal with the stock market crash. And he had the unpopularity of Bush, as did Santorum when he lost in 2006.

Dole was not a good campaigner and refused to attack Clinton. But Dole's voting record in Congress is substantially the same as Santorum's and Gingrigch, except maybe for abortion I am not sure.

Don't know enough about Dewey other that he was a famus prosecutor in NY.
We never nominated Rocky, Nixon beat him in 1960.

I think Romney has the best chance to beat Obama, and Romney will work to cut taxes, reduce the deficit, repeal Obamacare and grant waivers until repealed, and drill for oil.
If I were Obama I would prefer to run against Santorum to shift focus from the economy to Santorum's views on contraception and other so called social issues. With Romney there are no character issues like Newt, and the focus will be solely on the economy.
Santorum will be attacked also as a clone of GWB because Santorum was the Senate whip and had to ensure votes for all Bush's programs, including the war and the deficit of 5 trillion.
I will vote for any Rep nominee, and think the best ticket is Romney-- Rubio or Kasich of Ohio or McDonald of Virginia. Haven't thought about VP if Santorum is the nominee.

jcrew| 3.1.12 @ 4:22PM

Ok, how can a guy who's lived a life of luxury and had every advantage be less able to connect than a guy who was locked up in a tiger box for years and repeatedly poked with sharp objects? I think you should all give up and spend your money on some noble cause like burning Santa Claus and Easter Bunny lawn inflatables.

Al Adab| 3.1.12 @ 4:46PM

W:
What I tend to focus on is those who simply want to manage Leviathan better, thereby legitimizing it and those who intend, as Goldwater wrote, to reduce its size.

The social welfare state is not legitimate and is in fact an immoral aberration in a free society. Hence my reference to Tom Dewey who wanted simply to make the FDR system work better. We followed Dole to defeat. Ford made Rocky VP and Rocky and Romney Sr. opposed the Conservative Movement from its inception and the Goldwater candidacy during the '64 campaign.

We could go on and will at the "blogger convention" but for now we of course agree far more than disagree. A lesson perhaps for us all about the crucial nature of this election. Have a great evening.

W| 3.1.12 @ 5:09PM

Al Adab
Thank you, and you too.
I found a book about the Dem bloggers, primarily on DailyKos who had their first convention in Las Vegas about 5/6 years ago. They got some rich Dems to put up close to 100K. They had 1,000 bloggers attend, and speakers like Howard Dean, Hillary, John Edwards, Obama, etc.

Interestingly, the divisions among the bloggers resembles the divisions here. Many bloggers criticized Hillary/Bubba as sell out artists, and they loved Howard Dean. They viewed the Republicans as evil, powerful, well organized, and vicious, just like many here view the Dems. Of course, we are accurate.

I agree the issue is who will reduce the government. That is the reason for my choice. No problem with disagreeing respectfully as long as we keep our eye on the ball: Defeat Obama.

DRed| 3.1.12 @ 5:24PM

If your issue is who will reduce the government than I don't think you have any choice but to vote for Ron Paul or maybe, maybe Obama. Neither Mittens or Santorum will. Mitt is as establishment as it gets, and Santorum was fairly corrupt as a congressman and has done nothing but profit from the establishment since leaving off. He probably ran for president, at least in some part, to raise his profile among establishment conservatives so he could make more money.

W| 3.1.12 @ 5:36PM

Are you serious that Obama will reduce the size of government?
Santorum is not corrupt and infinetely better than Obama. Santorum did not have a house partly paid by a Chicago crook like Rezko or pal around with terrorrists like Ayers, or racist anti semites like Wright.
You lose all credibility when you say Obama will reduce government.

DRed| 3.1.12 @ 5:56PM

Actually, Santorum got a sweetheart home loan from a bank that he didn't qualify for. Perhaps coincidentally that bank was also a campaign donor of his.

As for Obama, he's already offered to significantly cut government in exchange for higher taxes. The Republicans in Congress laughed in his face. Do I think it's likely? No, sadly I don't. Obama talked a good game about changing our corrupt political system in his campaign, but that stop talked real quick like the moment he got elected. Perhaps an Obama free from pressure to be re-elected would be willing to, but there's no way that would happen without some republicans joining him, and if there's one thing republicans all seem to believe in it's refusing to work with Obama to do anything.

W| 3.1.12 @ 6:08PM

Post the facts and your sources about the loan.

DRed| 3.1.12 @ 6:55PM

http://www.drudge.com/news/153.....-santorums

That's the issue in brief.

DRed| 3.1.12 @ 6:56PM

Also, what's Rick been doing to earn a living since he left Congress?

W| 3.1.12 @ 7:12PM

Read it. A charge without any evidence as to the rate or why it was below market, and no charges filed. Drudge is reporting a charge made by one of your lefty organizations.
What did you think of Chris Dodd's ?Countrywide loan as a "friend of Angelo" for his getaway in Ireland?
What did you think about Tony Rezko, convicted felon, giving Obama the land for his house at a cheap price?

DRed| 3.1.12 @ 7:28PM

I think political corruption is an entirely non-partisan problem. Santorum got a loan that he didn't qualify for. His own financial reports indicated he didn't have enough liquid assets. The bank was a significant contributor to Santorum. Do you really need a map to put that one together? Does that make Rick the most corrupt person in Congress? Not at all. But what I'm asking is, why do you think he'd clean up Washington? The status quo works like a charm for Rick.

http://www.citizensforethics.o.....df?nocdn=1

The Rick stuff starts at page 207. There are numerous citations if you really want to dig.

W| 3.1.12 @ 10:46PM

Santorum the most corrupt? Gee, he did not pay taxes like Rangel, or kill a woman like Teddy, or take bribes like Torricelli, or get cheap loans from Countrywide like Dodd. But Santorum got a loan, made the payments, and you don't even know the interest rate to see how it compares to others. This nonsensical drivel never made it as an issue in the 2006 campaign because it was not and is not an issue except to lefty outfits.
Read you cite and it is a zero. No mention of interest rates, only that he got a loan, and does not state what all the criterion.
If it was a a real issue it would have been raised in a serious manner by the Dems.

weaverofdreams_2000| 3.1.12 @ 10:44AM

If nothing anybody says can bother you, why do you keep jumping into this thread. It's a pretty creepy thing for a writer of an article to do.

Cheers!

Ross Kaminsky| 3.1.12 @ 11:57AM

Creepy, eh? Interesting perspective. I certainly have gotten a lot more compliments than insults regarding the fact of my participation in the comments. (Separate of course from compliments versus insults regarding my articles themselves.)

I think that most of the readers, even those who clearly don't like me very much, appreciate that I participate in the discussion.

weaverofdreams_2000| 3.1.12 @ 3:35PM

It reflects a collossal narcisism and a pathological concern with what others think about what you have written.

Far better to stand by what you have written then jumping in here all the time to defend the points you have made. If they were good enough for you to put down in black and white and publish, then they should speak for themselves without recurring efforts to justify one's position.

Cheers!

rightasrain| 3.1.12 @ 4:16PM

I like that Ross cares enough about his readers to read the comments and actually respond.

scotchieguy| 3.1.12 @ 11:00AM

Yes, Ross, I agree. Some of these "conservative" posters remind me exactly of the intolerance I thought the left had a monopoly on. Just bring up Palin--she is the litmus test for "tolerance" on the part of the right on these pages. I don't know where some of these people come from, but I have never read any other conservative publication (WSJ, American Thinker, NRO, etc) where there is so much intolerance.

Casey Abell| 3.1.12 @ 1:04PM

I'm not attacking you at all. I do think that Ohio is much more of a must-win for Santorum than Romney.

The whole rationale for Santorum's campaign is working class hero. He's supposed to get all them salt-of-the-earth blue-collar types who think Romney is some snooty rich guy.

Ohio is the rust bucket of America, so the rationale gets put to the test. If Romney loses, he lives to fight another day. If Santorum loses, it's curtains.

Just one thing, though. Don't try any more robocalls to Dems with a far left message.

martin j smith| 3.1.12 @ 9:34AM

Romney has not sealed the deal with those who are looking for a candidate to beat Obama . And unless Ron Paul and New Gingrich drop out--we shall about Newt--and Santorum continues to get reasonable numbers-Romney will--even if he "wins" be a weak candidate with tepid support.
But the vote will be an anti Obama vote not pro Republican or pro Romney. That fact should be underscored. I am voting against Obama.

Con Chef (NB)| 3.1.12 @ 9:39AM

Roger that! In the end, that's what its all about.

Con Chef (NB)| 3.1.12 @ 9:37AM

The Romneybots can say what they want. Last I checked, this game is FAR from over. And with Super Tuesday coming up, & many states in Dixie in the mix, I think Santorum will do well yet again. People in the South are hip to the huckster brand of faux conservatism displayed my Mitt. As I've said countless times on this site, those who count Santorum out do so at their peril. And I've been proven correct time & again in this instance.

One prediction (I don't make many): If Newt has a poor showing on Super Tuesday, look for him to throw his support behind Santorum.

Santorum's polls in OH:

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/.....11-points/

Santorum's polls in TN (just ONE of the Dixie states in play next week):

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-.....-tennessee

And in the event that Mittens falls on his kisser on Tuesday, I will pre-emptively strike down an assertion I KNOW will be made by the Mitt-tard Die Hards. IF Mittens flames out, the predictable response from the Mitt-tards will be, "well, he didn't win in the South because those bumpkins don't like Mormons." And my response will be, "oh, so they voted for the Catholic instead. Since Southern Baptists traditionally "LOVE" Catholics, right?"

I want to put this religion issue to bed. If Mitt were a Mormon Santorum, & Santorum were a Catholic version of Mitt, I'd bet you any amount of money that Mitt would be a HUGE frontrunner, because he'd be CONSERVATIVE. And it would be Santorum who'd be the fraud. And when it all boils down, the fact of the matter is that people in the South can SEE THROUGH fake conservatism.

The South has changed. And this election is different & more important than any other in this country's history. And the good people of Dixie don't give a rat's tuchus if the most conservative guy's a Mormon or a Catholic. THEY WANT THE MOST CONSERVATIVE GUY because they know that's what's best for the country.

Con Chef (NB)| 3.1.12 @ 9:38AM

One more thing about the polls I posted. I realize, given the MI results that polls are fluid. Anything can happen. But those polls are recent. So I guess we'll just have to see.

John OB| 3.1.12 @ 9:43AM

Dirty Ticks? Mitt may want to give back some of those delegates he won in NH, an awful lot of Democrats voted for him there.

The GOP might want to consider the cost of Romney's mojo coming out of Michigan and going into Ohio--nearly 60 million dollars so far! On the other hand, Santorum's mojo has come and gone on a shoestring--7 million dollars. If this national election is going to be about the economy(spending), well, think about the moola-schmoola it's going to take to find Romney's mojo and get him elected President.

Doctor Right| 3.1.12 @ 9:47AM

Momentum, Ross..?

You're joking, right?

Romney had to fight like hell to BARELY eek out a win in his home state (well...one of his "home states"). This shouldn't even have been close.

In fact, the popular vote that Romney won is irrelevant since Santorum won at least 50% of the GOP delegates in Michigan.

Time after time, in vote after vote, Conservative voters have said one thing loud and clear:

We DON'T want Romney!

Romney barely beat Santorum for the popular vote, and nearly 60% of voters in Michigan voted AGAINST Romney.

And let's stop the fantasy that Dem-voters gave Santorum a push. That's utter nonsense. Santorum beat Romney easily in heavily Republican (RED) counties, while Romney won the BLUE counties (where most of Michigan's Democrats live).

If Romney is the nominee, I will support him. But ONLY if he's the nominee.

The shell-game that the media and the Democrat Party is playing has been effective not only on RINO politicians and pundits, but also on Democrats, themselves.

Obama wants desperately to run against Romney, NOT Santorum, but the RINOs are convinced (because the left-wing media keeps saying it) that Romney is a stronger candidate against Obama, and that Santorum would spell disaster for the GOP.

WRONG! The opposite is true.

rightasrain| 3.1.12 @ 9:58AM

Obama and the Dems are positively salivating at the prospect of going against Santorum, whose antediluvian pronouncements on contraception, prenatal testing, college, women in combat and JFK, among many others, will energize the Dems like even Obama couldn't.

Ross Kaminsky| 3.1.12 @ 10:13AM

You may notice that I posed momentum as a question, at least twice, not as a statement. Given how this race has gone, it would be foolish to assume momentum following any race, but that also doesn't mean it can't happen.

Furthermore, despite all the comments by Romney-haters on these pages, I would like anyone to show me where this article reads as if I'm cheering for Romney rather than what it actually is, thinking about past and future elections.

scotchieguy| 3.1.12 @ 11:08AM

Rush constantly says, "watch whom they attack the most--that's who ther really fear." The left does not fear Romney at all. They say they relish the chance at running against Santorum. They are bluffing.

rightasrain| 3.1.12 @ 11:50AM

Your comment is contradicted by what happened in MI. The Dems were urged to vote for Santorum. They see a much easier time of it if Santorum is the nominee.

Doctor Right| 3.1.12 @ 12:13PM

Then WHY did Romney win the "Blue" counties, while Santorum won the "Red" counties???

The narrative doesn't fit the votes.

rightasrain| 3.1.12 @ 12:20PM

You miss the point--the Dems want Santorum to be the nominee.

Doctor Right| 3.1.12 @ 12:12PM

EXACTLY!!!!

rightasrain| 3.1.12 @ 12:28PM

Santorum got 53% of the Dem vote; Romney got 17%. The point of the Dem interference in MI was to derail Romney and promote Santorum. They see a Santorum nomination as the fast-track to an Obama reelection.

jcrew| 3.1.12 @ 4:42PM

I would like to point out that momentum is a scientific term so the fact you all are using it makes you a bunch of RINOs. Just ask Galileo.

martin j smith| 3.1.12 @ 10:34AM

Does Romney know he has tepid support does he and his establishment friends know or care ? That is a crucial question. He has three who are NOT ROMNEY Santorum being the biggest pain so far. It does not matter if he wins for as things stand now the base see Romney as a fraud and a liar not better than Obama--BUT--They will get rid of Obama 'of that I will bet on. The Republican Party Leadershit are either very delusional or stupid or just don't care about the voters. In any event once step one is achieved --that is getting rid of Obama the next step will be looking at the Leadershit and getting real leaders.
That would be step two.

loulou| 3.1.12 @ 11:06AM

Leadershit doesn't care if Obama wins a second term. They are hoping that Romney will bring them the Senate. Rove and Co. want their power and control over the $$.

Idiots: if Romney can't win the presidency how can he help the GOP win the Senate?

gearjammer| 3.1.12 @ 10:38AM

Romney can win in places Santorum can't

loulou| 3.1.12 @ 10:58AM

Do you REALLY think Democrats will vote for Romney?

JJ| 3.1.12 @ 11:54AM

Looking at where Romney won in Michigan. Its Detroit and the college towns. In NOVEMBER they will go for Obama. Romney is the poorer candidate as his votes come in areas that will end up Democrat.

Al Adab| 3.1.12 @ 3:01PM

JJ:
Thank you for pointing that out. Why should States like Mich or for that matter CA, NY, NJ, MA and so on, have s a say in the GOP nominee. It is FL, VA, NC and Ohio which will decide the election. Those electoral votes are in play, not Michigans.

Tim the Enchanter| 3.1.12 @ 11:09AM

Santorum can win in places Romney can't. See, that was easy! And fun!

gearjammer| 3.1.12 @ 11:17AM

Name one. You can't. I named 2 already. NH and upper Maine. Then comes PA. How about Florida and Nevada and Colorado. I know Rick won the straw poll there. I won Powerball yesterday-2 bucks. What will I do with all that money. You are all in denial of the reality of the race ahead. Winning the majority in your household is not enought.

gearjammer| 3.1.12 @ 11:22AM

His name on ticket helps Scott Brown in Ma. and Snowes successor in Maine. But then they'd be Rinos and in your version of the constitution 40 true conservative Senators=a majority. dID THE CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERT MARK LEVIN GUIDE YOU IN THIS CONCLUSION ?

Sick Of The GOP Establishment| 3.2.12 @ 1:50PM

Michael Smerconish, is that you?

Clint| 3.1.12 @ 10:48AM

Yeah, France & Mexico.

The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To A Brokered Convention.

gearjammer| 3.1.12 @ 11:00AM

Try NH and upper Maine fool. Check the DOB of your favorite SJC justices. By the way, from what I see the Tea Party is quite Ok with Mitt. Just wrap your cement headed mind around the big tent concept-only way to victory.

Tommy Frisco| 3.1.12 @ 11:19AM

In Michigan, Romney won counties that historically favor Democrats and Santorum won counties that historically favor Republicans.

Setting aside the issue of who won the state, I think the results in Michigan are a strong indicator of the support each of those two candidates can expect throughout the primary.

gearjammer| 3.1.12 @ 11:25AM

Any repub carries the Santorum places.It is the fact that Romney just may grab a few of the otherss that keeps the Dems and Obama crew up at night.

loulou| 3.1.12 @ 11:35AM

That's where you're wrong--Romney isn't going to grab anything. He would loose as badly as Dukakis did.

gearjammer| 3.1.12 @ 11:44AM

How do you know ? Stubborn LOu Lou. Just a few college educated voters would send Obama in a tailspin. I am telling you that here in New England just a win in NH and/or upper Maine could do it. Romney works best. Check the electoral college. Do some homework start counting.I can't control every New Englander but they won't go for Rick. A few thousand votes may do it. Sorry but I am right. Only so many South Carolinas and Alabamas.

loulou| 3.1.12 @ 12:18PM

"I can't control every New Englander but they won't go for Rick."

Do you mean to say that Romney supporters would not vote for Santorum but we Santorum supporters are supposed to hold our noses and vote for Romney?!

You didn't mean that, did you?

Tommy Frisco| 3.1.12 @ 12:56PM

loulou,
It's the same thing as Republicans being expected to compromise with the Dems but the Dems never compromise with Republicans.

They offer us their most liberal candidate and we supposed to cmpromise by offering them our most liberal candidate.

gearjammer| 3.1.12 @ 3:38PM

No Lou Lou-I am saying alot of voters will not vote fot just any Repub. I will-I gave Bachman money ( her house races) evem though she drives me nuts at times. So I vote for anyone on that stage=but swing voters will not. I am not a swing voter-I am republican-and not a conservitive firster. And, in the end I would vote for Rick and not have to hold my nose. Why do you really say voting for Romney is such a chore for you ?

Tommy Frisco| 3.1.12 @ 12:45PM

Ah, so you're admitting that Romney is not a Republican? I appreciate your candor.

Al Adab| 3.1.12 @ 2:58PM

Tommy:
Sadly, he is a republican, just not a Conservative. The terms are not synonymous.

Tommy Frisco| 3.1.12 @ 4:42PM

Al Adab,
Romney is claiming to be a Republican now, but that doesn't mean anything to me. I look at a candidate's voting record. I believe if he thought he could win by calling himself a Democrat, that's what he would do.

Al Adab| 3.1.12 @ 4:51PM

Oh I don't doubt that Tommy. Except for his Father's republicanism he likely would be a Dem.

Tommy Frisco| 3.1.12 @ 4:58PM

George Romney was not a conservative either. He signed Michigan's state income tax into law and probably claimed the Democrats made him do it.

Al Adab| 3.1.12 @ 6:05PM

Correct you are. George and Rockefeller campaigned against Goldwater during 1964 post nomination. Should Conservatives really reward the son?

gearjammer| 3.1.12 @ 3:41PM

You are the Rino. A conservative litmus test voter. Become a republicam dude and admit Rick is just a bridge to far for indys and swingers we need to win.

Tommy Frisco| 3.1.12 @ 4:51PM

gearjammer,
Reagan won landslide victories, all across our nation, by being a conservative and adhering to conservative principles.

Moderates can win a few elections, but nothing changes in Washington when they do. We need someone to go to DC and turn the status quo on its head. By their very nature, Moderates would never do that.

gearjammer| 3.1.12 @ 5:36PM

Not the 80's chum. Alot of Reagan voters are dead and younger people do not buy old time religion on social issues. The ground has shifted-1980 32 years ago Why do we lose so many college educated and beyond. They worry about deficeit, jobs. They know just because market is back to 2008 levels doesn't mean they are actually getting ahead, and they know every day inflation is a killer-but being against pre natel testing ? Yikes ! Economics may persuade them to hold noses and vote GOP but maybe not.

Mark in LA| 3.1.12 @ 6:02PM

Reagan adhered to now conservative pricipals. He brayed a lot of conservative bromides but when the rubber hit the road he was anything but. How is the largest deficits ever conservative? How is amnesty for illegal immigrants conservative? How is massive government spending conservative? How is NAFTA conservative? How is guest workers conservative? How was the expansion of affirmative action and political correctness conservative?

Reagan was as phony as his acting roles. He was a right wing liberal.

jcrew| 3.1.12 @ 6:24PM

Republicans don't say dude, you're a RINO! Wow this kind of fun, I thought you were all degenerates but now I realize you're just easily amused. Good on ya mates.

Sick Of The GOP Establishment| 3.2.12 @ 1:53PM

Talk about a cement headed mind. Your gears are jammed again as usual.

W| 3.1.12 @ 4:13PM

The exit polls show Santorum won 53% of the Dem vote and Romney won 17%, with 100,000 Dem voters. Without the Dems Romney's margien would be 7% instead of 3%.

gearjammer| 3.1.12 @ 11:28AM

By the way it is amusing how you all just totally ignore Arizona-a state more indigative of what might happen in Colorado or New Mexico among others. This gets the attention of team Obama. Hey just live in your little bubble.

JJ| 3.1.12 @ 11:53AM

Ah, heavily MORMON Arizona.

Al Adab| 3.1.12 @ 2:57PM

JJ:
The votes of whom went 96% to Romney.

Arizona is about the third or fourth highest Mormon population state after of course Utah with MO and ID in there somewhere.

That said, AZ should be ashamed of themselves given the Romney family opposition to Barry Goldwater and the Conservative Movement.

gearjammer| 3.1.12 @ 3:43PM

Not only reason-live and let live libertarion attitude out there-like Colorado and New Mexico. Monseigner Rick turns off just enough to give Obama a win.

JJ| 3.1.12 @ 11:52AM

Is there a more ridiculous term than MOMENTUM. There is no evidence it even exists. If so explain how Romney with the MOMENTUM lost to Newt in SC. Then with the MOMENTUM how Newt lost in Florida, and with the MOMENTUM how Romney lost in Colorado, Missouri and Minnesota, and with the MOMENTUM how Santorum lost (though even in what matters - delegates) in Michigan.
No there is no such thing in this campaign as MOMENTUM.

JJ| 3.1.12 @ 11:52AM

Is there a more ridiculous term than MOMENTUM. There is no evidence it even exists. If so explain how Romney with the MOMENTUM lost to Newt in SC. Then with the MOMENTUM how Newt lost in Florida, and with the MOMENTUM how Romney lost in Colorado, Missouri and Minnesota, and with the MOMENTUM how Santorum lost (though even in what matters - delegates) in Michigan.
No there is no such thing in this campaign as MOMENTUM.

jcrew| 3.1.12 @ 6:15PM

Momentum= Evolution, Global Warming, Gravity

False lies from George Soros and George Clooney!

Nick| 3.1.12 @ 11:53AM

Romney wins Wyoming.

fb0252| 3.1.12 @ 12:00PM

Electability!!! Is it a "no brainer"?

Peppermint Tea| 3.1.12 @ 12:10PM

Ross, keep it up. Like you, I'm not hot for Mitt, but here on the AS pages, you act the part of the Realist opposite others who have their ideological axes to grind. Call them the ideological axis. None of the big three R candidates are 100% perfect (i.e. thinks like me), but I don't think Santorum is further right than Romney, and I know Newt isn't/is/isn't/is...

Ross Kaminsky| 3.1.12 @ 12:40PM

Thanks. For the record, I do have an ideological axe to grind, and that is unhesitatingly pro-liberty rather than pro-political party.

None of these candidates are very good on that score, but they're all better than Obama and my main goal for 2012 would be to try to beat Obama.

I like people with strong ideologies but I don't like when those people forget that someone whom you agree with 80% or 90% of the time is not the enemy. People like that are why people like Obama win.

David| 3.1.12 @ 1:09PM

Both Mitt and Newt have supported the individual mandate for health insurance for many years.

Santorum never has.

Both Mitt and Newt have bought into the global warming baloney, and all of the economy strangling regs and restrictions that come with it.

Santorum never has.

Both Mitt and Newt have supported the Wall Street bailouts.

Santorum never has.

By all ratings from conservative groups, Newt comes out only SLIGHTLY more conservative than Rick based on their votes over many years in Congress.

What is important is their very public positions on issues since leaving office.

Santorum gets the conservative nod on that hands down.

Santorum repeatedly said he WILL support a National Right to WOrk Act as prez.

As to social issues, the vast majority of voters agree with Santorum. I wish he would tone down some of it (like how his college statements can be mistrued or blatantly lied about what he actually meant. But most voters do agree that there is a continuing moral rot in this country.

I will never forget Scarborough's article in Politico which shows how Gingrich encouraged the very conservative reps to BREAK the contract with America. Steve Largent's lecture to the mainstream repubs (LED BY NEWT) said it all.

I can't speculate as to who will win or come close in this or that state. I just know that Santorum will continue to bust his butt to win. Always the BIG underdog and except for once, always a winner.

The big question for all voters is, based on all the candidates votes while holding office, and their very public positions since leaving office, WHO DO YOU TRUST TO DO WHAT HE SAYS HE WILL DO AS PREZ???

I don't know how any fair observer of the political scene over the course of the candidates' lives can come to any other answer than SANTORUM IS THE ONE WHO CAN BE TRUSTED!!!

Hardy Core| 3.1.12 @ 1:20PM

Will Romney win Ohio? Does it really matter? Is Ohio truly the historical benchmark—that is, because in previous elections a GOP win in a primary there resulted in a GOP winning the nomination?

Humans are always looking for anything to bring order to their reality. Hey—the Packers won the Super Bowl last year, so they are favored again. Or was it New Orleans, who won the previous year?

The absolute truth is that nobody actually KNOWS anything about the future, and clinging to the old patterns is like clinging to guns and religion---ha ha.

When the “Ohio pattern” is broken, why next pundits will say that in all the previous elections, except the “outlier” recent one, blah blah blah. The truth is each individual who votes is putatively “in charge”, or unique, and will factor in everything that enters their consciousness, with each one processing it in their own fashion. However, it is paradoxically simultaneously so that quite a lot of their input is controlled by the MSM, and that too many people have been programmed, ALREADY, by public schooling, Hollywood, academia, etc.

Maybe someday people will wake up, and refuse to even be polled, before an election, or else give answers that are either random or opposite to their actual opinions. Me, I NEVER talk to the offensive polltakers—my time is too valuable to waste!

Polling people before elections is a lot like fantasy football.

FANTASY!

Ah, given that the production of physical necessities has reached a state of so much abundance, society is reduced to fighting over the plethora of things. How exemplary! Our caveman ancestors had to struggle just to survive, and fighting over the “scraps” was where the literal action was.

And, now?

Mind games!

cc| 3.1.12 @ 1:34PM

"It won't mean anything if he doesn't win Ohio." blahhaha, yea sure, whatever you say.

Bill| 3.1.12 @ 1:44PM

I'm not a Romney fan, but he seems to be the inevitable GOP nominee. Under that circumstances, Romney needs to lay out an specific plan to repeal Obamacare. Here is what he must do:
1. a plan to repeal Obamacare
2. a job plan
3. a "bold" plan to reform the tax code, the regulatory agencies, and the federal bureaucracy
4. a plan to explore the energy sector based on fossil fuel, not those green energy
5. Embrace the Ryan Plan to fix the entitlements
6. No amnesty, no DREAM Act, no guest worker program
7. Secure the border
8. Mandatory E-verify for all workers and abolish the chain migration
9. Restart the "war on terror"
10. Help stop abortion, gay marriage, and assualts on the 2nd amendment
11. Drop lawsuits against state of AZ, AL, SC, GA over the voter ID and the immigration
Romney is not perfect, but he is fare better than Nobama.

Simon Templar| 3.1.12 @ 3:02PM

Racist Bill really rolled over quite quickly and without a fight. Wow, that is some list. Keep dreaming of the good old days of Dixie, Bill and Romney ever carrying out any of that.

Pathetic.

Bill| 3.1.12 @ 3:18PM

I'm NOT a racist, I speak the truth.
You, Simon Templar is a racist and liar!
Let's get to the issues.
Santorum cannot win MI, well, how about AZ? He wasn't even close winning AZ. Gingrich and Ron Paul are done, statistically, or in delegate counts. It's time to unify GOP and defeat Obama. Santorum's big labor stance didn't work in MI and AZ, and it won't work in Super Tuesday, May be, OH may fall for Santorum, a big labor state.

Con Chef (NB)| 3.1.12 @ 3:22PM

Yeah, Bumpkin Bill. People who aren't racists write things like "ni**er lover."

Go back to West Memphis, rube. Your mobile village misses its idiot.

Bill| 3.1.12 @ 3:31PM

Con Chef is a fugitive and convicted child molester. He's a liberal and liar!

gearjammer| 3.1.12 @ 3:50PM

Just how is anybody on that stage gonna stop gay marriage and abortion ? Put women who have them in jail ? Jail gay soldiers. You effing nut. The impossible litmus or nothing-thus 4 more years of Obama and company, Start a pro life, anti gay marriage party, take your 8 per cent of the vote and screw. That will allow the Lincoln-Ike-Reagan republicans to win center and save America. Beat it,

Nick099| 3.1.12 @ 2:02PM

So the word "momentum" then means limited perception not supported by facts. This is evidenced by Romney winning Michigan by three points with low turnout and a 50/50 split of the State's delegates with Santorum. This is huge how?????? This is "momentum?"Only in the minds of the sheeple as concluded by Rasmussen recent polling.

Bill| 3.1.12 @ 2:36PM

What if.................
President: Mitt Romney
VP: Chris Christie
I'm loving it!

JJ| 3.1.12 @ 6:56PM

It would create permanent orgasm for Ann Coulter.

Bill| 3.1.12 @ 3:20PM

Super Tuesday prediction:
Romney: winning MA, ID, ND, VT, AK, and VA (benefiting from the absence of Gingrich and Santorum)
Santorum: biggest prize of OH, then snatching OK and TN, from Gingrich's home turf
Gingrich: Georgian will not disappoint their home-boy, yet he;s a soldier, "don't die just fade away"
Ron Paul: fierce competition in VA and AK over delegates, yet Romney will bag both of those states
Winner: Willard Mitten Romney

Bill| 3.1.12 @ 3:30PM

Bill's favorites:
President: Ronald Reagan
Lawmakers: Jim Demint, Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Michelle Bachmann, Mike Pence, Jason Chaffetz, and those of who are defending our liberty and the constitutions
Governors: All 29 "magnificent" GOP governors
Talk-radio: Three trios: Limbaugh, Levine, and Hannity
Political organization: Republican Party, the Tea Party, AIPAC, AFP
Economic structure: Supply sided free market solutions
Issues: Pro-life, Pro-Second amendment, Pro-traditional marriage, pro-free enterprise, limited government, and strong military and foreign policy

jcrew| 3.1.12 @ 5:20PM

Bill's Favorites
1. Not using deodorant so he smells like cumin and wild onions.
2. Going to high school girl's volleyball games.
3. Admiring the way his mom's basement preserves his booger collection.
4. Huffing paint.
5. The prefix "pro".
6. Thinking wealthy politicians care about him sitting in his trailer making lists.
7. Muttering under his breath about the Mexican kid working the drive-in.
8. Gloryholes at the truckstop.
9. Scratching his yarbles and smelling his fingers,
10. Wine fresh out of the box.
11. Pork Rinds.

bustera| 3.1.12 @ 4:14PM

http://www.helium.com/items/22.....romneycare

Con Chef (NB)| 3.1.12 @ 4:17PM

JScrew Babbles Above (what's up with the "reply" feature)

"Are psychological visits covered by your insurance company? Or should I go clog up the ER like you because I don't have enough personal responsibility to buy insurance?"

Hey, dumbshit, I've GOT insurance now. And when I DIDN'T, it was called making a PAYMENT plan. I don't need the government, on any level, to tell me what to do in the interest of my own personal responsibility.

jcrew| 3.1.12 @ 5:07PM

I think you're confusing the layaway payments you made on that light up waterfall painting at Kmart with some sort of insurance plan. Anyways, good luck getting an appendectomy over there in automotive. Maybe they'll be having a blue light special. Maybe you should go over to the "fancy" part of town, there you'll find a store called Barnes & Noble. Don't be scared, it doesn't have crosses or rebel flags but go on in. Find a book on grammar and writing. Put the ranch and ketchup down, don't eat it. Look up contractions (uh oh big word should have warned you) and the use of contractions. Notice when you write I've you are really writing "I have" , so to put "got" after this phrase sounds well sort of uneducated. Not that you are but yeah let's face it you're a chef so I take that back. A good trick is not use contractions at all, that's what I do. You are welcome. Talk to you later Bocephus.

Con Chef (NB)| 3.2.12 @ 8:28AM

I have a bachelor's in history from the University of Memphis, with a minor in English literature. YOU, rube, are the last person I need a lesson in grammar & syntax from.

"Not that you are but yeah let's face it you're a chef so I take that back."

Dude, I know more about good living in the "fancy part of town" than you ever will. Its where I grew up & where I live. Its the place where I used to make my living as a chef. And its the place I live now that I'm NOT a chef.

Trust me, rube. When it comes to erudtion, sophistication & class, I've forgotten more in 33 years of life than you'll ever know.

Go scarf down some Chipoltle burritos. After all, those are REAALLY good for people who've got the palate of a camel's asshole.

jcrew| 3.2.12 @ 11:24AM

It seems I had you pegged all wrong I apologize. A degree in history AND literature? Way to put yourself through the ringer in order to contribute to society. You're going to change the world good buddy. Tell me, at what point in history did a camel's asshole possess a palate? Is that some sort of creationist revisionism of history they teach there in Memphis? Hold the burritos, those are for unimaginative chefs who are stuck in the whole 90's "let's make Mexican upscale" phase. Just give me some good Pork Carnitas, some good Pico de Gallo, a fresh Jalapeno, warm tortillas, some lime wedges and a nice cold can of Tecate. Have fun reading your Rick Bayless cookbooks you quack. Glad you found a real job, I hope it requires less imagination.

Con Chef (NB)| 3.2.12 @ 3:14PM

That's why Jose Andres' Oyamel in DC is still one of the best restaurants in the country. What you know about food wouldn't fill a thimble.

I don't read Bayless's books. I read Ferran Adria's & Anthony Bourdain's. And I'm certain I've forgotten more about food than you'll ever know.

Con Chef (NB)| 3.1.12 @ 4:21PM

Bill the Bigot Pukes:

"Con Chef is a fugitive and convicted child molester. He's a liberal and liar!"

Whereas you have no proof of this "out of your ass" assertion of who you think I am, I DO have your own words to peg you as a racist, you rube:

"That ni**er lover President Clinton had the pen and vetoed so many good bills passed by the Gingrich-led Congress."

http://spectator.org/archives/.....ent_749403

Ruh-roh, Bill. Busted out by your own words yet again. Get lost, mole.

Pat| 3.1.12 @ 4:31PM

It can be a little uncomfortable when our media pundits bend the nation’s voters over the exam table every 2 hours in order to shove a thermometer up our backsides. Constantly taking our temperature, the media folks try to predict which Republican candidate will emerge victorious, not that who might win would actually influence our individual votes in those states hosting primaries – but voting for the winning candidate does confer certain bragging rights down at the bowling alley.

With Guam’s primary coming up March 10th, no one has yet analyzed how Mitt or Rick will fare in lovely Guam. And is Guam a key predictor or just a remote territory no one can find on a map? Media pundits are divided on this issue – some believe a loss in the Guam primary might convince Romney not to remain in the race, others believe Guam will follow the Midwestern states in supporting Romney and yet other analysts claim no one actually cares what will happen in Guam, except the good folks of Guam that is.

Guam is no Michigan of course, although us taxpayers find it cheaper on our collective wallets to support Guam rather than Detroit’s UAW interests. But at least only registered Guam Republicans can vote for Mitt, Rick, Newt or Ron in their primary – there won’t be any of those scenarios where Michigan’s Democrats try to throw a monkey wrench into the primary’s election results. So, which Republican candidate will capture Guam’s 9 delegates – our media experts can only speculate – but it’s certain that the question is very important in the short term, at least until the American Samoa Republican primary on March 13th.

jcrew| 3.1.12 @ 5:24PM

Eh, Guam's a bit too foreign sounding don't you think? Maybe it's just me. Sounds kind of tacky, of course I didn't really read the whole comment. Kind of like the article it was too long, hard to read and didn't really match my views. I mean as far as I can tell without reading it.

Pat| 3.1.12 @ 6:33PM

jcrew: you appear to be a man of few words - and perhaps that's for the best.

jcrew| 3.1.12 @ 6:53PM

I try to type as little as possible. It takes a lot of energy to live on disability and food stamps. You have no idea how tough it is to watch daytime TV day after day. At least I have my two kids to keep me company, thanks to them I got a huge ass tax refund. Going to get me some new sneakers and a Playstation 3. Thanks to all the dummies working so I can sit on my ass.

Pat| 3.1.12 @ 7:11PM

Happy to oblige and too bad about Oprah ending her show - she had a special way of connecting with her audience.

David| 3.1.12 @ 4:50PM

Gearjammer, you have it exactly backwards. It is the LEFT who has been imposing its morality on the vast majorty of the God-fearing people of this nation. And you could not get it via our elected reps. You have to use hand picked judges in various courts to get what you want.

Our side is simply saying enough!!! You wanted to be tolerated - fine. Now, keep your homosexual assed in your bedroom instead of dragging them into the streets and into our public schools.

WE WILL TOLERATE YOU AND YOUR ILK - WE WILL NOT ACCEPT OR RESPECT WHAT YOU DO - WE WILL NOT TELL OUR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN THAT WHAT YOU DO IS OKAY.

Got it homo???

David| 3.1.12 @ 4:50PM

Gearjammer, you have it exactly backwards. It is the LEFT who has been imposing its morality on the vast majorty of the God-fearing people of this nation. And you could not get it via our elected reps. You have to use hand picked judges in various courts to get what you want.

Our side is simply saying enough!!! You wanted to be tolerated - fine. Now, keep your homosexual assed in your bedroom instead of dragging them into the streets and into our public schools.

WE WILL TOLERATE YOU AND YOUR ILK - WE WILL NOT ACCEPT OR RESPECT WHAT YOU DO - WE WILL NOT TELL OUR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN THAT WHAT YOU DO IS OKAY.

Got it homo???

gearjammer| 3.1.12 @ 5:06PM

You can call me a fag if you pefer. Sp fag kids can't go to school ? Pretty tolerant or do you the nutty fag agenda and sexualising our youth . I am against that. But, they are and will marry in many states. Younger people have no problem with it. The ground is shifting under our feet dude. What can be done is to protect holy matrimony-you know they wanna outlaw churches that won't let gays marry. Their is no live and let live on the left-but we must not be that way. Once again, have your
Santorum/Bachman ticket. Now What ? Do they court martial gay soldiers. What action do you seek ?

jcrew| 3.1.12 @ 5:13PM

You have a good point. Look at all the unmarried priests that molested little boys. If only they had been married they could have had women to engage with and would just have to fantasize about the new altar boy.

gearjammer| 3.1.12 @ 4:56PM

How is life on Guam. If dems win is it a good place to hhunker down? Pretty native island girls and all that ?

Mark in LA| 3.1.12 @ 5:51PM

It won't matter at all, Romney has too much Bain stink on him to win. Sorry, but no Democrat will cross over and vote for Romney, Santorum, or Gingrich. Thanks, to the idiot Reagan's amnesty you need to steal some votes. The conservative base is tired of holding their noses and voting for RNC trash. These three are DOA.

David| 3.1.12 @ 6:11PM

Gearjammer, you are making my point. Yes, younger people are more likely to "accept" and "respect" homosexuals rather than simply "tolerate" them, which by the way is the only thing they claimed they wanted.

But no, they had to force and pummel various leaders to have their sinful "lifestyle" promoted in our public schools. That is why the youth are more accepting - they have been indoctrinated - they have been taught to not make judgments - there should be no winners and losers in life - everyone should have an equal amount of life's pleasures - all behavior is acceptable as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else.

And who says being a homo couple of an adopted child does not hurt that child. I can't imagine any child anywhere wanting to go to school and tell someone he has two mommies or two daddies. How does anyone know how that f_cks with a kid's head?

That said, Santorum will be the strongest against Bam Bam.

gearjammer| 3.1.12 @ 6:30PM

Defend holy matrimony but marriage in a civil sense is here and will grow. I live across from a lesbian and her adopted child. She is full of herself-thinks she is a big time crusader and has lectured me at times. But, she really cares for her kid. My wife has layed her out a few times. The lezzy mom hates Catholics and my wife is one. So a few intolerant marks by gay mom about my wife's church swung my " little women" into action. Gay mom nolonger bashes Catholics around us. Her kid-gay mom's kid still comes by now and then. She likes my wife and her career-nursing. Gay mom has not banned her from this and we like the kid. I have a pick up and spring is coming and gay mom is a busy yard gal and so I will probably still offer to pick up some mulch and that for her and she'll say ok and life goes on.

Adjoran| 3.2.12 @ 1:41AM

The history of this campaign is of dramatic rises and falls for challengers to the "Not Romney" mantle, while Romney held steady for months and now slowly builds support. Santorum's numbers have followed the same sharp dropping pattern as every one who surged to a national lead before him, dropping mid-double digits in both Rasmussen tracking and Gallup's 5-day rolling average within the last two weeks.

Tennessee and Oklahoma haven't been the subject of reliable national polling - Rasmussen did a one-day in OK a week or so ago, but he uses three day polls when he's serious about it. Santorum hopes his leads hold up. After Michigan, it's do or die for his campaign now.