The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

Santorum Won, Solidly

By on 1.19.12 @ 10:05PM

Tonight was by far Rick Santorum’s best debate. He dominated the proceedings. He still has a big problem with saving his best line for last, sometimes after mind-numbing stats or details that come BEFORE his main point rather than to illustrate a point he already has made. But he was on target all night, and drew blood from the others on a number of occasions.

Newt Gingrich’s best moment was at the beginning. He absolutely blew away John King’s question about his marriage. After that, Newt was Newt. It was hardly his best performance, not by any means, but he was mostly effective throughout.

Ron Paul is losing his effectiveness. He is now rambling all over the place. He’s fading.

Mitt Romney had an excellent night for most of the two hours. But he did an absolutely horrible, memorably horrible, job dealing with a question EVERYBODY knew was coming, which was his whether he would release his tax returns. It REALLY detracted from his otherwise very good performance. It made him a net loser in the debate — EXCEPT that I don’t think most voters really care about his tax returns. So I’m just correcting what  just said: His overall effect was neither a political net plus or net minus. THe good and bad, in terms of political effectiveness, cancelled each other out.

View all comments (60) |

bill| 1.19.12 @ 10:15PM

Santorum VOTED AGAINST "Right-to-Work" state, and his excuse he's from PA, and yet he vowed to reinstate as the POTUS. It's hard to believe.
He has a very 'confusing" stance on immigration.
He voted for NCLB and Medicare Part D.
He cannot win in SC, just IA, by default.

Sean| 1.19.12 @ 10:20PM

Santorum is not a fiscal conservative. Don't worry he will be leaving soon.

Bob Grant| 1.19.12 @ 10:43PM

Like he said, it's a representative democracy. PA is a strong union state and I'm sure he ran a pro-union campaign during his senate runs.

It would be foolish for him to vote for right-to-work legislation considering his constituency.

The question to ask is do you trust his conservative tendencies? I have no reason not to.

bill| 1.19.12 @ 11:00PM

In the Myrtle Beach, SC debate, Santorum admitted that he lobbied for big labors while he was in the US senate.
Pat Toomey supports "Right-to-Work" law and became the junior senator from PA.
It's all about character and conviction, it has nothing to do with electability.
Remember, Santorum lost by 18 points in 2006.

Bob K.| 1.19.12 @ 11:04PM

Maybe, maybe not.

I'm from PA. When Santorum first came out of the woodwork and went into politics this story made the rounds: It seems he was considering entering politics but he didn't know which party he should join so he asked a number of politicos for advice. He considered all the advice and decided to become a Republican because in his area it was easier to get the backing he needed to run for office from them.

This happens all the time in many areas of PA. Democrats won't endorse a people for office so 2 years later they change registration and run as Republicans. It works too. There are municipalities run by Republicans who used to be Democrats. That is one of the reasons why Specter was able to go from a Democrat District Attorney of Philadelphia to a Republican Senator and back again to a Democrat Senator.

Bob Grant| 1.19.12 @ 11:13PM

I just tend to cut republicans in purple-blueish states slack because of their predicament, politically speaking.

He has alot of qualities I admire. He's a working-class republican, not a blue-blood one so, I believe, his tendencies on the national stage would be more to the right than he might be other wise being a senator from a state such as PA.

Maybe I'm being naive, hoping for the next great conservative from the north ala Calvin Coolidge.

Jack in Wi.| 1.19.12 @ 11:00PM

Laughable: Ron Paul mopped up the floor with those guys. Soon there will only be 2 on stage Ron and Mitt.They are the only ones capable of beating Obama. They poll best head to head, against Obama. Then maybe we can have the real debate this country and party needs. In only that way isit possible for the party to come together to beat Obama. Oherwise it is split, and Obama will win easily. Ron Paul has won part of the debate already. No pro-war Republican can be elected in this country. The nominee will have to sound a lot more like Ron Paul then Newt Gingrich to have a chance of beating Obama. 70% majorities want out of the wars, the Fed audited, the bailouts stopped for good, all foreign aid ended, and the budget slashed.

Jack in Wi.| 1.19.12 @ 11:13PM

Santorum is electoral poison in his own state. Ron Paul dominated the Debate as usual. All the other guys were like group of roosters fighting for worms in the barnyard. It will soon be down to the only guys who can beat Obama Ron Paul and Romney.

Nick| 1.20.12 @ 12:02AM

Little Jack-boot from Wi.: Grandpa, yesterday Jimmy said I was prejudiced.
Grandpa: Do you know what prejudice is?
Little Jack-boot from Wi.: No
Grandpa: Well, prejudice is when you react to someone because of their religion, or their color.
Little Jack-boot from Wi.: But I don't do that!
Grandpa: Who is Jimmy?
Little Jack-boot from Wi.: Jimmy's one of my Jewish friends.
Grandpa: Then you are prejudiced, because you think of Jimmy as your Jewish friend, and not your friend.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBJXtTIbDTo

Clint| 1.19.12 @ 10:18PM

" CBS Poll: Independents Prefer Ron Paul Vs Obama
In a head to head match up with incumbent President Barack Obama, the indie voter chooses Ron Paul, a CBS News poll suggested on Monday.

A total of 47% of independent voters said they would choose Ron Paul compared to 45% of independent voters choosing Mitt Romney against Obama, and 41% of independents saying they would choose Rick Santorum. If a Paul-Obama showdown were ever to take place, 47% of independent voters would vote for Paul, 81% republicans and 10% Democrats for a total of 45% of the vote. Obama would get just 40% of the independent vote in that contest, with 85% of the Democrats choosing Obama and 9% of Republicans choosing the President on election day in November. Obama would win the general election by a narrow one point margin if the election was held today between the two."

The Tea Party Rebellion Steps On The Big Government Statist, Little Ricky

PolitiJim | 1.19.12 @ 10:51PM

Unfortunately polls like this mean NOTHING at this stage of the game. How Polls DO (and don't) validate candidates here: - http://www.politijim.com/2012/.....cting.html

WL| 1.19.12 @ 11:11PM

CLint...quit posting the same ramblings on multiple articles you twit...

Your pap is getting ridiculous...you guy Paul made a rear-end out of himself tonight, just like you are...

I am starting to think y0u are a fraud anyway.

Clint| 1.20.12 @ 7:20AM

Why Don't Ya Try And Make Me, Israel Firster Bibi Butt Boy ?

Hmmmmmm ?

We Already Know You're An Israel Firster Smear Bund Bibi Butt Boy.

The Tea Party Rebellion Is In South Carolina.

bill| 1.19.12 @ 10:18PM

Santorum seems to be "over re-sensitive", angry, frustrated, and gloomy when he attacked his fellow Republicans. That is counter productive and irritable.

Matthew Quigley| 1.19.12 @ 10:29PM

Gotta respectfully disagree, Quin. Santorum is a sharp guy, and very plainly a decent human being, but he came off--to me--as petulant, and a bit snippy. It's almost as if he's trying to convince people that he has the "fire in the belly" when he may well not believe that he really has a chance. Gingrich was sharp, gave strong and aggressive answers...Romney was, well, Romney: The Democrat's Democrat. Paul was incoherent as usual. All told, except for Gingrich's performance, that was part of an evening I'll never get back.

Bob| 1.19.12 @ 10:35PM

What a quartet of misfits and malcontents...tax cheat, wife cheat, pope dope and a senile old fuddy duddy.

Anommynous| 1.19.12 @ 10:42PM

Pope dope? Do you feel there's no place for us "pope dopes" in the GOP?

Clint| 1.19.12 @ 10:39PM

" Gingrich isn’t much more popular among groups like Freedom Works than Romney. In May, when Gingrich sharply criticized Paul Ryan​’s Medicare reform plan, FreedomWorks Chairman Dick Armey reminded National Review that Gingrich had been a serial offender:

Citing Gingrich’s support of Dede Scozzafava in the 2009 congressional election in New York’s 23rd district, his backing of Medicare Part D and TARP, and his commercial with Nancy Pelosi​ about climate change, Armey observes that “Newt entered the race with serious ground to make up with these 2 million Tea Party activists.”…

Brendan Steinhauser, director of Federal and State Campaigns for FreedomWorks, reports that the Tea Partiers he’s talked to are “irate” at Gingrich… “I never met a single Tea Party activist that supported Newt Gingrich for president,” he adds."

The Tea Party Rebellion Is In South Carolina.

Margie| 1.19.12 @ 10:39PM

I LIKE Santorum's confidence.

Vlady| 1.20.12 @ 10:10AM

Man, Mullah Margie Omar Dear. You are killing me. But you must be almost at wit's end. You like Santorum, but you hate you some Catholics....

Just the other day, you were a hating on Santorum because he was a Catholic.

Here it is, in case you didn't take your meds and you forgot:

"Margie| 1.18.12 @ 9:47PM
" For Santorum -- whose losing Senate margin in Pennsylvania came in part because he was hammered for living in a mansion-sized house in Virginia instead of a modest Pittsburgh suburb -- to implicitly buy into the anti-free market rhetoric that was just back firing on Gingrich leaves one speechless."

Typical haughty Catholic.
He's learned well from the Papists who live like Kings bedecked in jewelry and fine linen at the ungodly Vatican.

I couldn't stand him for his lying about Herman Cain~ he jumped on tat bandwagon too, claiming Herman was for abortion, and I was willing to overlook it. But what a maroon.
Blechhh."

Margie's got one foot in,
Margie's got one foot out,
Margie tries to turn, but she shakes herself all about.....

If there's any maroon about, it's you, babe.

Margie| 1.20.12 @ 2:18PM

Well, Vlady Trollmiester scumbag loser:

I'll still take a haughty Papist or a repentant serial Adulterer over an unrepentant Marxist.

After all, the haughty Papists can reign over us like their Murderous forefathers did for six centuries, killing Bible believing Christians simply because they stood on Scripture and rejected the cult of the Apostate Catholic Religions blasphemous teachings.

Because, after all, thanks to Jesus, our Founding Fathers understood freedom of Religion and made certain that NO Pope or any other cult could RULE over the people.

So.. Santorum is running for President, not cult leader.
Asshole.

Margie| 1.20.12 @ 2:18PM

*s/b CAN'T reign over us, not CAN, above.

Margie| 1.20.12 @ 2:25PM

Excuse my "French".
Make that ass!@#$, okay??

steve| 1.20.12 @ 4:31PM

Admit it, Margie, you miss those Catholic boys from your misspent youth, come on, admit, you LIKE them,

Margie| 1.20.12 @ 6:49PM

I wasn't interested in faux Religious types then, and I'm not now, Troll.

They're punks like you, perfect examples of products from your cult.

bill| 1.19.12 @ 10:42PM

I like Gingrich's charisma, wisdom, statesmanship, and honesty.

Hobbes| 1.20.12 @ 12:19PM

Honesty? The Ku Ku Klansman likes Newt's honesty! He sure was honest about wanting to cheat on his wife.

Mike 3/505| 1.19.12 @ 10:44PM

Santorum's heart is in the right place, but Newt is correct about him; He is not capable of the Big Stuff that needs to be done. Santorum might be a good "Legislative Actions" guy for Newt. He seems to know the nuts and bolts, which would make him ideal to help shepherd Newt's ideas thru Congress.

Dan| 1.19.12 @ 11:29PM

Santorum actually ridiculed and decried exactly teh kind of big ideas that this country needs to get itself turned around.

L. Ross| 1.19.12 @ 10:44PM

Quin:

You know, I love you, buddy, but you are so transparent in your biases. As a reporter, I would think you should feel embarrassed. You are on the "anybody but Romney, Paul or Gingrich" train. I'm sure that if Perry was in the race, you would be commenting on his fine performance tonight as well.

WL| 1.19.12 @ 11:23PM

I wouldn't be so sure now LL Bean or whoever you are...

While I am a new convert to MR. HILLYER's church of bible beating fire and brimstone preaching (don't worry folks...that is not a smear...I am a thoroughbred holy roller, and always will be)...I am just pointing out the sudden interest in Santorum for Mr. Quin "You Rubes better go along with the Continuing Resolution" Hillyer...

Here is the litmus test....If Newt wins SC and rolls like a train into Florida, Rick will not have a chance...WE WILL ALL SEE the truth about Mr. Hillyer...

If he turns to RICHY RICH (MITT) the last few weeks have been only an effort to praise the lord all the way to stopping Newt...

If he takes Newt against Romney....he might be for real.

WE'RE WATCHING HILLYER!!!!

PolitiJim | 1.19.12 @ 10:49PM

Really? Doesn't seem like ANY of the pundits on TV, Twitter or the blogs agree with you! Romney also squirmed badly on Abortion and how can you fail to mention Ron Paul's "youre oversensitive" comment to Santorum? Don't tell me you guys are letting bias get in the way of balance. Please say you aren't.

Quin| 1.20.12 @ 12:08PM

Well, I don't usually put much stake in establishment pundits, but in this case, a lot of conservative pundits agreed with me. Terry Jeffrey, former E-in-C of Human Events http://www.nationalreview.com/.....p-jeffrey, said Santorum clearly won. Most folks at National Review thought Santorum won everything after Newt's opening blast at John King. Chris Wallace this morning said he thought Santorum was the most effective. SO did a bunch of conservatives on radio shows all morning.

aware| 1.21.12 @ 8:41AM

Proving the conservative Establishment is part of THE Establishment. Groupthink rules!

Dan| 1.19.12 @ 10:49PM

Santorum didn't well, but Newt hit this one out of the park, and the Dems can't be happier at the prospect that Newt is gaining momentum. And wait until the MSM starts reminding people about the Cayman Islands and the tax cheats down there.

Bob Grant| 1.19.12 @ 10:50PM

I thought Santorum's strongest points were when he deconstructed Romney and Gingrich. He might not win the nomination but throwing doubt about their conservative bona fides was politically smart...very smart.

TB| 1.19.12 @ 10:51PM

Santorum needs to smile more. He always seems petulant and aggrieved. He's a good man and made some good points tonight, but I don't see it translating into votes. So far, my prediction looks good -- Santorum does well in Iowa due to intensive retail politicking, is unable to replicate that success elsewhere. But we'll see Saturday.

Bob Grant| 1.19.12 @ 11:02PM

Just think if he had the cash of Perry back in the Summer?

Just think if he had more buzz early on like Bachmann?

Just think if his podium wasn't so far out in left field during the fist 30 debates, and moderators actually acknowledging his presence?

You might now be looking at the front runner.

Dan| 1.19.12 @ 11:28PM

He can't smile more.

It's not his nature.

TB| 1.20.12 @ 12:05AM

You know, you're likely right. He is what he is.

chuck| 1.20.12 @ 7:45AM

It's hard to smile when you haven't taken a dump in a month.

Hey Ricky, try some Ex-Lax!

Resist We Much! | 1.19.12 @ 11:10PM

Allentown, PA’s Morning Call from April 7, 1994:

"U.S. Rep. Rick Santorum, R-Pittsburgh area, and Joe Watkins, a Philadelphia businessman who worked in the Bush White House, are seeking the Republican Senate nomination, creating the only true Senate primary race….Santorum and Watkins both called for a “comprehensive restructuring” of health care. But they differed sharply on what elements should comprise a basic benefits package.

Watkins would include mental health services, long-term care, prescription drug coverage, dental services and preventive care such as immunizations. Santorum would not. Both reject abortion services. Santorum and Watkins both oppose having businesses provide health care for their employees. Instead, they would require individuals to purchase insurance. Both oppose higher taxes on alcohol or tobacco to help pay for care. They also oppose government-run health care and disagree with controls on doctor or hospital fees. They would cap malpractice awards.

Allentown, PA’s Morning Call from May 2, 1994:

Santorum and Watkins would require individuals to buy health insurance rather than forcing employers to pay for employee benefits. Both oppose abortion services and support limits on malpractice awards. Santorum says non-economic damages should not exceed $ 250,000, adjusted annually for inflation, and lawyers’ contingency fees should be capped at 25 percent. [...]

Santorum introduced the idea of a medical savings account, called Medisave, which has become part of the Gramm bill. Under it, workers would buy major medical insurance and could make tax-free contributions to a Medisave account, from which they would pay for preventive services.

mjs_pa| 1.20.12 @ 12:37AM

Erickson Was Wrong On Santorum And An Individual Health Care Mandate

Following up on this from The Right Scoop, actually Erickson's Tweet is false.

Erickson Tweet: Santorum too was once an individual mandate supporter.

Problem is that there is no link to the source for us to validate and the quote is in third person which means it’s not even Santorum’s own words.

There is a link. Follow this to the original article.

Watkins would allow a tax increase on cigarettes, alcohol and firearms; Santorum would not. Also, Watkins supports a national cap on spending, provided it doesn't force rationing. Santorum says no to board-set limits. Santorum introduced the idea of a medical savings account, called Medisave, which has become part of the Gramm bill. Under it, workers would buy major medical insurance and could make tax-free contributions to a Medisave account, from which they would pay for preventive services. Watkins said he believes the country can save as much as $76 billion by eliminating duplication of services and government bureaucracy. He also would require individuals to pay part of their health care bills. In the state governor's race, the Republicans oppose mandates on employers providing health insurance, including abortions in basic benefits packages and setting national spending limits.

Here's Santorum's actual position back then, in opposition to HillaryCare. He was also pushing good legal reform on lawsuits for pain and suffering. Still more here, there doesn't appear to have been any mandate, as Erickson stated.

Wofford campaigned successfully on the health care issue in 1991, and yesterday Santorum took aim at Democratic ideas for health care reform, particularly the plan proposed by President Clinton.

Under the Clinton plan, all employers would be required to provide health insurance for their workers and to pick up most of the cost. That plan would also place caps on how much could be spent on health care each year.
Santorum charged that Clinton's proposal to administer its system through regionalized health alliances essentially shuts medical professionals out of the process and puts it in the hands of political appointees.

The policy of placing caps on spending could create a horror scene similar to that which has occurred in Canada, where hospitals were shut down for periods of time for everything except emergencies because the money ran out, he said.
He suggested that instead of mandating that employers provide insurance, they should be required to join an insurance network, which would enable their employees to obtain coverage at group rates.

Access is also important in a good health care system, he said. Access could be improved by eliminating restrictions placed on coverage because of pre-existing conditions, by ensuring the right of renewal and through tax credits and vouchers, he said.

On responsibility, he said a Medisave plan will encourage employees to become more responsible health-care consumers.

Medisave calls for lower premiums from employers and higher deductibles from employees, with the savings on the premiums transferred into an interest-bearing, tax-free account that would be used by employees for routine health care. If an employee sought to use the money for anything other than health, the money would become taxable and a penalty would be charged, he said.

With such a plan, people would be motivated to shop for the best deal in an attempt to keep as much money in the account as they can, he said.

Santorum also proposed reforming malpractice suits by putting a cap on money given for pain and suffering.

http://www.riehlworldview.com/.....ndate.html

mjs_pa| 1.20.12 @ 12:47AM

Santorum never supported individual mandates. This article is obviously wrong factually. There are no quotes and no sources for claims.

No other paper in Pennsylvania ever reported this.

I opposed Heritage's call for individual mandates back when hillarycare was being debated, and I would have opposed Sentorum for Senate if he had advocated this position.

Resist We Much! | 1.20.12 @ 9:00AM

http://articles.mcall.com/1994.....premiums/2

Resist We Much! | 1.20.12 @ 9:04AM

"Santorum and Watkins both oppose having businesses provide health care for their employees. Instead, they would require individuals to purchase insurance. Both oppose higher taxes on alcohol or tobacco to help pay for care."

http://articles.mcall.com/1994.....ealth-care

By the way, I didn't get my information from Erickson.

WL| 1.19.12 @ 11:16PM

HILLYER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I have to respect this whole Pat Robertson telethon you got going here with Rick Santorum...I like him too...HOWEVER, you got to get with it man...

Rick Santorum looked like his sphinter was fighting a loosing battle to keep the TERDarian hoard from escaping tonight...

Even the old bag Ron Paul busted him for getting all defensive OUT OF NOWHERE...you have to know what I am talking about...

As much as the crooked Bamster lies...he is going to drive Santorum for 7 MONTHS!! in the general election...

You need to get behind Newt...he takes a lickin a keeps on tickin...

Bob Grant| 1.19.12 @ 11:21PM

The one thing I'm sure of about Newt. If he wins the nomination and finds Obama is unbeatable, he will go down with guns a blazin'. That's for sure!

That would be the most desirable consolation prize.

WL| 1.19.12 @ 11:28PM

Well Said Mr. Grant...well said...

Lots of us just want a good ol' political fight...
one where our guy isn't always on the ropes...
while the democrats throw every single punch below the belt...

We want a fighter.
A Champion.
someone with GUTS.

Newt is giving us that...

so givem hell NEWT!!!!

Dan| 1.19.12 @ 11:27PM

Santorum got in touch with his inner Fredo tonight: "I'm smart, I won Iowa, --------- and I WANT RESPECT!"

Any guy who actually thought it was a good idea to go trotting around on the presidential campaign trail in a sweater vest that one is apt to see in a senior center, is hardly the guy for the GOP nomination.

WL| 1.19.12 @ 11:32PM

Sometimes in the debates, when he gets pruned up, turns red, starts spittering and sputtering for the moderator to let him talk because he can't take the other guy saying something...

I think of you know who....guess......

ALGORE huffing and puffing at Bush!!! that's who...

Bob Grant| 1.20.12 @ 9:36AM

Inner Fredo, heh, heh...

...Oh come on. Give the guy a break. He's solid, albeit a little uptight in appearance.

To compare him to Algore is a stretch.

Look at it like this, all 3 candidates (I refuse to include Ron Paul) are much, much better debaters than the last 4 republican candidates/presidents (McCain, Bush II, Dole, Bush I).

Give Santorum a chance. I don't think he'll break your heart.

Ivan| 1.20.12 @ 2:03AM

"Ron Paul is losing his effectiveness. He is now rambling all over the place. He's fading."

hmm...that would mean that he was effective once. Who would say, reading earlier Mr Hillyers' earlier comments on Ron Paul, that he was ever effective. It seemed then that Paul was crazy, "nutty" and ineffective to begin with. Hm...

WL| 1.20.12 @ 6:43AM

Paul is a cranky old Democrat. He bellows like a hound dog about the constitution, but never really gets anything done....

In the real world...(think about this Tin Foil folks)
Someone who flies so far to the extreme...
And can't ever win...
But pulls votes and support from those who can...
and only contributes wishful thinking...
is called...
A DECOY.

I wouldn't doubt him taking marching orders from Barack's puppetmasters...as we speak.

WL| 1.20.12 @ 6:46AM

Think about that Ronulans...

The Bilderbergs, and the Trilateral Commision, AND the Rothschild's are playing you like a TUNE!!!!!!!!

HA!!!!

Clint| 1.20.12 @ 7:22AM

" CBS Poll: Independents Prefer Ron Paul Vs Obama
In a head to head match up with incumbent President Barack Obama, the indie voter chooses Ron Paul, a CBS News poll suggested on Monday.

A total of 47% of independent voters said they would choose Ron Paul compared to 45% of independent voters choosing Mitt Romney against Obama, and 41% of independents saying they would choose Rick Santorum. If a Paul-Obama showdown were ever to take place, 47% of independent voters would vote for Paul, 81% republicans and 10% Democrats for a total of 45% of the vote. Obama would get just 40% of the independent vote in that contest, with 85% of the Democrats choosing Obama and 9% of Republicans choosing the President on election day in November. Obama would win the general election by a narrow one point margin if the election was held today between the two."

The Tea Party Rebellion Steps On The Israel Firster Smear Bund Bibi Butt Boy.

Edward Cropper | 1.20.12 @ 8:40AM

Santorum is a snot nose little wimp, who keeps telling us how much he achieved while in the congress and Senate. Strange the people of Pennsylvania didn't seem to know this since they blew him out of office without giving a second thought.

Oldefarte| 1.20.12 @ 11:23AM

Santorum is sadly a whiner and a Catholic moralist anti-aborsionist who doesn't stand a dog's chance in hades of either being the nominee or the president [and as such will be instant political suicide to the Republican Party is her were to be selected, as the Democrats would laughingly campaign him out of the presidential race as such]. Newt is extremely intelligent and would be the best debater against Obama, but that's it [he would be probably devisive as a president, just as he was in congress]. Paul has some credible ideas, but he's simply too old. The one/only best shot is Romney who has adequate public-political and private-business qualifications to challange the current administrations' socialism in debates and properly administer/manage this country as its chief executive officer as president. It's simply time to admit same and to get moving on promoting Romney as the Republican's choice [since our country's survival will ultimately depends upon his installation as president and thereafter his professional abilities to accompolish that task]!!!!!!!!!!!

Oldefarte| 1.20.12 @ 5:04PM

Wait OMG, the thought just crossed my mind of Collesta as our next first lady, complete with a $million tiara from Tiffoneys atop her blond dyed sprayed hair, standing next to Newt as he places his hand upon the bible [which resultantly EXPLODES]!!!!

aware| 1.21.12 @ 8:47AM

Old dude, LMAO!

More Blog Posts by Quin Hillyer

http://spectator.org/blog/2012/01/19/santorum-one-solidly

ADVERTISEMENT

The Spectacle Blog

Elijah Harper, R.I.P.

Aaron Goldstein | 5.18.13

If Only the Tsar Knew!

F.H. Buckley | 5.18.13

Low-Level IRS Staffer: No, We Didn’t Mastermind This Entire Thing

Matt Purple | 5.17.13

UPDATED: IRS Acting Chief Apologizes, But Defends His Actions

Kaylin Bugos | 5.17.13

Voter Fraud Affected Election Results in Missouri

Kaylin Bugos | 5.17.13

Purple Privacy Push Persists in House Drone Hearing

Luca Gattoni-Celli | 5.17.13

IRS Director: ‘Some People Call Me Maurice’

Kyle Peterson | 5.17.13

Laughing to Keep From Crying

Ross Kaminsky | 5.17.13

Latest Headlines

Not Ready for Primetime Players

Daniel J. Flynn|100 comments

Assessing a Week of Scandal

Matt Purple|118 comments

Oops, Maybe Government is Tyrannical

Marta H. Mossburg|59 comments

Soros Funds Anti-‘Torture’ Report

Mark Tooley|104 comments

Treasure State Treasury

Bill Croke|3 comments

My Generation’s Disease

Benjamin Brophy|64 comments

The View From the Other Side

George H. Wittman|16 comments

USPS: Radical Surgery Needed

Peter Hannaford|19 comments

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

My Generation’s Disease

Benjamin Brophy | 5.17.13

The Liberal Union Behind the IRS

Jeffrey Lord | 5.16.13

Not Ready for Primetime Players

Daniel J. Flynn | 5.17.13

Assessing a Week of Scandal

Matt Purple | 5.17.13

Oops, Maybe Government is Tyrannical

Marta H. Mossburg | 5.17.13

The View From the Other Side

George H. Wittman | 5.17.13

From Bimbos to Benghazi

Jeffrey Lord | 5.9.13

USPS: Radical Surgery Needed

Peter Hannaford | 5.17.13

ADVERTISEMENT

Home |About |Contributors |Advertise |Donate |Privacy Policy |Contact

The American Spectator Foundation is the 501(c)(3) organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator magazine and training aspiring journalists who espouse traditional American values. Your contributions are tax deductible to the extent permitted by law. Each donor receives a year-end summary of their giving for tax purposes.

Copyright 2013, The American Spectator. All rights reserved.