-
SEQUESTER: The Horror!
March 1, 2013 | 4 comments
-
SOTU Preview: Human Props, Budget Fights, and Wedge Issues
February 12, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Hello, I Must Be Going
August 14, 2012 | 18 comments
-
Weekend Political Wrap-Up, Paul Ryan Edition
August 12, 2012 | 16 comments
-
Esquire Blogger Sees Paul Ryan, Shreds His Safety Net
August 11, 2012 | 13 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Not exactly a surprise given recent polls, but Mitt Romney has beaten Rick Santorum in the Illinois Republican primary. Exit polls suggest voters to Romney’s right went less overwhelmingly for Santorum than in other states and were matched about evenly by voters who thought Romney’s positions on the issues were just right. More to follow as returns come in.
UPDATE: Here is a good indicator of how things are different in Illinois than in the Deep South. Exit polls show that 35 percent of the primary voters were moderate or liberal. That’s smaller than the number that self-described as conservative, but equal to those who considered themselves somewhat conservative and larger than those who are very conservative. Romney won 46 percent of moderate to liberal voters and 52 percent of somewhat conservative ones. The very conservative voters went 48 percent for Santorum.
View all comments (65) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by W. James Antle, III
http://spectator.org/blog/2012/03/20/mitt-romney-wins-illinois
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Al Adab| 3.20.12 @ 9:26PM
Wonderful. Romney can win a GOP primary in a state which will not vote Republican in November. We can nominate someone who can run in blue states but still lose them. Is there a point?
Drek| 3.20.12 @ 9:41PM
Yup, the states we're not likely to take, which aren't crucial to our Electoral College chances, are the states deciding our primary.
But then again, Santorum came out and begged Democrats in Michigan to vote for him just a month ago, whereas in January he was crying over the fact that outsiders might influence our selection process.
So Santorum is all over the place with that too............
PCC| 3.21.12 @ 8:51AM
I'd be delighted if a "pure" conservative (like Sarah Palin or Paul Ryan or Bobby Jindal or Marco Rubio or Herbert Cain) were running AND winning outside of red states in order to challenge frontally the present incumbent in the White House.
The fact remains that that candidate does not exist.
Mitt Romney is so much more preferable than President Obama, and he is also a smart, decent and quite conservative candidate who definitely has great promise as someone who can beat Mr. Obama, that I enthusiastically support his candidacy and hope all conservative-oriented voters, after our intra-family squabbles are resolved, will flock to the polls in November to set our country back on the low-tax, lower-regulation, smaller-government, deficit-reducing, job-creating path that will restore America to the optimistic, prosperous path that we all desire and deserve.
Barbara | 3.20.12 @ 9:28PM
Please explain this: Romney claims to be conservative while Santorum says he is a Mass. liberal. What does it mean when Jeffery Imnelt, the job czar is leaving Obama to join Mitt Romney's camp?
Drek| 3.20.12 @ 9:47PM
Interesting query Barbara.
9thID| 3.20.12 @ 10:18PM
It just confirms what we already knew about Romney -- Obama Lite...
Bill| 3.20.12 @ 9:38PM
Congratulations to Mr. Romney, and I wish you nothing but the best of you!
Anommynous| 3.20.12 @ 11:20PM
So you were a Romney man all along! I suspected as much.
And still a racist, with your use of the N-word. I feel vindicated in backing Rick Santorum knowing that he's not your guy.
WL| 3.20.12 @ 11:50PM
I still haven't figured out what all these people are talking about when they say you are a racist....
What did you do? Did somebody take a picture of you in your Grand Wizard outfit or something?
Simon Templar| 3.21.12 @ 12:43AM
Racist Troll Bill....said in one of his comments, "That nigger lover President Clinton had the pen and vetoed so many good bills passed by the Gingrich-led Congress."
This is why.
WL| 3.21.12 @ 8:18AM
I see...well, I would say this...
If you make that statement...
You MIGHT BE A RACIST!!
Bill| 3.21.12 @ 10:09AM
The First Amendment.
somnolence| 3.20.12 @ 9:38PM
No, but I GUARANTEE you that Romney will win the entire South, including the states Santorum won in the primary. So what is your point?
Drek| 3.20.12 @ 9:42PM
You guarantee Romney will take North Carolina, Florida and Virginia, Missouri as well?
Drek| 3.20.12 @ 9:39PM
So yet another one v. one and Santorum gets his head handed to him.
But all of us Conservatives in the country are just supposed to drop whatever misgivings we have about Santorum, whatever concerns we have over his record, and jump up on board the Santorum bandwagon, just like THE OTHER MCCAIN for instance.
Michigan, Ohio, now Illinois. Whenever Santorum got his one v. one, he's lost.
WL| 3.20.12 @ 10:34PM
Drek...I know where you are coming from with your critiques on Santorum and Romney...and I share your views about Newt as well...
However, I am really starting to wonder whether us conservatives have as much power in the republican party as we would like to think....
I am starting to think that we don't have much in very many places at all. If after the last three years of LIBERAL HELL...we cannot even get a conservative past MITT...
I am wondering if it is high time that we start pulling the same games as the Democrats AND the Moderates in our own party....
Essentially, maybe our only real hope of having another grab at someone remotely like another Reagan...is to have some of our candidates play the ol' moderate game...until they get to victory...
THEN go all right wing on em!!!
aware| 3.21.12 @ 5:35AM
The Republican Party has never, and will never, be "conservative". But it doesn't mind playing you for fools to get your vote.
WL| 3.21.12 @ 8:22AM
Don't worry, we know, but much thanks for the information.
We are trying to wield some power in the party as was once accomplished by our 40th president.
We are not fools. The fools are people that they don't have to try and "play."
aware| 3.21.12 @ 11:13AM
Remember, I didn't say you were fools. I said you were being played for fools. It is a rigged game from the start, so "play" all you want but the only thing you will get is frustrated.
I've said from the beginning that Romney would be the nominee. And that he will be beaten in Nov. I hate it as much as anybody but that's how it will be.
somnolence| 3.20.12 @ 9:41PM
I also wouldn't be too sure that Obama will carry Michigan or Ohio in the fall. Next we go to Pennsylvania, where Santorum lost by 18 percentage points in his last election there.
Drek| 3.20.12 @ 9:43PM
I don't think he'll take Pennsylvania, even with the whole favourite son thing going on.
John - TMF| 3.20.12 @ 9:42PM
At 9:35 or so, Mittster dropped below 50% on a 47% of a tiny turnout.
With more than half of the votes left out (meaning it depends on where they come from) Mitt might continue to slip.
If he "wins" a plurality again, the Establishment "wisdom" is once again shown to be excruciatingly expensive for little gain. Romney and his PACs far outspent Santorum.
Romney and the Establishment are determined to smear, buy, and subvert their way into the nomination.
And the pledge remains:
Willard Milton Romney is a Limousine Liberal Democrat masquerading as a Republican; therefore I WILL NOT vote for him, EVER!
r/John - TMF
Drek| 3.20.12 @ 9:46PM
Santorum isn't all that either John.........
He crawled into bed with the unions, rolled around in the sack with Trent Lott, and rolled over again and again for the Bush administration.
During the Bush administration, when our annual budget was doubled, who here recalls Senator Rick Santorum opening his mouth about the reckless and insane spending trajectory the Bush administration laid out for the United States?
The only way Bush got away with all of his nonsense was that Gingrich had already been purged by Santorum types, who folded in the clutch later without his leadership.
John - TMF| 3.20.12 @ 9:58PM
I happen to be a Bush fan. Bush was fighting a war, and the deficit was tiny in comparison to what it is now. Before the 2006 Democrat take over of Congress we were on a trajectory to balance the budget and get back on track.
Bush hatred is irrational.
The budget is large, its the nature of a government of 300million people that spans a continent plus a vast portion of the Pacific ocean. Yup it was too big... but it was a tiny controllable blip compared to what Obama has generated.
As of today, Obama has run up as much debt in 3 years as Bush ran up in 8. And Bush didn't even run up most of it... or all of it... Congress did, since Congress controls the money. The vast bulk of the overspending came under Democrat control after the 2006 elections destroyed any control that George W. Bush might have had.
Santorum is the best that is left. He is the only Conservative left in the race. Gingrich is hanging on by pure ego. He is out of money, and out of chances.
History will vindicate George W. Bush. Cynicism will destroy us.
Romney probably won't finish above 50% at the end of the night. That is message enough. He is weak, and merely the Establishment's consolidator.
This election is likely to be unsatisfying for everyone.
r/TMF
9thID| 3.20.12 @ 10:23PM
I'm with you John. Mr. RomneyCare is a McCain Redux on steroids...
WL| 3.20.12 @ 10:47PM
Your defense of Bush being tied up "fighting a war" IS valid...
However, as the Lord above is my witness...I did not support the Iraqi invasion for one reason alone...and it wasn't that Bush wasn't justified...
The reason was whether our going to war with a fickel majority support of the population would damage our cause in the long run (more than Saddam ever could have). That, in turn, would get us in a worse fix than we would have been without the Iraqi campaign...
We'll never know the real answer about whether Saddam was able to get WMD's out in time....We'll never know what our political landscape would have been like without that campaign...
But we do know what it got us...and Obama presidency. I wish W would have considered that a little more at the time. I don't condemn W for the decision...but I DO question whether it was the right one.
John - TMF| 3.20.12 @ 11:01PM
Look. We invaded Iraq. We did it legally under our laws with Congressional approval... don't see that with Obambi do you?
We invaded Iraq for far more than barrels of nasty stuff with Mr. Yucky faces plastered on them. We invaded because Saddam Hussain was a dangerous man with a cash flow in petrodollars, and a nation-state behind him. He had enough yellowcake to eventually build more than a few bombs. He had the money and the expertise to build them. He had a read made chemical weapons capability that could be turned up as soon as he was left alone to do so.
AND you are forgetting one major factor. Iraq's neighbor to its east. The largest problem in the ME in the past, at the time, now, and in the future.; The Islamic Republic of Iran. The ground approaches to Iran are from Iraq. Air Bases for large bombers and fighters are too far away to be effective in offering any containment options should the need arise. Iraq was our base of operations to control Iran. So was Afghanistan, but too many people are too shortsighted to see that.
George Bush invaded Iraq because it needed to be done, period. Sometimes you need to create a gravity well, and then kick a bunch of tails. The people we are dealing with, respect only force, nothing else.
I am not going to go further in the discussion. Iraq was the right move. It took a while and we needed to do a better job of stabilizing it faster, but we needed to nation build there... and leave a light footprint in Afghanistan which is ungovernable, and just needs to be bombed back to the stone age occasionally. Which is about where they want to live, anyway.
Bush and his people had it exactly right... Obummer got it wrong, a thousand times over.
Mark my words, we will be back in both countries within the next decade. With a weaker position, fewer arms, and a smaller less capable military. That will result in disaster.
-TMF
WL| 3.20.12 @ 11:18PM
This will be my last hashing on the subject as well....AND AGAIN...I am not necessarily convinced that Bush was wrong, in case that did not get across in the original post. I could even add to your list of reasons that we were justified and/or correct to invade.
However, you cannot deny that the Bush Admin. failed to see the "dymamics" of the situtation AND the fallout. More specifically, they did not appreciate the possibilities of indirect consequences enough.....with your own post giving the best example possible....with your excellent analysis of how it was all gravy...until it resulted in Democrat power....destroying ALL OF the good things that came out of it.
Hell....one of the benefits was Quadaffi giving up his nukes...only to have Al Queida running the show now..YES...that was obama...and Obama is president because of the Iraq war. Justified or NOT, yellow cake or not, foothold or not, and all of the above or not, IT GAVE US OBAMA...to tear it all up.
I see your point of view, honestly I do but part of the best overall strategy should always be the fallout, because direct benefits don't mean a hill of dung...if the action promotes the likelyhood of some do-nothing con artist (Obama) to in your words..."got it wrong a thousand times over" and leave us in a "weaker position" etc etc etc.
RJ| 3.21.12 @ 2:09AM
Fully agree. Sustainability is the key to success. Bush 43's legacy is the Obama Administration. On a related point, I am reminded of a statement in President Eisenhower's First State of the Union Address:
"Our problem is to achieve adequate military strength within the limits of endurable strain upon our economy. To amass military power without regard to our economic capacity would be to defend ourselves against one kind of disaster by inviting another."
I wish our more recent Presidents had Eisenhower's wisdom regarding the development, use and deployment of military forces. We have sacrificed the lives of American youth and wasted a fortune in the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. Eisenhower wouldn't have done it.
WL| 3.21.12 @ 8:25AM
Good thought.
Drek| 3.21.12 @ 1:02AM
I'm not a Bush fan, not by a long shot.
It was Bush who tethered our war effort to our success in civilizing savages instead of wiping them out.
It was Bush who allowed the Iranians to continue to bleed our armed forces.
It was Bush who decided to allow the Iranians to continue to harden their targets to the extent where they are now..........
It was Bush who delivered over the entirety of the Treasury Department to the Democrat party, all as part of his idiotic bipartisan outreach program.
I could go on and on..........
Who was it that thought that nominating Harriet Meirs was a good idea?
Bush screwed us good, as did his father before him.
I don't know if this party will ever recover from the damage they did to our understanding of who we were as a party, and the damage they did to our brand name..........
RJ| 3.21.12 @ 2:15AM
There were many depressing times during the Bush 43 administration. Thanks for stopping when you did. The nomination of Harriet Meirs was my personal low point. And Mrs. Bush joined in too, calling opposition to the Miers nomination "sexist." No more Bushes.
WL| 3.21.12 @ 8:27AM
And to think...the Est. Repubs actually still throw around the possibility of a 3rd Bush...
I'll change my party registration at that point. I refuse to ride a titanic that has dynamite at the ready in case they can't find an iceberg.
somnolence| 3.20.12 @ 9:49PM
YES, DREK: Romney WILL carry every one of those states you mentioned, even Florida if he DOESN't pick Rubio.
Drek| 3.20.12 @ 9:52PM
Well, it's starting to look like we're all going to see if that's right, now aren't we...........
somnolence| 3.20.12 @ 10:06PM
I voted for Dubya twice. Part of his legacy is capitulating to the bank and auto bailouts along with the idiotic new light bulb. Obama merely took up where Bush left off. Romney cut taxes 19 times in Massachusetts and bailed the Olympics out of fiscal doldrums. Save your pegging him with the convenience of Establishment identity and pass it on to the more appropriate person of Mr. Washington Insider Newt Gingrich.
RJ| 3.20.12 @ 10:29PM
I am a Santorum supporter, but if Romney gets the GOP nomination he will have my full support and I hope that you are right about his conservatism. It would be a rare and unexpected surprise from an elected official. I think much of the problem for Republicans these days is the disappointment hang-over from Bush 43. I have not felt more betrayed by anyone who I have voted for. And as you imply, Bush 43's legacy is Obama.
John - TMF| 3.20.12 @ 10:47PM
Quit with the Olympics will ya? The Olympics is corrupt stupid sports trash. It isn't even close to life, and I don't see you bragging about the Atlanta Chamber of Commerce and JayCee's for running a profit making enterprise...
Romney took oodles of money from the Feds, and sold advertising... well duh... All well advertised major sporting events in the western hemisphere where people watch live events on live TV... make money. It's a no brainer.
And it is worthless as a double hung thermo-pane window on the Space station in regard to the qualifications necessary to run the country.
BTW- your boy Mitt is a liberal. He governed as a liberal, and he FAILED. He was rolled so many times by that legislature he was on his back more than a Combat Zone Working girl.
His re-elect numbers were so bad that he wouldn't have dared run again, or risk is greater ambition which was the presidency. Deval Patrick would have cleaned Willard's perfectly coiffed hair, Gucci loafered, custom suited rear end. And that would have ended his dream of President Mittster...
Romney is the Establishment's Consolidator. He will solidify the gains made under "The One". By mid term he will be raising taxes and cutting deals with his boss Harry Reid.
He's just Boy Clinton with less "immorality" baggage. And even Clinton was a successful multi-term governor... so Romney isn't even that.
The GOP is getting suckered... and I'm not falling for it.
When I was growing up, sometimes the crowd would work up do doing something really dumb... like drinking a keg and going driving in the woods. I refused to participate, and drew more than a little ire. Seems folks like to do stupid things together, since when everybody does it, then it makes it all better when it comes time to pay the fine or do the time.
Well we are going to do the time and pay the fine, and I am still going to be unpopular because I am having none of it.
Think of me as Cartman... I'm goin' home...
-TMF
WL| 3.20.12 @ 10:54PM
I actually think you have stumbled onto one of the devastating risks with Romney...
Imagine Willard in good ol' classic limp Republican defense during the final debates....and he happens to mention his experience with the Olympics....then the ol' Snake oil salesman Barack stops...pauses...looks at Willard and says..."Sorry Mitt, this ain't the Olympics."
It would rank up there with Benson's "....you're no Jack Kennedy" by the time the media gets done with it....
WL| 3.20.12 @ 10:59PM
I hope Axelrod doesn't read he Spectator...because that brilliant script I just wrote will probably cost us the election!!!
THIS SUCKS!!!!! We have a boob heading for a food fight with the ultimate of all LIARS.....it's gonna be like watching Les Miles keep Jordan Jefferson in the ENTIRE GAME!!!
All of us Republicans SUCK for letting us get into this position....
Whooda thunk it....after 4 YEARS of Obama...we send out the goofiest clown we have to get whipped by him.
RJ| 3.20.12 @ 11:22PM
No, it ain't the Olympics, but Nobama's Olympics record is none to good. He made a fool out of himself, again, in Copenhagen.
WL| 3.20.12 @ 11:39PM
I can't argue with that...
And Romney being the "goofiest clown we have" might have been an overstatement too! HA.
Clint| 3.20.12 @ 11:14PM
" But the story of Romney's supposed Olympic triumph isn't as simple as he wants you to believe. Rather, his success as president of the 2002 winter games was due to the unprecedented amount of federal money he procured to organize the most expensive Olympics in American history. And coming from a candidate who's spent his campaign railing against federal spending and earmarks, it's another breathtaking example of Romney's hypocrisy.
The Salt Lake games got more taxpayer dollars than all of the previous U.S.-hosted Olympics combined: a whopping $1.3 billion. For comparison, the 1984 games in L.A. received $75 million and the 1996 games in Atlanta received $609 million.
Romney's campaign is already pushing back by saying that the extra money was necessary for security. But our money went to much more than security, including $30 million for parking lots, $2 million for sewer systems, and $33,000 for an Olympic horse adoption program."
WL| 3.20.12 @ 11:30PM
I'm already commenting on the subject...so save your breath on how I follow you around, Clint...
but I must comment on something your post made me wonder....
If the olympics were massively funded like they were...and we put aside the surface issue of "earmarks" etc...we get to the real question....
Which is: Who made sure that the olympics got all that money, so he could succeed? Who was interested in good ol' Mitt way back then? with deep connections and pockets to make sure Mitt got to have a real good experience with it???
Hmmmm.....
WL| 3.20.12 @ 11:32PM
By the way...I just got an email from Bibi...
He wants to know just what Olympic sport will allow you to wear that TIN FOIL HELMET OF YOURS???????
WL| 3.20.12 @ 11:34PM
And they probably won't let you wear your SS uniform or White Pointy Hat to the opening ceremonies either...
spike59| 3.21.12 @ 6:05AM
it's fun to watch Widdle Cwint melt down and throw hissy fits...
Clint| 3.21.12 @ 6:38AM
Uh Oh !
Little Spicey, The Israel Firster Smear Bund BibiBot Crybaby Is In The Building.
http://www.grimmemennesker.dk/.....people.jpg
The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To A Brokered Convention.
Clint| 3.21.12 @ 6:41AM
Uh Oh !
The Israel Firster Smear Bund BibiBot,WL Plays His Dog Eared Nazi Card On Tea Party Clint.
The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To A Brokered Convention.
Clint| 3.21.12 @ 6:50AM
" To folks like John McCain—one of Romney's 2012 endorsers—this "ripoff of the taxpayers" for "an incredible pork-barrel project for Salt Lake City" was "outrageous" and "a national disgrace." Romney, however, bragged about the amount of funding he got from Uncle Sam.
But now that's he's in a tough Republican presidential primary, Romney says he's against that kind of spending: "Republicans spent too much money, borrowed too much money, earmarked too much. Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich have to be held accountable."
It's time that Romney is held accountable, too, for using $1.3 billion of the American taxpayers' money to take credit for "saving" the Olympics."
We Are Being Set Up By The RINO-CINO Flunkie Stooges For The Ruling Elites' Frontman Mittens Romney.
These Are The RINO-CINO Flunkie Stooges Who Gave Us The Serial Traitor To Conservatism, John McCain Of McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy,McCain-Lieberman,Gang Of 14, Opposing Bush Tax Cuts Of 2001 & 2003,TARP.
Now They Are Trying To Give Us RomneyCare,TARP, Cynical Flip-Flops On Abortion, Gays, Refuses to Sign Pro-Life Pledge, Illegal Immigrants, "Little Chain Saw Al" At Bain, Crony Capitalism Campaign Money Trail.....
The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To A Brokered Convention.
Les| 3.20.12 @ 10:27PM
Actually,most of Illinois is fairly conservative. If you take out Crook Co.(which you can't)it's a red state. Santorum won downstate by a big margin but we get outvoted.
Marco2| 3.20.12 @ 10:49PM
Nothing new here. Santorum always does well in areas with few people, especially if they're broke and/or stupid. BTW, does anybody still care if Newt (who?) quits or not?
somnolence| 3.21.12 @ 12:21AM
You wasted your breath. If he governed as a liberal, that is all past history. He achieved 19 tax cuts, and you can't dispute it. I would say he is currently doing very well, well enough to demolish the autocratic Gingrich, and make a sore ass loser out of you. So I'll harp on the Olympics all I want, Romney was successful in salvaging the proceedings, and BTW he will use Obamacare SUCCESSFULLY against Obama. What was instituted in Massachusetts is far removed from the national model, and yeah, I know what he said in past tense about implementing it on a national scale, but so did Gingrich(who continues to deny it) with the Heritage Foundation in the late eighties. So go to your corner and sulk. If Obama wins reelection I know what particular crowd to blame, and I also know that contraceptives and harping on about porn, as Santorum does, is a failing issue for a campaign's cornerstone. Once again, the objective is to beat Obama, and that is made more difficult by the GOP candidates slamming each other to pieces. If Romney has more money, so be it. It also shows he is more prepared, and has a better organization. I also hear of late that Obama won't get that billion dollars that was envisioned, and they are actually worried about the GOP super pacs.
WL| 3.21.12 @ 9:22AM
It's funny how the Romney Leftist supporters pull out the ol' liberal playing cards from time to time...it is very telling...
The way you throw in the whole "contraceptives" mention, as if Santorum or any other conservative created this whole dust up, must make Jane Fonda just giddy with leftist glee...
So, I guess Santorum and everybody else should just allow the Catholic church (and any other church) to be trampled by an encroaching government....
In that line of thinking...I guess election time is becoming the perfect environment for the Leviathan...
When the government dictates that we all have to go down and participate in Gay Pride day, and pay for the festivities, folks like you will be there to tell us how we are costing everyone the election by our Gay bashing when we don't think that should stand either huh?
Folks like you who obviously have some intelligence are misplacing it and costing our society a great deal.
Simon Templar| 3.21.12 @ 12:51AM
"If Obama wins reelection I know what particular crowd to blame...."
Just who will that be?
Drek| 3.21.12 @ 1:48AM
Isn't it interesting that they're already preparing their narrative if Romney should lose in the Fall?
How revealing.......
aware| 3.21.12 @ 6:41AM
If you were still thinking America would avoid a painful day of reckoning has the Republican primary at last shown you the utter futility of believing the political class would save you?
You are constantly given a couple of bad alternatives to make you believe you have a "choice". Even the term "government" is a propaganda tool so you can think the boot on your neck is somehow "yours".
You only have 2 lines you can stand in, one where you eat shit and one where you eat more shit and get kicked. Since you don't like to be kicked you learn to like shit.
somnolence| 3.21.12 @ 7:08AM
Simon, read the part after the comma in that same sentence to figure out what crowd I'm talking about. Santorum and Newt are about as fiscally conservative as Lowell Weicker was.
Proud Mormon| 3.21.12 @ 7:39AM
Mitt doused the flame of the GOP right-wing rabble rousers. Victory is so sweet beating these fanatics even more so than beating the Democrats.
WL| 3.21.12 @ 9:32AM
I bet you did a little jig when Dole and McCain were doing their little turn on the catwalk too?
You are entitled to your smile, but you smug and gleefully glib will be for a short time only.
Nearly all of us Romney critics will rise above your snarky little antics and do what we can to get fellow voters excited about voting this year...but we, and you will fail.
We will fail, and all of us will sit back and wonder what if...what if we had a better candidate that wasn't picked for us before the first primary vote was cast 2 elections in a row...what if Mitt didn't sit there like a good little republican and didn't grant the liberals home field advantage at every turn...
If you say that our understanding of this will cost us the election, then so be it, but it's gonna happen, whether any of us like it or not.
Ilk like you backed a loser in 2008, and Ilk like you are backing a loser now.
Clint| 3.21.12 @ 8:04AM
Go Wash Your Mormon Underwear, Obama Troll
Drek| 3.21.12 @ 9:13AM
I'm beginning to suspect that opposition to Romney is draining away.
And despite the best efforts of THE OTHER MCCAIN, who is still flogging away hopelessly for his very flawed candidate, it seems the base's hostility to Romney is dissipating.
If Romney had won a state earlier in the primary season, there would be more commentary from readers hostile to Romney.
We'll see.
WL| 3.21.12 @ 9:40AM
The hostility is fading, but not because the ground is not good for a party split from the Republicans, I think. It's because the clear and present danger of another Barack Obama term is too dangerous not side with Mitt and his supporters. We know we will not get ANYWHERE with him, and we will be sorely disappointed in his Presidency. This generation of Mitt supporters will roll over to a better understanding in a few years, as many of us have...but in 2016, 20, 24 and so on....there will be a fresh crop of voters, commenters, and bleacher bums to have forgotten or never learned the lessons of 92, 96, 08, and 12.
Drek| 3.21.12 @ 2:55PM
You're an optimist WL, holding out hope for even those besotted with Romney.
porno | 3.22.12 @ 5:32AM
Talking about real estate loving it Here’s some mildly amuzing stuff I found: Thought for the day? : Crime doesn’t pay… does that mean my job is a crime?